Did Muhammad rape Safiyah?

Amir was one of many Muslims who write to me challenging me to a debate.  I told him that I debate either with scholars who have a recognizable name, or with those who read my book. Amir agreed to read my book. I sent him the fourth edition in PDF.  After reading it, Amir has either left Islam or is about to.  No one can read my book and still believe in Islam.

Most Muslims who receive my book never write back. I am of the belief that they become scared and stop reading.  Some of them summon the courage and finish it. Amir is one of them.

He asked me several questions. He basically wants me to answer the “rebuttals” of Bassam Zawadi. I had so far ignored Zawadi because his articles actually incriminate Muhammad more and confirms what I say. However, for the benefit of those who can’t see that I will dedicate the following months responding to Mr. Zawadi.

Here is Amir’s email and my answer to his first question. It’s about Safiyah, the Jewish wife of Muhammad. Her story is here.

Hi Mr. Ali Sina.

To be honest with you all I can say is this: YES your book has shaken my little and shallow faith in Islam. So now what I want is either you give me your response, one by one, for all the following arguments, which is done by persons who has more and in-depth knowledge of  Islam, for each assertion, as you have promised to do so and lead me to leave Islam once and for all, OR leave me with the doubtful and dismal life which leads me to confront my mind, family and society. But Mr. Sina I urge you to do the first.

Accusation No.1

“A Rapist”

It is interesting to note that the person who Ali Sina thinks was “raped” is Safiyyah, a wife of the Holy Prophet (S). We need not reply to such stupid claims, we will just move on to the more important things. Still, if anyone is interested in learning about Safiyyah please visit this wonderful article written by Brother Bassam Zawadi:


In this response, Basam Zawadi quotes various hadiths to prove that it is unfair to say Muhammad’s marriage to Safiyah was rape and that she actually loved him. Here is what he wrote.

Zayd ibn Aslam said, “When the Prophet was so sick and on the verge of death his wives gathered around him. Safiyyah bint Huyayyay said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, by Allah, I would like to be in your place.’ Hearing her utterance, the Prophet’s wives winked at her. The Prophet saw them and said, ‘Rinse your mouths.’ They said, ‘For what, Messenger of Allah?’ He said, ‘For your winking at her, by Allah, she is telling the truth.'” (Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat, vol. 8, p.101, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.175)

In order to understand the dynamism of the situation we have to go beyond the words stated in the hadith. Each episode or hadith, taken in isolation, conveys very little. It’s when we put all of them together, like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, that the real picture emerges.

Safiyah was by all accounts a captive. Her father and uncle had been beheaded, and her husband was tortured to death. All her brothers and male relatives were massacred and his female relatives were enslaved by Muslims.   She was alone. She was caught among the enemy.

Does it make any sense that a sane person in her situation feels love for her captor and the murderer of her loved ones?  Certainly it doesn’t.

Science is advancing in every field including psychology. Many enigmas that puzzled people for centuries, particularly about Muhammad and his life, can now be explained through discoveries in psychology.  My book, Understanding Muhammad, is a psychoanalysis of Muhammad.  As far as I know it is the first on this subject.

The answer to this question is in the chapter eight of the fifth edition of my book. You, Amir, read the fourth edition. So I will explain it briefly.

Cameroon Hooker

Cameroon Hooker, a sociopath, kidnapped Colleen Stan, a 20 years old girl, and kept her in a coffin-like box under his bed for seven years. After she managed to escape, she did not report Hooker to authorities. He was captured after his wife confessed what her husband had done to a priest who advised her to tell that to police.

During Hooker’s trial, Colleen was not cooperative. To make the matters worse, the defendant’s lawyer presented a love letter written by Coleen to Hooker.

Coleen Stan

The facts were clear. Colleen had been kidnapped, her life was threatened and she was kept in a box for seven years.

So why was she not cooperating with the prosecutors? What was that love letter about? The jury could not convict Hooker because Coleen did not seem to be upset for what she had undergone.  The strange puzzle was solved by a psychologist who explained, that under duress; captives often develop a feeling of love and loyalty towards their captors. This is called Stockholm syndrome.

Coleen Stan spent several years in this box hidden under Hokker's bed

It’s a coping mechanism. Hooker was sentenced to life without parole.

Only under the light of the new understanding of human psychology can we understand the bizarre expression of Safiyah’s love for the murderer of her nearest and dearest.

Zawadi continues,

“Here is Umm al- Mu’minin, Safiyyah, relates those moments when she hated the Prophet for killing her father and her ex-husband. The Prophet apologized to her saying, “Your father charged the Arabs against me and committed heinous act,” he apologized to the extent that made Safiyyah get rid of her bitterness against the Prophet. (Al-Bayhaqi, Dala’il an-Nubuwwah, vol. 4, p. 230, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.166)

Does this make sense? Muhammad butchered her father and husband and then justified his actions, and as Zawadi says apologized (which he didn’t) and she forgave him? I am not sure what substance Zawadi is smoking, (well actually I know. His brain is on Islam) but his argument makes no sense. You murder someone’s father and husband and her entire family and then you explain why you had to do it and she forgives you? It’s this kind of thinking that allows Muslims to believe in any absurdity.  If Muslims used a little commonsense, they would leave Islam.


Yes, indeed Safiyyah was angry at the Prophet at first but she forgave him later on. This is mainly due to the fact that she always knew that Muhammad was indeed a Prophet.

Saffiyah says, “I was my father’s and my uncle’s favorite child. When the Messenger of Allah came to Madinah and stayed at Quba, my parents went to him at night and when they looked disconcerted and worn out. I received them cheerfully but to my surprise no one of them turned to me. They were so grieved that they did not feel my presence. I heard my uncle, Abu Yasir, saying to my father, ‘Is it really him?’ He said, ‘Yes, by Allah’. My uncle said: ‘Can you recognize him and confirm this?’ He said, ‘Yes’. My uncle said, ‘How do you feel towards him?’ He said, ‘By Allah I shall be his enemy as long as I live.'” (Ibn Hisham, As-Sirah an-Nabawiyyah, vol. 2, pp. 257-258, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.162)

The story above illustrates Safiyyah’s awareness and intelligence. It also shows that the Jews had known of the Prophet’s prophethood, and knew him as well as they knew their children. Nevertheless they harbored feelings of hatred and bitterness for Islam and for the Prophet. The story in addition to this shows the great enmity and hatred that Huyayy felt against the Messenger of Allah. Safiyyah did not inherit anything from her father because Allah made her heart ready for Islam and prepared her soul for faith. (Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.162-163)

This hadith reveals the sick mind of Muslims, who as I have repeatedly said and shown in my book, have inherited the insanity of their prophet.

Narcissists are under the delusion that everyone knows about their greatness and if anyone opposes them it is because of envy.  The above hadith is one example of the narcissistic mind of Muslims.

How can people possibly be convinced that someone is a messenger of God and decide to reject him vehemently?  Does it make sense at all?  It doesn’t.  Not to a normal person. But it does to narcissists. Narcissism is a mental disorder. The function of the brain is altered. The narcissist has a distorted understanding of reality.

People believe they are right and those who disagree with them are not.  It’s never the other way around.  How can anyone come up with such a stupid argument?

Furthermore, how could the Jews in Medina know that Muhammad was the messiah they were expecting?  Where is the evidence that they saw? How come that evidence does not exist anymore?

Muslims claim that Muhammad is mentioned in verse 5:16 of Song of Songs in the Bible? Please read my response to see the ridiculousness of their mind.  There is no mention of Muhammad in the Bible. There is no evidence whatsoever about him in any religious book prior to him. So how could Safiyah’s father and uncle know that Muhammad is “him?”  Unless they thought him to be the Devil. There are plenty of indications in the Bible that show Muhammad is the Devil, but there is none that would make us believe he is mentioned in that book as a promised one of the Jews.

Anyone who believes in this balderdash must be deficient in intelligence.   Muslims hate Baha’u’llah gutturally.  Will anyone of them refuse to believe after he becomes convinced that Baha’u’llah is a messenger of God?  Of course not! Such an argument goes against reason. Only a Muslim can believe in this blatant absurdity. Show me one Muslim who accepts Baha’u’llah to be a true prophet and does not believe in him?  It’s impossible.  This is the stupidest argument one can make.

The tragedy is not that Islam is a lie, it is the fact that it has damaged the brains of its adherents to such an extent that they can no longer think rationally.  They see everything jaundiced.  Reality is distorted for them. When you are a Muslim you live in a universe of concave and convex mirrors. You see the world warped.  Once you come out of Islam you will start seeing things in their real dimensions.  It’s not just your opinion that changes, your entire weltanschauung, your fundamental cognitive orientation changes.

Muslims believe that everyone is already convinced that Islam is true and the reason they are not Muslims is because they are envious, or have disease in their heart. They don’t see any necessity to prove the claim of Islam.  For them, that is not needed, because it is obvious like the sun.  If you don’t see it, it is because you don’t want to see it. As the result, anyone who disagrees with Islam is dehumanized and demonized. Therefore it is justified to take away from them their  human rights.

Zawadi quotes another Islamic site

“the next and last Prophet was accurately described in the Torah, which also contained signs by which the Jews could easily recognize,” but the Jews rejected him because he was an Arab and they were expecting a Jew.

Well show us where? Where in the Torah is Muhammad accurately described so that people can easily recognize?

Lies are the foundation upon which Islam is built.  This claim, like all other claims of Muslims, is a lie.   When Muhammad said he was mentioned in the Bible, his ignorant followers did not have Bibles to read and verify. They believed in what he told them. Today everyone has access to the Bible. It is online.  Show us where Muhammad is mentioned? No shame! When you think your honor will be restored if you murder your own daughter, you cannot possibly have shame for lying.

Safiyyah’s Character

This shows how much of a sincere worshipper to God Safiyyah was.

Abd Allah ibn Ubaydah said, “A group of people gathered in the room of Safiyyah, a wife of the Prophet. They remembered Allah, recited the Qur’an and prostrated. Saffiyah called them saying, ‘You prostrated and recited the Quran but where is your weeping (out of fearing Allah)?” (Abu Nu’aym al Asbahani, Hilyat al-Awliya‘, vol. 2, p. 55, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad,The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.177)

No, it does not show she was sincere. Since this episode happened after Muhammad’s death and she was no longer a teenager, it is likely that she had recovered from her Stockholm syndrome and was being sarcastic. Obama performed a genuflection to kiss the hand of the Saudi King. I suggested next time he should prostrate and kiss his shoes. Does that show I am a devout worshiper of the Saudi king? Common-sense and rational thinking is what Muslims need badly.

Taken from http://www.geocities.com/mutmainaa1/people/safiyah.html

She still underwent difficulties after the death of the Prophet. Once a slavegirl she owned went  to the Amir Al Muminin Umar and asked, “Amir al Muminin! Saiffya loves the Sabbath and maintains ties with the Jews!” Umar asked Safiyya about that and she said, “I have not loved the Sabbath since Allah replaced it with Friday for me, and I only maintain ties with those Jews to whom I am related by kinship.” She asked her slavegirl what had possessed her to carries lie to Umar and the girl replied, “Shaitan!” Safiyya said, “Go, you are free.”

This shows and proves that Safiyyah remained a loyal Muslim even after the Prophet’s death.

This hadith is quite revealing. Safiyah’s slave saw that she was observing the Sabath and associating with the Jewish slaves in Medina.  The poor girl was herself a slave. God knows what trauma she had endured.  Maybe she was  captured from Iran or Egypt.  Now she found herself a slave among a hostile people who thought she was filthy. She reported what she saw to Omar, perhaps in the hope to gain some favor. What could Safiyah say when interrogated? Could she confront the Commander of the Faithfuls, a man known for his short temper and violence and tell him she did not believe in the lies of Muhammad?  She had to hide her belief for her safety. The slave girl, realizing that it’s now her word against the word of an Ummul Mo’menin, feared for her life and blamed Satan for making her do this. Islam is a tragedy. Every story is a tragedy within another tragedy. Everyone is a victim and everyone a victimizer. Satan must be proud of his success.

When we read a hadith it helps also to think rationally. The truth is there, not in what the words say, but in what they imply. To understand the hadith, read what is not written, between the lines.

I read the Quran and the hadith, the same books that Muslims read. Yet, I saw what they haven’t for 1400 years. It’s because I did not gobble everything mindlessly. I pondered and analyzed them too.  Everyone can do that. It’s important that when we read a book, whether religious or not, we read it critically.


Safiyyah established a warm and sympathetic relation with the Prophet’s household. She presented Fatimah az-Zahra’ a gift of jewels expressing her affection to her, and she also gave some of the Prophet’s wives gifts from her jewels that she brought with her from Khaybar. (Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat, vol.8, p.100, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.172)


In other words she tried to buy their affection so they reduce their hostility towards her. Appeasement is the strategy of the weak for survival.

The Prophet’s Marriage to Safiyyah and It’s Wisdom

As for the accusation that Safiyyah was coerced into marriage or taken advantage of, as alleged by a known Islamophobic, [that would be me, but this Islamist is reluctant to mention my name] this claim has no basis at all. It is known that Safiyyah (R) remained loyal to the Prophet until he passed away.

Really!? So she refused to see all the men sending her flowers and calling her on her cell phone? Did she have any choice? If you keep your wife imprisoned, you can’t say she is loyal to you.  Safiyah did not have any freedom in Medina and had nowhere else to go.

(An account of how Safiyyah’s loyalty was affirmed by the Prophet(P) himself is recorded in Muhammad Husayn Haykal, op. cit., p. 374, of which an online document can be found, Cited in http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/index.php/articles/umm-ul-mukminin-safiyyah-the-jewish-wife-of-muhammadp)

We have in fact the Prophet (P) making the following offer to her, as recorded by Martin Lings:

He [the Prophet Muhammad – Ed.] then told Safiyyah that he was prepared to set her free, and he offered her the choice between remaining a Jewess and returning to her people or entering Islam and becoming his wife. “I choose God and His Messenger,” she said; and they were married at the first halt on the homeward march. (Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based On The Earliest Sources (George Allen & Unwin, 1983), p. 269, Cited in http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/index.php/articles/umm-ul-mukminin-safiyyah-the-jewish-wife-of-muhammadp)

Set her free?  Her husband was slain. Her father and uncle were killed. Her brothers were butchered. Her female relatives had become slaves in some Muslim household. Where could she go? If she did not marry Muhammad she would have become a sex slave of another Muslim.

The marriage to Safiyyah(R) has a political significance as well, as it helps to reduce hostilities and cement alliances. John L. Esposito notes that

As was customary for Arab chiefs, many were political marriages to cement alliances. Others were marriages to the widows of his companions who had fallen in combat and were in need of protection. (John L. Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, pp. 19-20, Cited in http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/index.php/articles/umm-ul-mukminin-safiyyah-the-jewish-wife-of-muhammadp)

John Esposito has sold his soul for money. With whom did Muhammad want to solidify his political ties by marrying Safiyah? Her tribe was exterminated and her father was beheaded.  Two ounce of rational thinking will demolish all these claims.

This significant act of marrying Safiyyah(R) was indeed a great honour for her, for this not only preserved her dignity, it also prevented her from becoming a slave.

Finally Zawadi says something I agree with. That is exactly what I said above. See how this apologist  contradicts himself?  Earlier he wrote that Muhammad offered Safiyah her freedom. Now he is acknowledging that her only other option was to become the sex slave of another Muslim.

Haykal notes that:

The Prophet granted her freedom and then married her, following the examples of great conquerors who married the daughters and wives of the kings whom they had conquered, partly in order to alleviate their tragedy and partly to preserve their dignity. (Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad (North American Trust Publications, 1976), p. 373, Cited in http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/index.php/articles/umm-ul-mukminin-safiyyah-the-jewish-wife-of-muhammadp)

I am truly at a loss to understand the Islamic mind. Imagine someone raiding your home and after killing you and your sons, takes your daughters and wife as slaves and then has sex with your daughter calling her his wife. Would that alleviate the tragedy or preserve your dignity?

This distorted thinking is due to the fact that for Muslims the very act of legalizing marriage is giving a woman and her family their dignity. Woman is awurat, an object of shame. Only if she marries, is her shame covered.  Once married, she can be raped. According to Islamic law it is not rape.  In fact when a girl is raped, the Islamic law prescribes ordering the rapist to marry the raped so her dignity is preserved.  This is the mentality of Islam.

With marrying Safiyyah, the Prophet aimed at ending the enmity and hostility adopted by the Jews against him and against Islam, all the way long, but alas they went on with their hatred for Islam and for the Prophet simply because it was their natural disposition to be malicious and stubborn. ( See Muhammad M. as-Sawwaf, Zawjat ar-Rasul at-Tahirat wa Hikmat T’adudihinn, pp. 76-79, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.168)

This kind of thinking is sickening.  Muslims really expect the Jews to love Muhammad because he raped a Jewess and called her his wife. So they must forget the fact that he had massacred her entire family and tribe. How can anyone be so cut off from reality?  Muslims see nothing wrong in killing us and expect us to be grateful to them for raping our daughters after they read the verse of marriage.  How can we co-exist with these people? They come from another world. We don’t have the same values.

The Prophet’s Attitude Towards Safiyyah

Indeed, when Bilal ibn Rabah(R), a Companion of the Prophet, brought Safiyyah along with another Jewess before him(P) by passing through the Jews that were slain in the battle, Muhammad(P) personally chided Bilal and said “Have you no compassion, Bilal, when you brought two women past their dead husbands?” (A. Guillaume (trans.), The Life of Muhammad: A translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah (Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 515, Cited in http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/index.php/articles/umm-ul-mukminin-safiyyah-the-jewish-wife-of-muhammadp)

Let us read the full passage from Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat.

“After the Messenger of God conquered al-Qamus, the fortress of Ibn Abi al-Huqyaq, Safiyyah bt. Huyayy b. Akhtab was brought to him, and another woman with her. Bilal, who was the one who brought them, led them past some of the slain Jews. When the woman who was with Safiyyah saw them, she cried out, struck her face, and poured dust on her head. When the Messenger of God saw her, he said, “Take this she-devil away from me!” she commanded that Safiyyah should be kept behind him and that the Messenger of God had chosen her for himself.”

Bilal brings Safiyah and her sister-in-law to Muhammad so he can choose one of them for the night while the “Mercy of Allah” PBUH had just finished torturing Kinana to death. Upon seeing her brother’s slain body, Kinana’s young sister becomes hysterical. The Mercy of Allah slaps her face and says, “Take this she-devil away from me.”  That she-devil’s offence was to cry out upon seeing her brother’s corpse. Then this Ensaane Kaamel (perfect human) rebukes Bilal and says, “Have you no compassion, Bilal, when you brought these two women past their dead husband and brother?

That is what Muslims mean when they talk about their prophet’s compassion.

There was once a situation when Zaynab bint Jahsh and Safiyyah went with the Prophet on one of his travels and the camel of Safiyyah fell sick. The Prophet said to Zaynab, “The camel of Safiyyah has fallen sick, what about giving her one of your camels?” She said, “Never should I give it to such a Jewish woman”. The Prophet became angry with her and he did not approach her for two months. (Ahmad, vol. 6, pp. 336-337, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.173)

What can be learned from this hadith? For Muslims, it is what is written. For rational people, this hadith shows how isolated Safiayh felt among Muhammad’s Arab wives. She did everything necessary to win her enemies’ affection. She gave them presents. She pretended to love Muhammad when it was clear to everyone except the narcissist Muhammad that she was not sincere. This young woman had a strong survival instinct.

Yes Muhammad could have been fooled into thinking that she loves him.  Despite all his cunningness, this narcissist was a very stupid man.  Who but a very stupid man would ask a woman in Kheibar to cook for him, after killing her loved ones? She tried to poison him, which unfortunately was uncovered.

Narcissists live in a world of fantasy. Muhammad thought that he was special and must be loved naturally by everyone, unless that person has some evil in his heart. Muslims suffer from the same mental disorder.  However, the reality was much different. Safiyah was only trying to assure her own survival. Even with her Stockholm syndrome she was not fool enough to fall in love with an old impotent man who had destroyed her life and massacred her loved ones. Stockholm syndrome is not love.

The Prophet used to treat Safiyyah with courteousness, gentleness and affection. Safiyyah said, “The Messenger of Allah went to Hajj with his wives. On the way my camel knelt down for it was the weakest among all the other camels and so I wept. The Prophet came to me and wiped away my tears with his dress and hands. The more he asked me not to weep the more I went on weeping. (Ahmad, vol.6, p. 337, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus’ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.176)

This story is heart breaking. If you have a heart you too will weep.  Put yourself in the shoes of this young girl.  Imagine that you are captured and live among the very people who killed your loved ones.  You have nowhere to go and no one to turn to for solace. You are despised by everyone around you. The only one who shows affection to you is the very man who killed your father and husband.

When Safiayh’s camel became sick, she broke down in tears. Her heart could no longer bear that much pain. It’s foolhardy to think that she was crying so inconsolably because her camel had fallen sick. She was weeping for her own lonely heart. At seventeen or eighteen she was too young. I left my country when I was sixteen. My parents were alive and well and I lived among supportive friends. Yet, I felt very nostalgic. Some nights I watched the moon and  thought that my mother maybe watching it also at that very moment and weeped in silence. Only God knows the pain that Safiyah had in her heart. That young women must have stood in front of her window, in the darkness of her room and looked at the stars night after night, wondering, which one is her beloved husband,  and which is her dad. Which ones are her brothers and which one is her uncle.  I lived among friends who were my age. We did what young people do and had fun. Safiyah was all alone – all alone.  When Safiyah told Muhammad at his death bed, that she wished to be in his place, maybe she meant it. She must have wished for death a million times.

Reading the Tabari was the most excruciating thing I have ever done. There is so much pain in that book. But you have to read between the lines. You have to be able to see yourself as one of the victims.  This is something Muslims are unable to do. They even laugh and jeer.  Under the influence of Islam they are reduced to something very evil – bereft of humanity, empathy and love.

You may also like...

No Responses

  1. Mach says:

    Haha Ali had insulted your phophet but he still live, Allah didn’t punish him. Is that the reason why Muslims always used violence as their Allah can’t do anything.

  2. luckylarrysilverstein says:

    Jesus picked 12 Apostles! He didn't pick Saul of Tarsus. Peter didn't pick Saul of Tarsus to replace Judas!
    Jesus exposed the Pharisees & their Talmudic Judaism (Matthew ch 15; ch 23).
    Saul of Tarsus was a Pharisee!
    The Pharisees tried to destroy the followers of Jesus (Galatians ch 1) & when they couldn't they infiltrated & destroyed from the inside (Galatians ch 1 & ch 2; 1 Corinthians ch 11; Acts 15:5).

    Jesus was a Jewish Reformer like his cousin John Baptist. Both were murdered!

    The Pharisees made a GOD out of Jesus & removed him out of the way!


    "Beware the LEAVEN/TEACHINGS of the Pharisees………."Matthew 16:6

    We have these teachings today in the form of the BABYLONIAN TALMUD!


  3. luckylarrysilverstein says:

    Shia say it was Aisha & Hafsa!

    If you Google: Aisha & Hafsa Poisoned Muhammad, you will get the article

  4. slaveofprophet says:

    Dear I am also keen to get file of Ali Sina. 

  5. azab-e-illahe says:

    sickness may surround you, so you may one day realize how evil you thought and wrote. Then may ALLAH guide you, but if you think you will not change and are sure that you are blind and deaf from your heart then I promise to meet you on the you will die and I further promise that ALLAH has forwarded your file to me and I will further punish you in hell.

  6. MischiefManaged says:

    Reading about the sicko Muhammed increases your faith? It's a blind faith then. 

  7. MischiefManaged says:

    He was certainly not a great person. He was a rotten, immoral person. You show that there are more fools born every day.

  8. cchuckc says:

    //Sahih al-Bukhari has hundreds of sayings of the prophet which reveal conflicting and contradictory approach of the prophet to humanity//
    Though there might be some fabrication since all the primary books of Hadeeth were written 300 years after Muhammad, isn't it true that these Hadeeth form the basis of all schools of Islamic Fiqh? If these have conflicting or contradictory accounts then it is far more likely that the person it deals it had a conflicting character (which is true for many of us). Isn't it far more probable that Muhammad took contradictory steps depending on the situation he was facing at any particular moment/event, like we all do? And if that is so, and these Hadeeths are indeed one of the basis of Islamic Theology, then it is clear that Muhammad was a criminal even by the much maligned Arabic civilities of the 7th century AD. After all even an ordinary criminal can make goody goody statements and act benevolently to members of his family, for example.

    //If Quran is true there is no need to read from the numerous books of the sayings of the prophet.//
    But Muhammad himself said that Quran has to be understood in the light of Sunnah, the deeds and words of Muhammad. There are Quranists who think Quran ought to be enough and they are entitled to their view, but there is a reason why the movement didn't acquire wings.

    //It is beyond the Dignity of God to dictate books of magic or the books to teach a man how to have sex. A True, Real and Creative God just helps. //
    Shouldn't that help not be confined to a particular book in a certain language? Shouldn't that help be coded in every human being, and in fact every living being, in a manner that with a well directed effort, call it spiritual realization, the being can expose itself to that wisdom? And if that appeals to you why a Quran will be needed. You say you read critically, a critical reading of Quran doesn't take us too far you see!!!

  9. Hamid Hameed says:

    Sahih al-Bukhari has hundreds of sayings of the prophet which reveal conflicting and contradictory approach of the prophet to humanity. I am Muslim yet confused because I read critically. If Quran is true there is no need to read from the numerous books of the sayings of the prophet. These books are the main source of ridicule against Islam and the prophet. I am of the view that no religion is in its original form. It is enough to believe in a God. It is beyond the Dignity of God to dictate books of magic or the books to teach a man how to have sex. A True, Real and Creative God just helps.

  10. ihateislam says:

    Well said. Thanks for letting me know that "pubh" means 'perverted bum under hell'. It is an excellent decoding of the acronym.

  11. R_not says:

    If you post that it is not true then tell your fellow moslems to stop doing such perversions, and other perversions. When moslems worry more about their own then the rest will stop figuring out what a pervert moe was and not care anymore. (Since it was in the past – moe is still a perverted, thug, but we just won't care anymore).

  12. R_not says:

    Trying to clean up after the perverted prophet of islam is a big job for one as yourself. Sorry, the hadith, koran, sira – and many others – have all said the guy was a pervert, a rapist, pedophile, an adulterer, etc.

    That is just an excuse to use with people who are happily not moslems to try to tell us all that because you are not a moslem, you can not (dare) to know anything islamic. You insult all, but your prophet insults you. There is nothing 'pbuh' about moe unless those 'pbuh' mean 'perverted bum under hell'. I can read islamic texts for myself, and have done so. Unlike moslems who have not read the Bible but then think they know all about Jesus and then will just say the Bible is corrupted without proving it.

  13. Something written and having Islamic title does not mean that Islam has owned it and it could be use as a reference .I can make many stories, I mean Zawadi and Ali Sina raped by someone and can also prove by providing some photos evidences, it is very easy today. People like Ali Sina with zero character credibility are trying to discuss the Greatest Person Prophet Muhammad PBUH it’s very strange. The books and references Quoted by Ali Sina have nothing with authentic books of Islam (Quran, Sahih al-Bukhari).Unfortunately the people who want to discuss the Muhammad PBUH personality are discussing it with a person who knows nothing about Islam. If Islam is so problematic then why it’s growing day by day. People like you are trying to make it controversial because you are from a controversial religion and even you may not know about your actual father.

  14. logic says:

    Something written and having Islamic title does not mean that Islam has owned it and it could be use as a reference .I can make many stories, I mean Zawadi and Ali Sina raped by someone and can also prove by providing some photos evidences, it is very easy today. People like Ali Sina with zero character credibility are trying to discuss the Greatest Person Prophet Muhammad PBUH it’s very strange. The books and references Quoted by Ali Sina have nothing with authentic books of Islam (Quran, Sahih al-Bukhari).Unfortunately the people who want to discuss the Muhammad PBUH personality are discussing it with a person who knows nothing about Islam. If Islam is so problematic then why it’s growing day by day. People like you are trying to make it controversial because you are from a controversial religion and even you may not know about your actual father.

  15. ihateislam says:

    And for consummating the 'marriage' with a 9 year old child, he was the "best of allah's creation".

  16. 1234567 says:

    Everybody knew that Khadija married Muhammad voluntarily for one very simple reason: SHE proposed to HIM. She had to make her father drunk to trick him into consenting. So the whole city knew that Khadija wanted Muhammad. Of course he didn't rape her. But when he married Aisha he was over 18 (to be precise, he was 52) and she was pre-pubescent (to be precise, she was nine years old). She did not menstruate until nearly six years later. So it was obvious that he was an adult and she was a child, meaning that for the first six years their relationship was paedophilic. So that is why people call him a paedophile.
    See? People are fair. We don't accuse him of doing something wrong unless it's obvious that he HAS done something wrong.

  17. yahoo says:

    visit- http://www.hinduwritersforum.org

    do use Google translator if you don't understand Hindi

  18. andre says:

    sir, can u please email me your books that u sent to the above mentioned person…
    i shall be very thankful to you..

  19. Redneck says:

    Hey She-Bear (Shabeer), "Great" Ali Sina is busy explaining the mad Dog Mo-Ham -Mad (Pig Piss Be Upon Him) to all the Kuffars and you mooslimes are searching for him. Go and ask your "Shaitan" Moon god Baal aka Allah…lala…la..lalala.. Go and hump a Camel you you mustard.

  20. Redneck says:

    Ali Sina, what a great job explaining the Pedophile Pig Mo-Ham-Mad (Piss Be Upon Him) created cult. Fun to see all the mooslimes get crazy and start insulting as they have nothing to rebut. Great work . These brain dead mosslime zombies don't have the guts to argue with you so they start lie and use taqqiya. Guys be aware. Mooslimes are orderfed by their "Shaintan" Moon God Baal aka Allah to lie and cheat for their lunatic cult "Pisslam" instigated by the mad Dog Mohammed.

  21. Nizamuddin Sheikh says:

    Dear Rizky,

    I'm also surprised to your wisdom a person who can get "Yesus be born without father? That's a simple thing in my mind." this question answer but a person how not get a false prophet who raped, who teach to kill innocent, burnt villages, looted caravans and tech bad things like eblees activities not got by yourself, A human not only shame on Muhammad but also on you for his foolishness as well as yourself. When anybody ask these question to you first you try to justify by other religious books of other religions after that you ask evidence and in last you also told that is weak hadith or fabricated. While you know very well all this happened but why you all guys tell a lie regarding this, it's beyond my knowledge, first try to learn feel guilty when you and also me for sin that is done, forget " taqiyya" be a humanist first because you have to also live here and other will be also here. Allah/God gave same right to everyone but it is Islam who draw a line between believers and non-believers. If a such religion teach like this throw in dustbin and forget everyone which you have obtained from stupid Mullah and say them adieu.

  22. 1234567 says:

    Yes, the poisoner was a Jewish woman, but no, she was not Safiya. For the record, her name was Zaynab bint Al-Harith, and she had been born in Khaybar (unlike Safiya, who was originally from Medina).

    At the age of fourteen, Safiya was married to a warrior-rabbi named Sallam ibn Mishkam. They were divorced after a very short time, after which Sallam married Zaynab, while Safiya married Kinana. So it is very likely that Safiya and Zaynab were acquainted.

    When Muhammad invaded Khaybar, Sallam was the commander of the defence, but he was killed in the first battle. So Sallam was the first Jew to die for Khaybar, and Zaynab was the last.

  23. Momo says:

    Those who follow Ali Sina never have healthy brain.
    I tell you brothers and sisters, all Ali Sina wants is your hatred to Islam and muslims.
    don't you realize that you are now being brainwashed? your hatred is being raised up to your head as if you want to kill Muhammad and all muslims.

    Read carefully what he writes about Islam, he never speaks politely. I suspect he never knows what polite means. His writing is full of hatred, insult, and offence.

    I don't believe someone who has good education can speak like kids.


  24. chuck says:

    //The prisoners-of-war who were captured were, however, made slaves only under inevitable circumstances .//
    Which used to arise almost always.

    Here's another, this time from Shahi Muslim
    Book 008, Number 3432: Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah her pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)"

    So in this case it is clear that Q;4:24 actually coerces the muslim invaders to have sex with the captive women. What more prove do you need. According to Sharia as soon as a woman is captured and brought to the Islamic territory her marriage becomes annulled and she becomes a slave. So all those "inevitable circumstances" will inevitably arise.

    //It may be seen that during the wars that took place in the time of the Caliphs, nobody was enslaved in Syria, Palestine, Iraq and Egypt.//
    Source please. This is utter lie. Here is an account of what happened in Persia (Kaveh Farrokh, Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War):
    "The local inhabitants made a desperate last stand at Veh Ardashir against the Arabs who finally broke into all of Ctesiphon in 637. For the first time the Arabs witnessed the riches, luxuries, arts, architecture and sophistication of one of the world’s greatest empires. Looting reached epic proportions. One fifth of the looted goods were sent from Ctesiphon to Caliph Omar at Medina. So great was the haul of booty that every Arab soldier was able to appropriate 12000 Dirhams worth of goods roughly the equivalent of 250,000 US Dollars at the time of writing. Nearly 40,000 captured Sassanid noblemen were taken to Arabia and sold as slaves ."

  25. chuck says:

    //'Abrogation is the language of muhammadanism.//
    Thats why used the word. here hoping that he will understand at least a theory borrowed from Muhamadism.

  26. chuck says:

    //His English is too strange to convey meaning except where he copies and pastes.//
    Yes it is.

    And thanks for your appreciation.

  27. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    'Abrogation is the language of muhammadanism.

  28. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Cleanliness to Muhammad had a different connotation from what every body understands. To him, cleanliness meant going to the mosque with semen satins on his gown, using dust to bath or perform ablution in place of water, drinking from a well which contained conterminated materials including clothes used by women during menses, fingering his wives when they menstruated and reciting the filthy quran with his head on his wife's lap while she had her menstrual flow.
    Ordinarily, cleanliness should have meant that a man who had lice would be cleanly shaven and either boil his clothes or burn them together with the bedding. This would have prevented him from being re-infected from the eggs which would have attached themselves to hair follicles and hatched. Not surprisingly, the all unknowing allah was a failure as usual.
    Copy and paste the whole of Bukhari 3:37:495 without leaving gaps. What are you afraid of.

  29. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    I respect your sense of interpretation because, most often, I am unable to decipher what Shabby means. His English is too strange to convey meaning except where he copies and pastes. I could not make any sense of his post you have so admirably responded to. But don't be surprised if he brings up the same argument later.

  30. DivineWind says:

    And the sun sets in a muddy pool of water. Wait a second, how can the set in muddy water ? If it does the whole pool of water will dried up n there will be a huge collusion. The earth would have broken into a fireball n vanished. Fairy tale ?

  31. chuck says:

    //she provided him with food and started looking for lice in his head.[when ???????????during the eating mentioned here ,or prophet ate lice with food mentioned here?????????????//WHAT FOOLISH CLAIM WAS THAT? //
    Do you deny the hadith? Also your question is as illogical as your other 'refutations' are. In case you haven't noticed the text says : "and started looking for lice in his head.". The only ambiguity here is whether the food was also served on his head. Looks unlikely though (She may have had some such feelings, to dump the food on his head, but I am not privy to such thoughts)

  32. chuck says:

    Your posts have all ready being trashed, no, sorry, mauled will be a better word. I abrogate 'trashed' by 'mauled'.

  33. chuck says:

    //lol //
    Yes, freeing a slave is a matter of 'lol' for you. Thanks for the confirmation.

    //so whats u'r mentality consider a man has only 1$,he has two child ,they r in hungry ,what he going do now? //
    Work my way to help feed them. But not sell another human being to fend for my poverty. But this obvious thing may be too much for you and your prophet who thought it apt to trade slaves for the purpose!!

    //Islam being natural & sensual religion,its ever ordered anything illogical /immoral//
    Sensual for sure. You are using this word a lot without knowing its meaning. Pick up a dictionary I say, (but perhaps you don't know what a dictionary means either). http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sensual
    But you are right Islamic principles are mostly affiliated to sensuality.

  34. Amir Khureshi says:

    @ Chuck
    "A prophet should have a completely white dress not a white tunic with blood or dirt on it".
    simply exceptional hahaha.

