The Slam Dunk Show

[AhmedBahgat]

Read above first ^^


Blessings from the One Whose hands control the kingdom, and He is, over everything, Capable.

67:1 تبارك الذي بيده الملك وهو علي كل شئ قدير

-> Similar example to the last verse is this one: تبارك الذي , TABARAAK Allazy, blessings from the One The following list can also be arguably considered as blessings from Him: Whose hands control the kingdom, and He is, over everything, Capable.

And finally the last verse where the word TABARAAK appeared:

Blessings from the name of your Lord, Owner of majesty and honour.

55:78 تبارك اسم ربك ذي الجلال والاكرام

-> This is a tough one actually, see what came after Tabaraak: تبارك اسم ربك , TABARAAK Ism Rabuk, Blessings from the name of your Lord. Obviously some will say, see blessings cannot be sent from a name. I say, quite the contrary it can be, because the name should be explicitly referring to such entity sending the blessings, if you replace the words the name of your Lord with thr real name Allah then the words will become Blessings from Allah, consequently it should mean blessings from the entity itself, and if others continue to argue then it should be equally hard for them to understand it the other way, how come a name is blessed?

See, it is similar to when we say: In the name of Allah.

From all the above, I found it far accurate to translate the verb TABARAAK as Blessings (sent) from Allah, for the following reasons:

1) The literal meaning stays the same.

2) The verb status stays the same.

3) It complies with the identical style used with the word Ta�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??alaa many times in the Quran.

4) It does not conflict with other words that are used to praise Allah, like the following verse for example:

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds.

1:2 الحمد لله رب العالمين

-> As you can see the words used to say: Praise be to Allah are: الحمد لله , Alhamd Li Allah

5) The context of translating it as blessings (sent) from Allah still imply indirectly praise to Allah, by stating the fact that all blessings are sent from Him and can only be done by Him.

Finally, as I have shown the goons of FFI that they should also argue the fact that the Bible said so at least 5 times,of which I showed them 4 times, let me bring one passage again:

Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;
[2 Corinthians 1:3]

If you ask the Christians how God is blessed, the will quickly tell you that it does not mean blessed in such sense rather praised, which is the same excuse used by many Muslims.

Now for the translators who preferred to stick to its meaning of bless, they cannot just say blessed be God, it makes no sense unless we accept that God is doing it upon Himself, which is fine with me to accept, as God can do anything to Himself as long as it is neither demeaning nor degrading. And certainly blessing Himself cannot be a demeaning act to Himself nor will it make Him lose another superior attribute of His.

However, to leave no room of argument for the ignorant kafirs (who are only interested in disputing the words of Allah), I must do it the way I thoroughly explained above, and I repeat, it should be the most accurate way to do it considering the verb status of the word and all other arguments that I presented.

Finally, this comment above is not debatable with kafirs, only Muslims are welcome to debate it, however if no Muslim come with compelling Quran logic and it ends up that me alone from among all Muslims is the one understanding it this way, I will not be motivated to make my understanding as theirs.

Salam

[AhmedBahgat]

Read above first ^^


Blessings from the One Whose hands control the kingdom, and He is, over everything, Capable.

67:1 تبارك الذي بيده الملك وهو علي كل شئ قدير

-> Similar example to the last verse is this one: تبارك الذي , TABARAAK Allazy, blessings from the One The following list can also be arguably considered as blessings from Him: Whose hands control the kingdom, and He is, over everything, Capable.

And finally the last verse where the word TABARAAK appeared:

Blessings from the name of your Lord, Owner of majesty and honour.

55:78 تبارك اسم ربك ذي الجلال والاكرام

-> This is a tough one actually, see what came after Tabaraak: تبارك اسم ربك , TABARAAK Ism Rabuk, Blessings from the name of your Lord. Obviously some will say, see blessings cannot be sent from a name. I say, quite the contrary it can be, because the name should be explicitly referring to such entity sending the blessings, if you replace the words the name of your Lord with thr real name Allah then the words will become Blessings from Allah, consequently it should mean blessings from the entity itself, and if others continue to argue then it should be equally hard for them to understand it the other way, how come a name is blessed?

See, it is similar to when we say: In the name of Allah.

From all the above, I found it far accurate to translate the verb TABARAAK as Blessings (sent) from Allah, for the following reasons:

1) The literal meaning stays the same.

2) The verb status stays the same.

3) It complies with the identical style used with the word Ta�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??alaa many times in the Quran.

4) It does not conflict with other words that are used to praise Allah, like the following verse for example:

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds.

1:2 الحمد لله رب العالمين

-> As you can see the words used to say: Praise be to Allah are: الحمد لله , Alhamd Li Allah

5) The context of translating it as blessings (sent) from Allah still imply indirectly praise to Allah, by stating the fact that all blessings are sent from Him and can only be done by Him.

Finally, as I have shown the goons of FFI that they should also argue the fact that the Bible said so at least 5 times,of which I showed them 4 times, let me bring one passage again:

Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;
[2 Corinthians 1:3]

If you ask the Christians how God is blessed, the will quickly tell you that it does not mean blessed in such sense rather praised, which is the same excuse used by many Muslims.

Now for the translators who preferred to stick to its meaning of bless, they cannot just say blessed be God, it makes no sense unless we accept that God is doing it upon Himself, which is fine with me to accept, as God can do anything to Himself as long as it is neither demeaning nor degrading. And certainly blessing Himself cannot be a demeaning act to Himself nor will it make Him lose another superior attribute of His.

However, to leave no room of argument for the ignorant kafirs (who are only interested in disputing the words of Allah), I must do it the way I thoroughly explained above, and I repeat, it should be the most accurate way to do it considering the verb status of the word and all other arguments that I presented.

Finally, this comment above is not debatable with kafirs, only Muslims are welcome to debate it, however if no Muslim come with compelling Quran logic and it ends up that me alone from among all Muslims is the one understanding it this way, I will not be motivated to make my understanding as theirs.

Salam

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

Let me show you a perfect example of the clear cut ignorance of the FFI goons

A criminal in there who is currently serving time in my Cyber Jail somehow is hooked on the issue of the moon, the earth and the rest of the heaven as talked about in the Quran, I used to reply to that inmate but since he was charged, convicted and jailed, I stopped replying to him, he is indeed a clear cut dumb bum with masses of stupidity pouring of him. So he said his usual crap:

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

Let me show you a perfect example of the clear cut ignorance of the FFI goons

A criminal in there who is currently serving time in my Cyber Jail somehow is hooked on the issue of the moon, the earth and the rest of the heaven as talked about in the Quran, I used to reply to that inmate but since he was charged, convicted and jailed, I stopped replying to him, he is indeed a clear cut dumb bum with masses of stupidity pouring of him. So he said his usual crap:

[BMZ]

[BMZ]

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

[BMZ]

[BMZ]

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

A goon on FFI block is getting high on morphene, he is spamming FFI forum with his so called Quran contradictions, I was not aware of it actually, but I had a look today and saw all his crap in there, no surprise you won�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t find any other goon cheering for his crap, so I decided to reply to two of his threads:

thunderbolt of FFI said:

Koran faults 5: The Cow (2):29
Which was created first: the heavens or the earth?

Every body knows now that the universe (heavens) came into being first and then within the solar system the earth developed to its present day state.
Of course this was not the common knowledge at the time of Mohammad.
The Koran in this verse; Cow 29, states the opposite.
This verse demolishes any idea that the Koran relates in the least way with present day scientific knowledge.

This verse is in contrast to two verses in The Soul-Snatchers (79): 27&30. In the later two verses the sequence is the heavens first then the earth.

In the following translations most authors (marked in red) used the word �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??then�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� meaning after He created earth He created the heavens. Some authors used �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??and�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� which is very different to �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??then�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��, another glaring example of twisting the meaning to suite the present day audience. The authors who used and are: Shakir, Malik, QXP, Maulana Ali and Asad. Yusuf Ali used the word �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??moreover�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��, another twisted translation.

It is of note also to recognise the expressions: �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??lifted Himself to heaven�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� (Arberry) and �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??(rose over) towards the heaven�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� (Hilali/Khan). Here Allah is being presented as a mere human finishing one job (creation of earth) and heading towards the next job.

---

I removed zillions of translations that he brought in, so this is how I replied briefly to him:

Mister ignorant, the Arabic word 'Thumma' also means 'Moreover', don't you know that I slamed your babie alegation many times before?

And he replied back:

thunderbolt of FFI said:
Even if you use the word "moreover":
More-over is composed of two words: "more" and "over" and both give the meaning of a sequence.
More-over = further = beside
You must have something first to say "more"
You must have something first to say "over"
You must have something first to say "further"
You must have something first to say "beside"
You must have something �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??under�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� (the earth) to say �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??over" (the heavens).

According to this verse in the Koran:
The earth was created first then/further/beside/moreover the heavens were created, the sequence is very clear.

Sorry friend, you bet on a loosing horse.

---

So I replied:

Good that you may agree that it means moreover

The bottom line is this, the word moreover may mean the following if we say: "I did A, moreover I did B"

the above means any of the following:

1) A is done before B
2) B is done before A
3) A & B are done together

cheers friend


On another thread, he posted more crap:

thunderbolt of FFI said:

Koran faults 7: The Cow (2):61
One or two? Rightful killing of prophets.

It is well known that the Israelites were sent the Manna and Quails from heaven by God during the years of wilderness in the Sinai desert.
However, here the Koran states �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??one food�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��, so which one it is and what about the other?

Also, we notice that at the end of the verse the Koran states that:
�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??and (they) kill the prophets without the right�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��
�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??slaying His Messengers without just cause.�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��
So, does this mean that God consider it isgument at times rightful/justifiable to kill the prophets whom He Himself has sent?
---------------------

So I replied:

Looks like you are very desperate, friend

You keep coming with clear cut Barbie crap, well, let me slam dunk you in a hurry:

For the first childish argument, of course an ignorant like you who knows no Arabic, does not know that Mann is a sweet DRINK, therefore the Jews were indeed having ONE FOOD which is Salwa (Quails). This should constitute the first 50% of my slam dunk

For the other 50%, well, again it seems that you have not read the Quran at all, this is because if you have read it, you should realize that whenever the crime of killing the prophets by the jews is mentioned, we always read it as follow:

And their killing of the prophets without right

This statement was repeated at least 5 times, check the following verses:

2:61
3:21
3:112
3:181
4:155

What I want you to ponder upon, is another verse, verse 5:32. so let me bring it in here:

Because of that, We ordained upon the children of Israel that whoever kills a soul without a soul or without mischief in the land, it is as if he killed all the people; and whoever revives it, it is as if he revived all the people; and certainly Our messengers came to them with the signs, then many of them after that in the land are transgressors.
[Al Quran ; 5:32]

مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَلِكَ كَتَبْنَا عَلَى بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ أَنَّهُ مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِي الأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَمَنْ أَحْيَاهَا فَكَأَنَّمَا أَحْيَا النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَلَقَدْ جَاء تْهُمْ رُسُلُنَا بِالبَيِّنَاتِ ثُمَّ إِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنْهُم بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فِي الأَرْضِ لَمُسْرِفُونَ (32)

-> See: Because of that, We ordained upon the children of Israel that whoever kills a soul without a soul or without mischief in the land, it is as if he killed all the people;

In simple words:

whoever kills a soul without RIGHT

As you should know by now that such right can be any of the following:

1- a person is killed. i.e. the jews may execute the murderer.

2- a person is causing mischief in the land, i.e. the jews may execute the mischief maker.

And certainly, any prophet was neither a murderer nor a mischief maker (for the incident of Musa when he killed an innocent man, it was a mistake, and for the companion of Musa who also killed a young man, it was a command of Allah to do so, the bottom line is this, under the Quran, there is no prophet who was an intentional murderer, unlike the bible which portrays some prophets, as alcoholic, drunk, intentional murderers, rapists and fukers of their blood daughters)

Consequently the jews had no right to kill any of them unless they believed in their crap OT, therefore if a prophet killed a soul or caused mischief in the land as they portrayed their own prophets in their own corrupt scriptures, then they would have had the right to kill him, under the command of Allah that was ordained on them

SO what is your stupid point exactly?

Yeh I know, you were eager to be slam dunked, here it is so I keep you happy:

# 59

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

A goon on FFI block is getting high on morphene, he is spamming FFI forum with his so called Quran contradictions, I was not aware of it actually, but I had a look today and saw all his crap in there, no surprise you won�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t find any other goon cheering for his crap, so I decided to reply to two of his threads:

thunderbolt of FFI said:

Koran faults 5: The Cow (2):29
Which was created first: the heavens or the earth?

Every body knows now that the universe (heavens) came into being first and then within the solar system the earth developed to its present day state.
Of course this was not the common knowledge at the time of Mohammad.
The Koran in this verse; Cow 29, states the opposite.
This verse demolishes any idea that the Koran relates in the least way with present day scientific knowledge.

This verse is in contrast to two verses in The Soul-Snatchers (79): 27&30. In the later two verses the sequence is the heavens first then the earth.

In the following translations most authors (marked in red) used the word �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??then�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� meaning after He created earth He created the heavens. Some authors used �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??and�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� which is very different to �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??then�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��, another glaring example of twisting the meaning to suite the present day audience. The authors who used and are: Shakir, Malik, QXP, Maulana Ali and Asad. Yusuf Ali used the word �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??moreover�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��, another twisted translation.

It is of note also to recognise the expressions: �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??lifted Himself to heaven�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� (Arberry) and �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??(rose over) towards the heaven�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� (Hilali/Khan). Here Allah is being presented as a mere human finishing one job (creation of earth) and heading towards the next job.

---

I removed zillions of translations that he brought in, so this is how I replied briefly to him:

Mister ignorant, the Arabic word 'Thumma' also means 'Moreover', don't you know that I slamed your babie alegation many times before?

And he replied back:

thunderbolt of FFI said:
Even if you use the word "moreover":
More-over is composed of two words: "more" and "over" and both give the meaning of a sequence.
More-over = further = beside
You must have something first to say "more"
You must have something first to say "over"
You must have something first to say "further"
You must have something first to say "beside"
You must have something �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??under�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�� (the earth) to say �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??over" (the heavens).

According to this verse in the Koran:
The earth was created first then/further/beside/moreover the heavens were created, the sequence is very clear.

Sorry friend, you bet on a loosing horse.

---

So I replied:

Good that you may agree that it means moreover

The bottom line is this, the word moreover may mean the following if we say: "I did A, moreover I did B"

the above means any of the following:

1) A is done before B
2) B is done before A
3) A & B are done together

cheers friend


On another thread, he posted more crap:

thunderbolt of FFI said:

Koran faults 7: The Cow (2):61
One or two? Rightful killing of prophets.

It is well known that the Israelites were sent the Manna and Quails from heaven by God during the years of wilderness in the Sinai desert.
However, here the Koran states �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??one food�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��, so which one it is and what about the other?

Also, we notice that at the end of the verse the Koran states that:
�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??and (they) kill the prophets without the right�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��
�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??slaying His Messengers without just cause.�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��
So, does this mean that God consider it isgument at times rightful/justifiable to kill the prophets whom He Himself has sent?
---------------------

So I replied:

Looks like you are very desperate, friend

You keep coming with clear cut Barbie crap, well, let me slam dunk you in a hurry:

For the first childish argument, of course an ignorant like you who knows no Arabic, does not know that Mann is a sweet DRINK, therefore the Jews were indeed having ONE FOOD which is Salwa (Quails). This should constitute the first 50% of my slam dunk

For the other 50%, well, again it seems that you have not read the Quran at all, this is because if you have read it, you should realize that whenever the crime of killing the prophets by the jews is mentioned, we always read it as follow:

And their killing of the prophets without right

This statement was repeated at least 5 times, check the following verses:

2:61
3:21
3:112
3:181
4:155

What I want you to ponder upon, is another verse, verse 5:32. so let me bring it in here:

Because of that, We ordained upon the children of Israel that whoever kills a soul without a soul or without mischief in the land, it is as if he killed all the people; and whoever revives it, it is as if he revived all the people; and certainly Our messengers came to them with the signs, then many of them after that in the land are transgressors.
[Al Quran ; 5:32]

مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَلِكَ كَتَبْنَا عَلَى بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ أَنَّهُ مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِي الأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَمَنْ أَحْيَاهَا فَكَأَنَّمَا أَحْيَا النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَلَقَدْ جَاء تْهُمْ رُسُلُنَا بِالبَيِّنَاتِ ثُمَّ إِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنْهُم بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فِي الأَرْضِ لَمُسْرِفُونَ (32)

-> See: Because of that, We ordained upon the children of Israel that whoever kills a soul without a soul or without mischief in the land, it is as if he killed all the people;

In simple words:

whoever kills a soul without RIGHT

As you should know by now that such right can be any of the following:

1- a person is killed. i.e. the jews may execute the murderer.

2- a person is causing mischief in the land, i.e. the jews may execute the mischief maker.

And certainly, any prophet was neither a murderer nor a mischief maker (for the incident of Musa when he killed an innocent man, it was a mistake, and for the companion of Musa who also killed a young man, it was a command of Allah to do so, the bottom line is this, under the Quran, there is no prophet who was an intentional murderer, unlike the bible which portrays some prophets, as alcoholic, drunk, intentional murderers, rapists and fukers of their blood daughters)

Consequently the jews had no right to kill any of them unless they believed in their crap OT, therefore if a prophet killed a soul or caused mischief in the land as they portrayed their own prophets in their own corrupt scriptures, then they would have had the right to kill him, under the command of Allah that was ordained on them

SO what is your stupid point exactly?