  35. shabeer says:

    The prisoners-of-war who were captured were, however, made
    slaves only under inevitable circumstances . The Muslims were not in
    the habit of capturing women and children when, in battle, the enemies
    were defeated at their hands. It may be seen that during the wars that
    took place in the time of the Caliphs, nobody was enslaved in Syria,
    Palestine, Iraq and Egypt. If in war, the men were killed or taken as
    prisoners, the women and children will, as a result, become orphans.
    Islam has commanded that they are never to be killed in war. Even if
    the children and women who went to war with their men are captured
    as prisoners, more often than not they were exchanged for Muslim
    prisoners. However, in some instances, Islam did permit their
    enslavement. It will be remembered that this permission was granted
    in a society in which slavery was prevalent.
    In any case, to limit the number of slaves who came into one’s
    possession, by these means under the existing circumstances was quite
    impractical. This was so in the case of slave women also. The question
    here is what could be done with the slaves that come into one’s
    possession through various ways. They could be married off, indeed,
    but to find suitors for slave women is not an easy task. If they are
    married to male slaves who are in his possession, the children that
    they beget will belong to the master. It is only natural that the children
    of slaves have no option but to be the possession of the master who is
    the owner of their parents.
    This meant that they, too, would end up being slaves. Apart
    from either option, they may be unconditionally set free. But such
    freedom will lead to their being rendered orphans, and to a serious
    erosion of values as well. Another option will be to allow her the
    exercise of all her human rights without yet marrying her and to let her
    live with her master. (After all, it would not be practical for all masters
    to set her free and then to marry her). The number of slaves living in
    such wise is limited, the question arises as to what is to be done with
    the other slave women who come beyond this limit but are still staying
    with the master. There would then be no means for them to attain
    their freedom. Their sexuality will then be either neglected or exploited.
    This will thus become the cause of great moral degeneration.
    If these problems are seen in the context of a society in which
    slavery is in existence, the fact that the laws envisioned by Islam in
    the matter are, indeed, very practical ones will become clearly
    manifested. In such a society.

  36. shabeer says:

    2 times answered either post/criticize based on my post or SHUT UP U"R MOUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!

  37. shabeer says:

    she provided him with food and started looking for lice in his head.[when ???????????during the eating mentioned here ,or prophet ate lice with food mentioned here?????????????//WHAT FOOLISH CLAIM WAS THAT?
    Muslim :: Book 2 : Hadith 432
    Abu Malik at-Ash'ari reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Cleanliness is half of faith and al-Hamdu Liliah (Praise be to Allah) fills the scale, and Subhan Allah (Glory be to Allah) and al-Hamdu Liliah (Praise be to Allah) fill upwhat is between the heavens and the earth, and prayer is a light, and charity is proof (of one's faith) and endurance is a brightness and the Holy Qur'an is a proof on your behalf or against you. All men go out early in the morning and sell themselves, thereby setting themselves free or destroying themselves.
    “Truly, God loves those who turn unto Him in repentance and loves those who purify themselves.” (Quran 2:222)
    “O you who believe! When you intend to offer the prayer, wash your faces and your hands (forearms) up to the elbows, wipe your heads, and (wash) your feet up to the ankles. If you are in a state of Janaba (i.e. had a sexual discharge) purify yourself.” (Quran 5:6)

    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 37 :: Hadith 495
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    Whenever a dead man in debt was brought to Allah's Apostle he would ask, "Has he left anything to repay his debt?" If he was informed that he had left something to repay his debts,>>>>>> he would offer his funeral prayer<<<<<, otherwise he would tell the Muslims to offer their friend's funeral prayer. When Allah made the Prophet wealthy through conquests, he said, "I am more rightful than other believers to be the guardian of the believers, so if a Muslim dies while in debt,>>>>>>>> I am responsible for the repayment of his debt<<<<<<<, and whoever leaves wealth (after his death) it will belong to >>>>>>>his heirs. <<<<<<<<<<<<NOT ORDER FOR HIM"

  38. shabeer says:

    lol so whats u'r mentality consider a man has only 1$,he has two child ,they r in hungry ,what he going do now?
    buy the bread for children or give to charity ????????????

    plz think sensual ,Islam being natural & sensual religion,its ever ordered anything illogical /immoral

  39. Sakat says:

    Just peep below you will have ample proof fo-

    The Earth is flat and mountains are pegs

    (The Quran)

    Earth spread out (like a carpet), mountains firm…15:19

    [al-Hijr 15:19] And the earth We have spread out (like a carpet); set thereon mountains firm and immovable; and produced therein all kinds of things in due balance.

    · God made earth like a carpet spread out…20:53

    [Ta Ha 20:53] "He Who has, made for you the earth like a carpet spread out; has enabled you to go about therein by roads (and channels); and has sent down water from the sky." With it have We produced diverse pairs of plants each separate from the others.

    · The earth is like a carpet spread out…43.10

    [az-Zukhruf 43:10] (Yea, the same that) has made for you the earth (like a carpet) spread out, and has made for you roads (and channels) therein, in order that ye may find guidance (on the way);

    · Allah spread out earth and set mountains standing firm…50: 7

    [Qaf 50:7] And the earth- We have spread it out, and set thereon mountains standing firm, and produced therein every kind of beautiful growth (in pairs)-

    · Allah has spread out the earth…51:48

    [adh-Dhariyat 51:48] And We have spread out the (spacious) earth: How excellently We do spread out!

    · Allah made the earth a carpet…71:19

    [Nuh 71:19] "'And God has made the earth for you as a carpet (spread out),

    · Allah made the earth as a wide expanse…78:6

    [an-Naba' 78:6] Have We not made the earth as a wide expanse,

    · The earth is made as a wide expanse…79:30

    [an-Nazi`at 79:30] And the earth, moreover, hath He extended (to a wide expanse);

    · Allah set up mountains firm lest the earth shake…16:15

    [an-Nahl 16:15] And He has set up on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; and rivers and roads; that ye may guide yourselves;

    · Allah set on mountains high lest the earth shake with them…21:31

    [al-Anbiya' 21:31] And We have set on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with them, and We have made therein broad highways (between mountains) for them to pass through: that they may receive Guidance.

    Allah set mountains immovable…27.61

    [an-Naml 27:61] Or, Who has made the earth firm to live in; made rivers in its midst; set thereon mountains immovable; and made a separating bar between the two bodies of flowing water? (can there be another) god besides God? Nay, most of them know not.

    · Allah set mountains firm for earth not to shake…31:10

    [Luqman 31:10] He created the heavens without any pillars that ye can see; He set on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; and He scattered through it beasts of all kinds. We send down rain from the sky, and produce on the earth every kind of noble creature, in pairs.

    · Allah put mountains standing firm…77:27

    [al-Mursalat 77:27] And made therein mountains standing firm, lofty (in stature); and provided for you water sweet (and wholesome)?

    · Allah put mountains as pegs…78:7

    [an-Naba' 78:7] And the mountains as pegs

    Allah will take the whole world in His hand and will roll up heaven in his right hand…76:526
    The Prophet said, "Allah will take the whole earth (in His Hand) and will roll up the Heaven in His right Hand, and then He will say, "I am King! Where are the kings of the earth? "
    • People will be gathered on reddish white land like pure loaf of bread…76.528
    • Allh's apostle saw a green carpet spread all over the horizon of sky…54.456
    • The real Gabriel is so huge that he covers the whole horizon…54.458

  40. Sakat says:

    Not necessary, I have already done my job ,your own companions visiting this site have come to know the truth about its existence in your Quaran .Time is most precious ,the ball is in your court ,please establish the quaran has not spoken it out that ,the earth is not flat (there is an articles by Sina right here in this site with proof about earth flat story in Quaran ,no one has refuted it till date).

  41. Sakat says:


    !!!ROFALMAO!!!,nice dissection.

  42. chuck says:

    //""""""""""once by me""""""""""' WHERE ? 1)NO2)NO3)NO………….IS IT TRASHED??????????? //
    I have refuted each of your points one-on-one. Where is your reply?

    Yes off-course, you ended by saying that tea is made of sugar. We saw your epic failure.

    Go back look into that thread for your silly arguments regarding the Baker analogy and the tea analogy. If anything the last point in that thread was also made by me. You ran off with your tails between your legs.

  43. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    It is only satan that could have inspired sura 4:24 with so much harm to be inflicted on man. It authorizes war. It sanctions married women not only being enslaved but being raped by their captors. These are all virtues to allah and its messenger of evil.
    Hell will not be hot enough for Muhammad and all of you except you repent of your evil ways.

  44. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    You are quite a fat clown.

  45. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Why did allah not teach its prophet rudimentary rules of personal hygiene?
    Do you mean to say that both allah and its prophet did not know that the simplest way to get rid of head lice is by barbing the hair entirely? How can anything so stupid be holy and all-knowing?
    Muhammad was a false prophet who sowed preference for the rich.
    Now you two muhammadans, can you explain why your prophet was so material conscious? Given that he determines who gets to paradise, being rich is a sure ticket.

  46. chuck says:

    Freeing the slave since a human being has NO RIGHT to keep one. As apostle of Allah Muhamad ought to have known that. Muhamad should have shown the magnanimity to give that person some money to repay his debt and applaud the manumission!!

    Yes, thats the typical Islamic mentality. You and your prophet consider granting freedom to another human a charity!! Your true colour is showing off now.

  47. chuck says:

    Q 4:24 kills your argument since the master has the right to enjoy sex with his slave and as per this hadeeth point 3 requires the slave to submit before such sexual demands of the master.
    Point remains that though Muhamad said a few good things he taught far many bad things. A prophet should have a completely white dress not a white tunic with blood or dirt on it. When his prophethood will be judged it will show up. Since you are from India here's a mishra for you in your language: jo chup rahegi zuban-e-khanjar lahoo pukarey ga aasteen ka

  48. shabeer says:

    Loans, Payment of Loans, Freezing of Property, Bankruptcy
    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 41 :: Hadith 598
    Narrated Jabir: A man manumitted a slave and he had no other property than that, so the Prophet cancelled the manumission (and sold the slave for him). No'aim bin Al-Nahham bought the slave from him.


  49. shabeer says:

    BEFOR IT :
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 750
    Narrated Al-Aswad:

    Aisha said, "I bought Barira and her masters stipulated that the Wala would be for them." Aisha mentioned that to the Prophet and he said, "Manumit her, as the Wala is for the one who gives the silver (i.e. pays the price for freeing the slave)." Aisha added, "So I manumitted her. After that, the Prophet caller her (Barira) and>>>>>>> gave her the choice to go back to her husband or not<<<<<<<<. She said, "If he gave me so much and so much (money) I would not stay with him." So she selected her ownself (i.e. refused to go back to her husband)."

    THE HADEETH FROM Laws of Inheritance (Al-Faraa'id)
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 753
    Narrated Anas bin Malik:

    The Prophet said, "The freed slave belongs to the people who have freed him," or said something similar.
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 755
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    The Prophet said, " If somebody dies (among the Muslims) leaving some property, the property will go to his heirs;


    @ a slave who observes Allah's Rights and Obligations and is sincere to his master.
    Bukhari :: Book 4 :: Volume 52 :: Hadith 255
    Narrated Abu Burda's father:

    The Prophet said, "Three persons will get their reward twice. (One is) a person who has a slave girl and he educates her properly[REMEMBER 1400 Y'RS AGO DURING A DARK AGE ,A MAN TALKING ABOUT SLAVE GIRL EDUCATION,GOOD MANNERS,HER FREEDOM,HER MARRIAGE,THE EUROPEAN JUST 200 YEARS AGO DISCUSSION WAS WAS WOMEN HAS A SOUL ,CHUCK THANK U TO SPREAD TRUTH ] and teaches her good manners properly (without violence) and then manumits and marries her. Such a person will get a double reward. (Another is) a believer from the people of the scriptures who has been a true believer and then he believes in the Prophet (Muhammad). Such a person will get a double reward. (The third is) a slave who observes Allah's Rights and Obligations and is sincere to his master." [MUSLIM SLAVE MUST BEING KIND PERSON,GOOD RELATION WITH HIS MASTER][NOT LIKE NON MUSLIM SALVE SEX WITH HIS MASTER WIFE & DAUGHTER ]

  50. chuck says:

    Its you who is repeating stuffs again and again.
    //the Qur'an has prompted the owner towards having sexual relations with an unmarried female slave. This permission is however restricted to the owner alone. No one else is allowed to use her in this fashion even if it be with the permission of the master! //
    I am saying exactly same thing. The Quran patronizes the master to enslave women for sex. This had been one of the major reason for the slave trade. As far as marriage is concerned, the master has no obligation to marry. He may or may not. And there were methods known to ancient people to avoid pregnancy. I have already quoted the hadith indicating that the muslim invaders used to practice coitus interruptus. The very fact that Quran authorizes slaves to be treated as objects/properties goes a long way in approving slavery.

  51. shabeer says:

    4:24. Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allâh ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage) from your property, desiring chastity, not committing illegal sexual intercourse, so with those of whom you have enjoyed sexual relations, give them their Mahr as prescribed; but if after a Mahr is prescribed, you agree mutually (to give more), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allâh is Ever All­Knowing, All­Wise.

    the Qur'an has prompted the owner
    towards having sexual relations with an unmarried female slave. This
    permission is however restricted to the owner alone. No one else is
    allowed to use her in this fashion even if it be with the permission of
    the master!
    In giving birth to the child of the master, the slave woman
    becomes entitled to new rights. Thenceforth, the master has no right
    to sell her. She becomes the mother of her master’s children. These
    children, too, become entitled to all the rights and privileges enjoyed by
    the master’s other children. Islam disagrees with the Jewish stand
    that the children born through a slave woman have none of the rights
    that should naturally be given to them by virtue of paternity. These
    children are, in all respects, his own children. There is to be no
    discrimination of any kind between them and the other children. With
    the death of the master, the slave woman, who is the mother of his
    children, becomes a free woman. She is then protected by her own
    children. They, too, like the other children, will becomes entitled to a
    share in their father’s inheritance.
    The permission to accept slave women as one’s life-partner
    was, in fact, a provision which would, in the course of one generation,
    cut out the very root of slavery. In reality, therefore, the permission
    granted for having relations with slave women was one among the
    many unique steps taken by Islam in practically eradicating slavery.

    The Qur'an does provide permission for those who wish to marry
    slave women (4:27). Indeed, the Prophet had said that such marriages
    will confer a double reward. “He who provides the slave woman under
    him with proper manners, provides her with the best education, then
    frees her and ultimately marries her will be given a double reward.’’
    (Bukhari, Muslim)
    The guardian of the slave is the master whether it be a male or
    a female slave. The guardianship of the slave woman who is under a
    male master rests with that man. Even if she is to be married off, it is he who will have to carrry it out. It is also he who is to take care of all
    her affairs. It is for this very reason that there is not the need for the
    act of marrying her. In Islam, marriage is a contract that is solemnized
    by the guardian of the woman and the bridegroom. In this case, he is
    both the master and bridegroom. Then the marriage ceremony becomes
    irrelevant in itself.
    The Qur'an instructs that the maximum number of wives for a
    man must be four (4:3). Let us suppose that there is a slave woman
    under the care of a man who has four wives He cannnot, in that case,
    marry her. If he is not ready to grant her freedom, liberation from
    dependence will remain for her a dream. She will then be forced to
    resort to adultery in her bid to satisfy her sexual desire. But since
    there is the law that the master can engage in sexual relations with her
    without recourse to marriage, a solution for all such problems manifests
    itself. It becomes possible for her to walk into freedom when she
    gives birth to her master’s child. It will also be the solution for her
    sexual needs. In a society where slavery prevails, if a solution is not
    provided for such problems it will lead to a large scale erosion of
    values. Along with this, there will also be the problem of the children
    born from adulterous relationships. Naturally, they ,too,will end up as
    slaves. The end result of all this will be that slavery becomes entrenched
    as a system that can, is, no wise, be terminated.
    In the case of Islam, however, the provision is made such that
    the masters are permitted to have sexual relations with woman slaves,
    whereby, within the span of a single generation, slavery is made extinct.
    If ‘marriage’ is made a condition for it, it is not possible then to obtain
    the results envisaged by Islam. Certainly, all masters would not be
    willing to marry their slaves woman Besides, it is impossible for those
    who already have four wives.

  52. shabeer says:





  53. vijay says:

    Abdu Rasul Dear, if we talk about the religion of peace, then from where on earth this fight could come in?

  54. shabeer says:


  55. shabeer says:

    """"""""""once by me""""""""""' WHERE ? 1)NO2)NO3)NO………….IS IT TRASHED???????????


  56. Sakat says:

    The same question you asked me the other weak and i answered it with proof and you ran away from the the thread,keep some shame ,don't get naked every where like your prophet.

  57. shabeer says:

    where???????// plz bring it to me……………..

  58. Sakat says:

    @Slave of Prophet
    You have no sound argument to fight the Infidels,and then you apply your prophets tactics of "surprise attacking" and killing the unprepared opponents.That you people have demonstrated this other day,by beheading a brave soldier in Britain.Even in one-o-one fight you are cowards.You people enter the house as guest and in their deep sleep kill the host.You take refuge in west and kill natives .Your Quaran is criminal manual ,don't worry the momentum has begun against you zombies every where in the world, time will take care.

  59. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    It is not only the 'non-believers' that you fight. The fight is even more intense among you muhammadans. It has always and will ever remain so. Think of the battle of Yamama or the battle of the camels which led to the extinction of the hafiz. With them gone, so did the authentic sources of the quran leaving the compilation to be done with very dubious materials.
    Six months after the evil prophets' death, his favorite wife, Aisha, haunted his favorite daughter to her early grave.
    It was the 'believers' who dispatched Muhammad's grandsons to ' the land of see me no more'.
    In modern times, the believers are casting terror into the hearts of 'believers' all over the world.
    Saddam Husdein, Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar turned their backs to their own kind and the first two could not get to their paradise . How disgraceful it is to be the feedstock for marine worms!
    You have exposed further the imbecility of Muhammad whom you say incorrectly believed that the Trinity means joining companions to allah. Christians do not believe in allah which originated as a pagan god. It is not their place to join or disjoin partners to something as dead and powerless as that.

  60. vijay says:

    did you fought your own ego ?

  61. vijay says:

    You must marry your sister or daughter who is less then 6 years to him.

  62. Slave of Prophet says:

    It is duty of believers to fight against non-believers in path of Allah. Holy Quran orders the believers
    As a Muslim we all should act according to these verse.
    Quran (2:244) – "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

    Quran (2:216) – "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."
    Quran (3:56) – "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

    Quran (3:151) – "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

    Quran (8:15) – "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

  63. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Slave mentality
    What a moral boosting consolation for an incredibly poor performer! If muhammadans put up such shows of disgrace as Shabby has done, then the movement will self destruct sooner than Muhammad predicted.

  64. Slave of Prophet says:

    Bravo, Shabeer. Today I realize why Muslim are Allah's best creation. You are one of them. Prophet will be delighted how you are fighting for his religion. I think you are above even Zakir Naik. You have guts to refute the non-believers. Shabeer is mercy of Allah in form of believers. Shabeer is fighting for the cause of believers.

  65. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    It is either you dislodge arguments with facts or simply shut up. No amount of noise making will amount to even a flimsy fact. Quantity is not the same as quality. After having placed the evidence before you, it is your place to counter. Instead of doing that you have resorted to typical muhammadan ranting.

  66. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Splendid. Bring up some more.

  67. chuck says:

    Further to the one from Quran here's more scriptural evidence:: Shahi Bukhai, Volume 8, Book 80, Number 753:
    Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, "The freed slave belongs to the people who have freed him," or said something similar.
    So the 'freedom' was not much of a freedom!!

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 255: Three persons will get their reward twice…..(The third is) a slave who observes Allah's Rights and Obligations and is sincere to his master.
    In other words to get double the reward the slaves are being coerced to remain as such!!

    A man did a good job of manumission, but Mo cancels it since he had outstanding debt. He even goes ahead and trades the slave!!
    Volume 3, Book 41, Number 598: Narrated Jabir: A man manumitted a slave and he had no other property than that, so the Prophet cancelled the manumission (and sold the slave for him). No'aim bin Al-Nahham bought the slave from him.

    Mo here actively patronizes supplying (sex?) slave girls to uncles vis-a-vis manumission. He even offers a bribe (you have got more reward).
    Volume 3, Book 47, Number 765: Narrated Kurib: the freed slave of Ibn 'Abbas, that Maimuna bint Al-Harith told him that she manumitted a slavegirl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, "Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?" He said, "Have you really?" She replied in the affirmative. He said, "You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles."

    Another instance to actual slave trading done by Allah's free-thinking prophet.
    Volume 3, Book 34, Number 351: Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah: A man decided that a slave of his would be manumitted after his death and later on he was in need of money, so the Prophet took the slave and said, "Who will buy this slave from me?" Nu'aim bin 'Abdullah bought him for such and such price and the Prophet gave him the slave.

    And I am yet to open Abu Dawud and Shahi Muslim!!

  68. chuck says:

    //You are a mighty headed dolt//
    Not surprising considering he is a muslim.

  69. chuck says:

    Foolish question. I am not talking about any natural calamity. I am giving you evidence that Arabia AFTER the advent of Islam was the foremost player in slave trading. Looking at the sheer number of slaves mentioned in the article it is impossible to believe that this was happening with state and religious approval.

    I also posted verse from Quran : Q:4:24, here's the first part: Also (prohibited are)
    Women already married, Except those Whom your right hands possess
    You have completely agreed that Quran authorizes masters to sexually exploit slave women. Isn't that patronizing slavery? Didn't Muhamad himself had around 30 slaves some of who were women e.g. Maria the Copt? here is another quote from the world renowned Encyclopedia of Islam, page 13 :: "The purchase of female slaves for sex was lawful from the perspective of Islamic law, and this was the most common motive for the purchase of slaves throughout Islamic history."

    I will again quote a hadeeth that you yourself quoted believing that I will be deceived.
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 77 :: Hadith 600
    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

    That while he was sitting with the Prophet a man from the Ansar came and said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get slave girls from the war captives and we love property; what do you think about coitus interruptus?" Allah's Apostle said, "Do you do that? It is better for you not to do it, for there is no soul which Allah has ordained to come into existence but will be created."

    This is further proof that: 1. War captives were to be traded into slavery. 2. Muslims used to have sex with them and were fearful that a pregnant woman won't fetch much money. 3. Muhamad was there with them and he didn't ask them to free the slaves or at least maintain their 'asmat'.

    //self contradiction :The Arab slave trade originated before Islam and lasted more than a millennium.//
    Where is the contradiction. I never claimed that the slave trading wasn't present before Islam. That anyway was never the point. The point was contrary to how and what you were asserting Islam actually patronized slavery and it flourished massively during the said period – 650 AD to 1900 AD despite Arabia being predominantly Islamic. Over a period of 1400, that is about 70 generations one should expect drastic reduction even if the reduction per generation be small!! But no, what do we see the Islamic countries are the very last countries to abolish slavery.

  70. chuck says:

    Doesn't matter if you are a board member of Niche of Truth. You didn't point to that site, you linked to your personal blog site and claimed it your own article. And seeing the language it is clear that you are not the author of that article anyway. And there is no evidence that you are a board member of that silly organisation or that the article itself hasn't been lifted by Niche of Truth from another source.

  71. chuck says:

    All your 12 points have been already trashed once by me and once by I-HATE-ISLAM.

    Thousands of errors have been already pointed out. Your Muhamad believed that there are Jinns. Have you seen any or can you provide any evidences? Your quran itself says that Allah keeps on abrogating verses. How can one trust that book? It is the kind of stuff that might soothe your collective posteriors, but only that much.

  72. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    You are a mighty headed dolt.With all the abrogation, you still have the nerve to call that book of evils divine,pure and uncorrupted. Muhammad said allah would cause him to forget a verse or chapter after reciting it and will then give him a 'better one'. Was allah drunk or on drugs not to have known that what he was 'revealing' would not be good enough? When the people scoffed at the fraud, there was always a 'revelation' to justify the change. Ibn Ishaq said that he saw different manuscripts of the quran and no two copies were the same.That was even after Uthman had standardized several editions and came up with the uthamnic recension which was compiled by Yazid.
    If age is the determinant of divinity, then Homer's classics should be given super divine status for their are much older than the quran and have not been changed throughout the centuries.He lived in the 8th century BC. To even make it more divine, Homer was physically handicapped but his works have remained unique and uncorrupted to date.
    The quran is Muhammad's piece of shit.

  73. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    regrettably, one those Woolwich murderers is of Nigerian origin like me. But he converted to muhammadanism in 2001 and the result is the shameful depravity which was demonstrated in the open street today. Sad as the death of that young man and the agony brought to his family may be, I think it actually serves the British right with the political correctness of the left wing politicians and press. In spite of the overwhelming evidence that the killing was religion induced, both the press and govt have scrambled to distance muhammadanism from it. I doubt that a daily occurrence of such killing will wake the British up from their muhammadan induced slumber and let them demand that there is only one Britain and whoever does not want to conform with the norms of a civilized society should voluntarily ship out or be thrown out. But 'liberalism' will prevent this from happening. So the British will continue in their sleep till they are blown or hacked to oblivion.
    Also today, a Chechen immigrant terrorist was shot and killed in Orlando, USA. He was confessing to a triple murder which he took part in in 2011 before going berserk by attacking a policeman.
    Still today, muhammadan terrorists killed 20 soldiers in Niger and wounded scores of others. Since the beginning of this year no day passes without jihadists killing people like flies. No other religion has been mentioned so far. With all these, one gets startled when the press dubs muhannadanism 'a religion of peace'. Could it be that they know more that everyone else?

  74. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    there is no point in having to waste my precious time responding to this trash. When you come up with something that merits a second look I will definitely give you my reaction. For now, suit yourself.

  75. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    the quran calls Muhammad a compulsive liar. It says that the quran is the noise making of the impostor.
    Then as an after thought, Muhammad hastily added:"IT IS THE REVELATION FROM THE LORD OF ALL CREATURES".
    Why did allah not say right from the beginning that this was its revelation? As further proof of Muhammad as a liar, verse 44 says:"HAD HE INVENTED LIES CONCERNING US, WE WOULD HAVE SEIZED HIM BY THE RIGHT HAND AND CUT OFF HIS HEART'S VEIN (AORTA): NOT ONE OF YOU COULD HAVE PROTECTED HIM"
    Muhammad presented his words as those of God and deceived people from worshiping the true God. He got 'degraded' for such audacity. Nobody or anything was able to stop him from being poisoned or could prevent the poison from having its effect on the he-devil.
    Muhammadans claim that sura al-fatiha or the opening is the mother of the quran. That, according to them, was the first 'revelation'. But ibn Kathir, in his tafseer on this sura, says that the verse is not the verbatim words of allah. They are mostly those of Muhammad. This fact has also found corroboration in your saying that"THE PROPHET'S SAYINGS AND ACTIONS WERE PRIMARILY BASED ON REVELATION FROM ALLAH-"
    This means that there were other sources of his actions and sayings. In fact, one of such sources was satan which inspired him to write the 'satanic verses', if not the entire worthless book. Chuck had earlier referred to the satanic verses.
    Muhammadans are despicable creatures who are never consistent. When it suits them they refer to the hadiths. But when they are cornered, they reject the hadiths. One of these rejecters was Rashad Khalifa. In his book "Quran, Hadith and Islam' he said that after 12 years of research, he had physical evidence that the hadith and sunna are satanic innovations which do not represent the life of Muhammad.
    On the hadith, you say that each represents a source of divine guidance which allah granted its prophet. Between you and Khalifa, who is correct?
    The level of deceit and somersaults in muhammadanism is simply bewildering.
    There is no mincing of words in sura 16:44 that the quran is "THE BOOK OF DARK PROPHECIES". Hardly can anyone find a better way of describing it. From its pages the 'dark' incident took place this morning in London with the killing and decapitation of a British soldier by two muhammadans.
    That is how Muhammad taught his followers to "explain to men what is sent for them", and that they may be terrorized " to give thought".

  76. Sakat says:

    “Verily this is a Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds”

    The lord of the world reveals ,"the moon is above the star".

  77. Sakat says:

    /quran the message from almighty god has responsible inform his created human the truth /

    And the truth is ,earth is flat.

  78. Sakat says:

    The term "Allah" is synonymous of "Satan",don't be confused him to almighty God.

  79. Sakat says:

    /The Qur'an recognizes all the scriptures/
    The other scriptures are not maligned ,they do not required any recognitions from a criminal manual.

  80. Sakat says:

    Quaran contained soothing law for pedophiles.

  81. Sakat says:

    What is marriage and what is prostitution both are license to sex ,but it is heinous crime to procure license to fondle with a toddler by an old man,of using his power .

  82. Sakat says:

    Why Allah so much interested in slave trading by MAD MOHAMMED.

  83. Sakat says:

    why your prophet of doom married a toddler of 6.

  84. Sakat says:

    Why your Allah say's earth is flat .

  85. vijay says:

    Sahbbo Darling! congrats, you brothers from Nigeria have done very "noble" task in woolwich. Now you will paste a good lot textual matter which will be proving otherwise and Abdu Rasul will justify it quoting prosecution of Muslims by west and Israel. But you saying that proof of some text being divine is its being unaltered for say 1400 years is absurd. Do you know Rashad Khalifa and he edited the text in question . By the way there is book about sex called Kamsutra by sage Vatsyayan. It was compiled after 600 years of this sage. Same text is at present without change since 200 CE. Can that be divine ? Present version of Holy Kuran is the one which was produced by a Sahaba and not prophet and there are Shias which claim that it is only 1/ 3rd of the original one. Rest is with Imam Mahadi. Does it matters to the God or the Last prophet if some one follows or believes or does not? But if some one kills one humans, he has killed the humanity.

  86. shabeer says:





  87. Intelligent lad says:

    Savage , You are a Mallu like me…..Shame on you. Is Kunalikutty the ice-crem vendor your leader. Your great grand mother was a nair girl raped by Muslims from Mysore. You are a rape product. I hang my head in shame that we are from same state. Listen Kerala belongs only to Kaffirs.

  88. shabeer says:



    self contradiction :The Arab slave trade originated before Islam and lasted more than a millennium.[22][23][24] Arab traders brought Africans across the Indian Ocean from present-day Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania, South Sudan,[25] Eritrea, Ethiopia [same link]

  89. shabeer says:


  90. shabeer says:

    #what is the guarantee that other verses aren't from Satan ?
    1. It , itself, declares that it is a divine Scripture
    2. It shall remain unchanged upto the Last Day.
    3. The path of right conduct that it prescribes is faultless.
    4. It is practicable.
    5. The history that it teaches is faultless and honest.
    6. Its literature is incomparable.
    7. The prophecies made in it can be seen to have come true.
    8. The references in it to the varied phenomena of nature, as
    representing the signs of God, are free of controversies.
    9. There is no reference, whatsoever, of an unscientific nature in it.
    10. It is free of all contradictions.
    11. None has been able to take up the challenge it poses when it calls
    forth all, and any, to produce an equivalent of at least one of its
    12. The person who was appointed with it in the world was himself of
    a truthful and selfless nature.


    1. Revelation: The Prophet’s sayings and actions were primarily based on revelation from Allah (One True God) and, as such, must be considered a fundamental source of guidance along with Qur’an. Allah in the Qur’an said concerning the Prophet (pbuh) –
    He does not speak on his own, out of his own desire; That is but a Revelation that is revealed to him.
    [Quran 53:3-4]
    Therefore, the Hadeeth represents a personal source of divine guidance which Allah granted His Prophet (pbuh) which was similar in its nature to the Qur’an itself. The Prophet (pbuh) reiterated this point in one of his recorded statements, “Indeed, I was given the Qur’an and something similar to it along with it.” [Sunan Abu Dawud]
    2. Tafseer: The preservation of the Qur’an was not restricted to protecting its wording from change. Was that the case, its meanings could be manipulated according to human desires, while maintaining its wording. However, Allah also protected its essential meanings from change by entrusting the explanation of the meanings of Qur’an to the Prophet (PBUH) himself. Allah states the following in the Qur’an regarding its interpretation:
    (We sent them) with Clear Signs and Books of dark prophecies; and We have sent down unto thee [Muhammad (pbuh)] the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them, and that they may give thought. [Qur’an 16:44]

  91. shabeer says:

    quran the message from almighty god has responsible inform his created human the truth about him & what he actually created,destiny of human,bec's he love us ,he never hide anything from us,don't compare religious text with some human creation like art&poem………………… more than hell quran talking about thouheed & good manners keep it up ,it the way of paradise:
    argue in a kindly manner with those given earlier revelation, 16:125, 29:46
    avoid becoming involved in matters you know nothing of, 17:36
    avoid grave sins and shameful deeds, 53:32
    avoid guesswork about one another, 49:12
    be just in your opinions, 6:152
    community should be moderate, 2:143, 25:67
    conceit discouraged, 4:36, 57:23
    don't chide those who seek your help, 93:10
    don't consider yourself pure, 53:32
    don't deride others, 49:11, 104:1
    don't mention evil things openly, 4:148
    don't speak ill of each other, 49:12, 104:1
    don't spy on each other, 49:12
    each group given a law and way of life, 2:148, 5:48, 10:47, 10:74, 13:38, 16:36, 16:63, 16:84
    and a prophet, 10:47, 16:36
    and a way of worship, 22:67
    Allah could have made them one community, 5:48, 11:118, 16:93, 42:8
    one community under Allah, 21:92
    forgive Jews who distort the Qur'an, 5:13
    forgive non-believers, 31:15, 45:14
    forgive readily, 42:37
    maligning believers is sinful, 33:58
    men (toward women), 24:30
    peacemakers rewarded, 42:40
    rulers make decisions after consultations, 42:38
    speak justly toward those in want, if you can do nothing else, 17:28
    towards aging parents in your care, 17:23
    towards other Muslims, 33:6
    towards others, 17:26-29, 17:35, 17:53, 60:8
    towards parents, 46:15
    towards slaves, 4:36, 24:33
    treat non-belligerent non-believers with equity, 60:8

  92. shabeer says:

    SD wrong…………quran ever divine & ever pure ,evidence :1400 years of history no change even a word from it………….
    15:9. Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'ân) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).

    7:196. "Verily, my Walî (Protector, Supporter, and Helper, etc.) is Allâh Who has revealed the Book (the Qur'ân), and He protects (supports and helps) the righteous.

    41:41. Verily, those who disbelieved in the Reminder (i.e. the Qur'ân) when it came to them (shall receive the punishment). And verily, it is an honourable respected Book (because it is Allâh's Speech, and He has protected it from corruption

  93. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    in addition to such clear evidence as provided by Chuck, please yourself with the following confirmation of the quran having been changed:
    From chapter 9, 157 verses were removed living it with the current length.
    Like the rajam verse, the verse of suckling has also been removed.
    When something is removed, it signifies changes because the originality has been lost.
    Zayid, who was saddled with the task of compiling the quran, described the assignment as being more difficult than moving a mountain. The reason for that statement was very apparent. The source materials he had were of dubious quality and the best reciters had either been killed during the internecine wars or were excluded from Zayid's committee.
    Without the fear of the slightest contradiction, the quran in circulation today is neither the original as recited by Muhammad nor can its textual quality be vouched for.
    Yet eternal morons regard the worthless compilation as being of divine origin. What god would author such utter nonsense?

  94. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    I always enjoy it when you use your own sources to prove the assertion of your opponents. The verse in Bukhari you quoted only solidifies the position that slavery remains eternally an integral part of muhammadanism. It calls on muhammadans to free only those slave who are themselves muhammadans. It is silent on those salves who are of other faiths.Muhammadans hold that what the religion does not explicitly forbid is allowed. By that logic enslaving non muhammadans is not forbidden.
    Note that he used the present tense which means that muhammadanism still practices slavery and slave trade. To him a horse has more value than a human being whose degraded position is that of a slave without rights.

  95. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    that a book or anything makes some lofty claims for itself/himself does not, in any way, mean that such a claim is genuine. It is not what the individual says about himself but what others say about him that matters. Truth remains for ever and does to require force to proclaim or maintain its perpetual quality. This does not apply to the quran and Muhammad, its author, Coercion is the only way that both have used to able to command acceptance.
    On Muhammad's prophethood, the test by Tiamiyyah is very apt. He said that when someone calls himself a prophet, he should be judged beyond his claims by looking at his actions and statements to see if he merits who or what he projects himself to be. Muhammad with all his non-stop vices cannot conceivably be a prophet except that of something as cruel as allah.
    Even at that, allah was dissatisfied with Muhammad and stood aside while he was poisoned. Allah further promised to send a beast with another message since Muhammad was such a disappointment. This means that contrary to the believe by muhammadans, their prophet is not the last messenger. In fact, Rashad Khalifa of the Submitters of Tucson, confirmed this and declared himself as the latest messenger. It should not be forgotten that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had earlier done the same thing.
    All these claims and counterclaims inexorably prove that muhammadanism is neither truthful nor consistent. Considering all the evil it unleashes on humanity, muhammadanism leaves much to be desired.

  96. chuck says:

    //# already been changed…….where ? not the line can u prove any word? plz bring it the evidence//
    1. Do you deny the verses commonly referred to as The Satanic verses? If these were revealed then Muhamad himself edited them out later. And if it was revealed by Satan then what is the guarantee that other verses aren't from Satan (they definitely look so).

    2. Shahi Ak Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 527:
    Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
    'Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he
    recites.' Ubai says, 'I have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Apostle and will not leave for anything
    What was the point of leaving some of what Ubai used to recite?

    3. In fact why standardizing was required in the first place? You standardize something because variations exist.

    4. Where is the verse of stoning? As of now the basis of stoning are only hadeeths (for example Shahi Al Bukhari Volume 8, Book 82, Number 806). However if it was decreed by Allah, it should have been in Quran after all the verse of 100 lashes is indeed in Quran!! This clearly indicates that Quran is incomplete or some parts are missing. Either way it falsifies your claim.