Yeh I know, you were eager to be slam dunked, here it is so I keep you happy:

# 59

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

Let me get my slam dunk show going with the next slam dunk.

Here is what an FFI dumb bum had to say:

---

thunderbolt of FFI wrote:

Koran faults 23: The Women (4):171: Does the Koran preaches/condones polytheism?

The massage in this verse is clear: do not say that God is three.
Implication of this is it is fine to say God is one, two, four, five, extra; as long as you do not say three.
This urge for polytheism can be found throughout the Koran as in 21:22.

Literal
but the Messiah, Jesus, Mary's son (is) God's messenger and His word/expression He threw it away to Mary, and a Soul/Spirit (could be Gabriel) from Him; so believe with God, and His messengers, and do not say: "Three."

Pickthal
The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you!

Arberry
The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only the Messenger of God, and His Word that He committed to Mary, and a Spirit from Him. So believe in God and His Messengers, and say not, 'Three.' Refrain; better is it for you.

Shakir
the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only a messenger of Allah and His Word which He communicated to Marium and a spirit from Him; believe therefore in Allah and His messengers, and say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you;

Sarwar
Jesus, son of Mary, is only a Messenger of God, His Word, and a spirit from Him whom He conveyed to Mary. So have faith in God and His Messengers. Do not say that there are three gods.

H/K/Saheeh
The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist it is better for you.

QXP
The Messiah Jesus son of Mary was a Messenger of Allah, the fulfillment of His Word to Mary, created according to the Laws of Creation and given free will from the Divine Energy (like all human beings (15:29), (32:7-9), (38:72)). Believe in Allah and His Messengers, and say not: "Three". Cease!

Maulana Ali
The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, is only a messenger of Allah and His word which He communicated to Mary and a mercy from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you.

George Sale
Verily Christ Jesus the son of Mary is the Apostle of God, and his word, which he conveyed into Mary, and a spirit proceeding from him. Believe therefore in God, and his Apostles, and say not, there are three Gods; forbear this; it will be better for you.

---

A Muslim on FFI web site replied to him as follow:

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

Let me get my slam dunk show going with the next slam dunk.

Here is what an FFI dumb bum had to say:

---

thunderbolt of FFI wrote:

Koran faults 23: The Women (4):171: Does the Koran preaches/condones polytheism?

The massage in this verse is clear: do not say that God is three.
Implication of this is it is fine to say God is one, two, four, five, extra; as long as you do not say three.
This urge for polytheism can be found throughout the Koran as in 21:22.

Literal
but the Messiah, Jesus, Mary's son (is) God's messenger and His word/expression He threw it away to Mary, and a Soul/Spirit (could be Gabriel) from Him; so believe with God, and His messengers, and do not say: "Three."

Pickthal
The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you!

Arberry
The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only the Messenger of God, and His Word that He committed to Mary, and a Spirit from Him. So believe in God and His Messengers, and say not, 'Three.' Refrain; better is it for you.

Shakir
the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only a messenger of Allah and His Word which He communicated to Marium and a spirit from Him; believe therefore in Allah and His messengers, and say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you;

Sarwar
Jesus, son of Mary, is only a Messenger of God, His Word, and a spirit from Him whom He conveyed to Mary. So have faith in God and His Messengers. Do not say that there are three gods.

H/K/Saheeh
The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist it is better for you.

QXP
The Messiah Jesus son of Mary was a Messenger of Allah, the fulfillment of His Word to Mary, created according to the Laws of Creation and given free will from the Divine Energy (like all human beings (15:29), (32:7-9), (38:72)). Believe in Allah and His Messengers, and say not: "Three". Cease!

Maulana Ali
The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, is only a messenger of Allah and His word which He communicated to Mary and a mercy from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you.

George Sale
Verily Christ Jesus the son of Mary is the Apostle of God, and his word, which he conveyed into Mary, and a spirit proceeding from him. Believe therefore in God, and his Apostles, and say not, there are three Gods; forbear this; it will be better for you.

---

A Muslim on FFI web site replied to him as follow:

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

The subject of killing the apostates is on FFI again, well, forgetting 2:256 which states the following:

لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ فَمَنْ يَكْفُرْ بِالطَّاغُوتِ وَيُؤْمِن بِاللّهِ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَىَ لاَ انفِصَامَ لَهَا وَاللّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ (256)
There is no compulsion in the religion; indeed the right path has become distinct from error; so whoever disbelieves in the evil and believes in Allah, he indeed has grasped on the firmest handle, no break in it, and Allah is all-Hearing, all-Knowing.
[Al Quran ; 2:256]

-> See: There is no compulsion in the religion , but let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s forget this for a moment.

As well, forgetting 18:29 which states the following:

وَقُلِ الْحَقُّ مِنْ رَبِّكُمْ ۖ فَمَنْ شَاءَ فَلْيُؤْمِنْ وَمَنْ شَاءَ فَلْيَكْفُرْ ۚ إِنَّا أَعْتَدْنَا لِلظَّالِمِينَ نَارًا أَحَاطَ بِهِمْ سُرَادِقُهَا ۚ وَإِنْ يَسْتَغِيثُوا يُغَاثُوا بِمَاءٍ كَالْمُهْلِ يَشْوِي الْوُجُوهَ ۚ بِئْسَ الشَّرَابُ وَسَاءَتْ مُرْتَفَقًا (29)
And say: The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills, let him believe, and whoever wills, let him disbelieve. Indeed, We have prepared for the unjust a fire, whose walls will surround them; and if they call for help, they will be helped with water like molten brass which will scald the faces; miserable is the drink and bad is the resting place.
[Al Quran ; 18:29]

-> See: so whoever wills, let him believe, and whoever wills, let him disbelieve , let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s also forget about this for another moment

Let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s now have a closer look at 4:137

Indeed, those who have believed then disbelieved, then believed then disbelieved, then increased in disbelief, it is not for Allah to forgive them nor guide them to a way.
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ ثُمَّ كَفَرُواْ ثُمَّ آمَنُواْ ثُمَّ كَفَرُواْ ثُمَّ ازْدَادُواْ كُفْرًا لَّمْ يَكُنِ اللّهُ لِيَغْفِرَ لَهُمْ وَلاَ لِيَهْدِيَهُمْ سَبِيلاً (137)
[The Quran ; 4:137]

-> See, Indeed, those who have believed then disbelieved, then believed then disbelieved, then increased in disbelief, , i.e. we are talking about some humans who left the belief MORE THAN ONCE, now if they should be killed, how come then they became believers then disbelievers, then even increased in disbelief after that? This verse should make such Azhar Fatwa provided by an FFI kafir, a joke. A joke at those confused Azhar Ulamaa. Let me bring such rubbish of a fatwa in here again then add my comments about it:

The above document (if genuine) is dated 23/9/1978 and it seems being issued by Al-Azhar Fatwa Division in reply to a couple of questions by a guy named Ahmed Darwish on behalf of another man who is the subject of the questions, simply that other man was a Muslim who married a German and Christian woman, so he converted to Christianity and left Islam, two questions been asked:

1) What is the Islamic punishment for him?
2) What should be the religious status of his children being Muslims or Christians?

Al-Azhar confused Ulamaa replied as follow:

Firstly they praised Mohammed by calling him Sayed Al Mursaleen, i.e. The Master of all Messengers. I say, what bloody crap is that coming from those confused Azhar Ulamaa? They clearly put Mohammed on a level higher than all the messengers. Am I right or possibly Satan is screwing me? Well, while I agree that this piece of shit Satan screws me sometimes, I don�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t think that he is screwing me when I suggest that those confused Azhara Ulamaa CLEARLY put one messenger above all the rest of the messengers, by calling him, the Master of all Messengers, well, well, well, I guess, I have three messages for those dumb bums of Ulamaa, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s have a look:

قُولُواْ آمَنَّا بِاللّهِ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالأسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى وَعِيسَى وَمَا أُوتِيَ النَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ (136)
Say: We have believed in Allah and (in) that which had been sent down to us, and (in) that which was sent down to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Musa and Isa, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him, we are submitters.
[Al Quran ; 2:136]

-> See: Say: We have believed in Allah and (in) that which had been sent down to us, and (in) that which was sent down to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Musa and Isa, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them. this is clearly a command from Allah to all believers, to again: Say:�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�¦ we do not make any distinction between any of them. , but the matter of fact is the contrary, indeed those dumb bums of Azhar Ulamaa made a clear distinction between one messenger and the rest:

Current Score:
The Quran : 1
The confused Ulamaa of Azhar : 0

قُلْ آمَنَّا بِاللّهِ وَمَا أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنزِلَ عَلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالأَسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى وَعِيسَى وَالنَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ (84)
Say: We have believed in Allah and in what has been sent down on us, and what was sent down on Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Isa and the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him we are submitters.
[Al Quran ; 3:84]

-> See again: Say: We have believed in Allah and in what has been sent down on us, and what was sent down on Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Isa and the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them., but the matter of the fact remains intact that the confused Ulamaa of Azhar made and continue to make a clear distinction between one messenger and the rest of them:

Current Score:
The Quran : 2
The confused Ulamaa of Azhar : 0

وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَلَمْ يُفَرِّقُواْ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ أُوْلَئِكَ سَوْفَ يُؤْتِيهِمْ أُجُورَهُمْ وَكَانَ اللّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا (152)
And those who have believed in Allah and His messengers and did not make a distinction between any of them, they are the ones whom Allah will grant their rewards; and indeed Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
[Al Quran ; 4:152]

-> See again, And those who have believed in Allah and His messengers and did not make a distinction between any of them, they are the ones whom Allah will grant their rewards; , but as you know by know that by calling a person, the master of others, you clearly made a distinction between such person and the others, therefore:

Current Score:
The Quran : 3
The confused Ulamaa of Azhar : 0

How about we make it 4? Why not, let the Quran speak:

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللّهِ وَمَلآئِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ وَقَالُواْ سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ (285)
The messenger believed in what was sent down to him from his Lord, and the believers; they all believed in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers. We (the believers) make no distinction between any of His messengers; and they (the believers) said: We heard and obeyed, our Lord! Your forgiveness and to You is the destiny.
[Al Quran ; 2:285]

-> See: We (the believers) make no distinction between any of His messengers;

Final Score:
The Quran : 4
The confused Ulamaa of Azhar : 0

Yet those stubborn and confused so called Ulamaa insist on praising Mohammed above all other messengers and prophets.

A few years ago, I confronted one confused Muslim woman with 2:136 & 3:84 which stated, not to make any distinction between the PROPHETS, she came back with a silly reply, that 2:136 & 3:84 talk about PROPHETS and not MESSENGERS, i.e. it is OK to make a distinction between a MESSENGER and other MESSENGERS. Miss confused forgot that EVERY MESSENGER IS A PROPHET, i.e. if we should not make any distinction between all prophets, then automatically we should not make any distinction between all messengers because every messenger is a prophet, but I am sure such confused Muslims won�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t understand such logic, so I slammed her with 2:285 & 4:152 which state clearly not to make distinction between ALL MESSENGERS, of course she buried her pinhead in the sand after that, and likewise should do the confused Ulamaa of Azhar.

Let me now get back to the stupid answers in such Fatwa by those confused Ulamaa of Azhar

They said that if the man does not repent, then he should be killed.

I say, how dumb, it is not like a kafir may escape the punishment of Allah, so we make sure that he reaches by killing him and sending him to Allah, it absolutely does not make any sense, in fact the message of the Quran that those kafirs wanted this life and consequently Allah will make them have of its fun more and more, the bottom line is this, at the end of time, they will not be able to escape the punishment of Allah for their disbelief. In fact they won�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t be able to escape death from the first place; they will die sooner or later according to Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s decree, not to our decrees unless they killed innocent people, in such case we may kill them and yet that is still according to Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s decree.

Also how much time we should allow such people to give them a chance to repent and believe again? You cannot really put a time limit on it.

The whole idea by such Ulamaa is stupid and full of holes, that is because it is purely man made, see, I can disbelieve then before they kill me, I repent and believe, then later on I disbelieve again, and again before they kill me I repent and believe again, I can play with them the cat and mouse game for the rest of my life, see it does not make any sense. I can escape their man made punishment, but will I be able to escape Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s punishment? Of course not; the kafir must be the ultimate loser at the end.

What makes more non sense is the fact that no one knows if any person is a believer or not, we can say and do what we want, but only Allah knows who is sincere in the belief, and also knows who is sincere in disbelief. The whole matter of belief and its punishment is under the hands of Allah alone, no one can interfere with it, absolutely no one except Allah.

Can you also see that verse 4:137 that I brought in has stated the punishment for those who kept on believing and disbelieving until they ended up hardcore unbelievers, here it is: it is not for Allah to forgive them nor guide them to a way. , in fact Allah told Mohammad what to do with them exactly, nothing more than saying the following as stated in the following verse 4:138:

بَشِّرِ الْمُنَافِقِينَ بِأَنَّ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا أَلِيمًا (138)
Give the tidings to the hypocrites that they will have a painful torture.
[Al Quran ; 4:138]

-> See: Give the tidings to the hypocrites that they will have a painful torture. , of course they are hypocrites if they : believe then disbelieve, again believe and again disbelieve, then increase in disbelief.

After all these compelling Quran evidences, I bet you will still see Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk from among the Ulamaa of Azhar are not happy with Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s clear words regarding the apostates that their reckoning is only with Allah on the JD, they believe that the apostate must be killed, so they worked hard to justify their lies, what they did was simple. Let's steal such law from the Bible then inject it in a hearsay hadith and brainwash the believers that the hadith is as holy as the Quran. AND THEY SUCCEEDED.

The false belief among Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk that they must kill the apostates has no basis in the Quran. It is another false belief stolen from the Bible and then passed off as teaching and Sunnah of the prophet etc. Here is the evidences of their theft from the Bible:

Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.
[Leviticus 24:16]

Here is more of let's kill the apostates' insanity from the Bible:

But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has counseled rebellion against the LORD your God who brought you from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, to seduce you from the way in which the LORD your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from among you.
[Deuteronomy13:5]

According to the Bible, anyone who thinks differently (dreamer of dreams) shall be killed. This is the real teaching of the Bible. Just kill people who do not wish to believe like you anymore.

Here is yet more killing from the Bible :

If your brother, your mother's son, or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul, entice you secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods' you shall not yield to him or listen to him; and your eye shall not pity him, nor shall you spare or conceal him. But you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. So you shall stone him to death because he has sought to seduce you from the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
[Deuteronomy 13:6-10]

The Bible and the invented Sharia laws of the Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk do not allow any freedom of belief. According to the Bible and the Sharia Laws of the Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk, a person should be put to death when he changes from belief to disbelief. It is clear again that the Muftis of Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk reject the teachings of Allah in the Quran. Instead they prefer to plagiaries biblical teachings and pass it off as the teachings of the prophet through nothing but hearsay that we should consider holy, yeh right.

For the second question concerning the children of such apostate, those confused Ulamaa of Azhar said the following:

As for the children, if they are young, then they should be Muslims, but when the grow older and decide to change their faith, they should be asked to repent and if they refused, then they should be killed.

Holy non sense man, this crap of all humans being born Muslims, does not make sense to any sane human, if we all bloody are born Muslims, then all kafirs and other religion followers must be killed according to those bunch of confused arseholes of Azhar Ulamaa (sorry I have to give it to such confused punks who are damaging my religion with their hardcore stupidity)

I challenge any punk of them to false me:

They bloody say that all humans are born Muslims, i.e. any one who is currently not a Muslim MUST BE APOSTATE and consequently must be killed, HAHAHAHAHAAH, I reckon that should be enough to expose their blindness and confusion.

Well, let me prove it to you that those punks are indeed confused beyond repair:

Let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s take the noble prophets Ibrahim and Ismael as examples, according to those confused Ulamaa and hadith worshippers from al-Azhar, Ibrahim and Ismael were born Muslims, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s now look at this verse:

رَبَّنَا وَاجْعَلْنَا مُسْلِمَيْنِ لَكَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِنَا أُمَّةً مُّسْلِمَةً لَّكَ وَأَرِنَا مَنَاسِكَنَا وَتُبْ عَلَيْنَآ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ التَّوَّابُ الرَّحِيمُ (128)
Our Lord! And make us both submitters to You and from our offspring a nation that is submitting to You, and show us our path of worship and forgive us, surely You are the Relenting, the Merciful.
[Al Quran ; 2:128]
-> See what Ibrahim and Ismael are saying at a later time in their lives: Our Lord! And make us both submitters to You and from our offspring a nation that is submitting to You,. So I ask those confused Ulamaa, if Ibrahim and Ismael were born Muslims, how come later on they are asking Allah to be Muslims and even from their off spring a Muslim nation? It makes no sense, of course no one is born a Muslim. You are only born an innocent child who knows nothing, and because at that time you know nothing, then you cannot be a Muslim, because being a Muslim is 100% dependant on knowledge, it is not dependant on magic. In fact a good Muslim is one who is described in the Quran as SOLID IN KNOWLEDGE concerning the messages of Allah.

The conclusion is this, those confused Ulamaa of Azhar are very hard on killing others, for them killing an invaluable soul that Allah has created, is so easy, simply kill it and send it to God, as if God and His appointed team of angels cannot do it, bearing in mind that the matter of belief should concern Him alone and should not concern anyone else on this earth, simply, it is the matter of believing in Him.