  97. chuck says:

    //However, on the other hand, it is of primary importance that if a book is of divine origin, it must, of its own accord, or by way of the messenger who had come with it, raise that claim.//
    Another bunch of copy pastes. If a book is divine inspired reading it will tell me so. If the language of a poem is from the top draw, reading it will tell me so. In other words the book or the poem or any literary piece is brilliant not because it claims to be so, but a vast majority of people have enjoyed their brilliance and attested them to be masterpieces. What you are saying is that "The Monalisa" isn't a masterpiece because Vinci didn't declare it to be one before/after creating it!!
    It is the Islamic Allah which is so insecure that it has to make such lofty claims, no wonder Quran keeps on repeating how merciful, how great, how powerful Allah is. Such is the poor quality that the Allah has to remind its many attributes every second verse. Such a book can only survive by creating fear psychosis, its not surprising that hell-fire(An-Naar) is mentioned 145 times in Quran but paradise far lesser times!!!

  98. chuck says:

    This is further certificate that you are a liar. Your blog?? That stuff has been in circulation for some time. You possibly copied it from http://www.nicheoftruth.org/pages/the_quran_and_s
    And in your site you even didn't acknowledge where you copied it from. This is how you treat another fellow Muslim, how can a normal human being expect anything better from you??

    And it is very easy to know what you write and what you copy. Your English is pathetic, one correct sentence and you are caught with your pants down.

  99. chuck says:

    If there is a liar, its you.
    First you claimed that Saudi or Mauritania weren't the last countries to officially disown slavery. From your own link I quoted texts which off-course you choose to overlook. Now the second link that I provided: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade . Now I quote the very first line written in this article in chapter named Scope of the trade: "Historians estimate that between 10 and 18 million Africans were enslaved by Arab slave traders and taken across the Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and Sahara desert between 650 and 1900". Check the time again 650 AD was when Islam was firmly established in the Arabia.

    Its rather foolish. You prophet was not only a rapist and looter, he was a great liar. So while it is true that he might have said a few good things his intent was never good. What then explains that he kept many slaves both khidmatgars and kaneezes and allowed slave trading?

    The meaning of the above hadeeth is very clear. He demands others to make a few sacrifices so that he sounds good, what a devious person!! You don't have to know any language for that, just a bit of understanding of history is enough. It doesn't matter what he says, for action speaks louder than any word. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_and_slavery
    Quote from this link : "Available historical sources confirm the circumstances of Muhammad's direction and ownership of slaves including slave concubines – amounting to at least 34 males and some 16 females – commencing in his infancy with the death of his father and continuing uninterrupted until his own death more than six decades later"

    And after all this you still can't devite from the main point which was that Mariah the Copt was a slave and Muhamad had established sexual contact with her. She gave birth to a son and it could be speculated that Muhamad wasn't the father. And even if he was, it is surprising that a man with a dozen young wives and the potency of 30 men could only produce one child during his entire career of alleged prophethood!!

  100. shabeer says:

    @I-HATE-ISLAM & rolaaus

    Laws of Rape (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)

    If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces [TIP] of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her[PUNISHMENT OF RAPE MARRIAGE?], and he will never be allowed to divorce her[OH!!!!!!!! GOD ALLOWED MASS RAPPING].

    (2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB) A BIBLE PROPHET DAVID DECLARE:
    I will take your wives [plural] while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'

    Judges 21: 10- 24 :
    They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, "Go and hide in the vineyards. When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife!…………They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance.
    Numbers 31: 7-18 :
    They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.FOR WHAT?
    Deuteronomy 20: 10-14:
    As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.KILL MEN KEEP WOMEN /ENJOYMENT WHAT WAS IT?


    Said Rabbi Joseph, "Come and take note: A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. And if a Levir has had intercourse with her, he has acquired her. And one can be liable on her account because of the law prohibiting intercourse with a married woman. And she imparts uncleanness to him who has intercourse with her when she is menstruating, to convey uncleanness to the lower as to the upper layer [of what lies beneath]. If she was married to a priest, she may eat food in the status of priestly rations. If one of those who are unfit for marriage with her had intercourse with her, he has rendered her unfit to marry into the priesthood. If any of those who are forbidden in the Torah to have intercourse with her had intercourse with her, he is put to death on her account, but she is free of responsibility [M.Nid. 5:4]. Sanhedrin 7/55B [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/guido_deimel/judaism.html#132]

  101. shabeer says:


  102. shabeer says:

    #The arab slave trade STARTED with the advent of Islam…………………

    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 46 :: Hadith 693
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    The Prophet said, "Whoever frees a Muslim slave, Allah will save all the parts of his body from the (Hell) Fire as he has freed the body-parts of the slave." Said bin Marjana said that he narrated that Hadith to 'Ali bin Al-Husain and he freed his slave for whom 'Abdullah bin Ja'far had offered him ten thousand Dirhams or one-thousand Dinars.







  103. Sanatan Dharma says:

    No book is divine. All books are perishable & can be destroyed easily. A divine book should not be perishable. But we find every book get perish after 20, 200 or 300 hundred years after. I can tear the Quran book into many pieces.

  104. shabeer says:

    #1“(This is) the revelation of the Book in which there is no
    doubt, from the Lord of the Worlds.” (32:2).
    “Verily this is a Revelation from the Lord of the Worlds”
    “(It is a Revelation) sent down by (Him), the Exalted in
    Might, Most Merciful” (36:5).

    Will a book become divine merely by way of its own claim of being
    divinely inspired?

    No. Any book which lays claim to its own divine status must
    necessarily prove that it is, indeed, divinely inspired. However, on
    the other hand, it is of primary importance that if a book is of divine
    origin, it must, of its own accord, or by way of the messenger who
    had come with it, raise that claim. In reality, none has the right to
    claim divine status for a book unless and until either the Book itself
    or the person who came with it makes that claim first. If, the followers
    of the book, then, say that it is of divine origin, it will be but their
    witnessing to the truth of the claim already made by the book or by
    the individual who had come with it. But if that claim itself is not
    there, any witnessing to that claim is obviously irrelevant.
    This is the case with all the other religious scriptures apart from
    the Qur'an. None of them has claimed divine origin for itself. In fact,
    it was their followers who conferred on them the status of divinity. As
    of the laws of dialectics and argumentation, this is but a gross anomaly;
    a thing so irrelevant as to be unworthy of consideration by the intelligent.
    It is to be dismissed as simply as the witness who appear in court for
    the proceedings of a case in which there is not the very subject of
    contention itself.
    This, however, is not the case with the Qur'an. It itself declares
    that it is of divine origin. As such there exists a claim. What remains to
    be seen, then, is the veracity of this claim. Indeed, there is meaning
    and substance in such a verification. This is quite unlike the futile
    and pointless scrutiny of the divine origin of books which make no
    such claim in the first place.
    # already been changed…….where ? not the line can u prove any word? plz bring it the evidence ,& prove u'r claim,the right /moral/sensual/courageous/ people believe the trustful evidence…………i give 12 condition of divinity ,plz prove at least,one with clear evidence .EITHER PROVE WITH EVIDENCE OR DARE TO COME TRUE RELIGION OF GOD,LIKE THE COURAGEOUS PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD ,ESPECIALLY WOMEN,PLZ STOP ………….bla………..bli………..blu………..THAT not a trustful/valuable replay for criticizing world most superior religion " ISLAM "

  105. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    ba ba,
    living with islam is worse than hell. So one does not need to get to the hereafter before experiencing hell. Muhamadans burn people all the time.

  106. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    very interesting.

  107. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Hi Chuck,
    the ploy by these muhammadans, in resorting to argumentum verbosium, is to irritate the other person so that he loses interest and abandons the debate, The muhammadan the claims a cheap victory. Very disingenuous or should we call that muhammadan negative ingenuity!

  108. rolaaus says:

    WOw, really, Wasim … if you can't see the difference than there is the explanation right there as to why you are a Muslim and why there is no hope for you to see the truth about a man that was sexually attracted to a six year old and as far as what accounts we do have couldn't wait until she reached her first mensus to consumate their marriage

  109. rolaaus says:

    the ONLY difference between Hitler and Mohammad is that Hitler abhorred all religions, as opposed to claiming to be the "best of creation" and the leader of a new/old religion that all other prophets followed but that he was the first one to follow … umm, wait, I'm confused, but then again, that's MoMad for you and his Islamic followers

  110. rolaaus says:

    All the passages of Hadith that you quote actually promote having sex with your slaves (non-wives), however in the one case that a slave complains her master forces her to commit fornicatin it says to not force your slaves into PROSTITUTION (not "condoned sexual relations with their master" but rather paid sexual relations with another) … and even then it only says not to force them "if they prefer chastity", so in other words it is completely OKAY for a Muslim to be a PIMP! if his "bitches" are willing ho's!

  111. rolaaus says:

    Islamrules, Yes, I know for a fact that the author of this site/article suffered some sort of abuse, he tells us about it on multiple occasions, and he will admit it himself, the abuse he suffered was GROWING UP MUSLIM!

    And as for your baseless accusation about low IQ, well, your lowest of IQ is confirmed when you talk about different "versions" of the bible being "changed" when you should know (if you have half a brain cell) that all the various "versions" are nothing more than TRANSLATIONS just like your Qur'an has multiple English translations! What's wrong, why can't the Qur'an be CORRECTLY translated in to ONE SINGLE English edition?

    And while we are at it, why don't you give me the PROPER translation of Surah 3:55 .. you know the one that says … When Allah said: O Jesus, I will cause thee to die and exalt thee in My presence and clear thee of those who disbelieve and make those who follow thee above those who disbelieve to the day of Resurrection

    How can a Muslim possibly believe that Jesus' teachings fell by the wayside and got corrupted when Allah (supposedly) promises Jesus HIS FOLLOWERS WILL be ABOVE those who disbelieve UNTIL THE DAY OF RESURRECTION! You can't possibly believe that it took Allah 600 years for him to make this promise come to pass when Allah (allegedly) promises this to Jesus BEFORE HE DIES!

  112. rolaaus says:

    You are absolutely right, AJ all those Christian countries in Europe and the US itself where you can't build a mosque or repair one without first coming to the government first for permission, where Muslims aren't allowed to proselytize their religion to others, where Muslim "citizens" aren't allowed to press charges against Christians who harass them, with assault and theft, where Christian women are raped then charged with committing adultery/sexual immorality … oh no, WAIT that's what happens in MUSLIM COUNTRIES! … Yes, in deed, you are right, everyone should fight for people's basic HUMAN rights, and the BEST way to do this is to ABOLISH SHARI'A law!

  113. chuck says:

    //Debating with you is a nightmare second only to muhammadanism. Your arguments go in circles and, no matter how many times your 'copy and pasted' words are refuted with proofs, you keep on repeating them//
    That is because he employs argumentum verbosium. This is a method in Sophism (what else do you expect in Islam) where you employ a lot of deviant rhetoric to prove whatever you want the other to believe.

  114. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    save your wish for Muhammad and yourself.

  115. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    by being on this website you are also following the devil. That means not going to Muhammad's paradise which is the one place no decent human being wants to go.

  116. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    It is reported that on seeing the baby Aisha, Muhammad longed for her and concocted a story of having seen her wrapped in swaddling clothes and given to him by an angel. That the child was still wrapped in clothes shows that he started setting his eyes on her while she might still have been in the cradle. The story goes on to say, that after Abu Bakr had initially rejected Muhammad's interest to marry Aisha, Muhammad devised a plan and asked Abu Bakr to send date fruits to him by Aisha. When the poor little thing got to the old fox, he started to touch her inappropriately. She pulled herself away and remarked that the public thought of him as an upright man but there he was being perfidious. The embarrassed girl ran home and complained to her father about his friend's uncouth behaviour. Ever ready to support Muhammad, Abu Bakr replied that she had just been betrothed to him that was why he treated her as his wife.
    Aisha was " married" to Muhammad when she was only six years old. At the age of 9, still playing with her dolls and in the swing, she was handed over to Muhammad who wasted no time in consummating the "marriage".
    With a man like Muhammad, who was a terror, there was no way that Aisha could have refused to accede to his demand without knowing the consequence. In normal circumstances, a man of Muhammad's age cannot have carnal knowledge of such a near baby. There is no evidence that the age of consent was that low in Arabia. Any sexual intercourse with a minor is criminal even if the child has given her consent. That is why it is rape. The man was a rapist.
    Khadija was 15 years older than Muhammad and had already been married twice with children even though muhammadan literature hardly mentions them. She was quite a matron who was responsible for her decisions. Aisha lacked the capacity to take such decisions.

  117. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    You are absolutely right. Actually, he was the prophet of doom.

  118. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Debating with you is a nightmare second only to muhammadanism. Your arguments go in circles and, no matter how many times your 'copy and pasted' words are refuted with proofs, you keep on repeating them.Since you are deaf, dumb and blind, let us revisit your so-called evidences in support of the quran's divine nature.
    1,"It, itself, declares that it is a divine Scripture". This is the same as a criminal testifying for himself
    to prove his innocence. There is no extrinsic evidence, outside Muhammad and his book to
    support this contention. I can bear myself witness that I am some extraordinary being.
    2."It shall remain unchanged up to the Last Day". It was changed by the scribes who wrote
    Muhammad's rantings. It was corrupted by Uthman who was killed for it. It was changed by
    Yussuf Ali and according to Sunni News, it has been changed by the wahabis of Saudi Arabia.
    3. "The path of right conduct it has prescribed is faultless". Such racist and hate conduct as it
    showers on the Jews who, with other unbelievers, should be killed. It is marked by its intolerant
    nature towards other religions.
    4."It is practicable". Especially in the areas of slavery and debauchery.
    5."The history that it teaches is faultless". Such as the Virgin Mary being the sister of Aaron and
    Moses who lived about 3,000 years before her or Adam's wife not having a name.
    6. "The literature is incomparable". With its often incomplete and winding iterations making the damn
    thing such a bore. It takes more than patience to read the quran. Quite often one confronts
    incomplete stories which jump from the middle of one chapter to the other with no connections
    or link to show any continuation.

    7."The prophecies made in it can be seen to have come true". Such 'true prophecies' as you have
    not cared to mention for fear of being contradicted.
    8. "The references in it to the varied phenomena of nature, as representing the signs of God, are
    free of controversies". There can be no controversy when such phenomena are not cited. Go
    ahead and list them and let us see how acceptable they will be.
    9. "There is no reference, whatsoever, of an unscientific nature in it". No, there can not be when
    sun sets in murky water while the earth is flat and man is made from a variety of things. Who
    will waste his time to argue on such idiocy?
    10. "It is free of all contradictions". One of these is inability to determine the number of days the
    world was created and the sequence of creation.
    11. "None has been able to take up the challenge it poses when it calls forth all, and any, to
    produce an equivalent of at least one of its chapters". The blasphemy law is put as a
    barricade against that happening for those who dared to criticize Muhammad were branded
    enemies of allah and its prophet. Gruesome death was meted out to them. Abu Bakr
    Muhammad al-Razi's reply to this was:"—-YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A WORK WHICH
    12. "The person who was appointed with it in the world was himself of a truthful and selfless
    nature". But he ordered his followers to go on armed robberies and took 20% of the booty.
    He made thousands of children orphans and thousands of women widows. He procured
    his marriage to Khadijah through deceit by getting her uncle, who was bitterly opposed to
    the union, dead drunk and in that condition forced the acceptance of the rites on him.
    Muhammad remained deceitful even in the grave when he lured his grandson, Hussein, to
    death by urging him, in the dream, to leave the safety of Mecca for Karballah. There,
    Hussein, his family and entire household were wiped out by Yazid's forces.

  119. chuck says:

    //1. It , itself, declares that it is a divine Scripture.
    A self-attestation is no proof. I also claim to be a prophet.

    //2. It shall remain unchanged upto the Last Day.
    Have you seen the last Day yet? And anyway it has already been changed.

    //3. The path of right conduct that it prescribes is faultless.
    Raping, looting, slavery are all definitely faultless paths of right conduct. Subhanallah!!

    //4. It is practicable.
    You only have to dump your morality, such a none issue.

    //5. The history that it teaches is faultless and honest.
    Which history? You have already agreed in a previous post that Islam is anti-evolution, for example.

    //6. Its literature is incomparable.
    Its rubbish. Keats, Milton, Kalidasa, Amir Khusro, Ghalib fared far better.

    //7. The prophecies made in it can be seen to have come true.
    Which ones? Name at least 5.

    //8. The references in it to the varied phenomena of nature, as representing the signs of God, are free of controversies.
    Like your theory of mountains already trashed, like the Big Bang in Quran etc.

    //9. There is no reference, whatsoever, of an unscientific nature in it.
    Like Adam coming out of dust?

    //10. It is free of all contradictions.
    It itself says that it is full of abrogations.

    //11. None has been able to take up the challenge it poses when it calls forth all, and any, to produce an equivalent of at least one of its chapters.
    It is humanly impossible to produce shit in that quantity and of that high quality, but may be you can read some KKK material.

    //12. The person who was appointed with it in the world was himself of a truthful and selfless nature.
    A rapist, pedophile, mass murderer, thug and bandit!!
    So there goes your dozen claims of divinity.

  120. Sakat says:

    @chuck ·
    If you scratch Pakistani rural societies ,you will find bonded slaves are in million's ,serving the feudal chief tan's.

  121. chuck says:

    Having sex with your slave doesn't amount to marriage.

    //#2 Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Mauritania were the very last countries to officially abolish slavery.IS FALSE STATEMENT //
    Ha ha. As I mentioned earlier your own quotes falsify your stand. For example you referred http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery . Now read it thoroughly you will find this: "The Arab slave trade lasted more than a millennium. As recently as the early 1960s, Saudi Arabia's slave population was estimated at 300,000. Along with Yemen, the Saudis abolished slavery only in 1962." and yet another line "In Mauritania, the last country to abolish slavery (in 1981), it is estimated that up to 600,000 men, women and children, or 20% of the population, are enslaved with many used as bonded labour."

    So based on your reference my statement isn't false:-). The arab slave trade STARTED with the advent of Islam. Also read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade
    So we can safely assume that Islam had absolutely NO ROLE in abolishing slavery and in fact was the primary cause of the extensive slave trade that lasted over 1000 years. A few nuggets of examples don't take away the fact Muhamad and his coteries had scores of slaves. Aisha, for example is reported to have manumitted 40 slaves on one occasion. And Muhamad had another dozen of wives. This should give you an idea of the number of slaves he kept.

    But all these is beside the main point which was that Mariah the Copt was a slave and Muhamad had established sexual contact with her. She gave birth to a son and it could be speculated that Muhamad wasn't the father. And even if he was, it is surprising that a man with a dozen young wives and the potency of 30 men could only produce one child during his entire career of alleged prophethood!!

  122. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    "THE QURAN RECOGNIZES ALL THE SCRIPTURES THAT HAD BEEN REVEALED BEFORE ITS OWN TIME-". That means the quran is fake for it has brought no new revelation. No wonder it requires force and killing to stay afloat.

  123. shabeer says:


    freeing slave
    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 46 :: Hadith 693,94,95,96,97,98,99.
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 79 :: Hadith 700,701,702,706
    Bukhari 1.2.29
    Bukhari 1.3.97
    Malik :: Book 31 : Hadith 31.4.4
    Malik :: Book 36 : Hadith 36.4.7
    Muslim :: Book 9 : Hadith 3580

    Slave sex prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 79 :: Hadith 706
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 77 :: Hadith 600
    free the captive:
    Bukhari 4.52.282,83
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 746,49
    Freeing slave
    Dawud :: Book 29 : Hadith 3922, 23,37, 55
    Inheritance used for freeing slave
    Dawud :: Book 18 : Hadith 2911
    Forbid slave as gift:
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 80 :: Hadith 748,49,50, 51
    Slave self pay freedom:
    Dawud :: Book 29 : Hadith 3916
    slave has rights:
    Dawud :: Book 41 : Hadith 5120,21,42
    slave property belongs to him/HER
    Dawud :: Book 23 : Hadith 3419 ,3501,02,03
    Malik :: Book 39 : Hadith 39.3.5
    forced sex with slave prohibited:
    slave forced sex prohibited:
    Dawud :: Book 12 : Hadith 2304
    slave has right to inheritance:
    Dawud :: Book 18 : Hadith 2899,2911
    prophet dividing things to slave:
    Dawud :: Book 19 : Hadith 2946
    Slave self pay freedom:
    Dawud :: Book 29 : Hadith 3916
    Freeing slave
    Dawud :: Book 29 : Hadith 3922, 23,37, 55
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 79 :: Hadith 708
    Slave must cover the body Islamic:
    Dawud :: Book 32 : Hadith 4102, 01
    Slave sex prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 93 :: Hadith 506
    The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman)
    Muslim :: Book 15 : Hadith 4081
    Mu'awiya b. Suwaid reported: I slapped a slave belonging to us and then fled away. I came back just before noon and offered prayer behind my father. He called him (the slave) and me and said: Do as he has done to you. He granted pardon. He (my father) then said: We belonged to the family of Muqarrin during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him. and had only one slave-girl and one of us slapped her. This news reached Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and he said: Set her free. They (the members of the family) said: There is no other servant except she. Thereupon he said: Then employ her and when you can afford to dispense with her services, then set her free.
    The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman)
    Muslim :: Book 15 : Hadith 4103
    Ibn 'Umar reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who emancipates his share in the slave, it is his responsibility to secure full freedom for him provided he (the slave) has enough money to pay the (remaining) price, but it he has not so much money he would be emancipated to the extent that the first man emancipated.
    Muslim :: Book 1 : Hadith 225
    Hisham b. Urwa narrated it on the authority of his father: Hakim b. Hizam freed one hundred slave and donated one hundred camels (for the sake of Allah) during the state of ignorance. Then he freed one hundred slaves and donated one hundred camel (for the sake of Allah) after) he had embraced Islam. He subsequently came to the Apostle (may peace be upon him). The rest of the hadith is the same as narrated above.

    Bukhari :: Book 3 :: Volume 46 :: Hadith 693
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    The Prophet said, "Whoever frees a Muslim slave, Allah will save all the parts of his body from the (Hell) Fire as he has freed the body-parts of the slave." Said bin Marjana said that he narrated that Hadith to 'Ali bin Al-Husain and he freed his slave for whom 'Abdullah bin Ja'far had offered him ten thousand Dirhams or one-thousand Dinars.

    Japan in 1590
    England in 1772
    US In 1794 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery

  124. shabeer says:

    is it corrupted it never agreed one of the quality of true scripture :
    What are the evidences in favour of the Qur'an being a divine
    Given below is a list of some of the evidences in support of the
    divine nature of the Qur'an:
    1. It , itself, declares that it is a divine Scripture
    2. It shall remain unchanged upto the Last Day.
    3. The path of right conduct that it prescribes is faultless.
    4. It is practicable.
    5. The history that it teaches is faultless and honest.
    6. Its literature is incomparable.
    7. The prophecies made in it can be seen to have come true.
    8. The references in it to the varied phenomena of nature, as
    representing the signs of God, are free of controversies.
    9. There is no reference, whatsoever, of an unscientific nature in it.
    10. It is free of all contradictions.
    11. None has been able to take up the challenge it poses when it calls
    forth all, and any, to produce an equivalent of at least one of its
    12. The person who was appointed with it in the world was himself of
    a truthful and selfless nature.



  125. shabeer says:

    1. Yâ-Sîn.

    2. By the Qur'ân, full of wisdom (i.e. full of laws, evidences, and proofs),
    3. Truly, you (O Muhammad SAW) are one of the Messengers,
    4. On a Straight Path (i.e. on Allâh's religion of Islâmic Monotheism).
    5. (This is) a Revelation sent down by the All­Mighty, the Most Merciful,

    6. In order that you may warn a people whose forefathers were not warned, so they are heedless.
    1. Alif-Lâm-Râ. [These letters are one of the miracles of the Qur'ân and none but Allâh (Alone) knows their meanings].

    (This is) a Book, the Verses whereof are perfected (in every sphere of knowledge, etc.), and then explained in detail from One (Allâh), Who is All-Wise and Well-Acquainted (with all things).

    2:120. Never will the Jews nor the Christians be pleased with you (O Muhammad Peace be upon him ) till you follow their religion. Say: "Verily, the Guidance of Allâh (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism) that is the (only) Guidance. And if you (O Muhammad Peace be upon him ) were to follow their (Jews and Christians) desires after what you have received of Knowledge (i.e. the Qur'ân), then you would have against Allâh neither any Walî (protector or guardian) nor any helper.

    2:129. "Our Lord! Send amongst them a Messenger of their own (and indeed Allâh answered their invocation by sending Muhammad Peace be upon him ), who shall recite unto them Your Verses and instruct them in the Book (this Qur'ân) and Al-Hikmah (full knowledge of the Islâmic laws and jurisprudence or wisdom or Prophethood, etc.), and sanctify them. Verily! You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise."

    22:54. And that those who have been given knowledge may know that it (this Qur'ân) is the truth from your Lord, and that they may believe therein, and their hearts may submit to it with humility. And verily, Allâh is the Guide of those who believe, to the Straight Path.

    42:14. And they divided not till after knowledge had come to them, through selfish transgression between themselves. And had it not been for a Word that went forth before from your Lord for an appointed term, the matter would have been settled between them. And verily, those who were made to inherit the Scripture [i.e. the Taurâh (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] after them (i.e. Jews and Christians) are in grave doubt concerning it (i.e. Allâh's true religion Islâm or the Qur'ân).

    15. So unto this (religion of Islâm, alone and this Qur'ân) then invite (people) (O Muhammad SAW), and Istaqim [(i.e. stand firm and straight on Islâmic Monotheism by performing all that is ordained by Allâh (good deeds, etc.), and by abstaining from all that is forbidden by Allâh (sins and evil deeds, etc.)], as you are commanded, and follow not their desires but say: "I believe in whatsoever Allâh has sent down of the Book [all the holy Books, this Qur'ân and the Books of the old from the Taurât (Torah), or the Injeel (Gospel) or the Pages of Ibrâhim (Abraham)] and I am commanded to do justice among you, Allâh is our Lord and your Lord. For us our deeds and for you your deeds. There is no dispute between us and you. Allâh will assemble us (all), and to Him is the final return.

  126. shabeer says:

    The Qur'an recognizes all the scriptures that had been revealed
    before its own time. However, the Qur'an does not, in an explicit
    fashion, state the total number of all such revealed scriptures. There
    is only the mention of the names of four other scriptures in the Qur'an.
    These include the Taurat which was revealed to the Prophet Moosa
    (a), the Zaboor which was revealed to the Prophet Dawood (a) the
    Injeel which was revealed to the Prophet Isa (a) and the Qur'an itself
    which was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (e). The Qur'an further
    highlights the fact that besides these four scriptures, other edicts, too,
    were revealed by the Lord Creator.
    “Say : We believe in Allah and what is revealed to us and
    what was revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob
    and the tribes, and what was entrusted to Moses and Jesus and
    the prophets from their Lord.” (3:136)
    “And this is in the Books of the earliest (Revelations),
    The Books of Abraham and Moses.” (87:18,19)
    The Qur'an attests the truth of all the previous scriptures. “It is
    He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book,
    confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Torah (of
    Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus).” (3:3)
    It is the compulsory duty of the Muslim to believe in all the
    scriptures that were revealed by Allah. Indeed, the Qur'an views the
    disbelief in the divine nature of any of the previous scriptures as a
    gross perversion.

  127. Sakat says:

    @Wasim ·
    /Who is MAD MOHAMMED ? what is the difference between him and HITLER?/

    So simple they are two faces of same coin ,with one difference Hitler was intelligent and his followers too were equally intelligent ,however Mohammed was illiterate so his followers,still they are here in the form of "Slaves" and "Shabeers" wasting the oxygen hahaha.

  128. Sakat says:

    Slave and Shabeer admit everything contained in their Quran (contradictions) and yet shamelessly defend them.Everyone knows Mohammed was ugliest and most cunning personality the world had ever encountered ,yet these morons call him prophet ,this is great insult to humanity as whole (he was the pig to born in the form of human)

  129. Sakat says:

    Oh!!! great ,Muslims have begin to ask questions about the author of their cult ,don't worry my friend really now you are on the path of enlightenment. Ali Sina i salute you,it seems the bubble has began to burst,ha ha ha!!!.

  130. Wasim says:

    When this MAD MOHAMMED married one Khadija no one called him rapist , but when he married to Ayesha every one call him pedophile why? any body enlighten me please.

  131. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Vintage Chuck.

  132. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby, when you start to deny what is in the quran, then you are anything but a muhammadan. You want proof that allah says it sent the earlier prophets? Here you will find it:
    sura 2:130 "Say you: we believe in God, and in what has been sent down on us —-and that which was give to Moses and Jesus and the Prophets-"'.
    sura 2:170 "–True piety is this ; to believe in God – the angels, the book and the Prophets-"
    sura 2;205 "- then God sent forth the Prophets, good tidings to bear and warnings-".
    On Deuteronomy 31:25-29. Verse 29 says :"FOR I KNOW THAT AFTER MY DEATH YOU WILL UTTERLY CORRUPT YOURSELF-".
    Why is this a problem to the muhammadan? Did Muhammad not also say that you should follow the "rightly guided companions"? Which means that they were/are some who would not be rightly guided.
    That is why the shiites have refused to accept any other companion apart from Ali. Yet the descendants of Abu Sufyan made the most progress for muhammadanism and they have never been regarded as having been rightly guided.
    Matthew 5:29 is an admonition to the Christian that he should not allow anything to stand in his way of achieving heaven. Rather than lose heaven, the Christian should be ready to forgo what ever it might be, including having to lose a part of his body, if not the whole body.Just explain to a rational man how this amounts to the fulfillment of Moses' prediction that the law will be corrupted. It is simply self denial.
    The quran unequivocally confirms the perfect status of the Holy Bible.
    Can you now see why the Jews are head and shoulders above the Muhammadans such that allah, who only thinks of destroying them, acknowledges their superior intelligence. That sura further says that prophethood was the preserve of the Jews. When Muhammad proclaimed himself a prophet, he was being an impostor.
    All these quranic passages show that the Judeo-Christian religion is the true message. There was and there is still no need for the superfluity called muhammadanism or islam, if you may, which has brought only destruction.

  133. chuck says:

    //After having the sex while she is 9 and married, it is found that she is not at all a complete woman?//
    In fact sex that early can cause permanent damage to the reproductive system. I will not be surprised if that was the reason for Aisha to remain childless despite having such a 'potent' husband and some rumoured adulterous flings.

  134. chuck says:

    The fun with arguing with a Muslim is that when he quotes texts to prove a point the reverse is immediately proven. For example:
    //This, in effect, means that the Qur'an has prompted the owner towards having sexual relations with an unmarried female slave. This permission is however restricted to the owner alone. No one else is allowed to use her in this fashion even if it be with the permission of the master! //
    What this means that the master can have sexual relation with the slave as patronized by Q 4:24.

    //The permission to accept slave women as one’s life-partner was, in fact, a provision which would, in the course of one generation, cut out the very root of slavery. //
    Thats why I guess the Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Mauritania were the very last countries to officially abolish slavery.

  135. vijay says:

    Suppose it is discovered that girl never going to have mensuration at all due to some medical reasons then what will be the out come ? After having the sex while she is 9 and married, it is found that she is not at all a complete woman? or say she lost her women hood due to some medical or accidental reason? Is Nikah or marriage allowed between male and third gender ?

  136. chuck says:

    //The Book of Moses predicted that the Law (Bible) will get corrupted. //
    And that corruption is called Quran.

  137. DivineWind says:

    It was a terrible mistake to believe that there is such a paradise. Many people with Temporary Death Experience never saw this kind of paradise in the afterlife.

  138. shabeer says:


    marriage with girl permission
    Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2076,77,88,91,95
    Narrated AbuHurayrah:

    The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: An orphan virgin girl should be consulted about herself; if she says nothing that indicates her permission, but if she refuses, the authority of the guardian cannot be exercised against her will. The full information rest with the tradition narrated by Yazid

    Women permission required for marriage
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 86 :: Hadith 98 ,100,101
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 85 :: Hadith 79

    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 86 :: Hadith 100
    Narrated Abu Haraira:

    Allah's Apostle said, "A lady slave should not be given in marriage until she is consulted, and a virgin should not be given in marriage until her permission is granted." The people said, "How will she express her permission?" The Prophet said, "By keeping silent (when asked her consent)." Some people said, "If a man, by playing a trick, presents two false witnesses before the judge to testify that he has married a matron with her consent and the judge confirms his marriage, and the husband is sure that he has never married her (before), then such a marriage will be considered as a legal one and he may live with her as husband."

    Women permission required for marriage: parents forced to do it prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 86 :: Hadith 99
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 85 :: Hadith 78
    Narrated Al-Qasim:

    A woman from the offspring of Ja'far was afraid lest her guardian marry her (to somebody) against her will. So she sent for two elderly men from the Ansar, 'AbdurRahman and Mujammi', the two sons of Jariya, and they said to her, "Don't be afraid, for Khansa' bint Khidam was given by her father in marriage against her will, then the Prophet cancelled that marriage." (See Hadith No. 78)

    for marriage girl must reach her puberty level.
    Dawud :: Book 11 : Hadith 2098
    Dawud :: Book 19 : Hadith 2979
    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 86 :: Hadith 101

    Narrated 'Aisha:

    Allah's Apostle said, "It is essential to have the consent of a virgin (for the marriage). I said, "A virgin feels shy." The Prophet; said, "Her silence means her consent." Some people said, "If a man falls in love with an orphan slave girl or a virgin and she refuses (him) and then he makes a trick by bringing two false witnesses to testify that he has married her, and then she attains the age of puberty and agrees to marry him and the judge accepts the false witness and the husband knows that the witnesses were false ones, he may consummate his marriage."


    Dawud :: Book 29 : Hadith 3952
    Narrated AbuHurayrah:
    The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The child of adultery is worst of the three.

  139. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Slave mentality, which law makes the name WASIM exclusive to muhammadans? You should answer his question instead of nosing around for his religion.

  140. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck, they die for their prophet and take other lives so that his allah can reward them. Without killing others, the gate of paradise will not be opened for the muhammadan.

  141. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Slave mentality, first of all, you have admitted that there are contradictions between what the quran enjoins and what amounts to rational behavior. I just do not see how marrying children fostered any political motive more than marrying adults and how such a motive is essential for humanity, culture and country. It seems that your prophet would not have been able to establish the religion of allah without his craving for little girls. When Muhammad's cravings are added to those of his followers, that makes the religion he established for allah one of pedophilia. No circumstances can justify such a thing.

  142. shabeer says:



  143. shabeer says:

    Female slaves are the natural by-product of the system of
    slavery. The situation that prevailed in all societies where the institution
    of slavery existed was such that slave women were used at will and
    were employed to gain economic advantage by inciting them towards
    prostitution. As for Islam, it provided for a facility which would, in the
    course of one generation, bring an end to the system through the slave
    women themselves.
    The slave woman is the property of the master. However, the
    master has no right, whatsoever, to incite her towards adultery. Like the male slaves, the female slaves, too, have rights of their own. It is
    the duty of the master to provide her with food, shelter, clothes and
    other necessities. Moreover, the Qur'an has asked the owner to make
    the necessary arrangements for her marriage as well (Qur'an 24:32).
    This, in effect, means that the Qur'an has prompted the owner
    towards having sexual relations with an unmarried female slave. This
    permission is however restricted to the owner alone. No one else is
    allowed to use her in this fashion even if it be with the permission of
    the master!
    In giving birth to the child of the master, the slave woman
    becomes entitled to new rights. Thenceforth, the master has no right
    to sell her. She becomes the mother of her master’s children. These
    children, too, become entitled to all the rights and privileges enjoyed by
    the master’s other children. Islam disagrees with the Jewish stand
    that the children born through a slave woman have none of the rights
    that should naturally be given to them by virtue of paternity. These
    children are, in all respects, his own children. There is to be no
    discrimination of any kind between them and the other children. With
    the death of the master, the slave woman, who is the mother of his
    children, becomes a free woman. She is then protected by her own
    children. They, too, like the other children, will becomes entitled to a
    share in their father’s inheritance.
    The permission to accept slave women as one’s life-partner
    was, in fact, a provision which would, in the course of one generation,
    cut out the very root of slavery. In reality, therefore, the permission
    granted for having relations with slave women was one among the
    many unique steps taken by Islam in practically eradicating slavery.
    It is not possible to equate the permission given for having
    relations with slave women to adultery. These acts stand at two extreme
    poles. One is the case of the woman who lives under her master
    enjoying the protection that he confers upon her. It is a relationship in
    which he fully agrees to take up the responsibilities that may result as
    a product of that relationship. It is a relationship in which her personality,
    beyond the contours defined by sex, is accorded full recognition. It is
    a relationship which opens to her the door to freedom. As for the
    second, it is nothing but a carnal relationship with a prostitute without
    any sort of commitment. The position of the prostitute is, in fact, much
    worse than that of the slave woman. For, she is nothing more than a
    soul less animal. Her function is restricted solely to the gratification of
    the animal passions of man. There is not even a grain of love and
    compassion in that relationship, not the slightest touch of personal
    fulfillment even. It is but a transaction made solely for money. Flesh
    trade! The man who comes for the satisfaction of carnel of his desire
    is never prepared to take up the responsibility that may accrue from it.
    He has no obligation towards her. She is only an animal destined to
    satisfy his sexul appetite. Each one of her relationships will serve only
    to immerse her even deeper into the mire that is the inhumanity of
    prostitution. Even the very dream of freedom is alien to her. She is one
    doomed to embrace the loneliness of orphanhood when in a diseased
    state, with her skin wrinkled and faded, she ends up being the object
    of nobody’s concern.
    What, then, of the tradition which lays open, before the slave,
    the very door to freedom? And what of the rottings system which
    drives the woman from one dependence to the other? Any comparison,
    whatsoever, between these two is impossible because they stand at
    two opposing and extreme poles. One recognized by benign humanism,
    the other which leads to depredation and frustration.
    The Qur'an does provide permission for those who wish to marry
    slave women (4:27). Indeed, the Prophet had said that such marriages
    will confer a double reward. “He who provides the slave woman under
    him with proper manners, provides her with the best education, then
    frees her and ultimately marries her will be given a double reward.’’
    (Bukhari, Muslim)

  144. shabeer says:


    "We have a young sister, and her breasts are not yet grown. What shall we do for our sister for the day she is spoken for? (Song of Songs 8:8)" and later about the sister….."I am a wall, and my breasts are like towers. Thus I have become in his eyes like one bringing contentment. (Song of Songs 8:10)"

    Let us look at Proverbs 5:19 "A loving doe, a graceful deer, may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be captivated by her love."