Salam

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

The subject of killing the apostates is on FFI again, well, forgetting 2:256 which states the following:

لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ فَمَنْ يَكْفُرْ بِالطَّاغُوتِ وَيُؤْمِن بِاللّهِ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَىَ لاَ انفِصَامَ لَهَا وَاللّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ (256)
There is no compulsion in the religion; indeed the right path has become distinct from error; so whoever disbelieves in the evil and believes in Allah, he indeed has grasped on the firmest handle, no break in it, and Allah is all-Hearing, all-Knowing.
[Al Quran ; 2:256]

-> See: There is no compulsion in the religion , but let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s forget this for a moment.

As well, forgetting 18:29 which states the following:

وَقُلِ الْحَقُّ مِنْ رَبِّكُمْ ۖ فَمَنْ شَاءَ فَلْيُؤْمِنْ وَمَنْ شَاءَ فَلْيَكْفُرْ ۚ إِنَّا أَعْتَدْنَا لِلظَّالِمِينَ نَارًا أَحَاطَ بِهِمْ سُرَادِقُهَا ۚ وَإِنْ يَسْتَغِيثُوا يُغَاثُوا بِمَاءٍ كَالْمُهْلِ يَشْوِي الْوُجُوهَ ۚ بِئْسَ الشَّرَابُ وَسَاءَتْ مُرْتَفَقًا (29)
And say: The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills, let him believe, and whoever wills, let him disbelieve. Indeed, We have prepared for the unjust a fire, whose walls will surround them; and if they call for help, they will be helped with water like molten brass which will scald the faces; miserable is the drink and bad is the resting place.
[Al Quran ; 18:29]

-> See: so whoever wills, let him believe, and whoever wills, let him disbelieve , let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s also forget about this for another moment

Let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s now have a closer look at 4:137

Indeed, those who have believed then disbelieved, then believed then disbelieved, then increased in disbelief, it is not for Allah to forgive them nor guide them to a way.
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ ثُمَّ كَفَرُواْ ثُمَّ آمَنُواْ ثُمَّ كَفَرُواْ ثُمَّ ازْدَادُواْ كُفْرًا لَّمْ يَكُنِ اللّهُ لِيَغْفِرَ لَهُمْ وَلاَ لِيَهْدِيَهُمْ سَبِيلاً (137)
[The Quran ; 4:137]

-> See, Indeed, those who have believed then disbelieved, then believed then disbelieved, then increased in disbelief, , i.e. we are talking about some humans who left the belief MORE THAN ONCE, now if they should be killed, how come then they became believers then disbelievers, then even increased in disbelief after that? This verse should make such Azhar Fatwa provided by an FFI kafir, a joke. A joke at those confused Azhar Ulamaa. Let me bring such rubbish of a fatwa in here again then add my comments about it:

The above document (if genuine) is dated 23/9/1978 and it seems being issued by Al-Azhar Fatwa Division in reply to a couple of questions by a guy named Ahmed Darwish on behalf of another man who is the subject of the questions, simply that other man was a Muslim who married a German and Christian woman, so he converted to Christianity and left Islam, two questions been asked:

1) What is the Islamic punishment for him?
2) What should be the religious status of his children being Muslims or Christians?

Al-Azhar confused Ulamaa replied as follow:

Firstly they praised Mohammed by calling him Sayed Al Mursaleen, i.e. The Master of all Messengers. I say, what bloody crap is that coming from those confused Azhar Ulamaa? They clearly put Mohammed on a level higher than all the messengers. Am I right or possibly Satan is screwing me? Well, while I agree that this piece of shit Satan screws me sometimes, I don�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t think that he is screwing me when I suggest that those confused Azhara Ulamaa CLEARLY put one messenger above all the rest of the messengers, by calling him, the Master of all Messengers, well, well, well, I guess, I have three messages for those dumb bums of Ulamaa, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s have a look:

قُولُواْ آمَنَّا بِاللّهِ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالأسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى وَعِيسَى وَمَا أُوتِيَ النَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ (136)
Say: We have believed in Allah and (in) that which had been sent down to us, and (in) that which was sent down to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Musa and Isa, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him, we are submitters.
[Al Quran ; 2:136]

-> See: Say: We have believed in Allah and (in) that which had been sent down to us, and (in) that which was sent down to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Musa and Isa, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them. this is clearly a command from Allah to all believers, to again: Say:�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???¢?�?????�????�???�??�?�¦ we do not make any distinction between any of them. , but the matter of fact is the contrary, indeed those dumb bums of Azhar Ulamaa made a clear distinction between one messenger and the rest:

Current Score:
The Quran : 1
The confused Ulamaa of Azhar : 0

قُلْ آمَنَّا بِاللّهِ وَمَا أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا وَمَا أُنزِلَ عَلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالأَسْبَاطِ وَمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى وَعِيسَى وَالنَّبِيُّونَ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَنَحْنُ لَهُ مُسْلِمُونَ (84)
Say: We have believed in Allah and in what has been sent down on us, and what was sent down on Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Isa and the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him we are submitters.
[Al Quran ; 3:84]

-> See again: Say: We have believed in Allah and in what has been sent down on us, and what was sent down on Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and what was given to Musa and Isa and the prophets from their Lord; we do not make any distinction between any of them., but the matter of the fact remains intact that the confused Ulamaa of Azhar made and continue to make a clear distinction between one messenger and the rest of them:

Current Score:
The Quran : 2
The confused Ulamaa of Azhar : 0

وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَلَمْ يُفَرِّقُواْ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ أُوْلَئِكَ سَوْفَ يُؤْتِيهِمْ أُجُورَهُمْ وَكَانَ اللّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا (152)
And those who have believed in Allah and His messengers and did not make a distinction between any of them, they are the ones whom Allah will grant their rewards; and indeed Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
[Al Quran ; 4:152]

-> See again, And those who have believed in Allah and His messengers and did not make a distinction between any of them, they are the ones whom Allah will grant their rewards; , but as you know by know that by calling a person, the master of others, you clearly made a distinction between such person and the others, therefore:

Current Score:
The Quran : 3
The confused Ulamaa of Azhar : 0

How about we make it 4? Why not, let the Quran speak:

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللّهِ وَمَلآئِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ وَقَالُواْ سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ (285)
The messenger believed in what was sent down to him from his Lord, and the believers; they all believed in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers. We (the believers) make no distinction between any of His messengers; and they (the believers) said: We heard and obeyed, our Lord! Your forgiveness and to You is the destiny.
[Al Quran ; 2:285]

-> See: We (the believers) make no distinction between any of His messengers;

Final Score:
The Quran : 4
The confused Ulamaa of Azhar : 0

Yet those stubborn and confused so called Ulamaa insist on praising Mohammed above all other messengers and prophets.

A few years ago, I confronted one confused Muslim woman with 2:136 & 3:84 which stated, not to make any distinction between the PROPHETS, she came back with a silly reply, that 2:136 & 3:84 talk about PROPHETS and not MESSENGERS, i.e. it is OK to make a distinction between a MESSENGER and other MESSENGERS. Miss confused forgot that EVERY MESSENGER IS A PROPHET, i.e. if we should not make any distinction between all prophets, then automatically we should not make any distinction between all messengers because every messenger is a prophet, but I am sure such confused Muslims won�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t understand such logic, so I slammed her with 2:285 & 4:152 which state clearly not to make distinction between ALL MESSENGERS, of course she buried her pinhead in the sand after that, and likewise should do the confused Ulamaa of Azhar.

Let me now get back to the stupid answers in such Fatwa by those confused Ulamaa of Azhar

They said that if the man does not repent, then he should be killed.

I say, how dumb, it is not like a kafir may escape the punishment of Allah, so we make sure that he reaches by killing him and sending him to Allah, it absolutely does not make any sense, in fact the message of the Quran that those kafirs wanted this life and consequently Allah will make them have of its fun more and more, the bottom line is this, at the end of time, they will not be able to escape the punishment of Allah for their disbelief. In fact they won�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t be able to escape death from the first place; they will die sooner or later according to Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s decree, not to our decrees unless they killed innocent people, in such case we may kill them and yet that is still according to Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s decree.

Also how much time we should allow such people to give them a chance to repent and believe again? You cannot really put a time limit on it.

The whole idea by such Ulamaa is stupid and full of holes, that is because it is purely man made, see, I can disbelieve then before they kill me, I repent and believe, then later on I disbelieve again, and again before they kill me I repent and believe again, I can play with them the cat and mouse game for the rest of my life, see it does not make any sense. I can escape their man made punishment, but will I be able to escape Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s punishment? Of course not; the kafir must be the ultimate loser at the end.

What makes more non sense is the fact that no one knows if any person is a believer or not, we can say and do what we want, but only Allah knows who is sincere in the belief, and also knows who is sincere in disbelief. The whole matter of belief and its punishment is under the hands of Allah alone, no one can interfere with it, absolutely no one except Allah.

Can you also see that verse 4:137 that I brought in has stated the punishment for those who kept on believing and disbelieving until they ended up hardcore unbelievers, here it is: it is not for Allah to forgive them nor guide them to a way. , in fact Allah told Mohammad what to do with them exactly, nothing more than saying the following as stated in the following verse 4:138:

بَشِّرِ الْمُنَافِقِينَ بِأَنَّ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا أَلِيمًا (138)
Give the tidings to the hypocrites that they will have a painful torture.
[Al Quran ; 4:138]

-> See: Give the tidings to the hypocrites that they will have a painful torture. , of course they are hypocrites if they : believe then disbelieve, again believe and again disbelieve, then increase in disbelief.

After all these compelling Quran evidences, I bet you will still see Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk from among the Ulamaa of Azhar are not happy with Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s clear words regarding the apostates that their reckoning is only with Allah on the JD, they believe that the apostate must be killed, so they worked hard to justify their lies, what they did was simple. Let's steal such law from the Bible then inject it in a hearsay hadith and brainwash the believers that the hadith is as holy as the Quran. AND THEY SUCCEEDED.

The false belief among Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk that they must kill the apostates has no basis in the Quran. It is another false belief stolen from the Bible and then passed off as teaching and Sunnah of the prophet etc. Here is the evidences of their theft from the Bible:

Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.
[Leviticus 24:16]

Here is more of let's kill the apostates' insanity from the Bible:

But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has counseled rebellion against the LORD your God who brought you from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, to seduce you from the way in which the LORD your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from among you.
[Deuteronomy13:5]

According to the Bible, anyone who thinks differently (dreamer of dreams) shall be killed. This is the real teaching of the Bible. Just kill people who do not wish to believe like you anymore.

Here is yet more killing from the Bible :

If your brother, your mother's son, or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul, entice you secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods' you shall not yield to him or listen to him; and your eye shall not pity him, nor shall you spare or conceal him. But you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. So you shall stone him to death because he has sought to seduce you from the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
[Deuteronomy 13:6-10]

The Bible and the invented Sharia laws of the Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk do not allow any freedom of belief. According to the Bible and the Sharia Laws of the Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk, a person should be put to death when he changes from belief to disbelief. It is clear again that the Muftis of Ahl Al Sunnah and Shirk reject the teachings of Allah in the Quran. Instead they prefer to plagiaries biblical teachings and pass it off as the teachings of the prophet through nothing but hearsay that we should consider holy, yeh right.

For the second question concerning the children of such apostate, those confused Ulamaa of Azhar said the following:

As for the children, if they are young, then they should be Muslims, but when the grow older and decide to change their faith, they should be asked to repent and if they refused, then they should be killed.

Holy non sense man, this crap of all humans being born Muslims, does not make sense to any sane human, if we all bloody are born Muslims, then all kafirs and other religion followers must be killed according to those bunch of confused arseholes of Azhar Ulamaa (sorry I have to give it to such confused punks who are damaging my religion with their hardcore stupidity)

I challenge any punk of them to false me:

They bloody say that all humans are born Muslims, i.e. any one who is currently not a Muslim MUST BE APOSTATE and consequently must be killed, HAHAHAHAHAAH, I reckon that should be enough to expose their blindness and confusion.

Well, let me prove it to you that those punks are indeed confused beyond repair:

Let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s take the noble prophets Ibrahim and Ismael as examples, according to those confused Ulamaa and hadith worshippers from al-Azhar, Ibrahim and Ismael were born Muslims, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s now look at this verse:

رَبَّنَا وَاجْعَلْنَا مُسْلِمَيْنِ لَكَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِنَا أُمَّةً مُّسْلِمَةً لَّكَ وَأَرِنَا مَنَاسِكَنَا وَتُبْ عَلَيْنَآ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ التَّوَّابُ الرَّحِيمُ (128)
Our Lord! And make us both submitters to You and from our offspring a nation that is submitting to You, and show us our path of worship and forgive us, surely You are the Relenting, the Merciful.
[Al Quran ; 2:128]
-> See what Ibrahim and Ismael are saying at a later time in their lives: Our Lord! And make us both submitters to You and from our offspring a nation that is submitting to You,. So I ask those confused Ulamaa, if Ibrahim and Ismael were born Muslims, how come later on they are asking Allah to be Muslims and even from their off spring a Muslim nation? It makes no sense, of course no one is born a Muslim. You are only born an innocent child who knows nothing, and because at that time you know nothing, then you cannot be a Muslim, because being a Muslim is 100% dependant on knowledge, it is not dependant on magic. In fact a good Muslim is one who is described in the Quran as SOLID IN KNOWLEDGE concerning the messages of Allah.

The conclusion is this, those confused Ulamaa of Azhar are very hard on killing others, for them killing an invaluable soul that Allah has created, is so easy, simply kill it and send it to God, as if God and His appointed team of angels cannot do it, bearing in mind that the matter of belief should concern Him alone and should not concern anyone else on this earth, simply, it is the matter of believing in Him.

Salam

[openurmind]

Hi,
Dear brother Ahmed, did you write this? I mean the argument and the explanations. The more I read about things like this, I just wonder, why the Quran is so accurate while what is happening is not. And I mean even from the time of the prophet. There are many Hadiths, stories and recorded actions and even wars during the time of the prophet which really contradict the Quran. You know me well by now, I am only searching for a common ground, I do not mean any harm, but I just feel that the gap between the Quran and the Muslims, including the prophet (Or what was told/recorded about him) is too great to be ignored.

I think you are taking few serious steps that are confirming what I am saying. First you do not rely much on Hadith, which was obvious to you from the start. Then, you Are re-translating the Quran, and that is not because the last few generations lacked the translation skills from Arabic to English, but simply, and somehow, they were blinded by the common explanation of the Quran. The Hadith had the same problem. I have always wondered, how could people in the past had listened to obviously corrupt Hadith and said �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??Sobhan Allah�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��? It is a mystery. And it is that mystery which led people, like myself, to question the validity of Islam in general. Yet, while and when you consult the Quran, the picture changes.

I am beginning to truly ask myself tonight, was the prophet really aware of the message he was delivering, or he was just the currier who had nothing to do with the package? The more I review the Quran, with your help, I just realise that people have listened, believed, worshiped the currier than the message itself. It is not an easy fight now; I would even dare to get involved. The number of people who believe in what Hadith, society, scholars, fundamentalists taught them, are very hard to change. Even though what you have got is possibly the word of God, you and people like youself are still facing a war that would need more than the re-coming of the prophet himself. Yet, one step is better than stillness.

May God be with you
We have never been contated.
No one knows the truth

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

Today, I am going to show you a clear example of one of those weak, confused and retarded so called Muslims

On Faithfreedom International web site, http://www.faithfreedom.org a punk calling himself a Muslim raised a thread to the Kafirs titled Apostasy has no death penalty., the freak so called Muslim is using the name �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??AllahuAkabar�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��, however I will refer to him from now on as The Tard, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s see what the Tard had to say to the kafirs on their web site:

The Tard said on FFI:
The death penalty for apostates only exists in the hadiths which I was led to believe, were infact for political reasons to keep Muslims from getting scared and leaving Islam during war time. Also, there is no compulsion in religion like the Qur'an clearly states on 2:256 and there's nothing in the Qur'an that speaks of killing apostates. The west is on a crusade against Islam, it's a crusader/ zionist/munafiq alliance that invades countries for oil. Our history is much less bloody that the European/Western history, when Salahuddin captured Jerusalem he didn't kill innocent people. I dare you to name me one indegionous population that we have totally wiped out.
----------------------

Obviously, it seems that he wanted to defend Islam somehow, it also seems that he does not uphold the hadith, this was clear by comparing his thread title Apostasy has no death penalty with what he said above: The death penalty for apostates only exists in the hadiths which I was led to believe, were infact for political reasons to keep Muslims from getting scared and leaving Islam during war time.

Then the Tard briefly mentioned verse 2:256 which states that there is no compulsion in religion

Now, after reading the above, I thought to myself, good, we have another good Muslim in the block, however I was totally wrong, it seems that this Tard is another fake sharmoot who is pretending to be a Muslim, or at least one of those stupid Muslims who can easily fall in the kafirs simple trap

Now, let me tell ya, what is the kafirs simple trap that they use against the weak Muslims, it is Bukhari Springer Hadith, that is why the filthy kafirs who attack Islam are not allowed to use Bukhari Springer hadith and his likes in any debate with me whatsoever.Period

See, I am not a weak Muslim to fall in the kafirs simple trap unlike so many Muslims who can easily trapped, let me now show you how the kafirs came to the Tard�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s thread like a bunch of hungry wolves who wants to prey on weak Muslims.