    Let us look at Proverbs 7:18 "Come, let's drink deep of love till morning; let's enjoy ourselves with love!" Could this verse in the Bible be referring to love making and sexual intercourse "till morning"?

    Let us look at Song of Songs 1:13 "My lover is to me a sachet of myrrh resting between my breasts."
    Hosea 13:16

    Samaria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword, their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open. (NRSV)
    1 Samuel 15:3,8

    Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' " … He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword.(NIV)

    Isaiah 65 & 66 declare Christianity to be a false religion!
    They keep making me angry by sneering at me, while offering sacrifices to idols in gardens and burning incense to them on bricks. 4They spend their nights hiding in burial caves; they eat the meat of pigs, cooked in sauces made of stuff unfit to eat. 5And then they say to others, "Don't come near us! We're dedicated to God." Such people are like smoke, irritating my nose all day." (CEV Bible, Isaiah 65:3-5)
    "12Your luck will end! I will see to it that you are slaughtered with swords. You refused to answer when I called out; you paid no attention to my instructions. Instead, you did what I hated, knowing it was wrong." (CEV Bible, Isaiah 65:12)
    "15I, the LORD God, promise to see that you are killed and that my chosen servants use your names as curse words. But I will give new names to my servants. 16I am God! I can be trusted. Your past troubles are gone; I no longer think of them. When you pray for someone to receive a blessing, or when you make a promise, you must do it in my name. I alone am the God who can be trusted." (CEV Bible, Isaiah 65:15-16)

  145. shabeer says:

    #what the earlier prophets did and said were directed by allah…………..when? where ?…………..proof needed………..bring it plz ……….

    Tauraat is the scripture that was given to Moosa (a). Similarly,
    the Zaboor and the Injeel are the books that were given to Dawood (a)
    and Isa (a). The Qur'an introduces the scriptures as those that were
    revealed by the Lord Creator Himself. “It was We who revealed
    the Torah (to Moses): therein was guidance and light.” (5:44)
    “And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary,
    confirming the Torah that had come before him: We sent him the
    Gospel: therein was guidance and light.” (5:46)
    From this it is abundantly clear that these scriptures were all in
    fact, revealed by the Lord Creator Himself. But this is not the case
    with the books of the Bible. They were all written centuries after the
    messengers. Indeed, there is not even a single book in the Bible
    which can reasonably be believed to have been revealed to the
    messengers. It is the traditional belief of the Jews that Moses (a),
    himself, had written the Pentateuch (Torah); not that it was revealed
    by God. However, modern research indicates that even the traditional
    belief that Moses had written the Pentateuch is, in itself, baseless. It
    is the opinion of the scholars that since the death of Moses, and the
    events that followed his death, have been described in the Pentateuch
    (Deuteronomy 34:5-10), it can never be that Moses (a) had written
    the book himself. Similar is the case of the Book of Psalms. In actual
    fact, there is not in it, a single Psalm that can be authoritatively said to
    have been written by David. In the Gospels, too, although there is
    mention, therein, of the true Gospel of God which Jesus had actually
    preached (Mark 1:14,15), there is no clear picture about this Gospel
    in the four accounts in the Bible. As for the Gospels in the New
    testament, it was written at least five decades after Jesus. The gospels
    give but vastly differing and contradictory accounts of the life of Jesus.
    It is now clear that none of these was the true scripture that was revealed
    to Jesus. In short, therefore, even though the various books of the
    Bible do quote certain ideas from the Tauraat, the Zaboor and the
    Injeel, it cannot be said that they are present in the Bible in all their
    fullness and purity.
    "Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: "This is from God," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (The Noble Quran, 2:79)"


    "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
    Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.

    The Book of Moses predicted that the Law (Bible) will get corrupted.
    "If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 5:29)"

  146. chuck says:

    @Slave of Prophet

    // that they can give their life in the way of prophet//
    You mean they can take others life.

  147. Slave of Prophet says:

    @Impostor Wasim
    Firstly let me know who you the impostor in disguise of Muslim? A true Muslim can not say & listen against prophet (PBUH). Muslim love to prophet to an extent that they can give their life in the way of prophet.

  148. Wasim says:

    Who is MAD MOHAMMED ? what is the difference between him and HITLER? can any one enlighten me?.

  149. Slave of Prophet says:

    If there are any verse exist in Holy Quran regarding marriage before reaching menstruation. We should understand circumstances. Sometime marriage are done for the political motive which are essentials for the humanity, culture, and country. Prophet was the messenger of Allah. He had to establish religion of Allah. Do not see the contradiction all the time but understand the circumstances also.

  150. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Slave mentality, you want quranic evidence on having sex with girls not yet menstruating,
    You and your co-travelers in muhammadanism have argued that even though Aisha was 6 years old, for as long as she was "legally married" it was right for Muhammad to have sex with her. In the same vein, Dr Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric in Saudi Arabia's religious council, issued a fatwa in 2001 asserting that islam did not prescribe any minimum age for marriage.and that a girl can be married even if she is in the cradle.
    What matters in muhammadanism is not the child's age but whether she can carry the weight of the "husband". This is a subjective test as the so-called husband alone can determine if the child can carry his weight. Stories abound of old men marrying girls who are as young as their great grand daughters. Do not pretend not to know that this is true.
    On Umar, what evidence do you have that the "marriage" was not consummated immediately? The ball is in your court given that there is mounting evidence that muhammadans indulge in such unholy practices.

  151. Slave of Prophet says:

    _______quran authorizes sex with even children who have not yet reached puberty.___
    Provide evidence from Quran or get lost from here if you have nothing to produce before me.
    _____Umar outdid his master by marrying Aisha's sister who was between 4 and 5 years old.There is no evidence to suggest that the "marriage" was not consummated at that time. ___

    What are evidences you have that marriage was consumed?

  152. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Slave mentality, the tragedy in muhammadanism is that the quran authorizes sex with even children who have not yet reached puberty. The quran lays down rules to divorce prepubescent girls. This means that since they are "legitimately" married their husbands can have carnal knowledge of them. So the men take advantage of this and go for even babies in cradles. Umar outdid his master by marrying Aisha's sister who was between 4 and 5 years old. There is no evidence to suggest that the "marriage" was not consummated at that time.
    In modern times such lunacy, in the name of marriage, is common place as somebody has posted about an incident in Afghanistan

  153. Slave of Prophet says:

    Yes, she can be consumed if she passed the maximum age of to get puberty. If she still not get mensuration she can have sex with her husband. Prophet(PBUH) consumed his marriage with Aisha when she was 9 years old and prophet was 57 years old. Aisha was the prophet dearest wife. She is believed "Mother of believers".

  154. vijay says:

    Abdu Rasul, if you marry a girl before she gets age of mensuration and latter it is found out she has some physical problem that she may never have mensuration or by accident or by menopause lady stops mensuration. Can a person make that lady a wife or have sex there after ? As you find it sunnat to have child bride, how many will you have ?

  155. Slave of Prophet says:

    It was matter of pride for the Aisha' father that his daughter got married with prophet (PBUH). No issue if Aisha (mother of believers) was 6 years old while prophet was 54 years old at the time if marriage.
    As per divine laws of Islam if girl got the puberty she can be consumed by her husband. It is shirk for a Muslim to doubt in divine laws.

  156. Justajoke says:

    What are your comments, Shabeer and the Slave ? What if these child brides are your daughters ?
    Afghanistan: 8-year-old bride of mullah bleeds to death on her wedding night on May 15, 2013.
    The story above is graphic. But it has to be told, as it graphically illustrates the human cost of Islamic child marriage and the treatment of women and girls as commodities.
    The first nights of those child brides are "screaming in pain and bleeding." Only savages will take child brides.

  157. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby, you posted:"MUHAMMAD MUST HAVE COME IN CONTACT WITH MANY OF THESE COPTS AND LISTENED TO THEIR STORIES. MUHAMMAD'S FRIENDSHIP TO CHRISTIANS OF COPTIC FAITH IS REFLECTED IN MANY ASPECTS OF HIS LIFE-". This is quite an eye opener to the doubting Thomases who do not believe that Muhammad heard Biblical stories,especially of the heretical type, and twisted them to suit his imaginary prophethood. One cannot fail to agree with the Byzantine Emperor who said that the only thing original to Muhammad is violence.

  158. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby, Muhammad said that the Torah, Psalms and the Gospels were the 'early revelations'. He further said that all what the earlier prophets did and said were directed by allah. The Torah comprises the laws which were given by Jehovah to Moses and were directed to a specific people, place and time. They were never meant to be opened ended or serve as precedents. After that period, no Jew put those laws into practice any more. But what did Muhammad do? He developed a fascination for the obsolete laws and brought them back to life again. In effect, allah validated all what had been discarded and even went beyond that. He/it made them the permanent way of life of the muhammadan. Any Jew who tries such things today will surely go to prison. But the muhammadan will see them as the will of allah.
    Even with all their harshness, the mosaic laws were still more humane than what the shariah offers. A girl who was defiled in the mosaic law became the responsibility of the defiler. But in muhammadanism, an under aged girl whose reproductive organ is destroyed by a human beast lives with the shame of being abandoned as the assailant has no obligation to marry her and she will, in all likelihood, remain unmarried for life. What is even more damning is that there is no punishment for the assailant. Could any system be more inhuman?
    On vulgarity, is it not in muhammadanism that the quran takes time to describe what the breasts of the black eyed houris will look like in 'paradise'? It is still in one of your texts that a scholar talks about muhammadan women "HAVING THE MOST APPETIZING VIRGINAS IN PARADISE" which will never loose their virginity no matter how many times the women will have sex.
    Muhammad himself is said to have promised that his followers will have sex "DAHMAN, DAHMAN".
    Why does muhammadanism have so much obsession for sex?

  159. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Shabby, from your half baked narration, your prophet was not against adultery with the slave girls/women. He was against coitus interrupt-us which was practiced to prevent pregnancy.But it was perfectly acceptable to him for the women captured in battles, he cowardly launched on defenseless communities, to be shared as sex slaves to his companions or sold as chattels in the slave markets. There is the story of how one of Muhammad's companions took a fancy to his slave girl and subjected her to endless bouts of sexual orgy. His wife, who had been neglected, grew jealous. To deter the husband from continuing his sexual escapades with the slave, she suckled her with the hope that the husband would now see the slave as a member of the family and refrain from sexing her. Unfortunately for her, the husband was incensed by her action which resulted in his giving her the beating of her life. Muhammad heard about it and did not admonish him. This meant approval, for in muhammadanism anything done before the 'prophet' which he did not disapprove became part of the sunnah or tradition.
    Muhammadan reasoning is warped. What threats did Abu Bakar and Umar pose to Muhammad or muhammadanism which necessitated their daughters being married to Muhammad to preserve the muslim bond? It is said that Abu Bakr had first wanted to marry Fatima but Muhammad refused. If marriage was to consolidate the muhammadan bond, why did he refuse being Abu Bakr's father in-law?
    Bani Al-Mustaliq did not become muhammadan because Muhammad married Juwayriyah. They were defeated and had no choice. Total extermination was the option.
    There are genes of madness in every muhammadan. The Jewish communities in and around Medina had been subdued one after the other. As at the time Muhammad killed Kinana and others and took Safiyya, the Jewish tribes had long ceased to be a threat to him. How did this imaginary marriage foster Muhammad's neutralization of the "great section of the hostile Jews of Arabia"?
    The king of Egypt foolishly thought that by being courteous to Muhammad, through gifts including the slave girl, Mary, that he would be spared by Muhammad. He did not know that he was dealing with a wild beast who could not be placated and who saw such moves as signs of weakness. Bin Ladan was later to quote this as an example of islam not accepting anything but total surrender. Mary was a slave to Hafsa until the pregnancy which is the subject of much controversy. After the child's death, Mary's status reverted to what it was before. No more affection did he show to her. Egypt was captured after Muhammad's death and Umar, the then caliph, was as brutal as he was elsewhere.
    The Negus of Abyssinia did not present Zayyanab to Muhammad. He asked for her return after hearing that her husband, who had converted to Christianity, had died. He meant the liaison to be a slight to his arch enemy, Abu Sufyan, who was Zayyanab's father.
    In all, there is no evil equal or greater than Muhammadanism. The foolishness of the leaders of those communities destroyed by Muhammad,by not coming together to oppose him, led to their demise. Unfortunately, such imbecility is common place today. Those who call themselves "enlightened' do not read and do not want to know muhaammadan history. Dealing with a wild beast calls for determination. The first step is to recognize what one is dealing with. This is abysmally missing today.

  160. chuck says:

    Trust Shabeer to talk about irrelevant topics. Ok, I agree it is more correct to assume that by "His Slaves" all human beings are referred. What does that change? The fact remains on the occasion of his only son's death who was a child of 2, Muhamad thought it appropriate to preach against adultery and lament that he knew something that the other knew not in the same context.

    //Maria al-Qibtiyya (may Allah be pleased with her) is said to have married the Prophet //
    Hunh. Can you show me something more authentic? Note the phrase "is said to have". This is Ibn Kathir's try to colour that relationship more favourably just like most Muslim are wont of doing.

    //is slave sex permitted?//
    Instead of quoting Hadiths go and look back into Quran Surat An-Nisa 4:24 http://quran.com/4/24

    This is a direct decree to keep slaves and enjoy sex with them.

  161. shabeer says:


    Numbers 31: 7-18 :
    They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.
    Deuteronomy 20: 10-14:
    When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.
    Chapter 22
    If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; 29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days
    When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

    In the Rigveda, there are numerous places where gifts of beautiful girls as salves are made to saintly persons. For example, Rigveda 6/27/8 mentions Abhyavarti, son of Chayaman, presenting a gift of slave girls stuffed in two big wagons to Rishi Bhardavaj.

    Two wagon-teams, with damsels, twenty oxen, O Agni, Abhydvarti Chayamana, the liberal Sovran, gives me. This guerdon of Prthu's seed is hard to win from others.

    Another instance of gifting slave girls is mentioned in Rigveda 1/126/3
    Manu Smriti (Chapter 8, verse 415) classifies them into seven categories:

    war captive,
    a self-volunteered slave,
    born of a female slave,
    a slave purchased,
    slave given by parents,
    inherited through will and
    penalised by the king
    Kautilya's Arthshastra reveals that slaves could be sold, mortgaged or even slaughtered. They were subjected to inhuman conditions. They could not ask for justice in any court. Every wealthyfamily had a number of born slaves.

    Slaves led a miserable existence. To run away was the only way out but quite often they were caught and had to pay a heavy price. If a slave, who had mortgaged himself, was caught escaping, he could be condemned to a lifetime of slavery. The owners of female slaves not only had sex with them but also offered them to their guests as a part of entertainment.

    Very often economic calamity drove a person to accept slavery. The famous legend of king Harishchandra supports this truth. He had to sell his wife, child and himself in his bad days. (Markandey Puran chapter 8)

    Religious prostitution
    Another form of slavery that has shadowed the Hindu society through many ages is that of the Devdasis or the 'temple girls' who were forced into prostitution in the guise of religion. These girls adorn temples especially in South India. They are offered to the temple in their childhood.

    As they reach maturity they are wedded to the temple deity. The privileged ones are kept by priests to satiate their lust. The not so fortunate ones become common prostitutes.

    Such is the vulgarisation of Hindu religious practices.

    Devadasis still exist in India today, as shown in a 2004 report by the National Human Rights Commission of the Government of India (1). According to this report, "after initiation as devadasis, women migrate either to nearby towns or other far-off cities to practice prostitution" (page 200). A study from 1990 recorded that 45.9% of devadasis in one particular district were prostitutes, while most of the others relied on manual labour and agriculture for their income. The practice of dedicating devadasis was declared illegal by the government of the Indian state Karnataka in 1982 and by the government of Andhra Pradesh in 1988.

  162. shabeer says:

    Allah as He has forbidden that His slaves, male or female commit adultery " His slaves " here mentioned the total human being ,not slave of human……………..

    is slave sex permitted?
    Slave sex prohibited:
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 79 :: Hadith 706
    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 79 :: Hadith 706
    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    The Prophet said, "If somebody manumits a Muslim slave, Allah will save from the Fire every part of his body for freeing the corresponding parts of the slave's body, even his private parts will be saved from the Fire) because of>>>>>> freeing the slave's private parts<<<<<."

    Bukhari :: Book 8 :: Volume 77 :: Hadith 600
    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

    That while he was sitting with the Prophet a man from the Ansar came and said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get slave girls from the war captives and we love property; what do you think about coitus interruptus?" Allah's Apostle said, "Do you do that?>>>>>> It is better for you not to do it<<<<, for there is no soul which Allah has ordained to come into existence but will be created."

    Bukhari :: Book 9 :: Volume 93 :: Hadith 506

    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

    That during the battle with Bani Al-Mustaliq they (Muslims) captured some females and intended to have sexual relation with them without impregnating them. So they asked the Prophet about coitus interrupt us. The Prophet said, "It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection." Qaza'a said, "I heard Abu Sa'id saying that the Prophet said, 'No soul is ordained to be created but Allah will create it."

    forced sex with slave prohibited:
    Dawud :: Book 12 : Hadith 2304
    Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah:

    Musaykah, a slave-girl of some Ansari, came and said: My master forces me to commit fornication. Thereupon the following verse was revealed: "But force not your maids to prostitution (when they desire chastity)."

    There are sources that tell us that Mariyah was married to the Prophet..

    Taken from http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?page

    The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) contracted some of his marriages for sociopolitical reasons. His principal concern was the future of Islam. He was interested in strengthening the Muslims by all bonds. That is why he married the young daughter of Abu Bakr, his First Successor, and the daughter of `Umar, his Second Successor. It was by his marriage to Juwayriyyah that he gained the support for Islam of the whole clan of Bani Al-Mustaliq and their allied tribes. It was through marriage to Safiyyah that he neutralized a great section of the hostile Jews of Arabia. By accepting Mariyah, the Copt from Egypt, as his wife, he formed a political alliance with a king of great magnitude. It was also a gesture of friendship with a neighboring king that Muhammad married Zaynab who was presented to him by the Negus of Abyssinia in whose territory the early Muslims found safe refuge.

    Ibn Kathir is quoted to have said:

    Maria al-Qibtiyya (may Allah be pleased with her) is said to have married the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and certainly everyone gave her the same title of respect as the Prophet's wives, 'Umm al Muminin' 'Mother of the Believers'.
    Muhammad must have come in contact with many of these Copts and listened to their stories. Muhammad's friendship to Christians of Coptic faith is reflected in many aspects of his life. He is known to have had cordial relations with the Negus of Abyssinia, as indicated by the fact that he advised his followers at a time of persecution to flee there. He married a Coptic wife named Mariya, and he is reported to have advised his followers to be especially kind to the Copts of Egypt, considering them his in-laws.
    (R.H. Charles, "Vitae Adae et Evae," The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha [Oxford, 1963] Volume 2, p. 294)
    Other non Islamic sources list Mariya as the Prophets spouse: http://users.legacyfamilytree.com/NorthernEurope/http://www.peterwestern.f9.co.uk/maximilia/pafg88

    For more evidence that Mariya was indeed the Prophet's wife, visit this site http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_201_250/hon

  163. Sakat says:

    @Slave of Prophet
    See how nicely Chuck and I HATE ISLAM are contributing further information to the encyclopedia of great pedophile Mohammed.You must thank them for enhancing your knowledge in leafs and bound about your prophet.

  164. Sakat says:



  165. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck, there is no doubt about the meaning. Muhammad knew that he was incapable of fathering Ibrahim.
    Also notice how he addressed 'followers of Muhammad' as different from the 'followers of allah. This is further confirmation that Muhammad and allah were inseparable or as the saying goes, "two sides of the same coin".

  166. chuck says:

    And here's another hadeeth that convinces me that Mo knew that Ibrahim was possibly not his son. When the poor kid died Mo blabbered something about eclipse and then says :

    Volume 2, Book 18, Number 154
    The Prophet then said, "O followers of Muhammad! By Allah! There is none who has more
    ghaira (self-respect) than Allah as He has forbidden that His slaves, male or female commit adultery (illegal sexual intercourse). O followers of Muhammad! By Allah! If you knew that which I know you would laugh little and weep much.

    Note the reference to adultery committed by slaves and the fact that Mariah the Copt was a slave. Also note that he seems to know something 'disturbing' about adultery by slaves and reminiscences about it on the occasion of the death of 'his' 2 year old kid!!!

  167. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Chuck, that is quite hilarious. It says it all. What he could not do with his manhood, he chose to use his fingers and pass it off for "control of his sexual desires". Yet fools say that he was sexually hyperactive.There was nothing the impostor did not fake. Thanks my friend. I enjoyed it.

  168. chuck says:

    Here's more from Shahi Bukhari. Make your own conclusions (Aisha was a smart lady, it is more important to note what she means than what she actually says):
    Volume 1, Book 6, Number 299:
    Narrated 'Abdur-Rahman bin Al-Aswad:
    (on the authority of his father) 'Aisha said: "Whenever Allah's Apostle wanted to fondle anyone of
    us during her periods (menses), he used to order her to put on an Izar and start fondling her." 'Aisha added, "None of you could control his sexual desires as the Prophet could."

    He couldn't help fondling those young things, or perhaps that was all he could do!! Has only 1 child to show for all his 22 year career of alleged prophethood and a dozen wive and a score of sex slaves. And that birth is also a suspect Mariah the copt might have been having an affair.

  169. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    Slave mentality, I ask you again, with all that raging libido, what did Muhammad have to show for it? There were no children as evidence. He had altercations with Hafsa, who was never sexually satistied by him. On one occasion Aisha took sides with Hafsa. Then Umar admonished them and threatened that if they continued to be unruly, Muhammad would divorce them and marry new wives. To hide his incapability because of being ravaged by acromegaly, Muhammad conjured one of his ' revelations' in the exact same words that Umar had used to admonish the headstrong young wives. He threatened that if they did not repent allah would send them packing and give its messenger new wives, including virgins.
    There were two other 'revelations', one of which was inspired by the same Umar. This time, it was that Muhammad's wives should wear veils to hide their faces. But the truth was that they were to be shielded from the prying eyes of his followers whom he feared may lured his sexually starved wives and expose his impotence.That was the origin of the hijab which has graduated to burkha. The second 'revelation' was that his followers were not to visit him uninvited and when they received any invitation, they should not tarry for long. Again, this was to stop any possibility of other men getting in contact with his wives and letting out the secret which was so strongly guarded.
    Muhammad preferred virgins to matrons because the virgins, being novices, would not know when a man could not perform. His wives remained slaves who were denied marriage to other men whether they were divorcees or had become widows after his demise.
    All that sexual bravado was only for public consumption. Below the surface there was nothing. He said it himself that he was the least endowed in sexual matters until 'Gabriel' brought him special food from allah. Was allah so idle that all it could do was to cook food to cure impotence? Would it not have been simpler if allah, said to be capable of doing everything, just healed Muhammad of his impotence? Calling the whole saga stupid, does not describe it adequately.

  170. Justajoke says:

    @Ba ba, Yes it will rule in the hellish world of Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, where firefights and suicide bombings are daily occurrence.

  171. Sakat says:

    Mr.Slave of Prophet ,
    By saying qualities of "Superman libido" of your prophet ,you are mocking your Prophet.You think by high lighting repeatedly all those qualities of your prophet in your post ,you will enrage the infidels.However in that process you are entering your own trap.Many Muslim brethren of you are visiting this site,but they don't have any praise worthy moral qualities of Mohammed,unlike Jesus or Buddha ,so they can debate here.They always read the post here in hiding ,you are "pinching salt on their preconceived high morality of Mr Mohammed". You are thoroughly stripping and disclosing the noble and moral qualities of Mohammed to be emulated by each and every Muslim,Ha Ha Ha…………..

  172. Slave of Prophet says:

    Dear Islam mean peace. And Muslim are most peaceful people of the world. Many times non-believers argue why prophet did sex with his wife Aisha. I would like to ask whether doing sex with wife illegal? Is it rape if one's do sex with wife? Non-believers say prophet did sex with Aisha (mother of Believers) when he was 54 years old. But I would like to remind them prophet had stamina of 30 man. Allah had given him bliss that he can marry with 30 women and can satisfy them in one day one by one. So, argument of non-believers fall flat that Aisha was not happy with the prophet.

  173. I-HATE-ISLAM says:

    ba ba, islam will rule the world because its prophet raped the woman whose husband he had just killed and whose mutilated body remained unburied. For that act of muhammadan piety, he will lead all the muhammadans to their paradise while the non rapists and non killers burn in hell. Such is the muhammadan sense of justice and their concept of paradise.

  174. denialisnoproof says:

    Your allah will eat camel waste and mohammad will eat 9 year old ayesha's menstrual waste.

  175. denialisnoproof says:

    Idiot muslim first learn the english grammar before commenting.
    Islam will rule shit.

  176. ba ba says:

    what is this ? is that true ?i dnt think so…but
    soon ISLAM ruled the world…………….nd u all burnt in hell… INSHALLAH

  177. bigstick1 says:

    I would like to point out that atheism is not an ideology. It is simple the believe of no God.

  178. Svati says:

    how true, this is the one thing that struck me going through the article, none of them loved him, they did not care even when he was dying.

  179. denialisnoproof says:

    you are serving allah . the pimp god who supplies virgins

  180. denialisnoproof says:

    your allah and mohammad are gay.

  181. MAZILAZ says:


  182. EZRA says:


  183. EZRA says:


  184. SIA says:


  185. Razix says:

    What this cockroach means –let me translate."" You son of a b*tch, if u say anything bad @ islam, I will f*ck your sister""… Indeed, a great muslim Umar U R.

  186. Sahil Patel says:

    The Prophet acknowledged the honesty of Safiyyah and what a great acknowledgement it was as it came from the most honest person on earth. Zayd ibn Aslam said, "When the Prophet was so sick and on the verge of death his wives gathered around him. Safiyyah bint Huyayyay said, 'O Messenger of Allah, by Allah, I would like to be in your place.' Hearing her utterance, the Prophet's wives winked at her. The Prophet saw them and said, 'Rinse your mouths.' They said, 'For what, Messenger of Allah?' He said, 'For your winking at her, by Allah, she is telling the truth.'" (Ibn Sa'd, Tabaqat, vol. 8, p.101, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus'ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.175)

    This shows how much respect did his wives have for him, they were all mocking him on his deathbed.

  187. Sanatan Dharma says:

    If king of Arbia nation was follower of Veda, Mohammed would have been punished severally for the doing and advocating mistreatment with woman.

    उत्सक्थ्या अवगुदं धेहि समंजिं चारया विशन्। य: स्त्रीणां जीवभोजन:॥
    ts utmost duty of the King or Ruler to punish those Sinners (Rapists) who destroys the life of a women by Illicit conduct or Rape by hanging them upside down and by beating them so that Morality, Peace and Justice prevail in his kingdom – Yajur Veda 23:11

  188. denialisnoproof says:

    dear islamic goat.
    Internet is mainly accessed for two things .
    one is for porn and other is for information . the people who want to browse for information usually analyse things logically , Why don't you ask your zakir idiot to refute claims of alisina then?
    your zakir can only fool gullible idiots . ask him to put his argument in writing.

  189. Islamrules! says:

    this is the internet…which unfortunately everyo ne is allowed to access regardless of IQ. you seem very "concerned" andsince you have so much hatred to write books about your feelings i judge your moral character t be at the lowest. this article and your books are nothing but opinions in which ignorant people…such as urself agree with. may i ask…which version of the bible should i Google? the saintly king Henry version? or anyone else who fancied the bible to be changed according to them? unlike all religions Islam recognises the other religions in clarity none can deny.

    i am very concerned about the author…did you suffer some kind of abuse in your earlier years? you should consider getting a check up…just to keep the world…i mean you safe.

  190. carl says:

    could tyu comment further on Bahaullah and the 12th Imman?

  191. Julia says:

    Of course NOT the smart person SANADA!

  192. Julia says:

    I have read your article.
    You are a LIAR !

  193. aminriadh says:

    Ah . . the name changer . . . well – how many identities do you have?

  194. Julia says:

    You can't write ( like you fake prophet ) !
    You write your name as "AHAMED", but you should write "ASHAMED". WITH AN "S". 😉

  195. Julia says:

    You choose a wrong name for yourself, it should be STUPID Muslim .;-)

  196. Julia says:

    In the hadiths ,stupid muslim. Google it.
    Do you think ALL hadiths are fairy tales ?

  197. umar says:

    kuti kaa bachaa islam ko bura kaha to teri bahn ko chood kar looun gaa

  198. Mmm says:


    You should look more into early Christian missionary history. Also the missionaries to Ireland and England, which also included women. It is a marvellous courage those people had. Imagine travelling alone in this age as a women to a wild people who have a habit for human sacrifice, and having with you nothing but a story about Jesus! Respect.

  199. Mmm says:

    The vikings were fascinated by the story of a man being able to leave Hel. They related it to their own myth about Balder, the god of light,, who was killed and went to Hel, but was nearly helped out again (a bit like Eurydice in Greek myth, only this time it was Balder's mother trying to help). But because of Loki's treason it was prevented. There was much fear of the power of dead ancestors and dark spirits of Scandinavia. The asatru sacrificed humans to Odin the god of death and war. People did not convert in Scandinavia because they were forced, but because they actually liked the new, milder ideas. They called Jesus "Hvitakrist", the White Christ, as if they saw in him a "fulfillment" of Balder the Light God's mission to escape death.

    Some vikings thought the missionaries were silly, though, and murdered them with axes (this happened on Iceland) or sacrificed them to Odin.

  200. Mmm says:

    Correction of a few historical mistakes: 9 million witch hunts is wrong, the historians today estimate that about 60.000 people (20 % of them male) were condemned for witchcraft during all the centuries of witch persecution together. Look it up on wikipedia or elsewhere.

    One should not belittle such terrible crimes as burning human beings alive, but there is also no need to tell tall tales about untrue figures, this only takes respect away.

    I also have no idea where you have your 'some 50 % of Scandinavia' from. If you are imagining it to be connected with a violent Christian conquest of Scandinavian Pagans, you are far off into fairyland.. The historical facts about the Christianisation of Scandinavia are that they happened primarily through peaceful missionaries, monks and even women, who came weaponless to preach about loving one's neighbor and the man who had conquered death.

  201. Ali Sina says:

    So many people said this and then after reading my book left Islam. Do you think your faith is strong enough to read my book?

  202. AJ says:

    Ur article is just rubbish..if ur under the impression reading this. or ur book someone is going to leave islam..Lol.. Islam is the. most beautiful religion and we believe in life in the hereafter.No matter how hard u try to get islam down its the fastest growing religion in the world. u know why coz its a way of life. I’m not a born muslim i reverted to islam. seriously it just makes me laugh as people in this century are deprived of basic rights.. First fight for the rights of people who are alive…..

  203. DPhysicist says:

    Its been 1400 year since Safiyah walked this earth in pain and agony… Ali Sina you have revealed her life, her pain and sufferings to us. Safiyah could not have ever thought in dreams that centuries later people will understand her pain… through your words you have done justice to her and exposed the lies. This story has emotionally stirred me.

  204. safiya says:

    WOW!!!!!!!!! Do u know any Christians with your mentality?? I would L-O-V-E for someone to make a jesus version of this (or should I say bible version of this). Nevertheless very enlightening. Thanks. Can I get ur book??

  205. John K says:

    Well, it sound like you are the idiot that knows nothing about Islam since you didn't bring any evidence to refute the article. Actually, you can't even write two lines well. You could never write a book yourself. Are you just jealous of those who are more capable than you?

  206. ace says:

    this is lie. u know nothing about islam so u just create ur story about what u know about islam. i dont understand why such an idiot like u can publish a book. shame on u.

  207. Rembrandt says:

    "Muslims get insulted by anything I say".


  208. John K says:

    Yes, but unfortunately the Jews' belief in a Messiah who would rescue them caused Arabs to support Muhammad.

  209. Dr.anburaj says:

    Mohammed being an insane man indulged in all sorts of rowdyism. His personality is swinging between a beast and a Man. Jews are expecting a Messiah/ christ/Prophet even today. Jews rejected Jesus . Elliah should precede christ. Jesus statement that Elliah was John was rejected by the Judges and he was charged with " cheate " and was cruzified. THERE IS NO CHANCE FOR THE JEWS TO ACCEPT mOHAMMED TO BE THE CHRIST THEY ARE EXPECTING.

  210. vikram says:

    it is because the proud roman catholics in goa massacred 100 thousand men and inserted swords in vaginas of women, it is because catholic plunderer vasco de gama sized whole wealth of kerala, it is because that saint xavier exclaimed happiness after 10000 were beheaded, it is because british christians in 1773 caused a famine that killed 12 million people half of that time italy, it is because they cut fingers of 100000 textile workers, it is because they took 10 trillion dollars from india, it is because they installed a nehru as a puppet and now a roman catholic sonia maino is giving country wealth to proud roman catholics like you. shame on you.

  211. vikram says:

    ranma is forgetting the 50000 killed in jerusalem, 4 million natives in america, 3millions in 30 years war, st. bartholmew massacre of france, 9 million witch hunts burning women to death, 10-30 million in mexico peru and central america, hundred thousand in goa where swords were inserted in vaginas, some 50 percent of scandinavia from 8 to 10 centuries and holocaust directly done as a result of jesus. also do not be proud and arrogant about your technological superiority. mussolini was 100 times more superior than the poor ethiopians yet it did not give him right to kill them so was hitler. also western superiority is a very recent phenomenon some 400 years in 5000 years of human history before that if west was ahead of eastern cultures of china and india it was poly theistic like greek and classical rome. also never forget 500-1500 are called dark ages as at that time while in india and persia commoners could read poems the europeans even the dukes and kings were unable to write their names. do remember this was the high time of christianity. if you find this biased read bertrand russeel,will durant,gore vidal and joseph macbee.

  212. John K says:

    The deception of publishing what the Quran, Ahadith, and Sira say.

    I'm sure you haven't read the Bible, and probably less than 1% of what I have read.

  213. Arya Anand says:

    Dont' you know Jews and Christians do not approve nor follow the barbaric teachings found in Old Testament?

  214. Sanada_10 says:

    Don't you read your Quran too? Don't forget that these books were used by Muhammad to authenticate Islam. And after all of these, only Islam produces barbaric system until now.

    Where is the proof, eh?

  215. Inthenameoferia says:

    "The strange puzzle was solved by a psychologist who explained, that under duress; captives often develop a feeling of love and loyalty towards their captors. This is called Stockholm syndrome"..

    Here i have to say something about the dickhead judge:
    He needed help himself,that psychopath which i garantee was a fascist izlamistleftist needed help.you
    just even damn thinking about the girl chosed,even when is plenty of evidence that she was catched and in room in damn 7 years and ONLY one letter to that pucko,then the judge claim she loved him.

    These kind of morons should be far a way from law not damn represent the damn law!
    He is a muzlim,already.someone should send him quran!

    The survive instinkt is strong.She is young and dont want to die.I actually saw plenty movies who were
    based on true history.

    Some of them had suicide thoughts,but as soon as it was someone else who tried to kill them,the survive instinkt is awake!

    Is just like this:I go when i want to go,you dont decide for me and my life.These persons will never be
    slaves and wont never accepting to be kill by others,just like the girl,she waited for her time,and now idiots think the young girl has to blame herself.Obviously,plenty women be paid by the judge as his sex-slave so that's why he released the psychopath who inslave her!
    USA is the perfect place for satan's sharialaw,many idiots as the judge above will pave the way for satan and satanists muhammadans!

  216. awareness says:

    The life of Muhammad is filled with hate, murder, rape, and barbaric acts….Muslims are mostly trible people who are blindly following a madman.

  217. sudhakar says:

    Killing a person for pointing out your faults is not bravery. Muslims anyway do not care for bravery. Cruelty, Treachery, Shamelessness, Deception and Boastfulness have been your chief characteristics. But you think you are the most peaceful, trustworthy, honest and humble people. That is false and hence selfdeception. Selfdeception occurs when you lack the ability to introspect. which occurs when your desire levels are very strong. At this point of total psychological degeneration You define criminal conduct as holy and exonerate yourself. That is what is quran, a degenerate man writing his own exoneration. Allah of quran is Mohammad's own degenate psychology speaking. Sane and intelligent people can grasp this truth. The world has tolerated the most intolerant psychology ( Islamic / Mohammadan psychology) for too long.

  218. Sanada_10 says:

    Tushar, your first paragraph is on page 514-515 (763) and your second paragraph is on page 516-517 (766).

  219. Sanada_10 says:

    Islam is "good" for Allah/Muhammad alone which indicates that Allah is Muhammad. This kind of balanced thinking never exist in muslim's mind coz they are just slaves to allegedly higher power. They are hypnotized and brainwashed.

  220. sudhakar says:

    Negative of negative is positive.
    There is something called Good and Bad in our behavior.
    How do we judge what is Good and what is Bad ( attitude , deed and conduct) ?
    Know that deed ( attitude & conduct) is Good if we like the same done to ouselves.
    Know that deed ( attitude & conduct) is Bad if we do not like the same done to ourselves.
    1. That which benefits a few and Harms none is Good.
    2. That which benefits a few but Harms many is Bad
    In this case the benefit to the few is only in the short term (few years or one life time)
    Even the short term benefit will turn into longterm harm ( few years later or few lifetimes
    later or in the after life)
    3. That which helps the harmful is Bad
    4. That which harms the harmful is beneficial to the whole – Hence it is Good.
    5. That which helps the helpful is Good.
    Was Mohammad Good or Bad ? Is Islam Good or bad? Think rationally oh man

  221. sudhakar says:

    I agree that some of the higher truths can not always be logically proved or probed. But consisitent & persistent cruelty and Inhumanness are definitely not the signs of divinity. Christianity may not also be rational. Irrationality of christianity does not prove Islam Right. But atleast jesus was humane.

  222. Tushar says:

    Hi Ali Sina,
    I think you forgot to mention here about how Muhammad actually raped Safiyah.
    Ibn Ishaq writes: “The apostle occupied the Jewish forts one after the other, taking prisoners as he went. Among these were Safiya, the wife of Kinana, the Khaibar chief, and two female cousins: [sisters of Kinana] the apostle chose Safiya for himself. The other prisoners were distributed among the Muslims. Bilal brought Safiya to the apostle, and they passed the bodies of several Jews on the way. Safiya’s female companions lamented and strewed dust on their heads. When the apostle of Allâh observed this scene, he said, ‘Remove these she devils from me.‘ But he ordered Safiya to remain, and threw his reda [cloak] over her. So the Muslims knew he had reserved her for his own. The apostle reprimanded Bilal, saying, ‘Hast thou lost all feelings of mercy, to make women pass by the corpses of their husbands?’”
    Safiyah was taken to Muhammad’s tent. Muhammad wanted to have sex with her on that very night, only hours after torturing to death her husband. She resisted his advances. That night Abu Ayyub al-Ansari guarded the tent of Muhammad. When, in the early dawn, Muhammad saw Abu Ayyub strolling up and down, he asked him what he meant by this sentry-go; he replied: “I was afraid for you with this young lady. You had killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives, I was really afraid for you on her account”. (Ibn Ishaq, p. 766)
    You had mentioned this as an article in Muhammad: The Rapist here: http://www.faithfreedom.org/the-challenge/muhamma
    This reference is not much used by critics to prove that Muhammad raped Safiyah. May I know the reason why? Also, I checked out this thing in page 766 of Ibn Ishaq, yet I didn't find it anywhere. Please explain!

  223. everin says:

    Population explosion.

  224. sudhakar says:

    Islam is all about fulfilling ones demonic sexual cravings by murdering (able bodied self respecting males) and raping their womanfolk.. If and when the whole of Humanity converts to Islam, there will be mutual wars, slaughtering and rapes as the basic nature of muslims doesn't change and more of Humanity joins this rapist Bandwagon.

  225. sudhakar says:

    Peace can be attained by sense control, mind control, by overcoming lower desires (sex, food & sleep), by overcoming anger, pride, arrogance, conceit, harshness. Mohammad was not a sage ( who has overcome the pull of the three Gunas and attained self-knowledge), but a Demon who was mired in the darkness of sense pleasures. Ali sina has given ample proof of The Demon hood of Mohammad & history has given ample proof of the demonic nature of Islamic societies. Only the spiritual guidance coming from sages will be liberating. The guidance from a demon is no guidance. It will lead humanity into the slippery path of senses and hell. Mr.Seraj is concerned about saving perhaps a few hours of his time. But we are concerned about saving Billions of centuries of time saved for the Humanity. But Muslims are unlikely to see reason.

  226. sudhakar says:

    The demon Mohammad & his followers have wasted the lives of billions of innocent people during the past 14 centuries. If left unchecked they are likely to waste many more billions of Human lives. At the end of it all, if they succeed the earth will no longer be hosting human beings but Demons.
    Since Mohammad started this Business of Islam for satisfying his suppressed carnal desires and gave a share to the entire participant Rascals, Islamic societies have continually produced Demons with mean carnal desires. Once Islam succeeds in conquering the planet earth, will there be peace? The answer is a clear NO,
    Because, there is no sense control in Islam.

  227. sudhakar says:

    Justice means –
    Doing unto others what you want to be done to yourself &__
    Not doing unto others what you do not want to be done to yourself.____

    Has mohammad done justice to his victims. Have muslims throughout history done
    justice to the peaceful populations they invaded and brutalized. The problem is that muslims do not know what real justice means. They are brianwashed into believing Mohammad's brutal conduct as justice. The problem faced by Freethinkers, Rational religionists & Humanists is How to wash the genetically ingrained cruelty & other aspects of spiritual Ignorance from the collective Muslim Mindset. The task is very very difficul due to the extreme intransigence of the Muslimmind.
    They simply can'nt let go their misplaced veneration for Mohammad. As long as Muslims venerate this monster, Humanity is in danger of being reduced to Demonity. This task assumes urgency as the Muslims have already acquired atomic weapons which they don't hesitate to use .

  228. sudhakar says:

    The weakness we find in the Hindu society is not due to Hindu philosophy, but the gradual descent into Thamas (material consumerism, fear of pain, death, lack of manly spirit & Finally Gandhian confusion) of the Hindu society. The factors responsible for this descent are multiple, some inborn & some due to the political compulsions of the British empire( like promoting Gandhism ). The Macaulean education prior to 1947 & the Nehruvian penchant for Communist & Muslim educationists after 1947 is responsible for converting Hindus into a mass of spineless squirming worms. The west needs to intervene in India to end the CongieCommieMuslim misrule for it's own welfare.

    Christianity does not preach righteous war.
    Islam preaches Jihad ( which is nothing bur unrighteous war)
    It is only Hiduism which preaches righteous war.
    The rational west needs to convey the message of Lord Krishna to it's soldiers fighting Islam. True christian preachings will make them guilty in fighting even a righteous war.

  229. sudhakar says:

    ……………Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising
    faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every
    step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science – the
    science against which it had vainly struggled – the civilisation of modern Europe might
    fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome." Churchill on Islam, science and
    christianity as quote in

    It is science , rational thinking & Not showing the other cheek ( unchristain sturdy commonsense approach to politics ) is what is responsible for the strength of the European civilization, not christianity. Winston churchill understood this point perfectly well.

  230. Ali Sina says:

    Dear Seraj,

    Islam is really a stupid belief system. This is not difficult to see.
    You say I am twisting stories and misquoting. The only example you have made is the case of Kinana. But you are wrong about him. Kinana was not even present during the battle fo Trench so he could not have killed Mahmoud ibn Maslama.

    You want me to admit I have been rebutted, but I haven’t. Give another example and be specific.

    I bash Muslims all the time. That does not mean I have been refuted.

    So you want to take me to court? You wrote “unless…” Unless what? Your condition is not clear. Unless I make you an apostate?

  231. Seraj says:

    Okay then. Hey everybody, calling somebody a "brain-dead zombie" and "stupid" are not insults, they're FACTS. Calling Islam an acme of stupidity is in NO WAY offensive, it's a FACT.

    You should care if I read your z-list book because you'll be "saving" me, now won't you? Please, do us a favor, and stop misquoting verses, twisting stories, and writing crappy books with recycled garbage to try and banish Islam.

    I see you're just a deceitful liar, therefore, I can say, until you admit you've been rebutted, caught lying, and caught bashing a Muslim, you'll be hearing no more of me.

    PS: UNLESS you write a book saying I "read your book" and you never heard of me again, so I'm rendered an apostate, then you'll be hearing of me in court.


  232. Ali Sina says:

    I don’t insult Muslims. Muslims are braindead zombies. Islam is acme of stupidity and hence Muslims are stupid. These are facts that I have proven over and over. These are not insults. They are insulting to Muslims but they are facts. Now I can use other words that are more diplomatic but I like to be direct.

    Why would I care that you read my book? You want me to remove my site so you read my book? Isn’t that absurd? Why should I give a damn that you read my book or not? Reading the book will only open YOUR eyes. It will save YOUR life. And if there is a hell it will save you from hell. It is not a favor that you do to me but a huge favor that you’d do to yourself and to your children.

  233. Seraj says:


    There, you said if you PERSONALLY INSULTED a Muslim. Don't you think calling a Muslim brainless, barbaric, a savage, a Satan-worshiper, etc. insulting?

    I think I'll read your book when this site is down, that's only fair, isn't it?

  234. Juste says:

    i think you over estimate yourself.
    But that’s good. Confidence is good.
    Ali Sina’s right. You wasted most of your time being muslim right?
    What’s reading a simple book compare to it?
    I just don’t want you get all excited like some people i see on the internet that lie by boasting that they’ve read the book, yet they don’t, but shamelessly managed to publish shallow scribbles out of it. 😆
    Good luck, Seraj. 🙂

  235. Ali Sina says:

    Where did I say I will close this site if I am caught insulting a Muslim. Muslims get insulted by anything I say. I said I will close my sites if someone can prove my charges against Muhammad are not true.

  236. Seraj says:


    I just noticed you replied. Wow, what a shock.

    So the parts are basically republishments? If so, okay, perhaps I might give it a try.

    You failed, once again, to address my post fully. You said you’d close this site if you were caught personally insulting a Muslim, please address.

  237. Seraj says:

    And if you read properly, then you’ll see I also mentioned ‘PRECIOUS TIME’, the issue isn’t money only. I think Sina has posted enough articles and rebuttals to his rebuttals on this site and FFI that I literally would be wasting my time in reading his book. The same old recycled garbage that I’ve seen before, rebutted myself before, and rebutted here – yet Ali is hiding behind the ‘I’ve said this all before’ concept. Muhammad preached for twenty three years the exact same words. He repeated himself a hundred and more times. If Ali is going to try and prove to 1.6 billion Muslims that they’re indeed ‘Satan worshippers’, then he’s gonna have to repeat himself dear.

    I’ve issued a couple of challenges to Ali is he most likely knows, if he can ‘rebute’ that he said he’d close this site down if he was caught bashing a Muslim, then we’ll talk. If he can ‘rebute’ that in a FFI article he said the sources which he uses to prove his allegations are unauthentic and undependable, then we’ll talk. If he can ‘rebute’ the fact he misquoted a verse from chapter 4, resorted to mistranslating words in ‘science heresies’, called Muslims barbaric and savages, saying that Muslims need to be wiped out, then we’ll talk. Till then, I have better things to do than reading a deceiving book filled with lies.

  238. Ali Sina says:

    The latesty edition of my book is nine parts. I kept refining it and now it is complete and I am launching it in November. However, you don’t have to buy it. I will send the earlier eidtion of it as digital file. So don’t worry about wasting money. You will not. You will not also waste time, You are already wasting your time in Islam. My book will save all the rest of your life. It’s a big saving.

    The articles are not in my book, but you can read the articles. Read also my debates. They are long but helpful.

    If you think I am a brainwasher then you don’t know what brainwashing is. No one can brainwash another person through Internet. No one.

    Brainwashing happens when pressure is exerted and all contrary information are eliminated. This happens in Islamic countries.

  239. Juste says:

    Come on Seraj,
    Scribbling something is not called a rebuttal 😆
    And thank you for accusing me as one of Sina’s goons. Though not true, i can accept it.
    Because i can see how your mind works form your writings.

  240. Juste says:

    Sina never asked you to BUY his book. He just asked you to READ it.
    Has it ever occured to you that maybe most of the things you brought forth here might already been evaluated by Sina in his books?
    Maybe the reason he asked you to READ it is because he doesn’t want to repeat the things that he already explained in the book.
    That’s why he asked you to READ it.
    So you can push a thorough REBUTTAL and answer his CHALLENGE.
    And yes, you can read with a “closed mind” if you want to. And you can DENY every single sentence in the book.
    One more thing Dude, being condescendent doesn’t make you smarter than Sina.

  241. Seraj says:

    I'm afraid I won't be wasting money or precious time reading a six-part book, however I won't hesitate to believe most, if not all, the articles found on this website are in your book. In all honesty, as I said, you have increased my knowledge and have increased my faith.

    I'm afraid you fit the description "brain-washer" perfectly and I think it's illogical to believe that, somehow, all these people have "seen the light" thanks to reading easily-refutable articles. The language you use makes me believe if one were to truly leave, rather DOUBT, their religion thanks to this site, is stupid. You say you were once a Muslim, but when you saw Islam called non-Muslims "najis", and Muhammad was a rapist, you left. So, today you're arguably the biggest critic and Islamaphobic? I'd love to see you say you're not an Islamaphobic, since you claim Islam is satanic, evil, inhumane and needs to be "wiped out". And "millions" have been rendered apostates after reading your book? I'll bite my butt if it's close to a thousand. Then again, money-lickers will resort to all kinds of tactics to brainwash and render one psychologically doubtful — and you say you're doing a good thing?

    Now here's my little challenge, "doctor": Is it not true you said that if you were caught bashing a Muslim personally you'd close this site? Here you go: (http://muslim-responses.com/Ali_Sina_exposed_/Ali_Sina_exposed_).
    Is it not true that in a debate with Mr. Mallah and Ms. Roach, you quoted a verse that says "women who are disobedient to their husbands will go to hell", when in fact the verse said that Lot and Noah's wives, who refused to accept the existence of God and the authenticity of their husbands' prophet-hood, were the ones punished? (http://alisina.org/gender-apartheid-and-islam/)

    Now, on your "FFI" site, you wrote an article rebutting a site that proved the age of 'Aisha is not PROVEN to be six-nine, but rather is a DEBATED topic and her age can be as high as in her thirties. You said "Tabari's narrations are not dependable", yet they are the narrations you use to try and prove Muhammad was the guy you believe him to be. You say that the hadiths quoted proving the misconception about 'Aisha's age are "unauthentic", yet they're graded sahih and are from the same hadith collections you quote to prove she's six-nine.

    Please, my "father" (I canNOT believe some users call you that), teach me! Please show me I'm wrong so I can believe in you and not the million websites which prove every single one of your claims dumbfound!.

    With regards,

    Your favourite fan, I'm sure.

  242. Ali Sina says:


    You think I am boasting about anyone reading my book leaves Islam. You probably consider yourself one who will never leave Islam. Will you accept my challege to read my book? Read it and refute it. Don’t read just a few pages; read all of it and then start writing your rebutal. Chances are that you too will start doubting Islam. After all it is my conviction that humans naturally want the truth. This is not true in always. Some people have other interests, such as power and use lies to get to power. Unless you are among this group, you too will leave Islam after reading my book.

    I am not a brainwasher. Please Google brainwashing and see how it is done. To brainwash someone you have to isolate him and deprive him of any information that contradicts your lies. I can’t do this. But Muslims are doing it in all Islamic countiries.

  243. Seraj says:

    This is the third article of yours I've read. The first, you failed to address my rebuttal logically (gender apartheid in Islam). The second, you didn't even answer (science in the Qur'an), but rather had someone else do your dirty work and embarrass themselves with their lack of knowledge in the Arabic language as well as the Qur'anic methodologies.
    So, perhaps third time lucky? You say Muhammad raped Saffiyah, I read this article with your evidences as well as the rebuttals, and in my honest frame of mind I see you as a silly brain-washer who denies every rebuttal thrown at you. The logical fallacies found in your claims and accusations and your disturbing ego when you boast about how everyone who will read your z-list book will leave Islam, are unbelievable considering the number of your followers (though unverifiable).

    I thank you Ali, from the bottom of my heart, for opening my eyes – to see how much of a money-licking fraud you are.


  244. sudhakar says:

    I agree that christian west is more Humane compared to Islamic world. But christianity is as irrational as Islam. Why should we choose between these two stupid religions. The strength of the west is not christianity but it's rational thinking. The rational west has no choice but to discard / subdue inhuman & irrational – religions (judaic triko) & idealogies atheism & communism).

  245. sudhakar says:

    Humanity needs to progress from inhuman & irrational – religions (judaic triko) & idealogies
    (atheism & communism) to Humane and rational approach to life. Which essentially means Humanity needs to control baser instincts, give protection to all living ( flora,fauna, other Human beings) and non-living entities and progress to Meditative way of life.

  246. sudhakar says:

    The debate is not about christianity vs atheism. It is rather between Humane rational thinking vs Inhuman conduct. It is preposterous to suggest that Inhuman conduct is the monopoly of atheism & Islam. The various christian sects between them have committed many crimes against humanity during the past five centuries.

    But the critical Difference between christianity & Islam is that christians commit atrocities in
    violation of the teachings of Jesus whereas Muslims commit atrocities when they Understand their prophet perfectly well.

    If you are talking about rationalism there are plenty of irrationalities in christianity too. A
    real truth seeker will seek truth instead of spreading his/her ignorant spiritual understanding.
    christianity is no less stupid but more humane compared to Islam. The post renaissance christians have produced science and rational thinking for which we are grateful to the Europe. Even then the credit goes to fearless truthseekers rather than to the christian religion which always opposed rational thinking.

  247. Larry says:

    Oh my god ,i lived with moslems so many years ,they scared me as a child but when i grow up we were not talking about relegion ,i know their relegion is violent ,why god allow evil to exist is the same why god allow one of his angels to descend and try to be god and still have all the power of an angel and we call him satan ,and he is the one who introduce all this evil to earth ,how can any one beleive that relegion called itself correct and ask their beleivers to kill any body else except themselfs and they call themself the winners
    how can you be awinner be killing human being ,no matter who is he ,live is sacred

  248. John K says:

    Muhammad = Quran = Islam = Allah = criminal

    "the greatest enemy, threat, and scourge of Muhammad and Islam is knowledge, and the best friend, savior, supporter of Muhammad is ignorance. Without a doubt the Quran is a product of Muhammad's imagination reflecting his personal thoughts, his fears, his hatreds, his lusts, his anger, his jealousy, his needs, and his ideas. The Quran, in short, is Muhammad's alter ego projected into the unsuspecting mouth of Allah, the supreme rock god of the Quareysh, imbedded in the corner wall of the Kaaba, called the black stone. Rocks cannot give inspiration, so Muhammad is author of the Quran, and in fact, Muhammad, Gabriel and Allah are the same with Gabriel and Allah as red herrings to give his words divine sanction. Religions worship God, a cult worships a human being. Islam teaches to Muslims to emulate deeds, thoughts, manners, and ideas of Muhammad since he represented the perfect male human being. This by and of itself represents cultism. Most important of all, there is not a single decent idea in the Quran that has not been plagerized, pirated, plundered or perverted from the beliefs of others. The only new ideas in it are the enormous amount of hate-monger, war-monger, torture and hellish verses that permeate most of its pages. – Idiot's Guide to Islam, 3 – Who is Allah?

  249. John K says:

    Is that why Muhammad said to kill the unbelievers wherever you find them?

    Your brother here is only following the perfect example of his criminal warlord.

    Perhaps you don't like a thing that is good for you.

  250. tayo says:

    hgjhgjhg a man was approached by his pastor and told he was reported to be a very violent person.
    the accused man jumped up, his face red with anger "me violent? who dares tell such lies against me" he yells driving his fist into the wall,"i swear if a find the person, i will beat him to death, i will smash his head with a wooden stick and break his legs, why are people so wicked an lie that i'm violent!"

    most of the content of mr ali sinas article claims muslims are irrationally violent and muslims deny that, claiming to be peaceful and loving. yet you come here and gave proof to what he said by proclaiming he'll be killed within hours(even the thieving italian mafias dont kill that fast). thanks for proving him right once again

  251. tayo says:

    a man was approached by his pastor and told he was reported to be a very violent person.
    the accused man jumped up, his face red with anger "me violent? who dares tell such lies against me" he yells driving his fist into the wall,"i swear if a find the person, i will beat him to death, i will smash his head with a wooden stick and break his legs, why are people so wicked an lie that i'm violent!"

    most of the content of mr ali sinas article claims muslims are irrationally violent and muslims deny that, claiming to be peaceful and loving. yet you come here and gave proof to what he said by proclaiming you want to kill him three times. thanks for proving him right once again

  252. Ali Sina says:

    You want to put that claim to test? I’ll send you the PDF version and let us see if you can still remain a Muslim.

  253. jazz says:

    thank you for posting this, i could of sworn he said that NO ONE can stay muslim if they read his books.

    may allah guide us all.

  254. jazz says:

    come on brother, you are feeding into there sterotypes.

    these people on here are not worth your bad deeds.

    The prophet SWS treated the nonbelievers fairly and equly.

    remember when the prophet went back home to medina where the people had killed his family members and completely disrespected him, remember what he did?
    this is the compassion of the prophet muhammed sws.

    may allah guide us all!

  255. Ali Sina says:

    Islam is the brainchild of Muhammad. Once Muhammad is discredited, his big lie will be also exposed.

    I drive my dart in the heart of the enemy. I know what will kill Islam.

  256. jazz says:

    I love how you attack Muhammad but never Islam


    enough said.

  257. jai says:

    Dear Ali,
    It is not only the muslims but also non muslims who should understand what islam in reality is,It is a dangerous cult and ex muslims like you only will be able to expose it.Every religon has many foolish things but islam is worst.You have rightly described it as dump of shit.Practice yoga and pranayam regularly or do breathing exercises regularly so that you may live long and keep your crusade going.May you have a long life.

  258. John K says:

    Matthew 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

  259. Realist says:

    So God had sex?

  260. Janasangam says:

    My dearest friend Rohit, Namaste and Sat Sree Akal, With the same folded hands I too would like to say the same. In my previous comment I said I love Hindus because they are the most tolerant society on earth. I am bit astonished the way you took the matter too personally. I too thinking LOKAM SAMASTAM SUKHINO BHAVANTOO" not like all the Kuffar to die or humiliated. This forum is particularly on one aspects that is bringing out truth about Islam and its evil design. It is a true secular forum where all participate with one aim that is knowing Islam not any other purpose. However people like VIIT come to this forum to create a rift inside the UMMAH of we Kaffir there I too forced take my stand in a most democratic way with out hurting anybodies sentiments with some facts. I never say my religion is right. India is a country where Christians are minor minority yet they have a dignified life because the Hindus are more tolerant than any others. I always stick to a point that Hindus know to love their neighborer more than them there for no need to teach Hindus to love their neighborer. Please see my name in this forum which is Janasangam which means alliance of people. I apologize to you if any of my word hurt you or antbody in this forum. My sincere best wishes to you, your family, friends, co-workers, your circle all the best. God bless all Vande Mataram.

  261. This web site is wonderful! Thank you for the data. I often discover some thing new when I check out. Many thanks.

  262. John K says:

    "you would also like to answer why the world wars both first and second was started by christian countries against christian countries"

    Christianity is not a political entity. WWI and WWII were fought by secular nations.

    "why Adolf Hitler who was a christian killed 6.6 million jews"

    Adolf Hitler was not a Christian and planned to kill the Christians when he finished with the Jews. He was a neo-Aryan pagan and planned on a Nazi state religion to replace Christianity. He made some steps in that direction before the war ended. Some links with this information are posted in the Freedom Bulwark forum.

    "why America a christian country dropped two atom bombs over japan"

    Partially the same as #1 above – America is a secular government. Nevertheless, millions of lives were saved, Japanese and American, by using the bomb instead of a conventional invasion.

  263. Scampi says:

    Christian scholars generally see the parts where Josephus refers to Jesus as Christ as later interpolations, but that Josephus did mention Jesus. That doesn't mean he thought Jesus was anything special.

  264. John K says:

    It's better than the usual meandering, meaningless Muslim tirade.

  265. Sanada_10 says:

    That's it?

  266. John K says:

    Why would anyone want Islam? What good does Islam have? Absolutely nothing.

  267. Ali Sina says:

    You did not read my book and you know it. No one can read my book and still defend Islam. I can show you lie by quizzing you on Gchat. I know you will not accept because your lie will be exposed. Read my book and you too will leave Islam.

    My book is not fiction. In 300 pages I have 430 footnotes plus over 100 quotes from the Quran. It is one of the most referenced books you can read.

  268. Omar says:

    hahaha This is like a failed cult. Ali Sina, firstly, change your name you're disgracing Saydina Ali, and You'll never succeed in your cause, no matter what you do, MORE and MORE ppl are reverting to islam, the true religion. So yeah continue with your works. Anyway i read your book it doesnt make any sense though, but good story you made up, you'll make it as a fictinious writer. Good luck in life dont regret it. xD

  269. Sanada_10 says:

    ou wrote, “I ‘ve read rahmanhadiq rebuttal book on yours, more realistic and scientific”

    My stomach hurt when I read this, really. I do agree with “more realistic” but on different subject if you know what I mean.

    You wrote, “I’ve also read your student comment (sanada-10 )”

    I wonder why the word “read” in muslim’s eyes is different from normal. I had similar experience in the past involving severe reading problem resulting many misunderstanding.

    You wrote, “Because your students very humiliated, his teacher had been take humiliated and abused by him.”

    Interestingly muslim has an upside down logic. I also had seen this in the past like win equals to lose, not responding equals to elaborately responded, or being proven as “wrong” is the same as “right”. You are not the first, kiddo.

    You wrote, “Prove that your student still human being who have feelings and conscience”

    You know, I am starting to think that you are a coward. You talked to Sina about me “behind my back”. I am right here so let’s cut the nonsense and start, shall we?

    Sina is of course has feeling and conscience if you ever bother to read his writing at all, in fact his conscience comes from himself unlike you whose conscience comes from a book. Let me point out the site that doesn’t have conscience (technically). The site is called Wikipedia.

    You wrote, “you had been adapted to the insulting and scolding words.”

    Wait until you read your brothers’ comments about Sina. Judging from Sina’s level of “insulting” he is just mediocre. You can’t even compare rahmanhadiq‘s insult or yours with it. Understand rahman, oh, I mean, inove?

    If you want a soft site, talking like a good mother or good policeman saying, “oh naughty naughty Muhammad, you are not a good man, don’t do it again”, then try other sites but the content is pretty much the same.

    You wrote, “That’s proved you are not human being but a devil.”

    So devil can have monomania and psychopathic illness. That’s new. Perhaps you should make a medical journal about it. Where should he go? To the devil mental hospital and attended by devil psychiatrist? Where is it? I see you know a lot about devil like rahmanhadiq. If I want to know information about someone I should ask his friend right?

    You wrote, “Of course you not reasonable debating with DR.Naik. Your capability was very very limited.”

    Ouch, why did you repeat your own sentence rahman? Oh, I forgot you are inove, you 2 are hard to differentiate. How’s that feel? I mean, spewing mere biased and prejudiced statement (not proof or argument) for the sake of protecting the master? Is it good? Chest feels light? Please elaborate. I’m interested in psychology of a “guard dog”. Dog is a loyal animal I give you that.

    You wrote, “You given me some awareness.”

    Yes, your posts tell the readers how a muslim thinks about “awareness”. Keep the good job.

    Last words for rahman, oh I mean inove:
    Why can’t you see what John K sees about Sina? He is a mormon not an atheist. Your brain mechanism must be different. Are you seriously that dependant, needing someone to tell you how to lead your own life in details?

  270. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “Every days, your job collect all kind of material to hate muslim all aspects . You do not care the beginning the source of the news.”

    This is his side “job” according to him but so do every Islamic critic (ex. Jihad watch, Islam watch, etc), Islamic propagandists, anti FFI.org, Christian sites, Hindu sites, etc. Duh, that’s obvious. If you have trouble about the source then you should present it here. Don’t imitate your teacher.

    You wrote, “The interest for you, increase your animosity for them.”

    This is pure assumption.

    You wrote, “You would very satisfied to get that animosity matter, despite minuscule for anything.”

    Again, this is assumption without proof.

    You wrote, “All of rotten material had been poisoned your character and soul.”

    Sigh, your sentences are full of assumptions. Please explain why the material is rotten.

    You wrote, “Finally, you suffer from a dangerous disease “Psychopath illness” and soon you’ll be crazy.”

    Says the “doctor”. I wonder how many time he has left, doctor? He started it in ’98 and now it’s 2011.

    You wrote, “Futhermore you contaminate this disease to your students to jointly to scatter animosity seeds in the world with a vicious provocation and slander.”

    First, ordinary people love to assume, even speculate wild things. They like to bring their fantasy into reality without proper research and argument like your fantasy accusing me as his student. Second, you didn’t read carefully what you didn’t like and chose your assumption just to justify your ego, your felling of “being right”. Third, if you really read my posts you would find it filled with technical issue needed to be answered not blatant animosity like rahmanhadiq did. Fourth, I from the very start am eager to discuss Islam with muslims and I dislike Islam before I know Sina’s site or other sites.

    You wrote, “Someone given you the godsend dubbed “ KSW ”.

    Inove, now I know your level. You are so obsessed with unnecessary and illogical name calling. Someone? I wonder, why did you pick him instead of others? Is it because…

    You wrote, “According to me, a title suitable for you are “The Scab dog pawing trapdirt, SDPT “.Because you contented the putridity and residue foods.”

    Like teacher like student (even use the same method). I couldn’t say more. Are you done showing your nature or this the habit of your beloved prophet, muslim? The rest of your post is garbage just like your teacher rahmanhadiq. I won’t be surprised if you are the same man. Why do you always act the same, muslim? Like a mass production from factory.

  271. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “Exactly you don’t have the best ten doctrines or good philosophy for human being”

    Where did you get that number? From Moses? Interestingly, FFI forum also has 10 rules for its members. That’s merely technical stuff. If you want philosophy without heavenly reward then try Confucianism.

    You wrote, “You claimed that you bring the teachings of democracy, but yourself very hate to muslim comunity hat are different of your mindset.”

    I advise you not to repeat your own words. Hating muslim community is not FFI mission, hating Islam is. And if you really understand how Sina is channeling his hate you wouldn’t say this (again I suggest you read my posts to rahman). Want to know how Muhammad channeling his hate?

    You wrote, “Every thing associated with islamic ideology certainly detestable for you.”

    Did you mean society that emulates the deeds of Muhammad who lived in 7th century barbaric Arabia? I don’t see why I can’t detest it. More importantly Sina only hates Islam and people who truly practice it but he didn’t hate people who want to truly reform it. For example, he supported Javed Ahmad Ghamidi in Pakistan.

    You wrote, “And even a president of the largest democratic in the world “Barrack Obama”, you very hate him and you provocate American’s peoples to coup him, by reason he would not made eliminated Islamic religion in American peoples in his countries”

    That’s democracy for you. The criticism is also used by Obama’s opposition. The “coup” is not democratic and USA is not like muslim countries. In democratic nation you don’t choose a failure and if Obama fails then Americans won’t choose him anymore in the next election. Americans have the right to choose for their country not for the pride of one man like Obama. Just because Sina promotes democracy doesn’t mean he must support American president blindly. That’s not democratic.

    Obama is a phenomenon, a weird and short one actually. Imagine people across the world were in love with him before the election without even knowing anything about him, not even his experience in politic. I can understand muslim love him because of his tendency to support and appease Islam (that’s why Sina hates him) even with lies, blacks loved him because he is half black, and Indonesians (except me because I don’t see any reason) love him simply because he stayed here for 4 years but non muslims also support him based on nothing at all. This was a gamble. Today people are not in love with him anymore, they started to question his ability including in Indonesia. To know why Sina hates him you have to see his arguments and we all know he used Sam Vaknin as reference and Vaknin had diagnosed Obama as a narcissist.

    You wrote, “Seem you are not like a human. Who are you? Exactly what is conveyed by a person who is not famous, ordinary people who named Rahmanhadiq. He gives his best for you KSW ( King Satanic in the World) , this is exactly for you. This is the best honorary title for you.”

    At one point you acted like an expert in human psychology talking about monomania and at another point you wrote like this. Are you sure you know what you are talking about? I was imagining you write a book called “Understanding Ali Sina: A Psychobiography of FFI’s Prophet”. Now that will be interesting. The answer is clear because you said rahmanhadiq is ordinary people so his book is also ordinary. We know society also consists mostly of ordinary people who understand very little but shouting very hard. You spelled that word (KSW) without realizing its fault in my posts to rahman. That’s ordinary reaction from ordinary person. And if that’s what you call “his best” then he is a sorry guy indeed. Oh, are you him?

  272. Sanada_10 says:

    You wrote, “Moreover, several assassins such as Hitler, Mussolini, and Jengis Khan who had been killed more than one millions of peoples, none of the doctrine that must to abhor them.”

    Why did you mention assassin only? It makes the impression that they were some kind of ninjas working for someone. You can ask any sane human about them except fascist, Neo Nazi or Mongolian to find the answer that their deeds were evil and detestable worth to be punished in court of law if they are alive unless you are a wikipedian writing an article.

    You wrote, “I do not see any doctrine of your best.”

    It’s because he didn’t bring any. You think everyone is the same with you, like that tail rahman.

    You wrote, “With your irrational pettifogging character, you had to provocated all of man to hate muslim community in the world.”

    Proof? It’s easy to say something but hard to prove it. Why don’t you read FFI.org’s slogan? About pettifog, you may want to check on Muhammad.

    You wrote, “Every thing associated with islamic ideology certainly detestable for you. Futhermore you call away them out from his religion. But you not give them alternative choise by doctrines of yours. Every one known that you are atheist , and you not believe to religion ideology at all, as often you write in your books.”

    Duh, Sina had clearly announced that he is anti Islam which means anti hateful ideology. This is not the same with Muhammad being anti polytheist and Jew which he detested everything that had anything to do with these 2. For example, Sufism, Bahai and Ahmadiya have connection with Islam but he doesn’t hate it.

    Sina only calls muslim, not others. The answer you are looking for (doctrine) is right in front of you (his comments and articles) and but you refuse to read it or you are too stupid to understand. Sina is an atheist to the extent that Einstein is an atheist. If you want religion you can speak with people here be it Hindu or Christian. Try Grace if you have any patience, even Sina can’t deal with her.

  273. Sanada_10 says:

    You better read before writing so that you can avoid silly mistake like this.

    You wrote, “Thank you Ali sina. You had given me suggestion to read your books and study carefully. You given me some aware.”

    Huh? Sina wrote to rahmanhadiq not you. Are you him? Well, that’s interesting.

    You wrote, “You promised to give 10 of your doctrines to replacement more than 6600 of al qur’an verses as guidebook of Muslim.”

    Huh? Can you quote his words about “giving 10 doctrines” to rahmanhadiq “the tail”? He never said something like that. Do you even know that 6000+ doctrine is nothing more than details for larger one and not all verses contain doctrine? Don’t get stuck with the number.

    Funny thing is, this rahmanhadiq were actually realizing his incompetent “book” and chose this (doctrine not science) to refute Sina. Watch rahman’s words, “the best his student” and “will not defend Islam again”. Forget about his English, see his boastful words too. He thought (Islamic) he is always the best and Sina is like kafir mullah. In addition can you mention the top ten of Islamic doctrine so that I can see if that is worth to be called good or not?

    You wrote, “However, by strangely, I did not find your doctrines there. Not be found the best your doctrines for goodness human being in the world.”

    Strangely too, you couldn’t see Sina’s obvious words which said,

    “Why are you searching for doctrines? Isn't commonsense enough? I don't give you any doctrine but I give you something better. I give you a tool with which you can find the right path on your own without any doctrine. It is called the Golden Rule.”

    "If you apply this, you can find the right thing to do in every situation in your life.”

    You replied to this particular comment but you didn’t even understand it (despite the fact that you were reading it directly with your own eyes) and pretended that you did, a typical muslim mindset.

    You wrote, “On the contrary, all of your doctrines are negative thinking. Your lectures is the provocateur and animosity matter to resist Islamic ideology. You want to murder the Islamic ideology.”

    A good debater knows how to present a case. Next time you should bring example using one of his words and Sina had written from the very start that he didn’t bring any doctrine. Islam was made to resist all non Islamic elements on this earth so the reverse also applies. Murder is not the right word since Islam is no a living thing. If you really read my opening posts to rahmanhadiq you wouldn’t say this. Most people read only what they like and discard what they hate including you.

    You wrote, “Personally you really hate a man who had been dead, whereas that man had been died 15 centuries a go, before you were born. I’ve never seen the crazy man like you before.”

    Hating the dead man (source) that inspired living men (result) to do crimes and many things (deserved to be hated)? Why not? Gengis Khan is dead but no one follow him and certainly he didn’t claim to be the last prophet and bringing the last law for all time. How about I turn it to you? Loving a dead man (unknown) excessively more than your own family (known) including his deeds and trying to emulate him is also crazy thing to do. Next time, bring a mirror. Love and hate come in one package so you can’t have only one of them and discard the other. Both of it is necessary in human life.

    You wrote, “None of applicable law and doctrine within democratic country in the world had to punish for a died man.”

    Ignoring your English, I ask you as why did you write the obvious thing? Sina had said that in FFI.org. What matter is now, the seeds Muhammad planted which is the mini Muhammad. If you don’t criticize Muhammad these minions will free to do his deeds because no one dares to object. Are you this naïve? The deeds of dead man cannot be judged but the deeds of his follower can.

  274. Sanada_10 says:

    You said my answer was made based on my instinct but you didn’t point out or explain anything and this response of yours is actually an instinct too. I can say that rahmanhadiq’s so called rebuttal was also made on instinct. His name calling (KSW) is an instinct came from his offended feeling watching Sina refuting Naik’s argument and apparently he is Naik’s fan so his words are biased. When you look at something you don’t like you’ll mostly be,

    1. Angry thus making you spewing ad hominem like KSW, liar, or loser.
    2. Complaining instead of proving (rahmanhadiq did this a lot)
    3. Doing incomplete reading and cannot stand the urge to respond just to ease your mind (like you on me)
    4. Writing irrelevant subjects for ego pleasing (again rahmanhadiq did this a lot)
    5. Keep misunderstanding his opponents (again and again rahmanhadiq did this and I had pointed it out in my response).

    Want to know one example? It’s you. You had misunderstood me for being Sina’s student and addressed Sina (not me) about my response to rahman while Sina and I never talk in this site. Hey, even his most loyal fan and “lover” Grace had never been addressed by Sina.

    If I managed only 10 % I would cherry pick his words, jumping around to see any answerable arguments (like most muslim do to me) rather than started it chronologically. If you really read my posts to rahmanhadiq you would realize that I have issued a challenge that will make the entire of this Islamic science “business” comes to real world not stuck in speculation world. That’s the major point.

    It’s easy to claim this and that like you who claimed that I’d used instinct (without explaining) or only managed to answer 10 % (while this is not the case if you really read mine) and nowadays any one can make any article. For me it is useless until rahmanhadiq agrees to be put to the test. I asked him to discuss his article right here right now instead of yelling to other sites that he’d refuted this and that. This is Sina’s comment section and that’s the right place to direct debate. What’s the result? He didn’t respond just like his master Zakir Naik. What’s the point to discuss all of his so called rebuttals if he doesn’t want to discuss even 1 word? Waste of time.

    Your words about “student” and rahmanhadiq’s words about “follower” are more suitable to muslims rather than me. Rahmanhadiq is Naik’s follower in literal meaning and you are his follower. Follower never accepts weakness and fault in their idol. The problem with muslim is that they always think and judge using their viewpoint and standard, they think that everyone can be applied with their thinking.

    You are welcomed to defend him but start from the first 5 topics to maintain focus. Start when you are ready.

    About monomania, you should explain it with example so that you don’t get caught between monomania (non existent in DSM), idealism and a cause. If Muhammad was so obsessed in his prophet hood, making Islam as the supreme religion and prevails over other religions would you call him having monomania? His emotion, reaction, and thinking always come from his obsession for Islam. In his mind only one thing exists, Islam.

    Do peace, environment, and animal activists have monomania?

  275. Sanada_10 says:

    Read my rebuttal carefully especially the last part. What I want is a straight discussion and I stopped at certain point to limit topics per discussion. This section is comment section and I don't write a book or article. PS: I am not his student and I do not 100 % agree with Sina. I'm not like you who cannot go outside "cult" thinking.

  276. Sanada_10 says:

    And that someone who called him KSW didn't have the gut the discuss Islam with me.

  277. inove says:

    Someone given you the godsend dubbed “ KSW ”. However , according in my opinion, that dubbed so high honorable and glory for youself only. According to me, a title suitable for you are “The Scab dog pawing trapdirt, SDPT “. Because you contented the putridity and residue foods. Furthermore you very like some human muck than the words from kindness human mouth. However, your faeces are snatched away and as a favorite foods for your house keeper animals. They ravenously eat those foods given them. The matter of fact, your mouth very poison as compared to your faeces.
    I ‘ve read rahmanhadiq rebuttal book on yours, more realistic and scientific, although many contains scolding and insult to you. I’ve also read your student comment (sanada-10 ) . Your student are only able to answer not up to 10% only with the ability of his instinct rather by thinking. Because your students very humiliated, his teacher had been take humiliated and abused by him. Prove that your student still human being who have feelings and conscience.. On the contrary, you would not feel take offense, because you had been adapted to the insulting and scolding words. That’s what your specialist. Moreover, you very hate to a die man and insult him and also all of muslim communities. On the contrary, you will very enjoy , very happy, laugh like a drain when you read the statement that insulting and scolding you. That’s proved you are not human being but a devil. This is proved, You are suffering from a very strange disease that has never suffered by humans before. I call your illness as "Ali Sina's Disease." You have made a large contribution to donate a kind of new disease in “psichophatology disease”. Thank you SDPT.
    SDPT ! Look out in front of your bed room windows, your lap dogs had been balzing out and screamingly howl by very loud voice, because they great passion on his master had been humiliated with abusive words by Rahmanhadiq. But you still mediating in your isolated room for completing your magic formula spells. You are not a teacher who very useful. You take cover based behind your students mind. Whereas your students have not completed studying with you and suckle on your breast. Of course you not reasonable debating with DR.Naik. Your capability was very very limited.
    Seem you get start to senile, your contemplative faculties has been greatly reduce, your age is getting old , just a moment you will sickly, and eventually death will pick you up. To whom you please some help ?, unto your students ?, unto your lovely cats? Or your personal doctor ? Contemplating Please !! Thank you Ali Sina ! You given me some awareness.

  278. inove says:

    Dear Ali Sina.
    Thank you Ali sina. You had given me suggestion to read your books and study carefully. You given me some aware. I hope you not reject my comments, because I will give you some advise and argumentation. You promised to give 10 of your doctrines to replacement more than 6600 of al qur’an verses as guidebook of Muslim.
    However, by strangely, I did not find your doctrines there. Not be found the best your doctrines for goodness human being in the world. On the contrary, all of your doctrines are negative thinking. Your lectures is the provocateur and animosity matter to resist Islamic ideology. You want to murder the Islamic ideology. Personally you really hate a man who had been dead, whereas that man had been died 15 centuries a go, before you were born. I’ve never seen the crazy man like you before. None of applicable law and doctrine within democratic country in the world had to punish for a died man. Moreover, several assassins such as Hitler, Mussolini, and Jengis Khan who had been killed more than one millions of peoples, none of the doctrine that must to abhor them.
    I do not see any doctrine of your best. I have one conclusion for you , you suffer monomania illness, seriously depression ” Psychopath disease”. The best suggestion, you have to meet some psychiatrists for checking out your illness.
    With your irrational pettifogging character, you had to provocated all of man to hate muslim community in the world. Futhermore you call away them out from his religion. But you not give them alternative choise by doctrines of yours. Every one known that you are atheist , and you not believe to religion ideology at all, as often you write in your books. Exactly you don’t have the best ten doctrines or good philosophy for human being. Actually , you call out human for naked or nude , and then you run away from your responsibilities. While you still wear your clothes made of wolf fur. Is this what you mean your best doctrines ?
    You claimed that you bring the teachings of democracy, but yourself very hate to muslim comunity hat are different of your mindset. Every thing associated with islamic ideology certainly detestable for you. You not ever to stop in order get out a muslim from his religion. And even a president of the largest democratic in the world “Barrack Obama”, you very hate him and you provocate American’s peoples to coup him, by reason he would not made eliminated Islamic religion in American peoples in his countries.
    Seem you are not like a human. Who are you? Exactly what is conveyed by a person who is not famous, ordinary people who named Rahmanhadiq. He gives his best for you KSW ( King Satanic in the World) , this is exactly for you. This is the best honorary title for you.
    Every days, your job collect all kind of material to hate muslim all aspects . You do not care the beginning the source of the news. The interest for you, increase your animosity for them. You would very satisfied to get that animosity matter, despite minuscule for anything. All of rotten material had been poisoned your character and soul. Finally, you suffer from a dangerous disease “Psychopath illness” and soon you’ll be crazy. Futhermore you contaminate this disease to your students to jointly to scatter animosity seeds in the world with a vicious provocation and slander.

  279. Rohit says:

    Yes the answer why we have most poor people is because we have christians running over goverment so give me a favour and take that Italian Bitch with you so our country can move towards prosperity.

  280. Rohit says:

    Well i guess i had given this link to you before http://www.vedmandir.com here you will find all the rebuttes of your claim, i am saying this again that the Arabs when invaded India they start making our sacred texts corrupted because this was the only way from which they can de-stabilize hinduism and i know from which site you are copiying these allegations and are posting here the so called (truth of hindus.) but hey think for a moment the orignal mahabharat had only 10,000 shloka and the mahabharat we had today has more than 1,20,000 shlokas, and you yourself dont know sanskrit so if i translate any sholaka and say you this means something nasty you will believe me because you dont know that language and the corruption of shlokas can also found in valmiki ramayan, manu smriti and in other holy texts so stop doing this copy paste game and dare to find the truth yourself by visiting that link thnx. and Namaste.

  281. Rohit says:

    How can you say that jesus was the son of God only on the basis of bible you cant say it, Christians believe that jesus is the only saviour of mankind. Vedanta says that whosoever adheres to the right path reaches perfection.

  282. marcionite says:

    Killing sudras is also a minor offence
    Manu11:67. Stealing grain, base metals, or cattle, intercourse with women who drink spirituous liquor, slaying women, Sudras, Vaisyas, or Kshatriyas, and atheism, (are all) minor offences, causing loss of caste (Upapataka)

    You're even allowed to ROB & Defraud a Sudra or any other lower caste.Is that not brutal discrimination or what?
    Manu XI:12 That article (required) for the completion of the sacrifice, may be taken (forcibly) from the house of any Vaisya, who possesses a large number of cattle, (but) neither performs the (minor) sacrifices nor drinks the Soma-juice;

    13.(Or) the (sacrificer) may take at his pleasure two or three (articles required for a sacrifice) from the house of a Sudra; for a Sudra has no business with sacrifices.

    14 & 15 Or just take by force whatever you like from whomever

    Sudras are even compared to animals
    Satapatha Brahmana 14:1:1:31. And whilst not coming into contact with Sûdras and remains of food; for this Gharma is he that shines yonder, and he is excellence, truth,and light; but woman, the Sûdra, the dog, and the black bird (the crow), are untruth:he should not look at these, lest he should mingle excellence and sin, light and darkness, truth and untruth.

  283. marcionite says:


    You asked some very interesting questions but I'm afraid your concerns seem a little dubious.
    First take a look at your own bloody history which is filled with racism & plunder.Your all accepting faith is not that accepting,even according to your own scriptures.
    The Bhavishya Purana mentions the Aryans killing 7 million Buddhists,then happily looting their properties .http://www.wattpad.com/860906-the-bhavishya-puran?p=7

    Murder & plunder is of course prescribed by your sacred texts.
    Atharva Veda 4:30:5 I bend the bow for Rudra that his arrow may strike and slay the hater of devotion.I rouse and order battle for the people, and I have penetrated Earth and Heaven.

    Rig Veda 1:CIII:6 To him the truly strong, whose deeds are many, to him the strong Bull let us pour the Soma.The Hero, watching like a thief in ambush, goes parting the possessions of the godless.

    Rig Veda 4:17:16 Eager for booty, craving strength and horses, we-singers stir Indra, the strong, for friendship,Who gives the wives we seek, whose succour fails not, to hasten, like a pitcher to the fountain.

  284. Rohit says:

    My dear brother Namaste, when we Hindus fold over hands and say namaste it is because we hindus belive that God lives in the heart of every human being. so plz accept my well wishes for you and for your family. brother as from your talk i can guess that you are a kind of person who thinks only there religion is great but i have some questions which you would like to answer why white christian are killing black christians when they follow the same religion, and you would also like to answer why the world wars both first and second was started by christian countries against christian countries, and why Adolf Hitler who was a christian killed 6.6 million jews when your lord jesus want to protect jews? and why America a christian country dropped two atom bombs over japan when your christ and so called christanity means peace as you are saying. and as far as Hindus and Hinduism are concerned we have neuer fought for religion because our religion had taught us peace, we are the only religion who has accepted Non-Hindus as our brother. If you dont like what i had write so i am sorry for that. May peace be upon you. Stay blessed. Namaste.

  285. Ace says:

    yeah right

  286. Agracean says:

    Oh, I'm so touched and impressed by your above reply, my dear hero, Dr Ali Sina. May God continue to bless your good works on planet earth and may you quickly come to terms with the absolute truth that Jesus Christ is Lord and He comes to give life and life to the fullest! 🙂

  287. Ali Sina says:

    “if u say like this. open your discusion in the islamic world you will be killed within hours.”
    And that proves that Islam is a true religion?

    On the contrary. It proves that Islam is from Satan. God does not need any henchmen to do his bidding. If God were offended of me and he wanted to kill me he could do it. But he does not do it. It is because he likes what I do. He wants me to destroy the lies of Muhammad and set the foolish Muslims free from that devil.

  288. aijaz ali says:

    Hi ali sina. give me your address.if you have guts ..you cant write like this agains propht pbuh..you are the devil and you are provoking people agains islam. if u say like this. open your discusion in the islamic world you will be killed within hours.

  289. Sanada_10 says:

    Actually there is no need for his quote, since Einstein himself didn't belong to any religion. That fact itself is sufficient to debunk muslims who love to misquote his speech.

  290. John K says:

    Thanks for this quote from Einstein. I had posted elsewhere on this site a collection of quotes from Einstein on religion, but I hadn't seen this particular one.

  291. John K says:

    Muslims have no answers for Christians. Muslims only know how to deceive. I'm sorry, but we have read your books and we know about your sociopathic evil, your criminal false prophet, and your hateful fake Allah.

  292. nur says:


    here, read the whole debate before getting all excited

  293. Nur says:


    here, read the whole debate before getting all excited

  294. John K says:

    Another Muslim visit to illustrate their barbarism and depravity.

  295. Rational Mind says:

    Dr Sina
    I thank you on behalf of the whole humanity, for you are doing a great service to this race. If a muslim doesn't change his mind about Muhammad and Islam after reading your lucid and logical arguments and explanations, then he is beyond help.

    Islam is actually a cult, but that is not its greatest tragedy (there have been many cults in this world); the greatest tragedy regarding islam is that it spread around the world (mainly by the power of the sword). it's a cult that should never have gotton out of the deserts of Arabia, which was home to one of the most backward people of that time.

    Keep it up. You are making a huge difference, which may one day even be responsible for changing the fate of mankind.

  296. Sanada_10 says:


  297. Sanada_10 says:

    At the end of this part of my rebuttal to you, rahmanhadiq, I’ll summarize the problems that always present when dealing with Islamic pseudoscience:

    1. The new “proposed” translation always differs from old ones (all of it)
    2. The structural change of sentences sometimes exists
    3. The verse usually is not complete and different in meaning
    4. There are too many commentaries about verses, often adding information that doesn’t exist in original verses (like you, for example)
    5. The habit of tailing science creates a fact that no one on this earth for more than 1400 years had successfully decoded Quranic verses (like a puzzle, you don’t find the answer after someone else find it then claim it as yours, that’s cheating)
    6. Its failure to get out from speculative world and stand side to side with real science

    Ops, it’s getting long so let’s stop here (because one error is enough to prove Islam is wrong) and discuss this part until conclusion is reached then move to another. I expect point by point response but without emotion, show your brain, not your Islamic behavior. Oh one more, is there any verse that explains the existence of hidden meaning? I ask this to ensure that you muslims are doing in accordance with Quran not your selfish ego. Here:

    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.

    I close it with this ignorant Quranic verse, yet can be applied to you if you think it as metaphor.

    Q 17:37. Nor walk on the earth with insolence: for thou canst not rend the earth asunder, nor reach the mountains in height.

  298. Sanada_10 says:

    Now how about ibn Kathir tafsir? Here it is:

    Allah reminds us of the creating of the higher and lower worlds. (We constructed the heaven.) meaning, `We made it as a high roof, protected from falling,' (with Hands), meaning, with strength, according to `Abdullah bin `Abbas, Mujahid, Qatadah, Ath-Thawri and several others. (Verily, We are able to extend the vastness of space thereof.) means, `We made it vast and We brought its roof higher without pillars to support it, and thus it is hanging independently.'

    Not too different from mine, isn’t it? “High roof”, “protected from falling”, “vast”, “brought higher”, and “hanging” indicate a flat earth covered with heaven/sky.

    You shouldn’t too proud that Quran gives this view because Bible had said it first in Isaiah,

    042:005 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

    044:024 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself

    And, Jeremiah,

    010:012 He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion

    Now, what if Christians or Jews are playing word games with the translation like you muslims? It will produce the same result and makes Islam a cheap photo copy.

    Another thing that strikes me as odd is, muslim worldwide still use the old translations, the one that is still raw, not yet cooked with word games and gymnastics ala Naik or another celebrity clown like Harun Yahya. Why don’t they discard all the old translations and change it to “decoded” translation”? Discard Yusuf Ali, Shakir, Pickthall, Arberry, Rodwell, Hilal Khan, or in Indonesia, discard the DEPAG translation and change it into Naik version. If another science is discovered you’ll just add revision on that version (like 1.1, 2.0, etc), of course without shame for being a tail whatsoever. In your mind, Naik was the winner (to me he’s a liar) so his translation should replace all other translations on this earth but no, it didn’t happen. Why rahman? And don’t forget my challenge to you in part 4.

  299. Sanada_10 says:

    Firmament is the sky functioned as an arch, a roof of a building covering the earth in curve angle. So the sky is viewed as earth’s roof, which is raised high above building and as firmament which indicates that earth is flat and both of heaven and earth should have the same attribute named “vast” because you can only cover something vast with another thing that also vast. Look at verse 48. Shakir said that earth is, “made wide extent”, Yusuf Ali’s “spread out (spacious) earth”, and Pickthall’s “laid out” which means to be put on surface. Again this is not scientific. In case you object it (I know you will, judging from your nature), I want you to show me one verse that mentions “the heaven is far bigger than the earth and getting bigger day after day” or something similar to that. This comparison is important. Another comparison is the size of the sun and the earth, can you show me?

    The context of heaven is the sky as far as we humans can see located above ours who dwell on earth. Scientifically we are inside the sky not below it so this is wrong. Why not say like this, “We are expanding the heaven with might and put earth inside”? Was it so hard to say simple sentences? Were Arabs those days retarded?

    Now back to the meaning, Naik actually had changed to structure of sentence from, “we are” to “we have" and that’s dishonesty. Verse 47 actually has the same meaning with 48. Shakir said, “most surely We are the makers of things ample”. See? Allah called himself the maker of ample things, this verse actually defines him not showing what he had done. This is important. What if you change it to expanding heaven? Allah is the maker of expanding things? Tell me, beside universe what other things that keep expanding until this day? The stage also creates problem because at first Allah raised/construct/built heaven/firmament then he didn’t tell the next step (expanding). Imagine I say, “I lifted the ball from the floor to my chest and most surely I am the kicker”. Do you find this sentence odd? I mean the jump from “lift” to “kicker”. There is a missing link which is “I kick the ball after controlling with my chest”. Same “goes to Yusuf Ali’s “it is We Who create the vastness of pace” changed to “It is I who kick the ball”. One might ask? Where is the expanding stage? Or it’s clear that I was the one that lift it but who did the kick? Oh it was also me after someone asked me. Was there a second party beside Allah asking question in that verse? If not, then Naik had made a bad linguistic structure in exchange of scientific notion. How about Pickthall’s “We it is who make the vast extent (thereof)”? Same thing, rahman.

    Now look at verse 48. Shakir’s “how well have We then spread [it] out” just the same with “We are the best spreader”. Same to Yusuf Ali and Pickthall that obviously said, “how gracious was the Spreader (thereof)”. It’s like, “I kicked the ball long and I am the best kicker or how good was the kicker.”

    Still protest? Fine, let’s add 2 more translations, Hilali and Khan said, “With power did We construct the heaven. Verily, We are Able to extend the vastness of space thereof.” in verse 47 and “And We have spread out the earth, how Excellent Spreader (thereof) are We!” See? It has the same structure with 3 translations above, first sentence show the thing Allah had done and second sentence shows Allah’s power

    How about Indonesian translation? Same thing, rahman. Verse 47 said, “And We built the sky with our might, most surely We are really mighty”. See the similarity? No expansion again. Verse 48: “the best spreader (is Us)”. Now we can see that essentially verse 47 and 48 talk about the ability of Allah. The power of Allah is very big, vast, ample, and mighty but not expanding. Or is it? Strange, look at the word “heaven”, it is translated as “sky” and I looked at other verses that literally explaining the universe, it is “semesta alam” which means the whole realm/world. So, Q 51:47 is not talking about universe, but merely the sky above us. Is the Arabic word for heaven in verse 47 the same with other verse that explain the whole universe? You must answer this.

  300. Sanada_10 says:

    Part 5, expanding universe:

    Next, let’s talk about expanding universe. Your “rebuttal” didn’t do you any good actually.

    You said, “Whatever the translation of the meaning and significance that the universe is "Board" or "Extend” or Dilated," as that imposed by KSW, the notion that too in accordance withreality as seen by the people of this century.”

    Sina didn’t say these specific words, the translators did and of course that notion is perfectly in accordance to reality but an incomplete reality. What to know its name? It’s common sense. Quran used common sense to describe the universe (?) and that has no difference with other books so Quran in this verse didn’t tell lies (no one called it lies not even Sina) but also didn’t tell anything hidden to human eyes. This similarity is the real problem and you didn’t realize it. Next you invented an imaginary word “broad” which is adjective word and interpreted it as “extend” which is verb by destroying the structure. You can’t just change adj. to verb and vice versa without looking at the structure. And more importantly these 2 things have similarity which is “the limit”. The same goes to “spread” and you can look at verse 48 about earth. Does this mean the earth is also expanding? If I say, “I extend this rubber” or “I spread the paper”, it doesn’t mean I keep extending or spreading this rubber/paper forever. So the presence of the limit is also common sense. Oh, next time bring reference about Arabic-English translation so that people can check it.

    This is one of your lies. You said, “AL Quran is the only book which states that the universe is broad and increasingly widespread”. First sentence I agree except universe (it’s sky instead) but second sentence was your imagination. Don’t add something that wasn’t there. Should I call you a liar, since you already lied on this one?

    And this is your mistake to misunderstand what Sina’s thinking. You said, “KSW is feeling great and just think that the universe is static and not expanding. KSW like swimming across the breadth of the universe as explained above earlier”. Now, on what basis that you think Sina had that kind of thinking? You didn’t realize that Sina knew the expanding universe and trying to prove that Quran didn’t say so. The only one that feels great to know the static universe was the believers of old. If Sina believed the universe is static then he shouldn’t criticize Quran since it matched his belief in the first place.

    Here, Naik said Hubble found it. So who was he? Was he muslim? Did he ever read Quran? Or Naik read his work and change the meaning of Quranic verses? Which one is it, rahman? Which one does come first, chicken or egg? Hubble or Quranic translation? Did Hubble need Quran or Quran needs Hubble? What if Hubble never found it? What would happen to this verse? Would we think that universe is just vast? Let’s see if this “expanding” interpretation is true or not.

    From 3 translators we know that the heaven is vast, duh, who doesn’t know it? So if things keep up like this will make Quran as an ordinary book with nothing new info. Shakir said, “raised it high” and “ample”, Yusuf Ali said, “construct firmament” and “vastness”, and Pickthall said, “built” and “vast extent”. What do we have here? Other than there is no “expanding heaven”, Allah actually proclaimed his ability and power. This verse doesn’t explain the nature of heaven at all, instead Allah talked about himself. Let’s look one by one from word’s variation.

    Raised it high = construct firmament = built. Well from these 2 out of 3 translations we know that heaven was originally located down below. This is not scientific. Oh I have to clear the meaning of heaven. Look at the next verse about earth, in Quran heaven and earth is just like sun and moon so it must be the sky seen above the earth. This is a supportive verse,

    Q 25:59. Who created the heavens and the earth and what is between them in six periods, and He is firmly established on the throne of authority; the Beneficent Allah, so ask respecting it one aware (Shakir)

    Logical question for you: Why do you compare the whole house with one chair inside it? Imagine a book which keeps saying “whole house” and “a chair” in the same story. In here Allah mentioned 2 big (vast) things (heaven and earth) and separated them from the rest of the creations. The heaven is compared to the earth and the sun is compared to the moon, and this is again scientifically wrong. The word “between” is also scientifically wrong.

  301. Sanada_10 says:

    Next, you objected about Jews and muslims getting noble prize and again you missed his point and his question (If all the science is in the Qur'an why all the Muslims are so backward?). Reading your long comments on this one gave me a smile because yours was full of emotional rather intelligent words. Sure you can do it long but also do it right. His point was that Islam brings nothing but backward civilization to its followers, killed one of the nobel winners, the 2 winners had studied in kafir lands, and one of them is labeled kafir. Those so called golden age of Islam was created in conquered nations (like Persia and Iraq) that had higher civilization than Arab and no scientists at that time used Quran as the reference. Jews for example, they had adapted time, compromised their fanatical faith and turned to modern way of life and you muslims with so many countries you were still ruled by violence, dictators, barbaric law, and backwardness. Quality defeats quantity (like 6 days battle at ‘67) and for your own record, Arabs in Israel refuse to be traded with Jews in Palestine, and many muslims want to get out of their own countries to the west. Why is that rahman? You are so proud of theocratic government and never realize that it is the source of muslim’s misery and downfall. It’s fact whether you like it or not.

    Another point is that Jews who had no clue at all about science in their own scriptures (or have they had it?) and cursed by Allah (the Master of Science) could make an unbelievable number of nobel prizes while muslim who had all the clues about science in Quran couldn’t even extract even one. Imagine 1 kid who had been given nothing but he could make many inventions compared to 100 kids that had been given the answer with riddles but couldn’t produce anything. There is something very wrong and disturbing on these 100 kids. Another disturbing feeling I have is, not even single news about Islamic science in public media. Indonesia have hundreds millions of muslims but not even one has the gut to insert this into the TV, newspaper, etc. We have preaches, sermons, history, propaganda, etc but not science. So in order to know science in Islam you have to use internet so people who doesn’t use internet will never know it, in short it’s only pseudo science. Sure I saw some about science but it’s in the small advertising section together with other cheap, unclear ads. Black Cumin? Nah, it’s not popular and can’t cure all diseases, health food products and TCM are more popular as alternatives. I said to myself, is this the price of Islamic science?

    What is the real problem then? The problem lies in the mindset. You can read Bible or Quran until the end of time but you will never find anything scientific from it. Only after the discovery made by others, these believers race with another to reopen their books and looking hard at any possible match up, all talk but no gain. Now I want you to try this in real world, my challenge that no muslims dare to take. Read your Quran and try to decode any verse you like to find the answer about new scientific notion that never been found by any people on this earth (I see you appear to know Arabic so you should have the ammunition to play word games and find the right meaning). With this, concrete evidence can be presented and scientific community will at last look at Quran. You do realize that scientific community ignores Quran and call it baseless assumption, right? So actually we are playing soccer without any professional watching us because they think we are child play. At a starter, give me one verse that contains new science or its clue unknown to anyone. I only ask one. This is important and you must do this in order to prove your view. Start right now if you can and show the world what Quran really is.

    It’s good to mention FFI.org but I never hear from you. Maybe you can help your running brothers there. Care to help them? Your brothers love to leave discussion unfinished.

  302. Sanada_10 says:

    You said, “but in principle the moon and the sun is a celestial body that floats and swims in a sea of vast space, so the statement The Qur'an does not infringe the fact. But KSW is looking for a gap to create doubts to mankind, Yeah! This is a vicious traits that are always hostile to mankind”

    Dear oh dear. You missed all the points. The problem is the honesty of translators. Zakir Naik lived in our time and this already makes his translation of Quran looks silly, outdated, and useless because you don’t extract science from Quran and it adapts science not the other way around. Islam is tailing science and trying so hard to make compatibility. The older translators had more credibility than this showman because they have fewer agenda. That principle is actually very obvious to the naked eyes. I ask you, what kind of human who doesn’t know that the sun and the moon “float” in the vast sky and moves on its own way? What kind of human who doesn’t know that the sun rise and set? You? There is indeed a big gap on Quran, for example, the moon is following the sun (Q 91:2), the moon as the smaller light (Q71:16), or no verse about rotation of earth (Q ?:?). If you still object then you better educate yourself about the context of “astronomy” in Quran which is “the sun and the moon” aka “the day and the night.” You can read any verse and you will find these 2 objects always stick together as if they have the same characteristic. The sun does moves but so does the entire solar system with sun as its center so it is wrong to always make sun and moon together as if they have the same movement in one system around “something”. In Quran, sun and moon are clearly moving objects but around what? The absence of movement on earth gives us the idea that the earth is stationary in Muhammad’s mind let alone flat. With this kind of astronomy of course you will doubt Islam. As for me Quran is just plain wrong.

  303. Sanada_10 says:

    Also logically when you threaten people you don’t use something that can’t be seen and suddenly explaining hidden thing, it will be out of context and anti climax. The context of these verses is, terrorizing people with power. Imagine, I say, “I’ll make my dog to bites you, then I’ll gather you, I’ll interrogating you, you will not deny, then I’ll complain about your refusal, then I’ll yell you, then I’ll destroy this rock. What? Do you think I can’t do it? I can break this rock like I break this paper and I know all you’d done because I can do anything, I’m perfect”. What if after I make you fear me till you piss on your pants suddenly I say, “Hey, do you know, this rock is as light as paper in outer space, and I know all you’d done”. What the! Are you joking? Of course this is pointless and they would never know it, let alone while pissing on their pant. This sentence is weird. Allah, you’d picked the wrong surah to explain it and the wrong subject.

    Next is getting more ridiculous and I was wrong to think your emotional state was gone, you said:

    “KSW imagine himself swimming in a sea of his own excrement is very wide and he did not want to know where to save himself, so he was forced to swim hiccup in his water feces”

    Actually, Sina is yasbahun (walking) around rahmanhadiq who is yasbahun (swimming) in the sea of garbage surrounded by yasbahun (crawling) maggots. This stupid words show your tremendous hate and ill behavior.

    You said, “KSW imagined that the prophet Muhammad as an expert astronomer who lived in the days of this millenium century, so he thought that Muhammad was the real astrology experts, KSW is a professor of astronomy that would explain his knowledge to Muhammad. Apparently Professor Ali Sina is going to comeback to 15 centuries ago to explain the astronomical science to the Arabic people who did not knew astronomy like as today. And on the Earth was round and rotates on its axis only, the new believe in 16 centuries by Nicolaus Copernicus at 1533 AD , and the earth rotated on the Sun believe after at this 17th century by Galileo. According that the Qur'an always precedes human scientific discovery”

    So ignorant yet so arrogant, what is the difference between genuine and fake? It’s the detail and the accuracy. If you have what others have then you are just the same with them. In this case, Muhammad of course was not an astronomer but you have forgotten who Muhammad was. Who was he? A prophet of god, the only man on earth who had been given the ability to know the unknown, to hear god’s voice (ops my bad, I mean angel’s voice) and more importantly god’s INFORMATION. So, Muhammad shouldn’t have difficulty reciting what had been told to him like a secretary or Muhammad was dumber than a secretary? You also forgot what Islam really is and to what time it was made for and forgot what parable was. Parable was used to explain difficult things. So if Quran indeed contains knowledge of truth then it should do 2 things, explaining the astronomy in detail and put it in “mystery” chapter called “the future truth” to be decoded later by modern men or using parable to ease the understanding of Arabs at that time and can be used as evidence later to modern men. None of it exists in Quran and instead we have an ancient layman description of universe, the worst of it, it is wrong. Your argument makes me think that in your mind Muhammad and Arabs at that time had below average intelligence to receive new information. All they had to do was receive revelation, not researching and thinking, like us in schools. Once the invention is found, it is not hard to transfer it to other people. The hard part is to find it. Once Edison found light bulb, it wasn’t hard to inform other people to make one. In this case Allah should do the hard part and the rest should be easy. Got it?

    So Muhammad did use his limited knowledge to describe astronomy and there is no verse that mentions earth is round and earth rotate around sun or simply moves so I challenge you to give me a verse (certainly not Q 27:88). Again I stress this, it is not hard to explain the rotation or movement of earth around sun yet it doesn’t exist, you don’t have to be a scientist/astronomer to know it.

  304. Sanada_10 says:

    Got it, rahman? What, you object? Oh, you are so stubborn, well respected Ibn Kathir here will explain it for you. Ibn Kathir, “Thank you Sanada_10, let me teach this ignorant muslim about understanding multiple Quranic verses, ready rahmanhadiq?”

    (And the mountains shall be moved away from their places and they will be as if they were a mirage.) This is similar to Allah's statement,

    (And you will see the mountains and think them solid, but they shall pass away as the passing away of the clouds.) (27:88) He also says,

    (And the mountain will be like carded wool.) (101:5) And Allah says here

    (As if they were a mirage.) meaning, they appear to the one who looks at them as if they are something, but they are actually nothing. After this they will be completely removed. Nothing will be seen of them, and there will be neither base nor trace of them. This is as Allah says,

    (And they ask you concerning the mountains, say: "My Lord will blast them and scatter them as particles of dust. Then He shall leave them as a level smooth plain. You will see therein nothing crooked or curved.'') (20:105-107) And He says,

    (And the Day We shall cause the mountains to pass away, and you will see the earth as a leveled plain.) (18:47)

    Earth as leveled plain after no mountains, ouch that hurts. Thank you, Ibn Kathir. Ibn Kathir, “you are welcome. Summon me anytime when you want to teach muslim a lesson because I hate this modern muslims who keep changing the meaning of my Quran”. I feel you, I feel you. Ibn Kathir, “Good to know we are on the same page, now I have to go back to my own world, sleeping until judgment day”. Like the day of the trumpet eh? Ibn Kathir, “Yes, of course”.

    There, the movement of earth is crushed. Wait, how about the tectonic plate? Same thing rahman if you read the true meaning of these verses. It’s again clear that the mountain will pass away/vanish/gone at judgement day. Even if this was about tectonic plate the subject should be “earth’s surface/layer/simply earth” not only mountain/hill (that would be absurd to say, mountain moves) and the time is in the future, not now. But mountain is a part of earth, you say? Listen, Quran have mentioned earth so many times in other verses and it shouldn’t be a problem to mention it again but it didn’t. Mountain is the product of this movement, not the subject that moves. You object again? Oh dear, okay let’s see the whole verses of Surah 27 start from 82:

    82. And when the word shall come to pass against them, We shall bring forth for them a creature from the earth that shall i wound them, because people did not believe in Our communications.
    83. And on the day when We will gather from every nation a party from among those who rejected Our communications, then they shall be formed into groups.
    84. Until when they come, He will say: Did you reject My communications while you had no comprehensive knowledge of them? Or what was it that you did?
    85. And the word shall come to pass against them because they were unjust, so they shall not speak.
    86. Do they not consider that We have made the night that they may rest therein, and the day to give light? Most surely there are signs in this for a people who believe.
    90. And whoever brings evil, these shall be thrown down on their faces into the fire; shall you be rewarded [for] aught except what you did?

    This is a warning from Allah to the unbelievers. The things Allah will do are, wounding people with creature (82), gathering people (83), asking them (84), the guilty party cannot speak (85), complaining about his neglected sign (86), terrorize people with loud sound (87), destroying/wiping out mountain/hill, flattering himself for being able to do that (making mountain as light as cloud) and saying he know everything the people did (88), the good will be secured (89), and the evil will go to hell (90). In short, it is doomsday. Still acting stubborn? Look at these verses:

    Surah 52
    9. On the Day when the firmament will be in dreadful commotion.
    10. And the mountains will fly hither and thither.

    Apparently the mountain will be flying not only like cloud but also like:

    Q 73:14. One Day the earth and the mountains will be in violent commotion. And the
    mountains will be as a heap of sand poured out and flowing down.

    Q 70:9. And the mountains will be like wool

    Q 77:10. When the mountains are scattered [to the winds] as dust

  305. Sanada_10 says:

    You said, “And the Quran also said that " Thou seest the mountains and thinkest them firmly fixed: but they shall pass away as the clouds pass away"

    Let me guess, you were trying to say that earth is moving (but not on its own axis because clouds don’t) and tectonic plate. Am I right? Unfortunately I have dealt with this lie. Let’s look at Q 27:88 (the mountains pass away like clouds so the earth (?) also passes away). You claimed that this verse indicates the movement of the earth (mountain is earth?) or even the tectonic plate. Usually Muslim love to use separated verse like this to make a point hoping to justify his/her claim (and make ordinary readers unaware of the actual context then clapping their hands). When we look at the previous verse (Q 27:87):

    And the Day that the Trumpet will be sounded – then will be smitten with terror those who are in the heavens, and those who are on earth, except such as Allah will please [to exempt]: and all shall come to His [Presence] as beings conscious of their lowliness.

    And the next one (Q27:89):

    If any do good, good will [accrue] to them there from; and they will be secure from terror that Day.

    So, what is this Day of the Trumpet? Let’s look at the other verses:

    Q 18:99. On that day We shall leave them to surge like waves on one another: the trumpet will be blown, and We shall collect them all together.
    Q 20:102. The Day when the Trumpet will be sounded: that Day, We shall gather the sinful, blear-eyed [with terror].
    Q 23:101. Then when the Trumpet is blown, there will be no more relationships between them that Day, nor will one ask after another!
    Q 36:51. The trumpet shall be sounded, when behold! from the sepulchres [men] will
    rush forth to their Lord!
    Q 39:68. The Trumpet will [just] be sounded, when all that are in the heavens and on earth will swoon, except such as it will please Allah [to exempt]. Then will a second one be sounded, when, behold, they will be standing and looking on!
    Q 50:20. And the Trumpet shall be blown: that will be the Day whereof Warning [had been given].
    Q 69:13. Then, when one blast is sounded on the Trumpet,
    Q 69:14. And the earth is moved, and its mountains, and they are crushed to powder at one stroke,-
    Q 78:18. The Day that the Trumpet shall be sounded, and ye shall come forth in crowds;
    Q 78:19. And the heavens shall be opened as if there were doors,
    Q 78:20. And the mountains shall vanish, as if they were a mirage.

    Now it’s clear that the Day of the Trumpet means a Judgment Day when Allah will bring the dead (Q 36:51) and the sinful (Q 20:102) together (Q 18:99). The first sound will make all creatures to swoon except for few people (Q39:68) and the second one will make them stand again. The context of Q 27:88 about mountain is the destruction of mountains (Q 78:20), the word “pass away” means death, flying, vanished (not walk or move, let alone rotate) and it’s the same meaning used on humans when they die, they fly/vanish into other world. The mountains are fixed means that the mountains cannot be destroyed or in this case, flied (because it’s so huge and hard), the clouds pass away means the clouds (which flying in the sky) vanish (like cloudless sky). To interpret it as movement or even rotation of the Earth is crazy indeed. It clearly said that the mountains (not earth) that do the passing and the time will be the future at judgement day. So in short Allah will make the mountain to fly like cloud and makes it disappear also like cloud.

  306. Sanada_10 says:

    I will add another verse that just add more problem, here it is:

    Surah 36:
    37. A token unto them is night. We strip it of the day, and lo! they are in darkness.
    38. And the sun runneth on unto a resting place for him. That is the measuring of the Mighty, the Wise.
    39. And for the moon We have appointed mansions till she return like an old shrivelled palm leaf.
    40. It is not for the sun to overtake the moon, nor doth the night outstrip the day. They float each in an orbit. (Pickthall)

    Now, why did again and again Quran bundle sun and moon together? Comparing sun’s orbit and moon’s orbit is useless since sun’s orbit is the solar system’s orbit. Sun and moon are totally different just like heaven and earth. Verse 37-40 explains about why the day and the night happen. It’s because of the movement of the sun and the moon (?). Is this scientific? According to you rahman, what is the cause of day and night?

    Q 13:33. And maketh the sun and the moon, constant in their courses, to be of service unto you, and hath made of service unto you the night and the day.

    This is common sense again, rahman. The day is the sun and the night is the moon. The movement of these 2 objects contributed to the day and the night.

    You said, “AL Quran does not provide some data from a celestial body which is rotating and which does not rotate so that the man must examine His own. The sun in the Qur'an stated is as celestial bodies that circulate in an orbit ("all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its rounded course in an orbit."), This is true when viewed from Earth, but not when viewed from other constellations.”

    There, you already have your answer. “Viewed from earth” is an excuse for someone who is unable to make differences and can’t get past the wall called “common sense”. What if other religions, myths, and faiths use this “viewed from earth” as an excuse? What if Christians or Jews do it on this one?

    Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
    Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
    His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

    Quran is the literal word of god and Allah talks directly so it should come from the actual perspective, Allah’s perspective. Or he could make both perspectives available for easier understanding. For example, he should say that the sun is moving in an orbit in human’s eyes but actually it’s rotating on its own axis, earth is flat, but actually is round. Still too difficult for Arab’s brain? Allah could try to use parable of different perspective of right and left. Hold something in your hand, tells your friend to stand in front of you and tell which hand that is holding the thing from each person. There are plenty ways to explain this (like drawing for example) and actually saying, “rotating on its axis” is easy enough too. You know, Allah actually viewed the sun from the earth. That is why he said it like that. You said, “but not when viewed from other constellations”. My question is, did Allah ever see it from other constellations or even from his throne?

  307. Sanada_10 says:

    Part 4, the sun and the moon rotate around its axis:

    You said, “KSW thought this was awesome, he imagined that each of the floating or moving among the billions of stars in the vast space, not rotating on its axis. KSW is to imagine that the earth, moon, sun and star clusters and planets were just swimming alone in the vast space”

    Oh dear, I now know how pathetic you are in refuting Sina. The main problem was the Arabic word “yasbahun” which Sina and other translators translated it as “swimming/floating”. If you didn’t say anything on this then you admitted that the meaning of “yasbahun” is indeed swimming or floating. And Sina doesn’t think that earth, sun or moon is simply swimming. Quran said that, not him. What he was trying to do was to prove that Quran says “swimming” because it is false. Are you that stupid not to know the meaning of his sentence? Beside why there are many parenthesis explaining the sun and the moon only? Can you quote the original Arabic?

    Now from10 translators that Sina quoted we know that yasbahun is either swimming, floating, or moving swiftly. I’ll add 1 more translation:

    Saheeh international version, “(all heavenly bodies) in an orbit are swimming” ugh, parenthesis again. Now, on what ground you call this, “rotating on its axis”? Sure, sure. I have read some muslims who claim that yasbahun means differently when used on different objects like when used on earth it means walking (human), in water it means swimming (human) and in the sky it means rotating on its axis (celestial body). But the overwhelming 11 respected translators didn’t know this makes it a very disturbing argument. There are 11 translations denying you or these 11 translators didn’t understand Arabic and how to apply yasbahun on celestial body? What we got at these 11 translations is common sense. Any people on earth can see that sun and moon moves and have rounded courses.

    Oh, wait. The creative mind doesn’t stop there, no, no. If yasbahun really means “movement of moving body” (I doubt that’s the right meaning) then what you call science is actually common sense. How about movement of human on earth? What is yasbahun? Running or walking or even crawling? How about a ball or a wheel? Of course it is rotating (around its axis!). How about the moon? Well it looks like a ball or a wheel so it must be rotating (because no solid object in this universe moves without moving itself). Have you ever seen 7th century solid object that moves without moving itself? This is common sense. Ah, there is one but in our time, a magician! Magician can fly without moving his body. Oh, another one is superman, Jewish made. But sadly you were lacking reference about yasbahun so next time, bring reliable reference that shows the true meaning of it. The 11 translations surely disagree with Naik.

    You also didn’t refute the crucial problem on Sina’s argument which is, “bundling the sun and the moon”. This is just like heaven and earth, which is wrong. There is one more crucial problem, the absence of earth rotating around its axis. Show me the verse that says the earth as “celestial body” and yasbahun. Care to show honesty once in a while unlike your guru? I’ll add these, are the sun and the moon the only objects that yasbahun? How about other planets? How many times yasbahun is used in Quran and in what verse? Is it also used in Q 6:38 on flying of the bird?

  308. Sanada_10 says:

    Ibn Kathir in his tafsir said,

    Some claimed that the Ayat mentioned the stones being humble as a metaphor. However, Ar-Razi, Al-Qurtubi and other Imams said that there is no need for this explanation, because Allah creates this characteristic – humbleness – in stones. For instance, Allah said,

    (Truly, We did offer Al-Amanah (the trust) to the heavens and the earth, and the mountains, but they declined to bear it and were afraid of it (i.e. afraid of Allah's torment)) (33:72),

    (The seven heavens and the earth and all that is therein, glorify Him) (17:44),

    (And the stars and the trees both prostrate themselves (to Allah)) (55:6),

    (Have they not observed things that Allah has created: (how) their shadows incline) (16:48),

    (They both said: "We come willingly.'') (41:11),

    (Had We sent down this Qur'an on a mountain) (59:21), and,

    (And they will say to their skins, "Why do you testify against us'' They will say: "Allah has caused us to speak.'') (41:21).

    It is recorded in the Sahih that the Prophet said,

    (This (Mount Uhud) is a mount that loves us and that we love.)

    Similarly, the compassion of the stump of the palm tree for the Prophet as confirmed in authentic narrations. In Sahih Muslim it is recorded that the Prophet said,

    (I know a stone in Makkah that used to greet me with the Salam before I was sent. I recognize this stone now.)

    There, there is no metaphor. Is this metaphor too?

    Surah 27:
    18. At length, when they came to a [lowly] valley of ants, one of the ants said: "O ye ants, get into your habitations, lest Solomon and his hosts crush you [under foot] without knowing it."
    19. So he smiled, amused at her speech; and he said: "O my Lord! so order me that I may be grateful for Thy favours, which thou hast bestowed on me and on my parents, and that I may work the righteousness that will please Thee: And admit me, by Thy Grace, to the ranks of Thy righteous Servants."

    I doubt it.

  309. Sanada_10 says:

    You comment on Q 41:11, “Apparently the KSW did not understand a word parable and metaphor. It is caused that he was not able to use his feel and magnanimity as owned by a normal human figure”

    So you did admit that this is a contradiction (like Naik’s opening words in big bang) and defend it for being a parable. This surah is called Fussilat (explained in detail) and when I explain something in detail I don’t use parable and metaphor. I use it when something is hard to explain in a normal way. Have you ever read manual instruction (which is fussilat) on various objects, like medicine, machine, etc? Do you ever find parable and metaphor on these things? You brother even claimed that the vapor/smoke/ whatever is scientific, based on nebula theory, so the metaphor is your imagination. Read other verses to know the meaning, I’ll use Shakir:

    Verse 3. A Book of which the verses are made plain, an Arabic Quran for a people who know
    Verse 9. Say: What! do you indeed disbelieve in Him Who created the earth in two periods, and do you set up equals with Him? That is the Lord of the Worlds.
    Verse 10. And He made in it mountains above its surface, and He blessed therein and made therein its foods, in four periods: alike for the seekers.
    Verse 11. Then He directed Himself to the heaven and it is a vapor, so He said to it and to the earth: Come both, willingly or unwillingly. They both said: We come willingly.
    Verse 12. So He ordained them seven heavens in two periods, and revealed in every heaven its affair; and We adorned the lower heaven with brilliant stars and [made it] to guard; that is the decree of the Mighty, the Knowing.

    The stage of creation in surah Fussilat aka plain, detail, and no metaphor is: earth in two literal periods, then mountains above earth (pay attention to “above its surface”, again this is literal), then foods both of it in four literal periods, after that the heaven (originally in the vapor form) so I call it vapor heaven. Allah mixed the vapor heaven with the earth (already filled with mountain and foods), then he created seven levels of heaven (again one of the Islamic science) in two literal periods.

    Got this rahman? According to Naik’s version, the nebula (heaven-earth gave birth to the vapor heaven and earth then mountain and foods filled the earth, after that the re-unity came. But we know that nebula is a formation of gas and clouds of dust so the heaven was the nebula but the earth was not, according to Quran. Where did the earth come from and in what form?

    So basically Sina’s words, “The earth is inside the sky and part of it. They can neither come together nor separate. The Qur'an gives us two versions of the creation that contradict each other and both are scientifically wrong” are right. You can’t separate or mix 2 things like earth and heaven since one was inside another from the very start of big bang/nebula/creation/whatever and no “inserting” stage in Quran.

  310. Sanada_10 says:

    You said, “He will reject anything out of evidence submitted by the religious community, especially the most hated of the Islamic community. Naturally, if he would look for other arguments are suitable according to his reason to refute the explanation given by the great man who feared by him, Naik DR”

    You know what? You make more emotional baseless statement than your actual rebuttal. No rational people accept religious community since they do not understand research, experiment and observation plus they are useless because they are tails not heads. What they do is opening books and playing word games. Do you think such childish tactic can convince rational people? Scientific community also rejects this proposal because religions do not do enough honesty and effort to the progress of science. You should complain to Wikipedia (the neutral site) also since that site includes Islam in creation myth and religious interpretation of science. People only accept theory based on research, experiment and observation for years and more importantly the one that new, not tailing others. Darwin’s evolution, Hubble’s expansion and Einstein’s relativity are accepted but not Adnan Oktar, Zakir Naik or even rahmanhadiq (except you do my challenge).

    Sina feared Naik? Even I can see Naik’s dishonesty, why should he fear him? What he did was cross checking data and found that Naik’s data didn’t match old scholars, old translations and scientific data. If Sina accepted the religious community then he should accept all religions too. Remember many religions beside Islam also have science. This means many religions are the truth?

    You said, “According to the fake Professor that the unlimited universe is derived from the breakdown of smallest atomic nuclei. I do not know where he got these weird science.”

    Now I know why Sina didn’t even look at you. You even rejected the theory proposed by scientific community. Big bang is scientific theory supported by the “expanding universe”. Nebula was belonged to different theory also from scientific community.

    You said, “this verse indicates a truth that fits with the basic principles of Big Bang theory, which was once the earth is a unity of the Universe who later underwent separation to form the universe as we see today. Unlike the unity in KSW mind that united his hatred with sly”

    What you call the earth was actually not the earth before big bang so calling it “in unity” is wrong. So, according to Naik, in “nebula” we have small version of heaven and earth already existed before sun, moon, planets and other galaxies.

    You said, “many particulars between the Bible and the Quran which have in common, this suggests that the two books were ever derived from the same author is from the creator of this Universe”

    It’s called plagiarizing. The same thing found in Bible means is not hard to copy sentences, like students cheating in exam. Ok, I skip your “comment” on Sina’s Babylonian and Mesopotamian since you didn’t do anything there to refute him.

  311. Sanada_10 says:

    Naik quoted Q 21:30 without the next verses. Verse 32:

    And We have made the heaven a guarded canopy and [yet] they turn aside from its signs (shakir)

    And We have made the heavens as a canopy well guarded: yet do they turn away from the Signs which these things [point to]! (Yusuf Ali)

    And We have made the sky a roof withheld (from them). Yet they turn away from its portents (Pickthall)

    So, what is the heaven exactly? Also, look at the stage, first it was heaven and earth split into 2 then it was water (verse 30), next was mountain (verse 31), then the heaven as canopy (verse 32) then night and day, sun and moon (verse 33). Is this even correct? Note that this form of creation (big bang/nebula) doesn’t only apply on heaven and earth but also on sun and moon but Quran didn’t even say anything about it. Why rahman? Why it had to use ancient myths rather than accurate detail? Again the heaven-earth is literally heaven/sky and earth, not universe since water and mountain were created right after the separation. Why did Allah use heaven-earth? It’s because in his eyes the biggest creations in size were heaven and earth. Don’t believe me? Prove it using size comparison in Quran.

    You then said, “in his fantasy, KSW imagined that the universe is not just happen without
    cause and without any purpose”

    This wasn’t the point rahman and actually the fantasy is also applied to you and Naik. So in your fantasy, you think that everything must have a cause and purpose. Don’t accuse someone without looking at the mirror. Look things with objective mind, like a blank paper. To have a cause or not is prejudice.

    You again used emotional statement, “He thinks that he is more worthy of worship than what is revered by followers of the religion anywhere in this world. KSW is just believe in the things that are material and otherwise throw out things that are non-material that can not be proved with his reason”

    Have you got any proof that Sina thinks like that? I have read his site for more than 2 years and I don’t have any impression like yours. You started hating Sina first then wrote this so called rebuttal. You will never convince rational people like this. Also, Sina actually believes non material things, what he doesn’t believe is proven myth like Islam. How long do you read FFI.org?

    Next you said, “So any evidence or theories that explained to him, then he would not trust even reject it”

    Again not true. He believes in evolution and big bang and both of it are theories but came from a series of research, experiment, and observation (and new, of course).

  312. Sanada_10 says:

    In this part you had missed the point completely. The fact is, Quran has the same story with other creation myths and that makes it not special, copycat product and worse, it is wrong. Further more Naik was taking about big bang not nebula, big bang is an explosion within itself not 1 cloven into 2 and the heaven is compared to the earth. Were these things having the same attribute and size back then? Also, Quran didn’t mention the size of the united heaven-earth originally. Big bang started at one thing that was very dense and hot then it exploded/expanded into all of the things (initially in different form) in universe and keeps expanding (and drop in temperature) until today. So, according to Quran this explosion was a split between 2 objects which is heaven and earth? After the “big bang/split”, Allah created other things like sun, moon, planets, etc? So, we have problems here:

    1. Weird choosing of wording from “explosion” to “split into 2”. When you make pop corn, you don’t call it a split
    2. From where did other objects like sun and moon come from, the heaven or the earth? And with what way, splitting it again?
    3. The initial size of united heaven-earth before the split.
    4. The temperature of the universe prior and after the split
    5. United heaven-earth was actually not heaven and earth initially but something else
    6. Heaven and earth were the first 2 things that existed after the “explosion”, so earth was alone at that point, no sun, moon, other planets, etc
    7. Where is the “insert” stage? Allah split it into 2 then he put one of it into another? Where is the verse? Earth is inside heaven, not below it so “clove asunder” alone is wrong.
    8. Is there a phase in Big Bang theory that shows earth outside the heaven?

    What is the context of heaven in that verse? Does it talk about the universe or only the earth’s sky? Reading from other verses gives us the clue that the sky is the correct one, I’ll mention it later. Also, in ancient myths the gods of the earth (below) were often connected with the gods of the sky (above). Certainly the sky is not the whole universe. Quran thinks that the sky above us is the whole universe separated from earth.

    You said, “context of the heavens and the earth in the Qur'an is one unit that shows the universe itself. Not like that is in the KSW of this subterfuge, which makes interpretation of the meaning of blurring of the Qur'an that it has become a target to destroyed”

    Apparently you only knew how to make statement but not proving it. I’m going to prove it the other way around. Beside, the earth has the same characteristic with other stars/planets and even smaller and younger than the sun so inserting it into original form of universe is wrong. If you want to show one unit then just call it one or name it something else and heaven-earth is not the whole universe.

  313. Sanada_10 says:

    Part 3, Big Bang theory:

    Quran is a book of sign? Yet muslims until this day are unable to decode that sign without copying others. What kind of sign is this? A sign of stupidity? And non muslims without the sign can achieve scientific discoveries. What a useless sign.

    Here, Naik said 2 methods of approach, which are concordance and conflict. I say, there is third approach, which is neutral approach, an approach of a blank paper, see first and think later not vice versa. The first 2 methods used, have weaknesses called subjectivity and obviously Naik had done the concordance approach, this is bad for investigation. In here I will use the third approach.

    From the first point, Naik had already made me confused. Big bang theory and nebula are 2 different things.

    You said this, “KSW concluded that universe was occurred from the explosion from a very small element (may be from an atom or a bacteria) and then transformed into a vast universe that unaccounted extent and amount. Thus KSW thinking about this the Big Bang theory. He does not believe that this universe originated from Nebula”

    Actually both of big bang and nebula are not the same so I feel weird seeing you wrote this. May I ask you where did you get this from? I search around and found out that nebula wasn’t the origin of the universe but it was the origin of matters in one galaxy. This doesn’t show that Sina didn’t believe in nebula but he corrected Naik’s confusing words because no one uses “big bang/explosion/separation” at nebula.

    The original form of universe in big bang theory was not a nebula and it created the whole universe unlike nebula and this theory was first proposed by a Catholic Priest, not an Islamic scholar called “hypothesis of primeval atom”. Nebula existed in the form of gas and dust clumped together into stars or planets. There is no explosion/separation in this stage and the explosion happen when the old stars die and forming new stars and at that point you don’t call it nebula. Nebula also happens multiple times in the past, present and will keep happening in the future, forming new matters, stars and galaxies. This begs the question on what was exactly Naik talking about? Was it the big bang theory or the nebula? I assumed he talked about the first one but made a confusing statement, “Initially there was one primary nebula, which later on it separated with a Big Bang, which gave rise to Galaxies, Stars, Sun and the Earth, we live in”. Here he clearly said the nebula (formation of gas) exploded or separated. What do you say rahman? He also said in the next part that universe is expanding and this gave us a clear sight that he was talking about big bang theory. If he was talking about nebula, he would use different verse which is Q 55:37 but now it’s not the time to talk about that.

  314. Sanada_10 says:

    Einstein also didn’t believe the concept of afterlife in religions, he said, “Those who brought about the belief that the individual continues to live after death must have been very sorry people indeed”.

    How about our soul? He also didn’t believe it, he said, “The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seems to me to be empty and devoid of meaning”.

    How about prayer? He said, “Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being”. Do you ever see him pray?

    How about reward, punishment, and the motivation behind behavior? He said,

    “I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves”

    “A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death”.

    When you know the picture of Einstein’s view you should know that his view contradicts Islam and surely he was critical to religions that call for supremacy among others. Sure, he respect religions but not all (eastern religions are in the list of Einstein’s respect). Einstein was a genius man so he wouldn’t tolerate the intolerant like your religion, rahman.

    You said, “Unlike the KSW is that in addition to anti-religion, but he also hated all those who have a religion and a more sadistic again this KSW to sow hatred among religious communities. After witnessing the seeds hatred thrives in the hearts of people who consumed the issue and the idea of race-lamb, then he would clap their hands watching Christians and Muslims clashed with each other”

    This is baseless assumption and shows that you never really read FFI.org. Sina is not anti religion, he is anti Islam which means anti hate itself and he regards Christianity and Buddhism as good religions. The hatred between C and M is dated thousand years ago and Sina’s writing is not significant to the hatred where I have explained in my opening. “race lamb” is wrong because religion is not a race and “clap hands” is an accusation, unlike Naik’s audience who clap their hands like any other audience in MLM seminars. Ever went to one of them, rahman? The atmosphere is similar.

    You said, “KSW is to take literature from books that are not written by Eisten, but cites the opinion of his friends who had nominated inconsequential news, that his friend who claimed Eisten interviewed during his live”

    Fix your misspelling about the man’s name first before giving unfounded statement like this. Yours is lacking of evidence that the quotes are wrong and still this doesn’t prove that Einstein’s “lame and blind” was targeted towards organized religion like Islam. Sina had more points on this one than you. Why I say this? It’s because you couldn’t produce the counter quotes be it from his friends or himself. Have you met Einstein yourself to know that this is wrong? With time machine for example? Take an example about reward and punishment, so according to you, what did he think, exactly? Care to enlighten me?

    The problem is, his quotes so far were consistent with his religious status which was none. If he indeed supported the religion that we know of, he should at least convert to one of them and not attacking himself while saying “lame and blind”. Einstein was without religion so he called himself lame and religions which don’t have science are blind? This is insulting religions not respecting it if he talked about religion like we know. Think with logic rahman, not with emotion.

    What you did, rahman, was diverting the issue here and attacked Sina again personally. Sina refuted Naik who tried to connect the dots between Islam and science using Einstein’s limited words and you didn’t refute this back. So, I conclude that Naik was misleading his audience by cherry picking Einstein’s words and you didn’t do anything about this fact. That’s what a subordinate do, isn’t it?

    Next topics will come later (big bang, sun and moon, and expanding universe).

  315. Sanada_10 says:

    Part 2, Einstein’s religiosity:

    It’s funny for a muslim like Naik to mention Einstein who was Jewish (worse of it, he was non practicing one) just to make a justification. Your comment about Einstein shows your lack of understanding about his version of “religion”.

    You said, “Einstein did not say that he adheres to a particular religion, but at least he can respect and appreciate the religious people with his words very wisely conveyed in an inaugural speech when he received the Nobel prize in 1921”

    Sure he meant it that way to some religions not all, but that wasn’t Naik’s point. Naik clearly used Einstein to show that he supported religion to stand side to side with science, Islam in particular. So he tried to say, “Science without Islam is lame and Islam without science is blind”. This gave the audience the impression that Einstein supported the organized religion and personal god like Islam but Einstein’s religion and your view of religion are totally different. I’m going to show you why Einstein’s religion is not compatible with Islam. Sina actually had refuted Naik but you missed both if these men’s points. So actually you didn’t do anything here except some emotional statements. And Einstein’s words at ’21 were too general to interpret without looking at his other words and more importantly his status.

    Einstein said, “Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent, just, and omni beneficent personal God is able to accord man solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. That is, if this being is omnipotent, then every occurrence, including every human action, every human thought, and every human feeling and aspiration is also His work; how is it possible to think of holding men responsible for their deeds and thoughts before such an almighty Being? In giving out punishment and rewards He would to a certain extent be passing judgment on Himself. How can this be combined with the goodness and righteousness ascribed to Him? The main source of the present day conflicts between the spheres of religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God.”

    Do you find a logical question in his words above? Try to answer it if you can. Next he described his religion:

    “Yes, you can call it that. Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in point of fact, religious.”

    Oh, that means I’m religious too.

    Einstein didn’t believe in organized religions which have supremacist ideology, he said, “A man who is convinced of the truth of his religion is indeed never tolerant. At the least, he is to feel pity for the adherent of another religion but usually it does not stop there. The faithful adherent of a religion will try first of all to convince those that believe in another religion and usually he goes on to hatred if he is not successful. However, hatred then leads to persecution when the might of the majority is behind it”. Don’t you notice something similar happen in Indonesia and anywhere else in muslim countries? This quote is undeniable fact.

  316. Sanada_10 says:

    Part 1, Naik’s assumption and your deluded response:

    First, Sina said about Naik making 2 assumptions, one was age of miracles. I was hoping you could provide some evidence contrary to Sina’s after reading your boastful opening and arrogant behavior but I was disappointed reading yours.

    You said, “How could KSW want to believe the news of truth, even when shown the evidence on his eyes, then he will reject it by saying that the science of witchcraft or magic. KSW was talking with asense of hatred and the attitude of hostility toward Islam, not with scientific thinking and science in polite and ethical”

    Oh dear, it turns out that you are the same with average believers with average thinking like your “followers”. Maybe to you and your few followers these particular sentences is sufficient to be called a “rebuttal” but that only happens if we dive into the standard of believers called the standard of imagination aka “no evidence, everyone’s happy, case closed, let’s go to bed with smile and wake up in heaven banging virgins (Islamic only)”. First of all, there is no evidence shown in front of Sina’s eyes, that’s including Naik, Campbell, audience, you and me. What the audience had seen is the mouth of a man named Zakir Naik, no more and no less. All of us never saw/see evidence of magical event related to Islam with our own eyes and we only hear and read words from people, books, ads, etc. This is the irrefutable fact. So you are wrong to say that, plus the age of miracles means that all people on earth were experiencing miracles be it monotheists, polytheists, atheists, naturalists, satanists, etc. Was Allah crazy?

    Second, instead of proving that the age of miracles was indeed existed in the past you chose again to personally attacking Sina. Can’t you stick into the topic? Are you Sina’s fan? You hate him so much that you are obsessed by him? So you didn’t refute Sina on this one. You filled your brain with him so you couldn’t see the point.

    Third is the worst, you couldn’t free your mind from Quranic mindset. Sina is a modern rationalist so he “believes” what he sees and if that Islamic miracle happens in front of his eyes he will surely know (not believe) that Islamic miracle exists. The same apply to everyone else. To say witchcraft/magic was a stupidity since rational people do not believe in witchcraft and magic (not magic trick in showbiz). So stop copying Quranic mindset about non believers accusing witchcraft when seeing miracle. That is a cheap excuse when you can’t do miracle at all and only happens in a book named Quran. When I see a miracle I KNOW that miracle exists not believing it, when I see angel I KNOW that angel exists not believing it (compare it to Muhammad in Islamic doctrine), and when I see rahmanhadiq’s writing I KNOW that you talk too much, high desire but no intellect. Question is, do you know that Islamic miracle exists? PS: Science isn’t miracle.

    Another assumption was non muslims claimed the glorious Quran and what did you say on this? Again you had disappointed me.

    You said, “by strange question of KSW, how a non-Muslim an acknowledged al qur'an and became Islam, KSW is more confused apparently”

    This wasn’t a strange question at all you silly. Sina asked for proof not just mouth (like you). In history non muslims were fought by muslims started from Pagans, Jews, and Christians into Europe and stopped by Charles Martel. This is not acknowledgment but force. Muhammad threatened non muslim leaders to surrender and enter Islam or war. You have to prove it using historical reference not this. Apparently rahmanhadiq is far more confused. So Naik’s opening statement were just his assumption aka belief.

    You said, “KSW also introduce some of his helpers, his friends and servants, who conspired to block the truth proclaimed by the verses of the Qur'an presented by DR Naik”

    This is emotional and prejudice once again. Giving a link is one way to make reference. Muslims also do it very often. Bring a mirror next time, rahman.

  317. Sanada_10 says:

    Again, your next sentences are poor and show your ego satisfaction. Sermon, spirit haunt, shackled for revenge, possessed man, etc are irrelevant to the topic. The sermon is actually more compatible to Naik than Sina, because to rational people there is no such thing as sermon and follower, only rational discussion and agreement. And that lawyer thing, do you even know that lawyers are often used by criminals and corrupters to free them? There are loyal only to money and no moral teaching means to them, they can bend the law and search for opening for their god, which is money. Got the point rahman? You didn’t even understand his point and chose whatever things you can think of to rebuff anything Sina had said. Oh, I remember one muslim who has this trait, Passive-Aggressive behavior. He rebuffed everything I’d said and in the end he’d run without connecting anything.

    This part makes me doubt your objectivity, apparently you are a fan of Naik, you said, “KSW established as the losers itself, who want to destabilize the throne DR. Naik that too Great and Noble for KSW”. “throne”, “noble”, and “great” makes you a subordinate of Naik, like a soldier and his king. You are too subjective on this. I agree with most of Sina’s writing but I don’t regard him having a throne like a king or having perfect record and if you consider Naik as a king then your standard is not good actually because his deception is pretty much obvious to rational people, but alas you are a mere follower. You have a bias view right from the very start.

    Reading your next sentence gave a glimpse your level and arrogance,

    You said, “KSW papers is only a incitement and hatred that are not qualified to be reply by the ripsnorter DR.Naik, supposing that KSW was refused waves on the beach with the palm of his hand. Let alone that rahmanhadiq banishes fly Naughton like KSW this”

    So far you only bring emotional statements and still the winning act comes to play. This is what will happen when you follow a narcissist. How about I change it to you? rahmanhadiq’s so called rebuttal and hatred (too many insults) doesn’t deserve to be replied by Sina. Then you wrote about Q 17:81. Why did you do this unnecessary act? For mind game? Was it a suggestion so that you can feel winning no matter what? Are you magician too? Like Romy Rafael? Your verse is nothing more than a logical fallacy called begging the question. And I know muslim like you never care about it like a child. Oh, wait. I see you had used Yusuf Ali’s translation. Why is that, rahman? You shouldn’t use old translations like his because it doesn’t have any miracle.

    At last we arrived at the topic and your emotional nonsense is gone (I hope). Should I call you the king of nonsense living in nonsense world and writing nonsense article, at the same time believed by your own few followers who are equally nonsense who are clapping their hands in front of monitors reading your so called rebuttal? Why I say this? I’m copying your attitude and unlike your emotional words I have reason and argument to show so let me teach you how a rebuttal should like. Let’s begin with the first 4 parts.

  318. Sanada_10 says:

    Back to the hatred, will you find this Christian vs Muslim hatred on mainstream media (hatred to ahmadiya is so obvious)? No, you won’t. But in their communities you will find it. Oh and one more, internet. So both Naik and Campbell have some hates in their hearts but on different level but since that was a public place they cannot express that. If you don’t have hate on something you won’t criticize it in the first place.

    Now, you rahmanhadiq also have hate and you showed it well. You called Sina as KSW (King of Satanic World). This is so much hate since satan is the worst enemy of humanity in Islamic doctrine. I don’t object the word “king” since Sina used “the world’s greatest” which is odd since Naik is not too famous actually (I myself have to search his name after Sina and other users keep writing about him) but Sina never called Naik such a foul name and the nickname he used is merely description based on fact while yours based on emotion built on fairy tale (unless you have been in that satanic world and met face to face with satan himself). It’s one minus point to you. Then you wrote emotional words such as, “defeated in a battle and fled into hiding in a ditch ran ass”. What battle? Sina analyzed Naik’s arguments and you barely started it and you already declared this and used rude language. This shows your hate and habit of muslims to personally attack their opponent. If you want battle then I’m on, we will have a debate right here right now. To be honest your first paragraph is not worth reading and contains nothing intelligent. Satisfying ego and emotion is not a good opener for intelligent rebuttal.

    You said, “indeed excellent committee's decision to cut scenes that are sensitive which may lead to conflict between Christians and Muslims, this proves that the committee intends to present a fair event without a sense of hatred”

    This is called PC (political correctness) and my sentences above are proven. In public place you have to limit the truth so that peace can be maintained. Naik used his hate to lie (yes, he indeed lies often and that’s why he is a controversial figure even in the eyes of muslims) and Campbell used it to criticized him. That’s why moderator exists.

    You said, “instead want scene sensitive KSW is to serve as his foodstruf to embed the hostility seeds between Muslims and Christians.”

    This is another emotional statement and no real argument. Sina didn’t spark the hostility among them because that “hostility” was already there (that’s why the debate exist) and Sina merely analyzing Naik because of his mission. You said Sina as the king of provocateur? Fix that description will you? Telling the truth is not provocation

    You then said, “This conjecture is only true for the KSW, but not for people who have sacret hearts and common sense).”

    Excuse me, sacred heart has nothing to do with this, the correct one is a believing heart. Christians will quickly believe science in Bible and Hindus will too. And you don’t have sacred heart judging from your ill comments. Oh and for your “Ali Sina is the King of Satanic in the World”. Fix your English please. This is basic and doesn’t require a native speaker to know it. My English is mediocre but this is too simple to miss out.

    Your magician didn’t have anything to do with the topic so it’s unnecessary but in case you object me then let me refute you.

    What is magic? Magic is the art of trick. What is trick? A trick is the art of deceiving people. What does magician do? It’s deceiving people for money. In what field does magician belong? It’s in show business. Compare it to Naik and you’ll get a match.

    You said, “A magician is much more admired and appreciated than a liar and a loser as KSW, for a magician to bring the power and satisfaction for the audience”

    You got it wrong. Both of them are liars but they have differences. Magician lies to entertain people just like actors but provocateur lies for his/her own benefit at the cost of others. Now, magician is of course admired just like film actor (both of them lying) but once the secrets are known people will lose respect. Sometimes people who know some tricks or if the trick is cracked they will sometimes insult the magician. If you agree on this comparison then Naik is nothing more than an admired magician as long as his trick is hidden and his arguments are nothing more than lies made only for show. There is no truth in it. The one that clap their hands is the one who don’t know the trick. Do you agree?

  319. Sanada_10 says:

    Well, I’m back and changed my user name. My old one was “Moooo”, but here in intensedebatecomment I use this. Rahmanhadiq, you titled your article and I’m going to do the same with you for fairness sake. I call it “A rebuttal to rahmanhadiq, the champion of emotion and ignorance”.

    Rahmanhadiq, after watching your comment and your complaint here I read your link and I will address your comments. It’s long so we take step by step. After one is finished we can go to the next. By the way, are you Indonesian? I’m Indonesian too and watching few blogs and comments by Indonesian muslims about Sina is hilarious and it reveals the emotion of muslims compared to other believers. If on TV they can be angry and scary, in internet they are worse, in linguistic speaking. Do you agree?

    Before I continue let me tell something about the truth between muslims and Christians. You said in your “rebuttal” that both of these men had no the feeling of hatred, animosity and mutual blasphemous. Well, that’s not 100% true. In Islamic doctrine Christians worship 2 gods or sometimes they called it 3 gods (the trinity). Let’s set aside this stupid thinking and go to the mind of muslims. The biggest sin in Islam is shirk and that is exactly what Christians do, so muslims automatically have hatred towards them. Naik is indeed a showman (he even said that houri is both male and female) who loves to use physical gestures and useless memorization of verses and a muslim but he is a public figure so he will carefully not to show his hatred to others and create a weapon against him.

    Let’s go to Campbell. Christians also hate muslims although their level of hate is lower than muslims. Muslims reject the divinity of Jesus and in judgement day, the god they worship will destroy their religion and even pigs (????). This is very offensive to Christians but because of their teaching “love your enemy” you will find this hard to be shown. Deep down inside they don’t like you muslims and this is natural. If you find this unacceptable then you have no sense of golden rule. Let’s say ahmadis claim that there was a prophet after Muhammad then what will you feel? This is offensive to the fundamental teaching of Islam that says Muhammad as the last. Muslims certainly hate ahmadiya and even the religious minister of Indonesia also hates it. Imagine a minister of a pluralistic nation has hate like that, stupid minister isn’t he? So it goes like this:

    Muslim => blasphemy on Christianity => hate => no physical reaction or verbal abuse => caused by the doctrine => hate changed to praying for muslims

    Ahmadi => blasphemy on Islam => hate => physical reaction and verbal abuse => caused by the doctrine => hate is changed into … nothing aka hate, that’s it

    And actually ahmadiyah is undergoing similar situation with earlier muslims at Mecca, the difference is, there was no religious violence by the pagan. Why don’t you change the subject from muslim meccans to ahmadis and pagans meccans to muslims at present days.

    Muslim => blasphemy on pagan Arab => hate => no physical reaction or verbal abuse, only warnings and economic restraint

    Rahmanhadiq, you never thought this way, didn’t you? It’s because you are muslim, you follow the supremacist of Islam thus the golden rule itself doesn’t apply to it. You always think that you are the only one that holds the truth, although in the eyes of rational people you look stupid, but you are proud of it. The same apply to ahmadiya’s case in Indonesia that becomes hot topic right now. Majority of these muslims are just like you, stupid but proud with the exception of few liberal ones. That guy whatever his name is, the old guy called big imam of istiqal mosque or whatever (I maybe wrong because I see the content and I don’t care about name, title, fame, etc) said angrily to an ahmadi at TVOne, “So Allah can’t pass his message without prophet!”, “So Allah is dumb!”, and he repeated this stupid words again and again. Now if you (angrily) protest, let me tell you that the burden of proof is on this old guy, not me if you know how an argument should be. Apparently this old guy (he is a scholar, isn’t he) didn’t understand what a proof is.

  320. Sanada_10 says:

    Maybe next time this muslim will say, Xena instead.

  321. Larry says:

    You illiterate bastard, you muslims can do nothing other than killing. Why I called you illiterate? Because its Sina not "Sena"

    Its written everywhere, even in the site domain but you can't read.

  322. Grace says:

    Muhammad is famous for killing the innocent in the name of his dead moon-god, Allah. I'm sure that Allah has turned this fool into Muhammad bin Abdullah!

  323. Ali Sina says:

    You don't have to kill me thrice. Once is enough. However, what will you achieve if you kill me? People will still read my book. In fact more people will read it and more people will know Islam is evil and and a lie that transforms good people into murderers.

    I have a better suggestion. Read my book and refute it. If you can prove I am wrong that will put an end to my claim. No one will ever believe me again. In fact I myself promise to accept your argument if you can show I am wrong.

  324. Muhammad says:

    Mr Ali sena ….. I wish that if i can get you some time in my life, and i promise to god i will killl you , kill you an kill you

  325. Moooo says:

    Have you read it? I'm reading it now and may want to comment on him. Funny thing is this man is pretty emotional and so do his "followers". You can't call it a "book", it has many ad hominems.

  326. Ali Sina says:

    If someone translates the articles in Malyalam, I will create a sub domain for that language.

  327. Sageer says:

    Ali sina
    You site is available in many language, but please malayalam also

  328. John K says:

    "Why is it…?"

    Because it is the only thing that can be done when someone is wrong and has no way to refute evidence.

  329. Moooo says:

    The essence of golden rule is to switch point of view. You have to understand others not using your own standard but theirs. It’s hard but that’s the best rule.

  330. Moooo says:

    Because he cannot think by himself just like majority of people. He is just one from many “tails” on this earth. His level stops at this point. This is pretty natural.

  331. John K says:

    You are correct about Muhammad's mental disorder. You need to read Dr. Sina's book, Understanding Muhammad to get the complete analysis:

  332. John K says:

    Thinking again about your comment on ignorance, Bill Warner has an excellent article called, "The Party of Knowledge and the Party of Ignorance". Here's a little quote that is relevant to you:

    "The Party of Knowledge has learned about the political doctrine and political history of Islam and knows about words such as jihad, Sunna, dhimmi and Kafir. Members of the Party of Knowledge know that the Koran is a dualistic document and contains "good" and "bad" verses that are both true. The Party of Knowledge also knows that the biggest key to understanding Islam is knowing Mohammed, not the Allah of the Koran.

    The Party of Ignorance draws its arguments from what Muslims say about Islam. They use the voice of Muslims to repeat apologies for Islam. The Party of Ignorance is always attacking the members of the Party of Knowledge with insults, put downs, mocking tones and allusions to the Party of Knowledge being bigots and hate-speechers. In short, the Party of Ignorance repeats what Muslims say and uses personal attacks against the members of the Party of Knowledge. Knowledge is evil; ignorance is good."

  333. 蒐證 says:

    my sentiments and I will instantly snatch your rss feed to be updated on any upcoming content you may publish,I am really fan of your web!

  334. John K says:

    How can Islam be good after what gangster Muhammad did to her people?

  335. John K says:

    Yes, you must have a simple mind. Jesus is the Son of God.

  336. John K says:

    Why would anyone be interested in Islam? The only converts you get are the ones you lie to with the Mecca verses and hide from them the Medina verses.

  337. Rahul Kedia says:

    Rebuttal is not for the charges against Muhammad or to prove that Muhammad was a messenger of God. Rebuttal is simply an answer to Ali Sina's "Worlds Greatest Showman" where he has unmasked and exposed Zakir Naik. Unmasking Zakir Naik is very important, especially in India. That book "Worlds Greatest Showman" is quoted by us, and Muslims then quote Worlds Greatest Jester by Suhail Khalid. Many points raised by Suhail Khalid are worth refuting. He does say many things which need to be refuted. Its not about the 50,000 $. Its about errors in the Quran, mistakes science etc.

  338. John K says:

    Actually, Dr. Sina is being modest. If you read over his writings, you will find far more than ten worthy contributions to modern thought. Start with the book he offered to send you. That will be a great start. There are plenty of good things to learn in that book. As he said, it will change your life for the better.

  339. John K says:

    It's not possible to rebut facts. All you can do is lie, obfuscate, and divert.

  340. Ali Sina says:

    Why are you searching for doctrines? Isn't commonsense enough? I don't give you any doctrine but I give you something better. I give you a tool with which you can find the right path on your own without any doctrine. It is called the Golden Rule. It spells as "Do not do to others what you would not like to be done to you." If you apply this, you can find the right thing to do in every situation in your life.

    However, I can show you that Islam is evil. Whenever you are ready, write to me and I will email you the earlier edition of my book. Once you read it you will no longer call yourself a Muslim. You will hate this faith of hate and its evil prophet. Truth will set you free.

  341. rahmanhadiq says:

    If ali Sina has some doctrine of good and useful to humans, I challenge and urged him to convey 10 his best teaching that can replace more than 6000 Islamic teachings. If ali Sina has a doctrine that, so I promised to register as the best his student and will not defend Islam again.

  342. rahmanhadiq says:

    A month ago, by chance I read Ali Sina's article entitled "World's Greatest Showman". After I learned it in detail, it turns out Ali Sina convey the lies of society. For that I wrote the book rebuttal to Ali Sina. My article can be read below; http://www.scribd.com/doc/47518188/rahmanhadiq-fo

  343. John K says:


    I've been thinking about this issue too since the site launch and made a comment in the FB thread.

    I can appreciate what Rajeshn is saying, and I can also appreciate your strategy to shift from The Challenge to Understanding Muhammad.

    From a web site design layout perspective, I think what is needed is a more prominent landing zone to serve three classes of people:

    1) Muslims coming for help with their doubts

    2) Muslims coming to challenge you

    3) Non-Muslims wanting to understand the issues

    As Rajeshn pointed out, the current weakness of the site is that the first thing below the banner is a list of random articles.

    I think that zone should default to a couple of articles, kind of like forum "sticky" topics.

    First, since your main strategy centers around Understanding Muhammad, I feel it occupies too weak of a position at the right of screen, especially since the it only features the cover art.

    That zone is especially weak because most blogs use that zone for advertising, and books featured there are usually Amazon associate program ads.

    So, the thing to do is to move the cover art to the left of screen as the graphic for your lead article. Then in the center you have your usual three lines of text to describe the thrust of your message.

    Actually, I think that 3 line zone is too small for such an important feature. You might make a larger zone for your 2 sticky articles. You might include more vivid graphics and text with a message like, "If you are a Muslim with a crisis in faith, start here", and another with, "If you are here to learn what's wrong with Islam, start here".

    After you sort out what those lead features would be, I would consider having your "About" article as the next sticky lead article. Then your other rotating articles can follow below as you presently have it.

    Just some thoughts.

    Then I think

  344. John K says:

    He is not born without a father. He is the Son of God.

  345. John K says:

    That's really it. I just read Bill Warner's brilliant piece which really sums it up:

    The Party of Knowledge and the Party of Ignorance

    The Party of Knowledge has learned about the political doctrine and political history of Islam and knows about words such as jihad, Sunna, dhimmi and Kafir. Members of the Party of Knowledge know that the Koran is a dualistic document and contains "good" and "bad" verses that are both true. The Party of Knowledge also knows that the biggest key to understanding Islam is knowing Mohammed, not the Allah of the Koran.

    The Party of Ignorance draws its arguments from what Muslims say about Islam. They use the voice of Muslims to repeat apologies for Islam. The Party of Ignorance is always attacking the members of the Party of Knowledge with insults, put downs, mocking tones and allusions to the Party of Knowledge being bigots and hate-speechers. In short, the Party of Ignorance repeats what Muslims say and uses personal attacks against the members of the Party of Knowledge. Knowledge is evil; ignorance is good.


  346. John K says:

    If he was so sure of his rebuttal he would be bringing it here to claim the $50,000.

  347. John K says:

    I think he is looking for volunteers to translate into as many languages as possible. If you want to do it, or have a volunteer, visit the Contact section on the menu.

  348. Ahmad says:

    hello to you …
    i would like to debate by telling that MUHAMMAD (S.A.A.S)…was mentioned in a ltawrah…and i can give you the website to go through…but i want you to promise that you will listen to it till the end(Its a Video). Thank you http://www.archive.org/details/The_Absolute_Truth

  349. analytical says:

    Whats wrong with u ,Muslim

  350. rahmanhadiq says:

    I agree with you. see also my reply to ali Sina book entitled "The World's Greatest Showman"

  351. Ara says:

    hahahahahahahhahahaha OMG I couldnt stop laughing. I mean seriuosly how do you know this fairy tale? are you from Muhamad's era?

  352. Proud Muslim says:

    this is very normal if some ignorants dont believe in Islam and Muhamad because there are many ignorants who still dont believe in Christianity and Judaism , Jesus and Moses. this hate will never stop people to convert to islam.

  353. Rahul Kedia says:

    Someone please write a rebutal.

  354. lee-lee says:

    It started with great violence and evil at the hands of a man who even thought himself possessed by devils, in my opinion Muhammed was someone who suffered some sort of diorder of the mind or brain; And by violence and cunning forced people to submit or die. That simple , nothing fantastic. And the silliness of his reasoning. But when a people live in darkness and don't have the freedom and right to examine what these so called inspired persons wrote down, they just parrot what they have heard and if they let it, they become as dark and out of touch with reality and humanity as Muhammed was. it is simply a case of the emperor who wore no clothes. Until an honest child said he was naked in the story, no one else in the whole kingdom dared to speak what their hearts all told them. And for the rude mouthed person who wrote this reply, Muslim, instead of hurling vicious insults and threats, why don't you just read the holy bible and your book and the hadith and ask God to show who which is the honest truth. Just screaming insults proves only that you have not any love in your heart.

  355. Western Feminista says:

    Why is it that followers of the "religion of peace" can never, ever respond to an opposite point of view without resorting to threats, foul language and insults?
    If someone had not made up their mind by the scholarly discourse in the article – I know they will be convinced that Islam is the "Religion of the Perpetually Outraged Violence" by the comments left by Muslims…lol!
    Many thanks for showing everyone the true nature of your beliefs….you make Ali's job soooo much easier this way. 🙂

  356. Janasangam says:

    VIIT, from your above comment I can understand you are a Hindu and your frustration. I love hindus for one reason they are personally one of the most compassionate people on earth. Let us take an example of India! Hindus couldn't reclaim any single land which they lost to Islam however Christians could reclaim Spain and could make it a no go area to Muslims totally for centuries. The Christian west could finish the Khaliphite with con and crook at least, however you can't even dream of anything like that. Let us take the example of India again. Just assume that India is a Christian majority country, the jaint mighty China wouldn't even dare to look into India with an evil thought. Then there wouldn't be countries called Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh on earth. Now in India there are around 8 to 12 crores of Christians however there are around 25 to 35 crores of JAYCHANDS the traitors who shamelessly lick the feet of an Italian empress the lady Macbeth. If India was a Christian majority country there wouldn't be this Italian empress anywhere in the picture of Indian politics. My friend Viit please understand you are not an organized religion and its very difficult for you to get organized too. Please think rationally one thing that just because Britain ruled India, India is today's India else it would have another Afghanistan, Pakistan or Bangladesh. Now lets go to Africa. There is a east, west and North Muslim Africa where you can't find a single Hindu however the Christian southern Africa you can see Hindus in plenty why my friend? Let us take the western country you can see prosperous Hindus every where who can practice their religion with out any hindrance or let how ever in Saudi its vice versa. Please note in this so called Saudi Arabia Christians are conducting weekly holy mass regularly and you Hindus cant even think of doing the pooja. Islam is evil however if you dream of a victory by alienating Christians I feel sorry to say you are in fools paradise. So please note that we all are belongs to Ummat Al Kuffar and think always practically.

  357. Rahul Kedia says:

    Great Dr Sina! KINDLY WRITE A REBUTTAL TO Suhail Khalid's "Worlds Greatest Jester" written in response to your "Worlds Greatest Showman". http://www.answering-christianity.com/suhail_khal… His rebuttal seems to be un-scholarly, but he does answer most of the points. If not you (as you are very busy) someone else from faithfreedom.org like Abul Kaseem or Islam-watch.org's M A Khan can write. But a reply is necessary.

  358. Ahamed says:

    Actually from islamist point i feel more distress to safiya, she already understand islam is good so she would have tell that I am ready to marry but give me 40 days or at least 7 days after the death husband, for this also islam genious tell is the fault of Darwin's evolution theory or to give message mankind woman should be patient even at the death of husband

  359. graphics says:

    Leo is fails to realize that no other religion will have you killed for criticizing it even if that whole religion is a lie. This guy Leo actually values the false religion of MuHamMad over human lives.

  360. graphics says:

    Mistake – not "unproven" challenge, it's "proven" challenge.

  361. graphics says:

    The compassion of Ali Sina is that he cares for all human beings. That's why he even cared to reply to this "Leo" who doesn't have any brain cells. He/She/0.5 comes to such a site which has a unproven challenge mounted on it. But as Ali Sina says, "Muslims are triumphalists".

  362. Ali Sina says:

    I did not say they agree or were converted. Most of them soon realized that their faith is being shaken and probably deleted the file in haste lest they lose their belief.

    The arguments against Jesus that you brought are just silly and stupid. Jesus of the Bible is a myth. You have to take it as is or leave it. You can't make up stories that are not there.

    Muhammad was far from being a myth. Every event of his life is detailed. Some of the stories about him are exaggeration but the the picture that emerges from all those hadiths is crystal clear. He was a psychopath as I have shown him to be.

  363. Leo says:

    “I sent my book to many Muslims. Most of them never wrote back”. Does not mean they agreed with the content in the book. People read and realised how low a person can go down and most people might hate to get back.

    Many people claimed Jesus was cruicified for the cause of homosexuality, smoke canabis, and terrorise pharsis in the temple, believed in gay sex, all these interpretations have biblical references( if anyone challange I can exclusively show them evidence). but follower of Jesus will still respect him despite of all arguments, proof. Same as hinduism.

  364. Ali Sina says:

    I will work on the challenge. I want Muslims read my book. The extracts that I posted in the challenge page is not enough. The skim over them and think they can respond. They often miss the point. But when they read the my book they leave Islam. I sent my book to many Muslims. Most of them never wrote back. These were people who promised they will come back with proof that I am wrong. A small percentage of them wrote back and said it clearly that the book has shaken their faith. So I want them to read the book and not just those few pages in the challenge page.

    If you can help with technical aspect of the site I will very much be grateful to use your expertise.

  365. g-blade says:

    Ali Sina,

    i don’t know how u do it, but you hit the nail on the head, everytime!

  366. Proud Roman Catholic says:

    If they are so great, why is most of the population living below the poverty line?

  367. rajeshn1091 says:

    Dr Sina, CREATING THIS SITE IS EXCELLENT. Very good. very nice. But the point is- the CHALLENGE SHOULD BE POSTED BOLDLY. The earlier message on FFI Forum was by another fellow Indian.
    This site is excellent, but it should be like the earlier FFI site- charming, attractive IRREFUTABLE. Also- many times counter arguments to Muslims’ illogical defences of Quranic mistakes should be easily available. You should see <a href="http://www.IslamReligion.com” target=”_blank”>www.IslamReligion.com – how it argues. Similarly 1 category can be here- “EVIDENCE THAT ISLAM IS FALSE”- under it 2 catagories- 1″Answering Quranic ‘miracles’ and 2- Quranic mistakes. (This site has Erroncies- which is good). MAJOR BLUNDERS should be prominently listed like mistaking Mary for Mariam in 19:27-28, and that sperm originates from backbone 86:7 etc which are VERY STRONG.
    Only 1 point is- there can be another section- ANSWERING MUSLIM ‘EXPLAINATIONS’ for every error, Muslims comes up with some or the other excuse and justification, most of these you have answered properly in that famous debate with Pakistanis Javed Ghamidi and Khalid Zaheer. For instance, Zakir Naik claims that 32:5 and 70:4 on 1 day of God 1,000 and 50,000 years is no contradiction, it is just an indication of long time. Also, amateurs like Suhail Khalid have written a counter (indeed, pathetic) “Worlds Greatest Jester” to your book on Zakir Naik. The counter arguments to Suhail Khalid too should be easily available.
    IT IS AN HONOUR DR SINA to see yur reply, and I am indeed delighted to see this site (I always wanted this- a site of Ali Sina himself). But the presentation should attract new and casual visitors. PLEASE POST THE CHALLENGE BOLDLY here as well on faithfreedom.org Regards and all the best to you in your mission!

  368. Janasangam says:

    VIIT, from your above comment I can understand you are a Hindu and your frustration. I love hindus for one reason they are personally one of the most compassionate people on earth. Let us take an example of India! Hindus couldn't reclaim any single land which they lost to Islam however Christians could reclaim Spain and could make it a no go area to Muslims totally for centuries. The Christian west could finish the Khaliphite with con and crook at least, however you can't even dream of anything like that. Let us take the example of India again. Just assume that India is a Christian majority country, the jaint mighty China wouldn't even dare to look into India with an evil thought. Then there wouldn't be countries called Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh on earth. Now in India there are around 8 to 12 crores of Christians however there are around 25 to 35 crores of JAYCHANDS the traitors who shamelessly lick the feet of an Italian empress the lady Macbeth. If India was a Christian majority country there wouldn't be this Italian empress anywhere in the picture of Indian politics. My friend Viit please understand you are not an organized religion and its very difficult for you to get organized too. Please think rationally one thing that just because Britain ruled India, India is today's India else it would have another Afghanistan, Pakistan or Bangladesh. Now lets go to Africa. There is a east, west and North Muslim Africa where you can't find a single Hindu however the Christian southern Africa you can see Hindus in plenty why my friend? Let us take the western country you can see prosperous Hindus every where who can practice their religion with out any hindrance or let how ever in Saudi its vice versa. Please note in this so called Saudi Arabia Christians are conducting weekly holy mass regularly and you Hindus cant even think of doing the pooja. Islam is evil however if you dream of a victory by alienating Christians I feel sorry to say you are in fools paradise. So please note that we all are belongs to Ummat Al Kuffar and think always practically.

  369. Ali Sina says:

    Without Muslims and their brainy comments, this site was missing something very important: LIVE EVIDENCE!

  370. Ali Sina says:

    Hi Rajeshn1091
    Didn't you make the same comment a couple of months ago on FFI forum? Well I listened and created this site. It's simple and easy to navigate and it will have only a handful of more poignant articles. What is wrong with this site?

  371. rajeshn1091 says:

    Another reader wrote this- " I had a look simply out of curiosity on faithfreedom.org for the first time. I would have looked at it for a few seconds and skipped it over if not for Ali Sina's bright red colored challenge to all muslims for a debate and the simplicity of the website.

    In general I don't look at any religious stuff (I think its all a bunch of baloney) but the original site was no nonsense and honest. Ali Sina's genuine and honest desire to convey his views of Islam showed through in the website. That was what set him apart from the usual hatemongers and was why I got interested.

    The real attraction to it was the David vs Goliath feel to it. It just felt right. I wanted to know more of what he wanted to say. With the new website its just like one of the hundred other muslim websites that are out there conveying whatever they have to say. I actually had to go looking for the where his 'Debates' stuff which was actually how the whole thing started.

    I was reading a comment on Youtube someone directing here and a reply to it saying exactly what I feel. "Its a bunch of unknown authors dishing muslims. No point going there".

    You are just loosing half the casual audience. And its not wise. Forums and videos and gadgets and revamps are nice but now its impossible to find the original spark that created all of this."

    DR SINA WAKE UP. DESIGN YOUR SITES TO ATTRACT NEW AND CASUAL READERS, not for old readers. For God's sake Dr Sina…reply on this…we want to help you in every possible way!

    I am a software developer and I know that if you bombard a new user with a lot of information at once chances are he's just going to move on. The new site is doing exactly that. In software people say 'if it ain't broken don't fix it'.

  372. Rizky says:

    A part of religion things can't be understand using rational thinking. If you think rationally, how can Yesus be born without father? That's a simple thing in my mind.

  373. Moooo says:

    Thanks for showing the real nature of muslim. No argument as usual.

  374. Muslim says:

    To who ever wrote this article, In the name of all religions I pray that you burn in hell in this life and the other you dirty son of a bitch fucker. you're just and ignorant bastard stupid as a god damn monkey. FUCK YOU ALL

  375. Moooo says:

    Good response and I’m disappointed in Zawadi’s argument which is clearly lack of logic and consistency. And as usual muslim after reading this would never dare to say anything except their stupid mouth just to please their ego like any narcissist. What stupid mouth? Here:

    “Ali sina you are not thinking rationaly but stupid as monkey can be.”

    If Ali Sina (who had long and extensive rational arguments) is a monkey then who is this Ali (who had nothing but a single emotional statement)? Amoeba?

    About crying to her camel, maybe she really did cry to the camel or at least some part of it was caused by it. She was all alone between Arab muslims and surrounded by Arab wives of Muhammad who of course had rivalry among them and might treat her differently just because she was a Jew (ex. Zainab, that is why the jewels came at play). From all the symbols of affection she chose jewel, an object, not human relationship since this kind of approach was impossible. Sounds like a bribe to a rational mind, but to a dumb mind aka amoeba’s mind who wears Islamic glasses, it’s not. “I give you this so don’t bother me again and leave me in peace”, a struggle (not Jihad of course) in her life just to survive and avoid pain. People who live alone and have no one often develop a strong affection towards animals (ex. pets in present days). They will treat these animals just like human. When it becomes sick or dies of course they will cry because they consider it as part of the family. Now, the problem lies in this sentence:

    “The more he asked me not to weep the more I went on weeping.”

    If Muhammad was really the most loved and important person in her life, she would stop weeping and felt peace in an instant, falling into the old man’s chest and smile. But no, she didn’t stop crying. So we can know that:

    1. Muhammad’s presence did not have any influence on her weeping. In short, Muhammad was not important. Or
    2. Muhammad was the cause of the weeping. When he approached her (after weeping for camel or her life or both), she remembered the main culprit of misery in her life and kept weeping.

    So, I ask you (muslims) this,

    Why Muhammad as the prophet of god who had superb moral and affection couldn’t stop a weeping woman? If it’s for the camel then Muhammad couldn’t defeat a camel in her heart. What a shameful prophet.

    I’ll add this:

    What is compassion, muslims? It seems old Mo had a weird standard about it and I know you will adapt it.

    Ali Sina said, “Yes Muhammad could have been fooled into thinking that she loves him.”

    Well, only woman can understand other woman. Men cannot do that because they are blinded with love and lust. Oh, who says emotion is a woman’s nature?

    Jkolak, you said:

    “Perhaps she would have rather been dead than to continue living among the Muslims.”

    Whoa, hold on a second. Some neutralists/liberals will object your comment and say, “this is prejudice and islamophobic!”. “You are hate mongering, blah, blah, blah,…”, “There is no source!”, “if she wanted that why didn’t she commit suicide?”. Same excuse, same tactic, same stupidity.


    Kim Jong Il is indeed a tyrant but he never cares about people outside Korea and this makes him far less dangerous than muslims and he will never be a threat to anyone except their southern brothers. Religion is a spice of immortality, with it you can extend your ideology for thousand years. Without religion this kind of tyrant will end some day.


    Even wikipedia “the neutral site” uses Esposito as source and call it neutral. A truly neutral “chaotic” site. They have their own “encyclopedia” for apologists and propagandists but they don’t even realize the meaning of it.


    Easy, they can discard the hadith and believe only the Quran OR they can adapt the concept and justify it. First one is in denial, the second is evil gets justified. Well, that’s human for you.


    Muhammad is a narcissist and very proud. Do you think he could have sex with prostitute who got used by many people? It’s like using cheap stuff. Beside there is no historical source mentions that.


    Russia and China are not backwards. Those South American nations who are Christians are more backward than those atheistic countries. Sweden is also atheistic but it’s not backward let alone abusive. Most of Japanese have no religion and they are not backward and abusive. Buddhism is an atheistic religion and it’s not evil. Don’t classify atheists into one category since it’s a free ride.

  376. qisamak says:

    those countries were still following an ideology and been led by paranoid dictators

    but USSR has had many advancements in science (launched first satellite and first man in space) it had united many different ethnic groups and religious groups

  377. rajeshn1091 says:

    For God's sake Dr Sina's admins POST THE CHALLENGE PROPERLY AND BOLDLY HERE. TRUTH AND FACTS are the only weapons of ex-Muslims in liberating Muslims from the mental prison called Islam. The so-called revamped faithfreedom.org and alisina.org are all like any other anti-Muslim sites. Muslims today just dismiss them- as 'anti-Islamic sites' while earlier the challenge was BOLDLY wriiten. FOR GOD's SAKE, post this rivals argument's on Safiya in a different colour. It seems that success has made even faithfreedom.org arrogant and it doesnt seem to understand that it MUST LOOK DIFFERENT from other sites, and post arguments SOLIDLY and easily readable.

  378. Rizky says:

    A part of religion things can't be understand using rational thinking Ali. If you think rationally, how can Yesus be born without father? That's a simple thing in my mind.

  379. rajeshn1091 says:

    Dr Ali Sina,
    THIS SITE MUST HAVE THE CHALLENGE of faithfreedom.org in BOLD. Secondly, in this debate, the opponent's arguments should be given in a different colour, not in the same colour.

  380. vijaya says:


    Great article. You have good understanding about narcissists and narcissism. Often people do not realise the evil, a narcissist is capable of. Narcissist lack empathy and they are not even conscious of their actions. This makes them devilish.

    I myself have suffered under a narcissist at one point of time in my life. No words can explain the pain of living with a narcissist. Narcissism is pure evil. Narcissists can break even the strongest of minds.

  381. lum says:

    Mappou approaches! Repent and convert to Buddhism!

    Buddhism was associated with China and India, both mighty and powerful civilizations. They were greater in power and advancement than Rome!

  382. Ali Sina says:

    If rape means penetration alone then you are right. Muhammad was impotent in the later years of his life. He fondled his wives and "drank their honey" (read the story of Mriyah if you don't understand) but he did not have intercourse unless in his dreams (See my book for detail)

    I believe rape is any sexual advance towards a woman without her consent. So we enter in a grey area. If your definition is right then we should say he sexually molested his female captives.

    No it was not STD. Muhammad dis not have sex with prostitutes. He married only weeks after Khadijah died.

  383. Ranma says:

    You may think Christians are stupid…
    but somehow they managed to be associated with the most advanced civilizations today.

    While the most backwards and human-right-abuser civilizations are based mostly on Islam and atheism.
    For example:
    North Korea, Rusia, China(atheistic)
    Middle East, most of Africa (Islam)

    You may claim that Christianity breeds stupidity but the real world fact speaks differently…
    It seems Atheistic countries are more stupid overall as can be gleaned from their ruthlessness towards mankind.

    Ali Sina thinks Christianity is based on fables.. which is perfectly fine to me as he is free to have his own opinion.
    Despite so, Ali Sina willingly admit that despite his misgivings, Christianity has been overall a force of good for mankind.

    If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.
    — Voltaire, quoted from Kevin Courcey, "Religion a Natural When it Comes To Terrorism"
    The atrocities in China, North Korea, Russia and their gulags are based on religion?
    how many people died when Mao purged all religions from China?
    Surely you cannot blame Mao's monstrous atrocity on religion too?

  384. R_not says:

    I thank Ali Sina for his clear thinking. I do believe that some of the subtleties of what Mr. Sina wrote flies over the heads of most moslems.

    And then there are some that just can't get over their trying to compare Christianity to islam. I have read so often how moslems tell us that the Bible was corrupted, now I read a post that the writings of Josephus are corrupted. No proof, nothing. The early Christians did not go on a rampage against the Jews or non-Christians and slaughter, enslave, or do what the moslems did to others. Were there bad men throughout history that did bad things? Yes, but they were not following the message and example of Jesus. moslems are following the message and example of mohammed.

    What people of no religion have done in the name of terrorism can also apply to committing atrocities. We see that in the example set by many in the 20th Century, and that continues to this day (Kim Jong Il as one example). And I don't understand the point of some posters in trying to compare Christianity with islam with this article. It doesn't even apply.

  385. Jay says:

    Ali, if your acromegaly thesis is correct and Mohammed is rendered impotent, wouldn't it be correct to say that he didn't rape Safiyah, rather he sexually molested her? Although I suppose he could have raped her via other means(i.e. fingers or an object)

    I must say I find your acromegaly thesis fascinating, but wouldn't it also be feasible for Mohammed to have gotten simple STDs(let's say some combination of syphilis, gonorrhea and/or chlamydia). As I understand it, prostitution in Mecca was quite common and his predilection for having sex might have led him down this road after the death of Khadija. Getting an STD from a prostitute, an "unclean" woman, would be consistent with all his ridiculous rules in the hadith about washing after sex and also why he has a specific antipathy or more correctly a love/hate relationship with all of his women(i.e. he loves to have sex with them, but hates that they have unique personalities and oppose him in domestic matters). This would also be consistent with him seeking out Aisha, as she was obviously a virgin and therefore could not have become "unclean" , it would also be consistent with him marrying women who had been clearly monogamous as his wives. It would also explain his inability to conceive children(post-Khadija) and the fact that since he would be a carrier he would pass the diseases onto his wives. Tertiary Syphillis, for instance, would make him start to look strange. Also, a good many STDs cause mental problems in people.

    This is just a thought , maybe you went down this direction before reaching your acrogemaly explanation?

  386. john says:

    good point

  387. royalj says:

    "The marriage to Safiyyah(R) has a political significance as well, as it helps to reduce hostilities and cement alliances".John L. Esposito notes .
    Sometimes Muslims use similar tactics . Idi Amin of Uganda wanted to bring national unity by marrying a woman from each tribe.

  388. BustedDivinity. says:

    I dont know if my hunch could be proven right, but there is something tacitly evil about people like Esposito, Estes and any other Islamic scholar who really read the sirat and fully understands the supremacist nature of Islam.

    The ignorant Muslims I can understand, but all those who read the stories of Safiya and Juwairiyya but still did not see any violations of human values are either too selfish to go for the truth or just plain evil, Islam and rationality are really poles apart.

  389. Ali Sina says:

    After raiding Kheibar and massacring the men, Muhammad ordered the women whose sons and husbands he had killed, to cook for him a lamb. One Jewish woman poisoned the food. Unfortunately someone else ate before Muhammad and he fell dead. Muhammad then stopped consuming further. He called that woman and asked why she had poisoned the food (Duh!) She told him that she wanted to see whether he was actually a prophet. If he was a prophet an angel would have informed him and if not he would eat and die. Well obviously Muhammad failed the test. He and his companions ate and one of them died. Muhammad then gave the woman to the brother of the man who was poisoned and he killed her in revenge.

    Muhammad had excruciating pains in the last years of his life. He blamed the poisoning. He was wrong. His pains were caused by his acromegaly, which also brought his death.

  390. Viiit says:

    Interestingly Christians make the same (narcissistic) error as Muslims:
    They claim that Flavius Josephus testified that Jesus was Christ (the Savior) in his book "Antiquities".
    Just like in the above case with Jews recognizing Muhammad as a prophet, but refusing to follow him. To anyone with any common sense it is clear that Josephus cannot would have become a Christian.
    However Josephus remained a devout Jew and opposed to Christians. Therefore it is clear that the mention of Jesus is a forgery inserted into his book later. (In fact the earliest book is from the 9th century)
    However, when I brought this point to the Christian pastor, his response was:
    On the contrary, this only proves that Jesus was so extraordinary that even an Orthodox Jew is forced to recognized Jesus as a Christ.

    Now i I know that i am not supposed to antagonize Christians, because they are our allies against the Muslims. They may be stupid, but not evil.
    However Voltaire begs to disagree:

    If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.
    — Voltaire, quoted from Kevin Courcey, "Religion a Natural When it Comes To Terrorism"

  391. Dianne says:

    I think that Muhammad actually raped all of his wives even Baby Aiasha. He picked Aiasha at the age of 6 so she wouldn't be able to reject him.So that to me is just rape and the same as taking advantage. His other wife Juvariah liked him so much she prayed namas everytime he came by hoping that he would pick another wife. I think the only wife he had that actually loved him as a free women was Khadija.

  392. sagintoronto says:

    On international women's day (I believe it is March 11th), why not organize some sort of educational campaign about the rapes of Safiyyah, Rayhanah etc.?

  393. NDANUSU KAPINGA says:

    Can you book be translated in swahili??

  394. Rationalist says:

    Who poisoned Muhammad? I thought it was a Jewish woman– may be Safiyya. Can Ali confirm that?

  395. NDANUSU KAPINGA says:


  396. battameez says:

    If I were muslim, reading this one article would be sufficient for me to not only ditch Islam but also crusade against this evil cult.

  397. radan says:

    The girl Saffiyah was in a helpless condition. When she lost everyone and everything in this world what other option is available to her. Even when she was with her loved ones (father, brother, husband and others) she underwent all the tragedies in the life due to the greed of Muham(mad). Now everyone has been murdered by Muham(mad) and his thugs. His husband was tortured and killed. What happened to her mother, sisters and other female relatives? Probably, they could have been shared by the muslim thugs as war booty and they might have become the sex slaves.

    After killing all the relatives and the loved ones making her a real orphan the shy, merciful and peaceful Muham(mad) gives her a choice. I think Muham(mad) and the muslims are mocking at everyone.

    In this situation where will she go, using these choices?
    Muham(mad) and his thugs ambush and attack peaceful tribes and kill all the males and take away all the belongings in the desert and really make them penniless orphans and what can they do with the choices?

    She survived physically. Mentally she was already dead. She might have wept for the reason that death has not come of its own to her to take her away from these thugs. She could have thought that living and witnessing all the atrocities of these thugs were more painful than living with them.

    We can only shed tears for this poor, innocent little girl. It is really a moving story (history).

  398. Marie says:

    Great article

    Only an insane woman would love their husband's killer.

  399. hinduidf says:

    great article

  400. Ali Sina says:

    Good point. Indeed that might have been the case.

  401. In Process says:

    Safiyyah bint Huyayyay said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, by Allah, I would like to be in your place.’

    The only thought I have not seen in connection with this is that perhaps she envied him for being on the verge of death. Perhaps she would have rather been dead than to continue living among the Muslims.

Leave a Reply