The first filthy kafir replied with some laughs:

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

Today, I am going to show you a clear example of one of those weak, confused and retarded so called Muslims

On Faithfreedom International web site, http://www.faithfreedom.org a punk calling himself a Muslim raised a thread to the Kafirs titled Apostasy has no death penalty., the freak so called Muslim is using the name �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??AllahuAkabar�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?�?????�????�???�??�?��, however I will refer to him from now on as The Tard, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s see what the Tard had to say to the kafirs on their web site:

The Tard said on FFI:
The death penalty for apostates only exists in the hadiths which I was led to believe, were infact for political reasons to keep Muslims from getting scared and leaving Islam during war time. Also, there is no compulsion in religion like the Qur'an clearly states on 2:256 and there's nothing in the Qur'an that speaks of killing apostates. The west is on a crusade against Islam, it's a crusader/ zionist/munafiq alliance that invades countries for oil. Our history is much less bloody that the European/Western history, when Salahuddin captured Jerusalem he didn't kill innocent people. I dare you to name me one indegionous population that we have totally wiped out.
----------------------

Obviously, it seems that he wanted to defend Islam somehow, it also seems that he does not uphold the hadith, this was clear by comparing his thread title Apostasy has no death penalty with what he said above: The death penalty for apostates only exists in the hadiths which I was led to believe, were infact for political reasons to keep Muslims from getting scared and leaving Islam during war time.

Then the Tard briefly mentioned verse 2:256 which states that there is no compulsion in religion

Now, after reading the above, I thought to myself, good, we have another good Muslim in the block, however I was totally wrong, it seems that this Tard is another fake sharmoot who is pretending to be a Muslim, or at least one of those stupid Muslims who can easily fall in the kafirs simple trap

Now, let me tell ya, what is the kafirs simple trap that they use against the weak Muslims, it is Bukhari Springer Hadith, that is why the filthy kafirs who attack Islam are not allowed to use Bukhari Springer hadith and his likes in any debate with me whatsoever.Period

See, I am not a weak Muslim to fall in the kafirs simple trap unlike so many Muslims who can easily trapped, let me now show you how the kafirs came to the Tard�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s thread like a bunch of hungry wolves who wants to prey on weak Muslims.

The first filthy kafir replied with some laughs:

[AhmedBahgat]

So the Tard replied like this:

[AhmedBahgat]

So the Tard replied like this:

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

How about a new slam by which I will dunk the Federal Court of Pakistan and a Pakistani woman named Jamilah Hussain

Both claim that Alcohol is not prohibited in the Quran. It came to my knowledge through a kafir on FFI web site, I like that kafir though, because he does not insult Mohammed.

Of course, the Quran prohibited alcohol, this was proven to me by a nice Canadian Muslim lady about 3 years ago, she was a member in here but she left due to my free speech style and insults, she was a very nice and knowledgeable lady though, I will never forget her because she taught me something very valuable:

The reason of my slam is this, for the last 2 years or so, many confused Muslims are promoting that Allah did not prohibit Khamr

They go around the internet promoting their crap, that in no where in the Quran we read the following:

Harram Allah Al-Khamr

They claim that Allah only said, don�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t come near Al-Khamr, so for them a little bit of Alcohol is ok.

Let me show you a couple of paragraphs brought on the table by a Kafir named Bunny whom I respect because he does not insult prophet Mohammed, it seems that the article source is somewhere in Pakistan:
----------------------------
Bunny of FFI http://faithfreedom.org brought on the table the following from an article posted by someone named Nadeem F. Paracha from Pakistan on 09 24th, 2009

The lingering Islamisation milieu put together by the Ziaul Haq dictatorship got a beating recently. In May this year, in an unprecedented move, the Federal Shariat Court declared that the consumption of alcohol in Islam was a (comparatively) lesser crime. The court duly overturned the punishment of applying 80 lashes to the seller and consumer of alcohol (with a whip) and replaced it with light �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??strokes from a stick made from a palm tree leave.�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??

In her book, Islam, Its Laws & Society, Islamic law expert Jamila Hussain states that though the Quran �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??advises�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? Muslims to stay away from wine (khamr), it does not outright forbid it like it does carrion meat, blood, pork, and idolatry. She also states that neither does the Holy Book prescribe any punishment for consuming alcohol.

http://blog.dawn.com:91/dblog/2009/09/24/from-lashes-to-strokes/
----------------------------

And this is how I replied to kafir Bunny:

Salam Bunny

The article should be interesting to expose the stupidity of such federal shariat court and that stupid woman Jamila Hussain from Pakistan, to be honest, they sound as stupid as the Ulamaa of Azhar.

Let me give you an introduction:

If I tell you in general that everything bad is Haram (prohibited)

Then I tell you, doing a specific action is very bad

That must lead to, such specific and very bad action is Haram (prohibited)

With that simple and compelling logic in mind, let me show you now, how those dumb bums Pakistanis are wrong:

First of all, the Quran indeed prohibited Alcohol outright, they just do not understand the Quran, as simple as that, but before I show it to every body, let me just tell you something that should expose the stupidity of such Pakistanis and their federal court:

I believe they mean by outright prohibition is to say:

Alcohol is Haram (prohibited)

Well, for them, if they do not read such outright prohibition in the Quran, then Alcohol is not Haram, the problem for them is this, the Quran never said:

Zina (sex outside wedlock) is Haram, in such outright manner which they are looking for. Would that mean that Zina is allowed?

Well, indeed the Quran outright prohibited both sins (Alcohol and Zina), let me first bring a verse in which we read that Allah outright prohibited a few things:

قُلْ إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ رَبِّيَ الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ وَالإِثْمَ وَالْبَغْيَ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ وَأَن تُشْرِكُواْ بِاللّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطَانًا وَأَن تَقُولُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ مَا لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ (33)
Say: Indeed My Lord has prohibited indecencies, what is apparent of them and what is concealed, and sin and perpetration without right, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority, and that you say about Allah what you do not know.
<Al Quran ; 7:33>

-> See mate, in 7:33, Allah has outright prohibited the following:

1) الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ , i.e. indecencies, what is apparent of them and what is concealed,
2) وَالإِثْمَ , i.e. Sin
3) وَالْبَغْيَ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ , i.e. perpetration without right
4) وَأَن تُشْرِكُواْ بِاللّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطَانًا , i.e. associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority
5) وَأَن تَقُولُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ مَا لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ , i.e. say about Allah what you do not know

Now, I want you to concentrate on items 1 & 2 above:

The Arabic word for Indecencies is فَوَاحِشَ , Fawahish, which is plural, the singular is: فَاحِشَةً , Fahishah, i.e. Indecency

The Arabic word for Sin is إِثْمَ , Ithm, which is singular, the plural is : اثامَ , Atham, i.e. Sins

Now bear in mind that in the Arabic language, we can use either the singular or the plural to prohibit the plural, this is just a style and is commonly used in the Arabic language, you can see both examples under items 1 & 2

1- The plural �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??indecencies�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? is used to prohibit all indecencies.
2- The singular �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??sin�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? is used to prohibit all sins.

Now, indecencies & sins are very general and can be speculated of course, and had Allah left it at that, I would have agreed with those ignorant from Pakistan, but Allah did not leave it at that, for Alcohol, He told us:

يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْسِرِ قُلْ فِيهِمَا إِثْمٌ كَبِيرٌ وَمَنَافِعُ لِلنَّاسِ وَإِثْمُهُمَآ أَكْبَرُ مِن نَّفْعِهِمَا وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ مَاذَا يُنفِقُونَ قُلِ الْعَفْوَ كَذَلِكَ يُبيِّنُ اللّهُ لَكُمُ الآيَاتِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَفَكَّرُونَ (219)
They ask you regarding the alcohol and the gambling; say: In both there is a great sin and means of benefit for the people, and its sin is greater than its benefit. And they ask you regarding what they should spend; say: Pardon others. Thus does Allah explain to you the signs that you may ponder-
<Al Quran ; 2:219>

-> See, They ask you regarding the alcohol and the gambling; say: In both there is a great sin

Now, because in 7:33 Allah prohibited all Atham (Sins), , and because in 2:219 Allah is telling us that in Alcohol is a great Ithm (sin), then according to 7:33 & 2:219 together, ALCOHOL IS HARAM as stated by Allah.

For Zina, Allah told us:

وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا الزِّنَا ۖ إِنَّهُ كَانَ فَاحِشَةً وَسَاءَ سَبِيلًا (32)
And go not near adultery; indeed, it is an indecency and an evil way.
<Al Quran ; 17:32>

-> See: And go not near adultery; indeed, it is an indecency and an evil way.

Now, because in 7:33 Allah prohibited all Fawahish (Indecencies), and because in 17:32 Allah is telling us that Zina is Fahishah (Indecency), then according to 7:33 & 17:32 together, ZINA IS HARAM as stated by Allah.

Finally, not because there is no punishment for drinking Alcohol in the Quran, it means it is allowed, this is stupid, indeed there is a huge punishment for it in this life and the punishment is from Allah, Alcohol will kill you and before it doed that, it will humiliate you. And surely the ultimate punishment will start when it kills you.

Here you have it, mrs Jamillah Hussain and the Federal Court of Pakistan have been slam dunked and exposed.

# 61

Salam

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

How about a new slam by which I will dunk the Federal Court of Pakistan and a Pakistani woman named Jamilah Hussain

Both claim that Alcohol is not prohibited in the Quran. It came to my knowledge through a kafir on FFI web site, I like that kafir though, because he does not insult Mohammed.

Of course, the Quran prohibited alcohol, this was proven to me by a nice Canadian Muslim lady about 3 years ago, she was a member in here but she left due to my free speech style and insults, she was a very nice and knowledgeable lady though, I will never forget her because she taught me something very valuable:

The reason of my slam is this, for the last 2 years or so, many confused Muslims are promoting that Allah did not prohibit Khamr

They go around the internet promoting their crap, that in no where in the Quran we read the following:

Harram Allah Al-Khamr

They claim that Allah only said, don�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??t come near Al-Khamr, so for them a little bit of Alcohol is ok.

Let me show you a couple of paragraphs brought on the table by a Kafir named Bunny whom I respect because he does not insult prophet Mohammed, it seems that the article source is somewhere in Pakistan:
----------------------------
Bunny of FFI http://faithfreedom.org brought on the table the following from an article posted by someone named Nadeem F. Paracha from Pakistan on 09 24th, 2009

The lingering Islamisation milieu put together by the Ziaul Haq dictatorship got a beating recently. In May this year, in an unprecedented move, the Federal Shariat Court declared that the consumption of alcohol in Islam was a (comparatively) lesser crime. The court duly overturned the punishment of applying 80 lashes to the seller and consumer of alcohol (with a whip) and replaced it with light �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??strokes from a stick made from a palm tree leave.�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??

In her book, Islam, Its Laws & Society, Islamic law expert Jamila Hussain states that though the Quran �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??advises�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? Muslims to stay away from wine (khamr), it does not outright forbid it like it does carrion meat, blood, pork, and idolatry. She also states that neither does the Holy Book prescribe any punishment for consuming alcohol.

http://blog.dawn.com:91/dblog/2009/09/24/from-lashes-to-strokes/
----------------------------

And this is how I replied to kafir Bunny:

Salam Bunny

The article should be interesting to expose the stupidity of such federal shariat court and that stupid woman Jamila Hussain from Pakistan, to be honest, they sound as stupid as the Ulamaa of Azhar.

Let me give you an introduction:

If I tell you in general that everything bad is Haram (prohibited)

Then I tell you, doing a specific action is very bad

That must lead to, such specific and very bad action is Haram (prohibited)

With that simple and compelling logic in mind, let me show you now, how those dumb bums Pakistanis are wrong:

First of all, the Quran indeed prohibited Alcohol outright, they just do not understand the Quran, as simple as that, but before I show it to every body, let me just tell you something that should expose the stupidity of such Pakistanis and their federal court:

I believe they mean by outright prohibition is to say:

Alcohol is Haram (prohibited)

Well, for them, if they do not read such outright prohibition in the Quran, then Alcohol is not Haram, the problem for them is this, the Quran never said:

Zina (sex outside wedlock) is Haram, in such outright manner which they are looking for. Would that mean that Zina is allowed?

Well, indeed the Quran outright prohibited both sins (Alcohol and Zina), let me first bring a verse in which we read that Allah outright prohibited a few things:

قُلْ إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ رَبِّيَ الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ وَالإِثْمَ وَالْبَغْيَ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ وَأَن تُشْرِكُواْ بِاللّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطَانًا وَأَن تَقُولُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ مَا لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ (33)
Say: Indeed My Lord has prohibited indecencies, what is apparent of them and what is concealed, and sin and perpetration without right, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority, and that you say about Allah what you do not know.
<Al Quran ; 7:33>

-> See mate, in 7:33, Allah has outright prohibited the following:

1) الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ , i.e. indecencies, what is apparent of them and what is concealed,
2) وَالإِثْمَ , i.e. Sin
3) وَالْبَغْيَ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ , i.e. perpetration without right
4) وَأَن تُشْرِكُواْ بِاللّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطَانًا , i.e. associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority
5) وَأَن تَقُولُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ مَا لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ , i.e. say about Allah what you do not know

Now, I want you to concentrate on items 1 & 2 above:

The Arabic word for Indecencies is فَوَاحِشَ , Fawahish, which is plural, the singular is: فَاحِشَةً , Fahishah, i.e. Indecency

The Arabic word for Sin is إِثْمَ , Ithm, which is singular, the plural is : اثامَ , Atham, i.e. Sins

Now bear in mind that in the Arabic language, we can use either the singular or the plural to prohibit the plural, this is just a style and is commonly used in the Arabic language, you can see both examples under items 1 & 2

1- The plural �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??indecencies�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? is used to prohibit all indecencies.
2- The singular �?????�????�???�??�?�¢??sin�?????�????�???�??�?�¢?? is used to prohibit all sins.

Now, indecencies & sins are very general and can be speculated of course, and had Allah left it at that, I would have agreed with those ignorant from Pakistan, but Allah did not leave it at that, for Alcohol, He told us:

يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْسِرِ قُلْ فِيهِمَا إِثْمٌ كَبِيرٌ وَمَنَافِعُ لِلنَّاسِ وَإِثْمُهُمَآ أَكْبَرُ مِن نَّفْعِهِمَا وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ مَاذَا يُنفِقُونَ قُلِ الْعَفْوَ كَذَلِكَ يُبيِّنُ اللّهُ لَكُمُ الآيَاتِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَفَكَّرُونَ (219)
They ask you regarding the alcohol and the gambling; say: In both there is a great sin and means of benefit for the people, and its sin is greater than its benefit. And they ask you regarding what they should spend; say: Pardon others. Thus does Allah explain to you the signs that you may ponder-
<Al Quran ; 2:219>

-> See, They ask you regarding the alcohol and the gambling; say: In both there is a great sin

Now, because in 7:33 Allah prohibited all Atham (Sins), , and because in 2:219 Allah is telling us that in Alcohol is a great Ithm (sin), then according to 7:33 & 2:219 together, ALCOHOL IS HARAM as stated by Allah.

For Zina, Allah told us:

وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا الزِّنَا ۖ إِنَّهُ كَانَ فَاحِشَةً وَسَاءَ سَبِيلًا (32)
And go not near adultery; indeed, it is an indecency and an evil way.
<Al Quran ; 17:32>

-> See: And go not near adultery; indeed, it is an indecency and an evil way.

Now, because in 7:33 Allah prohibited all Fawahish (Indecencies), and because in 17:32 Allah is telling us that Zina is Fahishah (Indecency), then according to 7:33 & 17:32 together, ZINA IS HARAM as stated by Allah.

Finally, not because there is no punishment for drinking Alcohol in the Quran, it means it is allowed, this is stupid, indeed there is a huge punishment for it in this life and the punishment is from Allah, Alcohol will kill you and before it doed that, it will humiliate you. And surely the ultimate punishment will start when it kills you.

Here you have it, mrs Jamillah Hussain and the Federal Court of Pakistan have been slam dunked and exposed.

# 61

Salam

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

The conversation between Bunny and myself continued further regarding alcohol and the last slam dunk, this is an edited version to the actual dialogue, I only kept what is related to the subject if you want to read the whole dialogue then you may go to:

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=4230&p=69565#p69565

[AhmedBahgat]

Salam all

The conversation between Bunny and myself continued further regarding alcohol and the last slam dunk, this is an edited version to the actual dialogue, I only kept what is related to the subject if you want to read the whole dialogue then you may go to:

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=4230&p=69565#p69565

[AhmedBahgat]

The difference between a complete punk of a Muslim and a decent Kafir


Salam all

This comment is going to be a bit strange, I thought about it for a while and decided to add it to my slam dunk show, not as a slam, but a compelling proof to how Satan is fuking the Muslims so bad

Bunny, the kafir who debated with me the issue of the prohibition of Alcohol, as read in the last two comments above, has replied back, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s read his reply:

[AhmedBahgat]

The difference between a complete punk of a Muslim and a decent Kafir


Salam all

This comment is going to be a bit strange, I thought about it for a while and decided to add it to my slam dunk show, not as a slam, but a compelling proof to how Satan is fuking the Muslims so bad

Bunny, the kafir who debated with me the issue of the prohibition of Alcohol, as read in the last two comments above, has replied back, let�?????�????�???�??�?�¢??s read his reply: