Catholic Archbishop Abducted in Iraq

No report of this from the Vatican Information Service yet.

f.g. spotted the BBC story here, as well:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4182629.stm

If the bishop isn't beheaded he might be released months from now after converting to Islam under the threat of death.

But no! As Spencer pointed out, this is a Syrian Catholic bishop. Why are Syrian Catholics in Iraq, you ask? Because they're barely allowed to live in Syria. And now that they're targetted in Iraq, if they survive, where do they go next? Who is helping them live? They exist in some harmony in Israel, but don't expect the Israelis to airlift them. At least as long as they're held captives they'll be allowed to eat and sleep. Beyond that, what's the hope for them? Not much if the current trend continues. They have no hope of surviving without help from fellow Christians. But of course I'm probably over-reacting. Maybe the Israelis will go to their aid.

Why isn't there LOUD CRIES AND PROTESTS FROM ALL
CHRISTIAN DENOMINATIONS IN THE WORLD!! Also would like to know why same persecuted Cristians aren't granted Refugee Status over Muslims in the West??
Why should dangerous Jihadists such as Abu Hamza, Omar Bakri, Mullah Krekar etc and their parasite families be given entry when law abiding, Pro Western Christians are not...

>he might be released months from now after converting to Islam under the threat of death.

I doubt he converts. Besides, is it a valid conversion if brought about by 'pain of death?' All they would be getting is a public renouncement of Christ from someone. Aside from the sick sense of victory it gives the terrorists, I hardly see what Islam gains by forcing conversions. It's meaningless like the rest of their trashy beliefs and behavior.

f.g.

The only honorable and Christ-like thing to do would be for the Pope to take the kidnapped archbishop's place at the pulpit in Iraq.

And place his life on the line the way the first Christian did. And risk the consequences.

In this way, it would alert the rest of the dozing world about the meaning of the old saying "greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for another".

If the Pope were kidnapped, perhaps then the collective coma of the West about the nature of radical Islam might end. Nothing else seems to have worked.

Not internet beheadings, daily bombings or calls to jihad from Manila to London, Calgary to Sydney.

The sooner something shocks 'infidels' out of their daydream of the "peaceful religion of Allah", the safer the future will be for those who believe in freedom. (And not in a mere slave's 'Paradise'.)

They threw wheelchair-bound Mr. Klinghoffer over the rail of the 'Achille Lauro' cruise ship, so I wouldn't except much sympathy for an ailing pontiff, but he needs to do something dramatic with the remainder of his life or we will linger in this twilight war until a city somewhere turns to an 'alarm clock' of geiger-counter glass.

Christian Terrorists in North-East India get support from America
Author: Kunal Ghosh
Publication: www.mainstreamweekly.com
Date:
The recent terrorist strikes in the USA on September 11, 2001, in which the World Trade Centre and Pentagon were "crash-bombed" by large airplanes, have brought a new resolve in the global community to root out terrorism from all parts of the world. The Americans are playing a leading role in building a world coalition against terrorism. This is the best time to remind the Americans that Baptist Christian terrorists are active in India's North-East and they derive their financial support from the southern parts of the USA where the Baptist Church has a strong following. Funds are collected in the form of donations in various church establishments in the name of evangelical work. Some of this money is spent in true philanthropic work of spreading education and healthcare. However, it has been suspected for a long time that a part of this fund gets diverted for buying arms for the Baptist terrorists of the North-East. Our ex-Chief Election Commissioner, T.N. Seshan, gave voice to this suspicion in a television panel discussion on Doordarshan as early as in 1993. Our Army is baffled by the seemingly unending supply of sophisticated and expensive supply of arms and equipment flooding into our North-East. All terrorists of various hues, the so-called Darjeeling Gorkha, the so-called Kamtapuri, Bodo, Ulfa, Naga, Manipuri, Tripuri etc, are flush with automatic rifles, land mines, remote control devices and so on. Money generated by the local extortion of businessmen and citizens account for only a small fraction. Therefore the greater part must be coming from abroad. It is suspected that the funds come from Islamic sources such as the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan, the Gulf states etc. and Christian sources such as the Baptist Church in southern USA and the Presbyterian Church of the UK.
The most prominent among the terrorist outfits of Tripura is the NLFT (National Liberation Front of Tripura). It employs terror tactics to effect mass conversion to Christianity (The Statesman 1999, 2000; Ghosh 1999) and is a predominantly Baptist (Protestant) organisation. Whatever token non-Christian representation it had, it has lost recently. Nayanbashi Jamatiya, a Hindu leader, led a revolt against the policy of forcible conversion of the NLFT and left a rebel camp in neighbouring Bangladesh with his followers. On April 8, 2001, while his party was moving towards the Indian border, it was attacked by the main group; seven activists were killed and he himself was seriously injured and taken to a government hospital in Bangladesh. (The Statesman 2001a, 2001b).
The sectarian nature of the Baptist terrorists has come to the fore. They killed a Catholic priest called Father Victor Crasta on July 25, 2000. In protest the Catholic Church of Tripura called a bandh (closure) in all Catholic run institutions on August 10, 2000. (The Telegraph 2000)
On August 6, 1999, four RSS (Rashtriya Swayam-sevak Sangh) workers of Tripura, named Shyamal Kanti Sen Gupta, Sudhamoy Dutta, Dinendranath Dey, Shubhankar Chakraborti, were kidnapped by the NLFT, taken to a camp in the jungles of Bangladesh and a ransom of Rs 2 crores was demanded from their parent organisation. The RSS refused to pay and they were done to death sometime in the month of December 2000 or January 2001. The news of their killing was confirmed by the Central Government in July 2001 and carried by all prominent national dailies. Their "guilt" was that they were preaching among the tribals to preserve Hinduism. Our Consti-tution permits propagation of a faith by legitimate means. If that is so then work for the preservation of a faith too is surely permissible. However, the kidnap and murder of these Hindu pracharaks of the RSS by Christian terrorists did not create a media sensation. This is not the first time that a Hindu preacher has been attacked in North-East India. I found reference to such an event in a most unlikely place albeit most authentic. Swami Gokulananda (1999), the present head of the Ramakrishna Mission Ashrama of New Delhi, has written that he had been the Secretary of the Khasi Hills Ashrama in Meghalaya in the 1980s. He futher writes:
The hostile forces were against our movement as it was trying to bring back the lost tradition of faith among the people of the Khasi hills. Since it was like a speed breaker in their path they wanted to remove me. One day a time bomb was planted in my room but they did not succeed in killing me.
It should be noted that the most dominant church in the Khasi hills is Presbyterian (Protestant) which is based in the UK. Christian terrorists have been active in various States of North-East India for a long time. Recently they have spread to North Bengal also. Reverend John Thwaites, a Protestant priest who had been in North Bengal for over three decades, was asked to leave the country in January 2001. No reason was given and he defied the order. The West Bengal Government quietly arrested and prosecuted him. There were demonstrations by his sympathisers during the trial which ended in August 2001. The judge sentenced him to three months simple imprisonment following which he was to be deported to his native land of the United Kingdom. Is there a link between the Protestant priest and the terrorist activities of the Kamtapuri separatists? The question is pertinent because just prior to the "quit India" order served on Reverend Thwaites (January 2001), the Kamtapuri terrorists had killed eight CPI-M activists including a District Committee member in the four-month span from August to November 2000. The West Bengal State Government has the answer to this question. They have not made public way the Reverend was asked to leave the country in the first place and the BJP-led government at the Centre has played ball the way the State Government wanted.
In the aftermath of the airplane crash-bombing of the World Trade Centre, President George W. Bush has said that America would do what it takes to rid the world of the scourge of terrorism. America would target not only the terrorists but also the those who shelter and finance them. If he is true to his word, he should have to look into his own backyard first. It is inconceivable that those in southern United States who collect funds for the Baptist Church's evangelical work in India have no inkling of the end use of that fund. One among several end uses is buying weapons for organised terrorism.
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0703/107.html

Once upon a time, the West would have done a bit more than "deplore" such a savage and barbaric act.

But those times are long gone. Christians today are no safer in New Jersey or Amsterdam than they are in Iraq.

Syrian Catholics are genuine, actual Catholics. The are known as "Eastern Rite," or sometimes "Greek Catholics."

Being genuine Catholics, under the authority of the Pope, we can hope that this will interest the Pope in opposing jihad.

Hopefully the kidnappers will make demands, hopefully the news media will pick this up, and turn it into a 'cause celebre.'

The AP, in order to see that this doesn't become such a cause says in their article: "The reason for the kidnapping was unclear, but Christians — tens of thousands of whom live in and around Mosul — have been subjected to attacks in the past."

Unclear? To whom? Journalists of this ilk are enemies of freedom, and lovers of Islamic totalitarianism. There is no other conclusion.

Posted by: whitequeen at January 17, 2005 05:45 PM

ROTFL

OH! BUT IT WERE TRUE??

WE KNOW THAT IT IS THE MUSSIS WHO CAUSE ALL THE PROBLEMS!!!

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength, Wisdom, Sight and Courage to Stay the course to Victory[FREEDOM] to Destroy ALL Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Worlds Eyes to their Evil Amen

I always understood that the Syrian Catholics were called that because they used the ancient Syrian language in their liturgy, just as the Western church used Latin.
Whatever, they are our sisters and brothers and we must support them.
The work of the Barnabas Fund, supporting persecuted Christians is very interesting. See
www.barnbasfund.org

whitequeen posts,

"The recent terrorist strikes in the USA on September 11, 2001..."

Recent? How old is this "news"?

I would like that he would be free soon, like a catholic, I am sad and I pray for his freedom, but I know that Al-Zarqawi is more near to the hell, he is a bastard, damn him,

whitequeen-

When these 'Christians' (if they exist) do what your average Muslim terrorists do, I'm sure they will get some air time, but its hard breaking through all of the web-posted beheadings, school massacres, carbombings, suicide bombers, hijackers, insurgencies -from the Phillipines to Spain, public slaughters of prominent freedom-loving 'infidels', ad nauseam.

I thought you were going to bring up the Wounded Knee affair again. Or how about the Crusades? (Oh, but weren't they in response to 400 years of Muslim "Crescades"- murdering their way, with sword and Koranic terror-suras, across North Africa and Asia and into Europe as far as Charles Martel's hammer?).

The sins of the West are shameful and lamented.

The sins of Islam are its pride and joy.

Read the Hadiths and the Quran and start using the thing at the top of you spine for something other than a burqa holder.

To whom it may concern,

Syrian Catholics are not Greek Catholics. These are not terms of language or nationality, but of liturgical usage. A "Roman Catholic" follows the liturgical and spiritual traditions of Rome. "Greek Catholics" follow the liturgical and spiritual traditions of Constantinople. Hence they are also known as Byzantine Catholics. "Syrian Catholics" follow the liturgical and spiritual traditions that originated in the great ancient Church of Antioch, which is properly in Syria but currently belongs to Turkey.

All these are "Catholics" because they share the common faith which has come to be known as Catholic. Many people assume that "Roman Catholic" and "Catholic" are synonymous, but they are not. The Roman Catholic Church is only the largest and best-known of 22 Catholic churches, all of which are in communion with each other, share a common faith, and acknowledge the Pope of Rome as the successor of Peter and chief bishop.

Further complicating the situation is that Greek Catholics, at least those of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, are mostly found in Lebanon and Syria. The Melkite Church is also the Church of Antioch. The Syrian Catholic Church is the segment of the Church of Antioch that left the communion of the Church universal after the Council of Chalcedon in 451 and reconciled with the Catholic Church later. They were long known as "Monophysites," although this term cannot be applied to their Catholic wing and probably not to its other wings either, anymore.

The Melkite Greek Catholic Church is made of the opponents of the Syrian Catholics at Chalcedon: the orthodox wing that held to the Christology that is still taught by Catholics, Orthodox, and most Protestants. They severed relations with Rome under duress under the yoke of Muslim rule in the Middle Ages, and restored communion with Rome in 1724. They retain Byzantine liturgical and spiritual traditions, and so are very close in spirit and practice to the Orthodox Church, particularly the Antiochian and Greek Orthodox.

Most Christians in Lebanon are Maronites. This Church is a remnant of yet another schism, the Monothelite split of the 7th century, reconciled with the Catholic Church later. The Maronite Catholic Church is the only one of the 22 Catholic Churches that has no counterpart in the Orthodox Church.

A smaller number of Lebanese, Syrian, and other Arabic-speaking Christians are Melkite Greek Catholics, Orthodox, and Roman Catholics. There is also a growing number of Protestants.

In Iraq, the largest Church is the Assyrian Church of the East, which is the remnant of the once-great Nestorian Church, born in the schism after the Council of Ephesus in 431. There is also a Catholic counterpart to this Church: the Chaldean Catholic Church. There is also a number of Syrian Catholics and Orthodox.

In Egypt, the Coptic Church is another remnant of the Monophysite schism, although it has had less of a commitment to Monophysitism in recent decades (or centuries). The Copts are often called "Coptic Orthodox," but in fact they are not in communion with the Orthodox Church of Constantinople (or with Rome either). There are also some Melkites and Orthodox in Egypt.

I'll bet that is all clear as mud at this point, but anyway, there it is.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

When does this go to far?
When do we take up arms against those who would kill us?
Soon to be open season on mussies everywhere!

All muslims must go and her is what will have to happen: Kill em all, let ykwh sort them out.

Maybe my point above was obscure: Syrian Catholics are not going to give in to conversion like the French and the Spanish just because some idiot with a knife is threatening to kill them. They Syrian Christians lived with that threat in Syria until they were expelled, and they lived through Moslem rule in Iraq under conditions nearly as bad. The only place I've ever had the pleasure of living with Syrian Catholics was in Jerusalem, under the protection of the Jews, who really haven't got a great motivation for protecting Christians. And yet, form what I see, the Syrian Christians stand a better chance of help from Israelis than they do from Christians in the West. I thought it was clear that Copts, Maronites, Syrian Christians and others should expect more help from their co-religionists than they get, and when they don't get it, they face the very real threat of murder. I think many of them will die because they will not pretend to convert. So, where does that leave us?

My suggestion is that church congregations bang pots and pans inside the churches till people wake up to the fact that Christians are dying at the hands of Islamic murderers, and that Christians, not Jews in Israel, not Buddhists in India, whoever, that Christians have the first obligation to do something about it. How many ministers and priests are banging pots and pans? Today isn't the first time this kind of persecution has happened in our time. It'll continue. Bang a pan.

Take your whole congregation onto the streets and demand that the government airlift Christians out of Iraq. Bang that pot. Bang. Bang. Bang. Make some noise. Get some attention. Save those people.
Bang! Bang that pot!

There is obviously nothing so low that these bastards won't stoop to it. If nothing else, it should bring the Vatican to the realization that these terrorists are a threat to every person on earth and their eradication MUST be a priority for all of us.

profitsbeard says,

"The only honorable and Christ-like thing to do would be for the Pope to take the kidnapped archbishop's place at the pulpit in Iraq."

But what of the ecumenical effort? Doesn't inclusiveness demand that the reprobate be amongst the consecrated?

Robert,

That was a meticulous and exhaustive taxonomy of the churches of the East, and I will print out that posting, and put in under the best magnet on my refrigerator, to make sure that I now understand the relationship of Copt to Melkite to Roman Catholic to Nestorian to Maronite.

And perhaps I will even be able to keep straight monophysite and monothelite.

It was, for me, especially useful, because the subject is one that has been a source of confusion for me. There is a certain kind of person who, when he hears the word "Nicene" thinks of the "Nicene Creed." But there is another sort of person who thinks of Edgar Allan Poe's use of the word:

"Helen, thy beauty is to me/Like those Nicean barks of yore..."

[There is even a third type, for whom the word "nicean" puts him in mind of a salade nicoise. But we can forget about him.]

Well, I am the one who thinks of Edgar Allen Poe, and not of churchmen in solemn conclave assembled, with fallings-out and heterodoxies and orthodoxies, and Eastern and Western Empires, and all that stuff.

You have at last, for me, cleared up a lot.

A tour de force of taxonomy and lucid exposition.

O.T.

In compiling an argument, the first thing that must occur is an agreement on the definition of the key words used in the argument. I have often had this discussion with a close friend of mine when arguing about socialism. He says, “you are a socialist in the sense that you don’t want to see people starving in the streets or dying of easily treatable diseases.” My reply is “you are confusing socialism with charity.” Just because I am charitable does not make me a socialist. My definition of socialism is “The government ownership and or control of the means of production.” My friend’s definition of socialism was some sort of mix of government controlled or directed charity.

This always makes it difficult to have a logical argument when your opponent has a different definition of the key words used in the argument. This occurs all the time when discussing Islam with Muslims. Muslims have a different definition of such words as “peace”, “self-defense”, “tolerance”, “human rights”, “suicide”, etc. In reading Mr. Spencer’s book “Onward Muslim Soldiers” I realized how illogical and how twisted Islamic thinking really is. It reminded me of the new-speak of the book “1984”. Black is white, old is new, hate is love, war is peace, etc.

It will be impossible to deal with Islam and the practitioners of the Islamic religion unless and until they over haul their education and religious systems. One of their most prevalent logical errors is their use of circular logic. A good example of this is found on page 237 and 238 of Mr. Spencer’s “Onward Muslim Soldiers”. A Mr. Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi explains his views on the rights of people to impose their religious beliefs on others. In his view people do not have the right to impose their religious views on others, except in the case of Islam, because Islam is the one true religion and they (Muslims) were given the right to impose their religious views on everyone else. (So here comes the circular argument implied in his thinking.) How did they obtain this right? Because God says so. And where do they get the impression that God sanctioned this action? From the Koran, the eternal word of God. And who says that the Koran is the word of God? Mohamed. And who told Mohamed that the Koran is the word of God? Why God told him of course…. silly question.

Does anyone else see the circular logic in this? This is the type of logic used by socialists the world over. We are right because we say we are right. End of argument.

CHRISTIANITY IS FALSE AND IMMORAL

by Keith S Cornish

Christianity embodies the notions of Paul, whose New Testament letters were written between 55 and 60 C.E. before any of the four gospels.

Paul was a Jew, brainwashed with the religion of the Jews, and therefore he believed in the tale of Adam and Eve. He accepted that sin was hereditary and he accepted the immoral and primitive doctrine that guilt for wrongdoing can be off-loaded on to an innocent scapegoat. This usually involved the shedding of blood (often human) as an atonement required to appease the 'gods'.

Though an innocent person may, and often does, pay the penalty, this immoral doctrine, which claims to absolve the wrongdoer from personal responsibility, results in the ongoing sequence of crime, confession, absolution and its repetition ad infinitum. Responsibility for wrongdoing must remain forever with the person who committed the offence. Anything that seeks to sidestep this basic principle inflicts grievous harm on society.

After being struck by lightning, Paul conceived the idea that one of the hundreds of Jewish rebels crucified by Rome was the son of Yahweh who made the ultimate sacrifice of blood to appease the Jewish elohim (deity).

Christianity was formalised by the murderer Constantine at Nicaea in 325 C.E. This Nicene Creed is now the benchmark used in choosing chaplains for the State schools in South Australia.

The gospel of Mark was the first and the other three in the New Testament are embellishments on Mark's gospel. There are many other gospels besides these four.

The message of Joshua (Jesus) was for repentance before the imminent coming of the 'Kingdom of Heaven', which would occur during the lifetime of his listeners. He was as ignorant as most people of that time and believed in a Heaven of bliss and a Hell of eternal torment. He also believed in angels, demons, prayer and the inferiority of women. He believed in a flat earth, a superior race and that the laws of nature were not immutable. He had no knowledge of the nature of disease or of effective cures. He believed that love could be commanded and that those who disagreed with him would be damned. He believed in compulsion to comply with his viewpoint.

Being a Jew, he considered that no Jewish law, however trivial, should be broken, including the law which prohibited the ingesting of blood. Obviously he could not have initiated a ritual of cannibalism which involved the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his blood, which is the major ritual of the predominant Christian denomination.

Christianity began at a time when belief in gods and demons was almost universal. There was little comprehension of the immutable laws of nature.

Today factual information is readily available so there is no valid excuse for believing in the myths and deceits so common two thousand years ago. There is no empirical evidence for supernatural beings or places. The evidence that the existence of all human life ends when the body dies is overwhelming.. This is the only life that humans will ever have and for the purveyors of religion to say otherwise is to engage in blatant deceit for their own benefit

Ya, right, save us from Christianity.

Pope is a good Christian in my opinion maybe u guys should follow his example

Look at what those muzzies think about Iraq

http://islamonline.net/English/Media/2003/08/Liberators/article01.shtml

The answer to all your questions is here disinformed Christian and Bar

http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac4.htm

Remember Tariq Aziz, a Christian who was Iraq's Secretary of State, why is he in an American jail?

Naw, heres the answer:

Armed Conflict in America
McVeigh and the Oklahoma Bombing
Epilogue 2: Waco, Mohammedism, and Domestic Terrorism
by Robert L. Kocher
To end the so-called terrorism, it appears that Mohammedism must be recognized, thoroughly understood, confronted, and thoroughly discredited for what it is. If it can not be walled in and left to rot in its own excrement, it must be expunged from the face of the earth in self defense.

http://freedom.orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/mcveigh13.htm

crusadewatcher,

Such creepy links which fade in/out of the browser. If I were paranoid and unprepared, I might find these links intrusive.

Did five hundred years of Islamic hegemony towards the Christian Middle East and North Africa justify the crusades?

If you live one thousand years in the past, shan't I express a similar viewpoint?

Or maybe the both of us shall live in the present and deal with the past?

Its nice to see that u mentioned McVeigh and Waco (bunch of Christian extremists) Kentem, heres what your article says

In the serious no-spin, no-bullshit world, Waco was an act of intolerable domestic terrorism not so different than the Arab hijackers running planes into the World Trade Center. Waco was comitted off by a bunch of self-programmed killer psychotics who were no better than those hijackers and who are still on the loose and dangerous today. That's the raw truth.

A great man

Images Haunt Soldier Refusing to Serve in Iraq
Some Colleagues Call Him a Coward
By RUSS BYNUM, AP

HINESVILLE, Ga. (Jan. 17) - A young girl clutching her arm blackened by burns, dogs feeding off bodies in mass graves - the images still haunt Sgt. Kevin Benderman 15 months after he came home from Iraq.

Witnessing the brutal reality of war, Benderman stunned his commanders when he sought a discharge as a conscientious objector after 10 years in the Army.

In an interview with The Associated Press, the sergeant said he never grasped the misery that war inflicts on civilians as well as combatants until he saw it all firsthand.

"Some people may be born a conscientious objector, but sometimes people realize through certain events in their lives that the path they're on is the wrong one," Benderman said. "The idea was: Do I really want to stay in an organization where the sole purpose is to kill?"

Benderman's decision - choosing conscience over his commitment to fellow troops - has meant bearing the insults.

An officer called him a coward. His battalion chaplain shamed him in an e-mail from Kuwait. That's because Benderman, whose unit just deployed for a second combat tour in Iraq, refused to return to war.

Benderman, 40, filed notice in December, and his timing could hardly have been worse for the Army. The Fort Stewart-based 3rd Infantry Division began deploying its 19,000 soldiers this month.

Benderman's unit, the 3rd Forward Support Battalion, was leaving for Kuwait on Jan. 5. When commanders ordered him to deploy while they processed his objector application, he refused to show up for his flight.

He said he has his reasons, reflecting on time in Iraq.

Benderman told of bombed out homes and displaced Iraqis living in mud huts and drinking from mud puddles; mass graves in Khanaqin near the Iranian border where dogs fed off bodies of men, women and children.

He recalled his convoy passing a girl, no older than 10, on the roadside clutching a badly injured arm. Benderman said his executive officer refused to help because troops had limited medical supplies.

"Her arm was burned, third-degree burns, just black. And she was standing there with her mother begging for help," Benderman said. "That was an eye opener to seeing how insane it really is."

Now Benderman, a mechanic who has been reassigned to a non-deploying rear detachment unit, could face a court-martial. Fort Stewart officials have not decided whether to charge him.

Separately, he must convince commanders he is morally opposed to war in all forms, as Army regulations define conscientious objection, despite his lengthy military service and previous combat tour.

"If he went to Iraq and then comes back and says, `I'm now opposed to war,' the issue is are you opposed to all wars or just this one you don't want to go back to?" said Mark Stevens, a military defense lawyer and retired Marine Corps judge advocate. "He wasn't opposed to war two years ago, why is he opposed to it now?"

Benderman said the officer who took his objector notice dismissed him as a coward. His unit's chaplain offered little encouragement.

"You should have had the moral fortitude to deploy with us and see me here in Kuwait to begin your CO application," Army Chaplain Matt Temple said in a recent e-mail to Benderman. "You should be ashamed of the way you have conducted yourself. I certainly am ashamed of you."

Benderman's wife, Monica, said her husband hinted that he had doubts about taking part in the war in a letter he sent home that referenced scholars' belief that Iraq was home to the biblical Garden of Eden.

"He said, `Here I am in the Garden of Eden, and what am I doing here with a gun?"' she said.

Raised a Southern Baptist in Tennessee, Benderman keeps an open Bible on his living room table but said he's "more spiritual than religious." After going to Iraq, he picked up the Quran and was struck by the similarities between Islam and Christianity.

He returned in September 2003 after serving eight months in Iraq with the 4th Infantry Division from Fort Hood, Texas. As a mechanic who fixes Bradley armored vehicles, he said he never fired a weapon in combat.

Still, Benderman began questioning whether he could return to a war zone when he transferred to Fort Stewart in October 2003. He said he never mentioned his doubts to soldiers in his new unit, but trained with them for a year as they prepared for a second tour. By December, he had even packed his clothes and equipment for shipping overseas.

Benderman acknowledged that waiting more than a year, until right before deployment, may seem "out of the blue." But he insisted his decision came from long deliberation, not desperation.

"People say, `You're abandoning these soldiers that depend on you,' and so that weighs on you," he said. "But what's worse? Going over there and participating in war, or maybe doing something that can help people figure out that you don't have to go to war?"

01/17/05 04:51 EST

crusadewatcher posts,

"...dogs feeding off bodies in mass graves..."

I have often wondered why Muhammad regarded dogs in such a low manner.

Now I know why. Muhammad felt guilt as the feral dogs fed off the carcasses of his victims.

Instead of blaming himself for such barbaric crimes, he blamed Man's Best Friend.

No "Prophet" would ever condemn God's gift to man, that of the dog. Such a loyal and useful creature.

Only an anti-man prophet is capable of such absurdity.

Moe, first of all Christians also put low regard to dogs thats why people call each other bitches in a derogatory manner, The Quran says Muslims are allowed to have dogs, i like dogs and also have a one, and i know for a fact that it stinks up the house and keeps all its dirty fur lying around, that is why the Quran says to keep the dog outdoors not your home, As for Muhammad, he did not bomb his "victims" killing thousands.

I am not Catholic but the Arch Bishop is a brother in the Lord so I pray that he is released. How sad that in 2005 people exist that lust for human sacrifice and revel in death.

Raised a Southern Baptist in Tennessee, Benderman keeps an open Bible on his living room table but said he's "more spiritual than religious." After going to Iraq, he picked up the Quran and was struck by the similarities between Islam and Christianity.

notice these lines?

crusadewatcher says,

"...As for Muhammad, he did not bomb his "victims" killing thousands."

Because he didn't have the technology to do so. I believe you already know this.

Muhammad was a great leader for Arabic nationalism, but he was certainly not a prophet.

I have posted this before, but for you, I will post it again.

Muhammad was a great leader in line with Caesar and Napoleon, but ascribing such a leader with divine inspiration is nothing more than a "submission" to his will.

That is Islam. Submission to Muhammad's will.

Welcome to the religion of hate: Mohammadanism

And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth. (Genesis 1:26)

Us and Our implies without a doubt more than 1
1x1x1 = 1

So much for Moslems claiming to follow the Torah!

No Bar your religion says 1+1+1=3 for trinity, polytheist

1- GOD Almighty in Islam and the Bible:

The original name for GOD Almighty in Aramaic and Hebrew was indeed "Allah". Allah in Arabic and Aramaic means "The Supreme GOD". Yahweh or Jehovah in Hebrew mean "The Eternal". GOD Almighty's Names are Attributes of Him. They're all the same. They're not just names like "Osama" or "Todd". Jesus by the way used "Allah" when he preached in Aramaic. See the proofs.

GOD Changing His Mind (abrogation) in the Bible.

Allah Almighty's response to the pagan polytheists from the hindus, and trinitarians and others about the impossibility of having multiple GOD.

The 99 attributes of Allah Almighty.

Why does Allah Almighty refer to Himself as "We" in the Noble Quran?

The Mercy of Allah Almighty on Mankind, and our age of 40 wisdom in Islam. See why Allah Almighty is more forgiving to those who are under the age of 40, and how Science and Psychology proved that people under 40 are less mature and tend to make more irresponsible decisions (i.e., mistakes and sins).

Allah Almighty will not forgive the sins that are publicly disclosed and bragged about.

Why would God send the Gospel with His prophet Jesus, and then allow all of the disciples of Jesus to be misled by believing that Jesus died on the cross, and thus distort the original message of the Gospel?

Can GOD change His Mind? Why did He allow for the Bible to get corrupted? What wisdom is He trying to give us?

If birth and death are controlled by GOD, then why does He punish those who commit suicide?

Why does GOD give the arrogants and wrong-doers much power in life and takes it away from the good people?

How do you reconcile suffering with the portrayal of a great and loving God, Why war, why famine, why sorrow?

The GOD of the Bible gets drunk!

Does Allah Almighty stop creating?

2- The Absolute Oneness of GOD Almighty in the Bible:

The early Christians rejected Trinity. Early Christians had major problems and disagreements about who truly Jesus was and whether or not he got crucified or not.

Early Christians' Doctrines confirm Jesus DID NOT GET crucified. See proofs that the early Christians' scriptures during the 1st and 2nd centuries claimed that GOD Almighty Saved Jesus from crucifixion.

Jesus had no Divine Will according to the New Testament. How could he be our Creator?
Ten detailed sub sections in this article:
1- Jesus said he had no Divine Will.
2- Jesus' repetitive Prayers contradicted his very own teachings.
3- Jesus begged GOD Almighty for Mercy.
4- Jesus prostrated to GOD Almighty only once during his most desperate times! This is hypocrisy by the way.
5- GOD Almighty Created pain and death, and yet, Jesus feared them.
6- The GOD of the O.T. Punishes to death those who cursed HIS HOLY NAME. How could Jesus escape to Egypt from King Herod and still be this Mighty and Arrogant GOD?
7- In original Hebrew, "son of GOD" literally means "SERVANT OF GOD". See proofs.
8- What about the authority in Heaven and Earth that was given to Jesus?
9- None of Jesus' Miracles were unique in the Bible.
10- Conclusion.

Obvious mistranslations of the Hebrew Manuscripts. See proofs of alterations and deceptions done by the Jews and Christians to disprove Islam in the Bible.

Answering Trinity- A full proof from the Bible that Jesus is not GOD.

The absolute Oneness of GOD Almighty in the Bible's Old Testament.

Texts referring to GOD as "One, Alone, None Other, None Else".

Principles of Bible Interpretation about GOD Almighty.

The word "LORD" in the Bible referring to the Almighty GOD alone.

The word "Elohim" proves Trinity?

More on absolute Oneness of GOD Almighty in the Bible's Old Testament.

**** The "God" title in the Bible was given to others in the OT and NT. Answering Isaiah 9:6. The "El" (God) title that was given to Jesus in the Old Testament, and the "HOTHEOS" (God) title in the New Testament, were given to others before and after Jesus in the Bible. The only UNIQUE title that exists in the Bible is "Yahweh", which means "The Eternal".

Emanuel, Emmanuel, Yahshua, Yeshua, Yashua, Immanuel and Imanuel. These were all "Godly" names given to others before and after Jesus in the Bible. None of them is unique. Only "Yahweh" was GOD Almighty's Unique Name.

Answering Jeremiah 23:5-6: A big blow to Sam Shamoun's trinity nonsense existing in the Old Testament.

My rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's "Refuting Osama Abdallah on Jeremiah 23:5-6" article.

The Bible directly claims that ANY "Son of GOD" is a "God"! (Refutation to Jesus' being God meaning that he is GOD Almighty).

Does GOD saying "Let us create" prove Trinity? GOD saying "We" and "Us" doesn't prove Trinity.

Does GOD's spirit in Jesus prove that Jesus is GOD? Others had it too. GOD's Spirit came upon many others beside Jesus.

Jesus being at GOD Almighty's "Right Hand" is only SYMBOLIC and not literal in the Bible.

"Jesus is my lord and savior" actually CONTRADICTS the Old Testament. The Old Testament clearly talks about Believing in One GOD Almighty and doing Righteousness saving you. No need for mediators (Jesus or idols) between you and GOD Almighty, your Creator.

Did GOD Almighty really appear in A FORM OF A MAN to Abraham in Genesis 17 and 18 (specifically in Genesis 18:2)?

The figurative speech in the Bible proves that Jesus must not be MAGNIFIED to the level of the Creator!

for more on your god go to

http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac4.htm

crusadewatcher,

I find it interesting that you imply polytheism when the Qur'an is replete with US and WE.

Do you find Muhammad's creation to be a 'slight' ripoff of the Christian doctrine?

Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him:

The sections about Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him here are:

1- In the Bible.
2- Life, Family and Family Tree.
3- Responses to all of the false charges against our beloved Prophet. Long list of rebuttals. Please read thoroughly.
4- Prophecies and Miracles.
5- Other.

1- In the Bible:

Muhammad peace be upon him was foretold by the name in several Books and Gospels in the Bible. See also some Biblical Prophets proving Islam.

Islamic Fasting was predicted by Isaiah in the Bible.

The Bible and Islam agree that Jesus wasn't sent to all of Mankind and only Muhammad was.

2- Life, Family and Family Tree:

The Fruits of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him.

The life of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him.

Another detailed site about Muhammad's life peace be upon him.

Muhammad's family tree that shows his direct link with Ishmael peace be upon him.

Another family tree of Prophet Muhammad. A more advanced one.

Islam discourages Polygamy.

Our Prophet's marriages and the discourage of Polygamy in Islam.

Details about the history of Muhammad's wives peace be upon him.

A site that has a brief history about Muhammad's wives peace be upon them.

A brief history about Muhammad's children peace be upon them.

3- Responses to all of the false charges against our beloved Prophet:

Prophet Muhammad was not sinless.

Prophet Muhammad is a Murderer for KILLING the enemies? WHAT ABOUT THE BIBLE'S PROPHETS' MURDERS that were blessed by GOD? Cutting the hands and feet of the enemy in the Bible.

Rebuttal to the lie about Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him being always influenced by magic. The Prophet relied only on Allah Almighty to cure him. He could've used the "Nashra" treatment, but he chose not to. He waited until Allah Almighty cured him, because he wanted to teach the Muslims to rely only on Allah Almighty for cures, and not on superstitious acts.

Is Islam a superstitious religion? The practice was not a superstition, but rather a spit and insult on satan. Voodoo and superstition is actually found in the Bible.

Rebuttal to Quennel Gale's "Silly Sayings of the Prophet" article.

Rebuttal to Silas' "Muhammad, Islam and Terrorism" article.

My rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's "Muhammad's false Prophecies".

Rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's "Muhammad's false Prophecies" article by the Noorallah Web Site.

My rebuttal to Silas' "Comments on a Response to 'Muhammad's Suicide Attempts' " article.

Rebuttal to Silas' "Muhammad and Satan" article.

Rebuttal to Silas' "Muhammad and the Satanic Verses" article.

My rebuttal to Silas' "The Death of Muhammad" article.

My rebuttal to Silas' "Muhammad the Sinner" article.

Rebuttal to Silas: Was Muhammad a Sinner?

My rebuttal to Silas' "Muhammad and the Treaty of Hudaybiyya" article.

Aisha in Islam:

Let's discuss the age of Aisha being 9 when she married our Prophet:

1- See proofs from the Bible about little girls as young as 9 were married off and even sold off by their fathers as slave girls to men who were even older than their fathers.

2- See also irrefutable proofs that pedophilia and terrorism exist in the Bible. During the Mosaic times in the Bible's Old Testament, 3-year old slave girls were literally forced into sex under Moses' Orders and Command. You sometimes have to read things twice to believe them!

See also: Maiming of the enemies' bodies in the Bible. Cutting the hands and feet of the enemies in the Bible, and hanging their live bodies on trees until they DIE.

Also visit: X-Rated Pornography in the Bible.

Also visit: Fathers sticking their fingers into their daughters' vaginas before marriage in the Bible.

3- See also proofs how Aisha's parents were the ones who married her to our Prophet, and that no Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it was widely practiced. The reason no one objected was:

People used to have very short life-spans in Arabia. They used to live between 40 to 60 years maximum. So it was only normal and natural for girls to be married off at ages 9 or 10 or similar.

Marriage for young girls was widely practiced among Arabs back then, and even today in many third-world non-Muslim and Muslim countries.
Please visit: The age of Aisha, girls similar to her in the Bible, and unbelievable pedophilia against 3-year old slave babies in the pedophilic Bible.

Also visit: Why Muta (temporary) Marriage was allowed and why it was discontinued.

A picture and news paper article about a 9-year old girl from Thailand gave birth.

A 12-year old Christian girl getting married in Romania.

Prophet Muhammad taking revenges for himself and committing murders is a lie! Does Islam really encourage Muslims to take revenge? Absolutely Not!

The death of Abdullah bin Sarh.

Muhammad married his daughter in law?

Muhammad prescribed camel urine as medicine. See the Cutting of hands and feet of the enemy in the Bible. Also, today's headache medicines such as Aspirin, Tylenol, Advil and others use animal urines as part of their ingredients.

If Muhammad peace be upon him was fake?

Did Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him really claim that he knew when the Day of Judgement will come?

My response to "Muhammad didn't have witnesses to prove that he was truthful"

Muhammad the Womanizer?

Muhammad the Racist?

Did Prophet Muhammad really split the moon with his index finger?

Was Muhammad peace be upon him a Polytheist?

Was Muhammad a Pagan?! A rebuttal by brother Yishan Jufu.

Some Muslim fanatics are (believe it or not) guilty of polytheism!

Did Muhammad self-serve himself in the Noble Quran?

Did Prophet Muhammad really take 20% of all of the Muslims' booty gains?

Prophet Muhammad a double-faced hypocrite?

4- Prophecies and Miracles:

Prophecies and Miracles in Islam.

Scientific Miracles in the Noble Quran.

5- Other:

Non-Muslim Western and Far Eastern Philosophers' positive opinions about Muhammad peace be upon him.

Where in the Quran does it say that Muhammad was the last Prophet and Messenger of GOD?

Is Muhammad GOD or part of GOD in Islam?

Why did GOD Almighty wait 600 years to send Muhammad peace be upon him?

Did Prophet Muhammad really recognize the Bible as an error-free book?

Why did Muhammad take up arms and Christ didn't? Why did Islam spread by the sword if it were indeed a Religion of Truth, and Christianity didn't? See my response to this misunderstanding. Did you know that even Jesus killed his enemies in the Bible?

Did GOD send a Messenger for each nation on earth before?

Can Muhammad or any other Prophet make a Prophecy? Simple refutation to the "Quran only" Muslims.

Muhammad isn't the "Beast" in Revelation 13! It's the satanic Western (mostly Christians) sexually open societies!

Mostly links to disprove all your assertations in

http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac4.htm

GOD says "Let us create".... in the book of Genesis: (Does "us" mean GOD and Jesus?)

It is unfortunate that Trinitarians try their best to try to prove that Jesus was GOD himself even if the cost is corrupting the real meanings of the Old Testament. In Hebrew, Arabic and Aramaic, the word "us" can be used to magnify a person. If a Chief Executive Officer of a company in the Middle East wants to say for instance "I decided to do the following....", then he would say it "We decided to do the following...." even though he would be referring to himself only.

If the word "us" in the book of Genesis is referring to Trinity as Trinitarians believe, then how come people back then were not Trinitarians? How come the concept of Trinity was born 2300 years after the book of Genesis? More than 1/3 of The Holy Quran (The Muslims' Holy Book) talks about Allah Almighty (GOD). Allah Almighty in numerous verses says "We" about himself. Muslims today believe in One GOD and don't believe in Trinity. Jews also believe in One GOD and not in Trinity, even though in their Holy Books such as the Talmud, GOD refers to Himself as "We" and not "I".

My dear friend, you must first study the languages of Hebrew, Arabic and Aramaic before you (as a Trinitarian) start corrupting the Old Testament's real meanings. I think this would be a sin !.

Further more regarding GOD using the word "Us" in the Bible:

From www.jewsforjudaism.org:

Question : God said: "Let us make man in our image . . ." (Genesis 1:26) and "Come, let us go down, and there confound their language" (Genesis 11:7). To whom does the "us" refer?

Answer: Trinitarian Christians maintain that Genesis 1:26 and Genesis 11:7 are prooftexts of an alleged tri-unity god, but this claim is erroneous. The inference that "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26) refers to the plurality of God is refuted by the subsequent verse, which relates the creation of man to a singular God, "And God created man in His image" (Genesis 1:27). In this verse the Hebrew verb "created" appears in the singular form. If "let us make man" indicates a numerical plurality, it would be followed in the next verse by, "And they created man in their image." Obviously, the plural form is used in the same way as in the divine appellation 'Elohim, to indicate the all-inclusiveness of God's attributes of authority and power, the plurality of majesty. It is customary for one in authority to speak of himself as if he were a plurality. Hence, Absalom said to Ahithophel, "Give your counsel what we shall do" (2 Samuel 16:20). The context shows that he was seeking advice for himself' yet he refers to himself as "we" (see also Ezra 4:16-19).

crusadwatcher,

Please post your thoughts, not some copy/paste quote from some agenda driven website.

Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

The Bible and Hadiths (Sayings of Prophet Muhammad) were written in a 3000-year and 200-year span respectively. They both contain Truth and falsehood in them:

Problems with the proper Arabic language and the large quantity of narrations:

In Arabic, only original Arabs and those who speak proper (not slang) Arabic fluently, understand and appreciate the fact that the words are very minimum and their meanings are very maximum. It is true and not a deception or innovation by translators to English that a single Arabic word can and would be translated to 3-5 English words! The reason for this is because in Arabic (and this is part of the complexity in grammar, art and poetry of the Arabic language) meanings and not necessarily actual words can be all put together in one word. In Arabic, a word is not original. There are of course "root" words, but in most proper Arabic words, the actual word is not original; meaning that depending on the grammar, letters (of meaning) can be added to or taken from it to add or take from its meaning and intention. This can change the entire meaning of the whole word and sentence.

That is why Arabic poetry is historically known to be a very complex and advanced one.

Having said all of this, in the case of the hadiths, given the fact that there exists "weak/doubtful ones", and what is considered as "strong and reliable ones", it is difficult to know for sure if a single hadith was told as is 100% unchanged (intentionally or not intentionally) by the Prophet peace be upon him. One word taken off from the hadith and the whole meaning can and would be changed to something else.

For those "reliable or strong" hadiths, their sources are doubtful. I have no doubt that the companions of the Prophet may Allah Almighty bless their souls did not intentionally commit forgery or lies. But for one such as Abu Huraira to narrate thousands upon thousands of hadiths is preposterous! Given the complexity and sensitivity of the Arabic language, it is extremely vital that every word be included in the narration. I find it impossible to believe that Abu Huraira and many others like him were able to narrate everything perfectly in its original text.

That is why I accept the hadiths that are linked to the Noble Quran as the Truth and reject the others.

Also, there is no proof what so ever that all of the accepted hadiths of today were all written during the Prophet's time. Some or even many of them were probably written down from individuals for personal use, but the thousands of hadiths (I was told close to 2 million hadiths!!) that exist today were not possibly all written during the Prophet's time.

I only accept the hadiths that have a direct relationship to the Noble Quran, such as explaining how to Pray, fast, etc....

Example about my own name to simplify things:

Take "Osama" for example. First of all, Osama in Arabic is written as "Osamat" with the "t" silent. The "t" however is not always silent, and it can be used to give meanings and intentions to the name "Osama". Osama can be written as "Osamatun", "Osamatan", "Osamatin", "Osamata", "Osamati", "Osamato". The punctuations added to the "t" cause for any of these names to be pronounced.

When writing positively about "Osama", such as "Osama bin Zaid", the leader who defeated the Romans in one of the battles, these punctuations are added to his name for praising. Unfortunately, I am not an expert in Arabic, nor can I explain in deep details about proper Arabic, but I know that use of punctuations IMPROPERLY can result in insulting the individual. I can write negatively about a name using punctuations in their proper places.

THE REASON WHY THE NOBLE QURAN IS SO PERFECT IS BECAUSE its grammar was constructed in a very complex way, and the Arabic words were not only original words, but were put together uniquely in an excellent artistic fashion that no Arabic poet could match up to back then when Allah Almighty challenged the Arabs to come up with a "SURAH LIKE IT".

One last point about the hadiths being "Al-thikr". Moses' (peace be upon him) Torah was also called "Al-thikr" in the Noble Quran:

"Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message [Al-thikr] (given to Moses): My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth." (The Noble Quran, 21:105)"

"In the past We granted to Moses and Aaron the criterion [Al-Furqan] (for judgment), and a Light and a Message [Thikr] for those who would do right,- (The Noble Quran, 21:48)"

"We certainly gave the Book [Al-Kitab] to Moses, but differences arose therein: had it not been that a word had gone forth before from thy Lord, the matter would have been decided between them, but they are in suspicious doubt concerning it. (The Noble Quran, 11:110)"

"And remember We gave Moses the Scripture and the Criterion [Al-Furqan] (Between right and wrong): There was a chance for you to be guided aright. (The Noble Quran, 2:53)"

Note: The Noble Quran has the following Holy Names: Al-Quran, Al-Thikr, Al-Furqan and Al-Kitab.

When Allah Almighty said that He sent down "Al-thikr" to Muhammad to explain what's revealed to the people, it referred to the Noble Quran (the current Al-thikr) explaining the previous "Al-Thikr", which is the Truthful parts of the Bible; those parts that agree with the Noble Quran.

Prophet Moses' (peace be upon him) Law or Torah was called "Al-Thikr", "Al-Furqan" and "Al-Kitab" in the Noble Quran. It is without doubt that when Allah Almighty called the Noble Quran as "Al-Thikr", He meant for it to only include the Noble Quran and NOT the Quran and hadiths during Prophet Muhammad's time, because the hadiths today contain ample corruptions in them, while the Noble Quran is Perfect:

"We have, without doubt, sent down the Message [The Noble Quran]; and We will assuredly Guard it (from corruption). (The Noble Quran, 15:9)"

"Nay, this is a Glorious Quran, (inscribed) in a Tablet Preserved! (The Noble Quran, 85:21-22)"

Muslims today do not conflict with each others about the contents of the original Arabic Noble Quran. But they have a great deal of problems with the hadiths and their validities and authenticities.

Most of the Hadiths were documented in the far east and not in Arabia:

The Hadith references mostly used on the internet today come from Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim and Sunan Abu Dawud and some other volumes. The word "Sahih" means "authentic" in Arabic, which is quite misleading in this case. In general, the Hadiths that come from Sahih Bukhari and Muslim are more authentic and Truthful than the ones from Sunan Abu Dawud. If however, a Hadith from Sunan Abu Dawud matches Hadith(s) from the Sahih ones or the Noble Quran, then it becomes valid. Otherwise, you are highly advised to not trust it.

You see, unlike the Noble Quran where it was documented on the spot as it was revealed from Allah Almighty, the Hadiths including the "Sahih" ones were documented in a 200-year span. Take the "Bukhari" hadiths for instance. The word word "bukhari" is derived from the root word "bukhara" which is located in the far east in Afghanistan:

"We now come to the Iron Gate which corresponds exactly to the Quranic description, and has the best claim to be connected with Alexander's story. It is near another Derbend in Central Asia, Hissar District, about 150 miles southeast of Bukhara......."

(www.answering-christianity.com/iron_gates.htm)

The Muslims did not reach these lands until many years after they had defeated the Persians and Romans in many battles that took place many years after the death of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. So to say that all of the hadiths (which there are 2 million of them) were documented during the Prophet's time is clear foolishness.

Sahih Bukhari was the first volume to be compiled:

The Hadiths (Sayings of Prophet Muhammad) were documented 100s of years after his death. The "Sahih Bukhari" or "Authentic Bukhari" in English was the first volume to be compiled. Bukhari is not an Arabic name! Bukhari is derived from the word "Bukhara" (As I proved with quote in the sub section above), which is a city in Afghanistan. For anyone who knows the Islamic history, this means that the Muslims spread Islam to the pagan Arabs, established the Islamic State in Arabia, then fought the Persians (Iranians) and the Romans; invaded the Persians and crushed the Romans, then fought the Hindus in Hindustan, invaded much of their lands such as "Pakistan", "Afghanistan", and much of the Indian territories, convert people there to Islam, and then Brother Bukhari appeared from his home town, Bukhara and decided to compile the Hadiths of "Sahih Bukhari".

Are these narrations all 100% perfect and reliable? Any person with the least atom of a brain would say no. I am not saying that all of the Hadiths must be rejected. But for us to day to have close to 2,000,000 of them is quite ridiculous, because they can't all have been written down during our Prophet's times in Arabia. Most of the Hadiths' chains of narrations today have 10s of narrators in them. In the Hadith books, you would see something like the following:

"About such and such, that he heard his father say that such and such said, that he heard such and such say, that he heard such and such say, etc...." Most of the narrations' links have tons of narrators in them, many times more than 10, and these people would be generations after each others! In other words, they're not people at the same age or the same group. And the worst dilemma of all, is that many of these chain of narrations have broken links in them, meaning, that two or three generations are missing in the chain!

Many of the hadiths were also documented during political conflicts' times:

Also, a large percentage of the hadiths were also documented during the political conflicts that took place among Muslims, where some Hadith(s) claim that a group of Arabs for instance were better than others, which totally contradicts the Noble Quran in 49:13, where Allah Almighty said that the best among Mankind are the most in righteousness:

"O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). (The Noble Quran, 49:13)"

Important: Also, many hypocrites from the Jews and Christians at that time tried to insert poison and corruption into Islam like they did to their Bible. There is a term in Arabic that we use called "The Israelite Hadiths", which is usually referring to hadiths that are highly doubtful and were believed made up by the hypocrites who embraced Islam untruthfully just to destroy it. Allah Almighty warned us from these hypocrites:

"A section of the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) say: Believe in the morning what is revealed to the believers (Muslims), but reject it at the end of the day; perchance they may (themselves) turn back (from Islam). (The Noble Quran, 3:72)"

So Muslims please beware of the Hadiths as you are with the Bible and always compare them to the Noble Quran for validity and integrity check. Similar to the Hadiths, the 66 books of the Bible were documented in a 3000-year span, and they were selected from 24,000 books. So the Bible too contains the Truth and the man-made corruption and falsehood in it. Please see the proof from the Bible's own Theologians and Historians claims and Bible's History documentations. We Muslims believe that the parts of the Bible that agree with the Noble Quran are the closest to the Truth. The same must be applied to the Hadiths!

The only doctrine that Allah Almighty promised to protect from man's corruption and falsehood was the Noble Quran. Allah Almighty said:

"We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly Guard it (from corruption). (The Noble Quran, 15:9)"

"Nay, this is a Glorious Quran, (inscribed) in a Tablet Preserved! (The Noble Quran, 85:21-22)"

The Bible:

Neither the Hadiths nor the Bible were promised to be personally protected by Allah Almighty Himself. That is why you see conflicts among Christians as to which books and gospels are valid and which are not. The same thing is with the Hadiths among Muslims. But almost 100% of the 1.4 billion Muslim population world-wide agree on the entire Noble Quran, except for a cult called the "Submitters" who disagree on two Noble Verses only, 9:128-129, and they don't even form 1 million people world-wide. They had been refuted at Answering the Islamic Cults. Anyway, so everything that you read or hear from religious claims must match the Noble Quran or else you must immediately and unquestionably discard it.

Again, please visit Why did GOD Almighty allow for the Bible to get corrupted?

Did Prophet Muhammad recognize the Bible as an error-free book?

What is the best way to convert a Christian to Islam?

Obvious mistranslations of the Hebrew Manuscripts. See proofs of alterations and deceptions done by the Jews and Christians to disprove Islam in the Bible.

Why does Islam consider the "brutal verses" in the Bible as corrupt?

This section is just an example of how we Muslims refuse many parts in the Bible. Let's look at what Allah Almighty said to the People of Israel in the Noble Quran:

"On that account: We ordained For the Children of Israel That if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came To them Our Messengers With Clear Signs, yet, Even after that, many Of them continued to commit Excess in the land. (The Noble Quran, 5:32)"

In this Noble Verse we see how Allah Almighty in the Noble Quran honors the value of a human life. Whether the person is a believer or not, his life as an innocent person is still sacred and must not be unjustly violated.

This Noble Verse, although is mentioned in the Noble Quran, it was sent for the People of Israel before the Muslims. When we compare it to the brutal and unmerciful verses in the Bible, we see a clear contradiction. Let's look at an example in the Bible:

"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. (From the NIV Bible, Numbers 31:17)"

"And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee. (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 20:13-14)"

When a Muslim reads the above examples in the Bible and compare it to what Allah Almighty said to the People of Israel in the Noble Quran, he is left with a clear contradiction. How can Allah Almighty value the innocent life of the human being and say that if you save a single person it is like you saved the entire people, and at the same time he commands His followers to kill all of the innocent children and women who weren't guilty of anything in the Bible?

Why should I as a Muslim trust the Bible, when in the introduction above the Bible itself clearly admits that it had been corrupted by man's alterations?

Please visit Contradictions and Proofs of Historical Corruptions in the Bible.

The original Bible was lost! See comments from the commentary of the NIV Bible (one of the most used Bibles world wide) itself admitting that most of the Books and Gospels of the Bible are corrupted. No one ever claimed ownership of the current Books and Gospels. The owners/writers are unknown.

Obvious mistranslations from the Hebrew Manuscripts to English. See proofs of alterations and deceptions done by the Jews and Christians to disprove Islam in the Bible.

Missionary Traps for Muslims:

by Macksood Aftab

Managing Editor of The Islamic Herald

The Islamic Herald, April 1996

Part 1: Faith and Works

One of the basic arguments raised by non-Muslims, especially Christians, against Islam concerns the concept of salvation. They say that in Christianity, one is saved by faith, whereas in Islam one must earn their salvation through good deeds. Unfortunately, many Muslims fall into the trap of defending the position imposed on them by these non-Muslims. This then provides the Christians with a basis for their entire Jesus-Father-Crucifixion-Salvation framework. They then go on to argue that salvation is a gift from God that cannot be earned. But if the true Islamic concept is made clear, the Christian has no basis to attack Islam.

Many times, Muslims fail to realize that the Islamic concept of salvation is not based upon good deeds, but is based primarily upon faith. In the dozens of times Allah Almighty talks in the Quran about salvation, he always states, "Those who believe and do good deeds." Belief is always mentioned before deeds or works. When one converts to Islam, one does not do it by doing some good work but rather through realizing and believing that there is but one God and Muhammad is his last messenger. Non-Muslims may perform good works as well, but what sets them apart from Muslims is their lack of iman, or belief. The reason that the good works of the non-believers are worthless in the hereafter is because of their disbelief. Unless a person's iman or aqeedah is not correct, all his good deeds are worthless. One of the more popular hadiths of the Prophet (peace be upon him) states, "All actions are based upon intentions," implying that the purpose, intent, or iman behind your action is what you get rewarded for; the actual action is really a consequence of the belief.

Another hadith (saying from Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him) states, "A man came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and asked, 'When will the day of judgment come?' The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied, 'What have you prepared for the judgment day that you are so concerned for it?' He replied, 'I do not have any good deeds in my account, but I do have one thing: I love Allah and His Messenger (peace be upon him).' The Prophet (peace be upon him) then said, 'In that case, do not worry; you will be with those whom you love.'" (Agreed Upon). This saying from Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him also confirms the Islamic position of placing aqeedah (faith) and belief before actions. For example, Allah Almighty says in various parts of the Quran, "The believers you will find praying..." He does not say the people who are praying are believers. It is the belief that brings about the action, but the converse is not always true. Another hadith (saying) of the Prophet (peace be upon him) states, "Unless one loves Allah and Allah's Messenger more than one's own self his iman is not complete."

Part 2: The Bible

Another misunderstanding Muslims often fall into concerns the Bible. Christian missionaries in almost every discussion of the Quran assert that the Quran asks Muslims to believe in the Bible as a revelation of God. Many Muslims tend to fall into this trap by saying that "we believe in the Bible as revealed book." Once the Muslim accepts this fact, the evangelist can point out that the Bible contradicts the Quran and that since the Bible has precedence over the Quran and since Muslims are required to believe in it, it therefore logically follows that the Bible is right and the Quran is wrong. But the Quran says no such thing.

There is no reference to the Bible in the Quran whatsoever. The Quran mentions the Taurat (Old Testament) and the Injil (New Testament). The Taurat is the book given to prophet Moses. This the equivalent of the Torah/Pentateuch of the Jews and Christians, since much of it was not written by prophet Moses. And the Taurat is definitely not the Old Testament since the OT includes dozens of books attributed to other prophets before Jesus. The Injil is translated as the Gospel revealed to prophet Jesus. This is not the New Testament.

The New Testament is a collection of 4 biographies of Christ, 27 epistles of St. Paul, and other books on the lives and adventures on the followers of Christ. There is no record of a book revealed to Jesus. Perhaps the closest to it are the words of Jesus himself, which constitutes less than 10% of the NT. Therefore to say that Christians changed the Bible is an inaccurate statement, and can cause trouble in a discussion, because the Christian can then ask questions such as: Who changed the Bible? When exactly was it changed? How do you know it was changed if you don't have a copy of the original? The Bible, or at least the New Testament, cannot be an altered copy of the Injil because it is a completely different book.

In fact, the original Bible or New Testament (the very first one) did not correspond to the Injil, Taurat, or Zabur in the first place. It doesn't matter how unreliably it was transmitted; the Bible does not correspond to the Quranic Injil.

It is not that the Christians have changed the original, but rather they have the wrong book, altogether. The words of Christ are possibly the closest thing to the Injil, but if some of them don't agree with the Noble Quran, then we don't take them. The recently discovered Gospel of Thomas, which is nothing but a list of sayings of Jesus, is even closer to the Islamic concept of Injil. Therefore, it should be kept in mind in discussion with Christians that the Bible has not been changed, but rather the original documents chosen as the word of God were incorrect.

Goethe:

"If this be Islam, do we not all live in Islam?"

(Writing in the 1770s)

What is the best way to convert a Christian to Islam?

Please visit What is the best way to convert a Christian to Islam?

Further sites to research:

Obvious mistranslations of the Hebrew Manuscripts. See proofs of alterations and deceptions done by the Jews and Christians to disprove Islam in the Bible.

Muhammad peace be upon him in the Bible.

Contradictions and Proofs of Historical Corruptions in the Bible.

The original Bible was lost! See comments from the NIV Bible itself admitting to this fact.

History of man's corruption in the Bible.

The blessed Jesus in Islam.

Answering Trinity.

Ask me any question.

What is the Wisdom of Islam?

Why choose Islam as your Religion?

Why did GOD Almighty allow for the Bible to get corrupted?

Did Prophet Muhammad recognize the Bible as an error-free book?

How can I convert to Islam?

What is the best way to convert a Christian to Islam?

http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac4.htm

The last time i posted my thoughts i got kicked out of this website

crusadewatcher,

Do you believe that the posters on this site are actually reading your copy/pastes?

They are not. There are those who believe in originality.

Your posts are nothing but disseminations of a socio-political agenda.

As boring as the Marxist pamphlets of the past. But, they will be dealt with.

Mankind as it is has no interest in propogating such tripe. Even the Chinese won't put up with it.

Dear sweet crusadewatcher,
if you islamic types couldn't win the Hindus over to your side in your prime, despite killing a 100 million, or was it just 50 million, Hindus, why do think you have any hope today ?

There are one billion Hindus who know their history well, and remember the slaughters committed by your peace loving islamic types - they, on their own, would be pleased to take you on, and if they do, Christians will stand with them as will another billion Confucians, not to speak of a few million Jews, Janes, Zoroastrians, Pagans, 100 million Buddhists...oh, the Bahais have a thing or two to settle with you as well...

It looks to me as if islam is going to reap what it has sown. Sadly, a lot of good people, muslims, will go down too; muslims who never understood how immoral and destructive an operating manual their messenger left them.

To be charitable, islam needs a rethink, at the very least.

We, the non-islamic world, the 80%, the vast majority, are not looking to hurt muslims; islam, however, seems intent on a collision.

As a muslim, and i'm sure a well intentioned person, please try to understand that islam will lose in any collision.

Please also try to understand that islam has nothing to interest us, nothing at all.

islam, to a Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Jew, Pagan, Confucian, is of no interest. You have nothing to teach us, nothing to show us. Nothing we see of value, and much we see amiss.

crusadewatcher arrogantly says,

"The last time i posted my thoughts..."

These are NOT your thoughts you automaton.

The British couldnt convert the hindues either after killing millions more hindus (especially after the Sepoy Rebellion) and making them "dhimmis" in their own country, and yes the Muslims did have success in converting hindus as did some christians, how do i know? My Mom came from India, my father is Bengali (a former Indian territory).

India

Hindu 81.3%, Muslim 12%, Christian 2.3%, Sikh 1.9%, other groups including Buddhist, Jain, Parsi 2.5% (2000) from the CIA World Fact Book

automaton?, LOL, face it Moe most of what u got came from Anti-Islamic website like answering-islam.org and others, u did not come up with these comments on your own

crusadewatcher says,

"automaton?, LOL, face it Moe most of what u got came from Anti-Islamic website like answering-islam.org and others, u did not come up with these comments on your own" (SIC)

Not likely my friend. I have never visited any of those websites, but I am a student (possibly an imam) of the Qur'an.

It is sad to see that you are not.

Hindu persecution of Christians
23 Jan 1999 - Graham Staines, an Australian Christian missionary aged 55 years, and his two sons, aged 8 and 10, were burned to death in the state of Orissa by members of Hindutva Parivar, a Hindu nationalist group. Staines was accused of making derogatory remarks about Hinduism, fraudulently converting local tribals, sexually assaulting a villagers wife and slaughtering cows, the most sacred animal to Hindus.

In Sept. 2002 eight Christian missionaries were beaten during worship services by Hindu fundamentalists.

In Oct. 2002 the governor of the Indian state of Tamil Nadu issued an ordinance aimed at preventing people from converting to Christianity, on the pretext that such conversions occur due to fraud. Christians may be sentenced to up to three years in jail if convicted of such a crime.

However, local Hindus have often criticized missionaries for exploiting the impoverished condition of non-Christians to convert them. In several cases, Christian pastors have publicly made derogatory remarks about Hinduism. In other cases, foreign missionaries have denied medical treatment and food aid to Hindus who refuse to convert to Christianity.

It should be noted that the majority of instances of persecutions of Christians in India do not involve the native Saint Thomas Christians, but rather Latin Rite Catholics and Protestants.

Christian News Source with several articles on persecution of Christians in India (http://www.csw.org.uk/Newsarchive.asp?country=India)

Indians Against Christian Aggression (http://www.kentaxrecords.com/iaca/index.php)

There are one billion Hindus who know their history well, and remember the slaughters committed by your peace loving islamic types - they, on their own, would be pleased to take you on, and if they do, Christians will stand with them as will another billion Confucians, not to speak of a few million Jews, Janes, Zoroastrians, Pagans, 100 million Buddhists...oh, the Bahais have a thing or two to settle with you as well...
dby

Stand with Hindus? they are no more tolerant to Christians than to other religions

read this

INDIAN CHRISTIANS ATTACKED IN ONGOING CAMPAIGN OF VIOLENCE

Indian Christians continue to be attacked in India on an almost daily basis.

On October 5 two Indian missionary pastors serving with Gospel for Asia (GFA) were beaten and kidnapped by a group of militant Hindus in Chattisgarh state, central India.

The two, named Tulsiram and Vijay, were preparing to baptize 32 new believers when they were attacked. After beating the two missionaries, the attackers dragged them out of the village and took them to an unknown location. It is reported that the kidnapping was part of a plan to stop them from continuing ministry in the village.

Vijay managed to escape and ran nearly 25 miles to tell the GFA district leader about the incident. The 32 believers whom they were planning to baptise were the first converts of his ministry in the village, so the attack seems to have been deliberately timed.

After being badly beaten and threatened, Tulsiram was released the next day.

At the end of September, a group of Hindu militants in India's southern state of Karnataka threatened to kill an Indian pastor in front of his family and to torture church members as part of a widespread campaign against missionaries.

Pastor Kumar had received threats from anti-Christian groups over the past few weeks in the village where he and his family arrived two years ago to preach the gospel and to establish a church. The militants had also threatened that anyone who went to the church - including the 40 new believers over the last two years - would be killed.

On October 1 they threatened Pastor Kumar that if he went to church to lead the service that Sunday (October 3) they would kill him in front of his family. In the end the pastor and the other believers, following police advice, stayed away from the church and met elsewhere in secret.

These attacks follow other disturbing incidents in late September. On September 25 a group of nuns and priests from Mother Teresa’s order, the Missionaries of Charity, were attacked by suspected militant Hindus in the state of Kerala, southern India.

They had been visiting a slum area on the outskirts of the city of Kozhikode to bring food for the inhabitants.

They were attacked by a small group suspected of belonging to Hindu militant groups. The group was shouting slogans in support of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which has links with Hindu militant groups such as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

According to reports, the City Police Commissioner confirmed he believed that RSS and BJP activists were behind the attack. Although the culprits escaped at the time, by October 7 the police had made 12 arrests in connection with the attacks.

The RSS issued a statement denying any involvement. It did, however, take advantage of the situation to demand a probe into alleged conversions by Christian groups – even though conversions are allowed by the Indian constitution.

These two incidents follow on from a spate of others around India over the last months. Despite victory for the Congress-led coalition in May’s general election, which many believed would be beneficial for non-Hindus, attacks from those believed to be Hindu militants have continued unabated.

Sam Paul of the All India Christian Council said: “The previous BJP-led regime had been indifferent to the attacks on the minorities by groups like the RSS. This encouraged those groups to continue with their attacks. The current United Progressive Alliance government has promised to take action to prevent such attacks, and we are hopeful that it will do so”.

Mervyn Thomas, Chief Executive of CSW, added: "These attacks show that Christians and other minorities are still not safe in parts of India. The new Congress-led government has talked about bringing in a new law to give further protection for the minorities; incidents like these demonstrate the importance of such legislation".

NOTES TO EDITORS:

On August 28, also in Kerala, a Roman Catholic priest, Father Job Chittilappilly, was killed. He had been threatened in the period leading up to the attack by phone calls because of his alleged spreading of the Christian message and his pastoral activities among Hindu families. The police ruled out robbery as a motive because nothing was taken. The crime investigators said the murder was likely to have been a deliberate execution. A 25-year-old man later arrested in connection with the murder is reported to have strong links to Hindu militant groups.

On August 22, armed assailants attacked and beat up a Father John Sunderam, in Jharkhand state. The attack left him in a coma. Another priest, Father Albanus Tirkey, was hospitalised.

On August 26, a group of 300 Hindu militants stormed the Church of Our Lady of Charity in the town of Raikia, in Orissa state. The attackers burst into the church and burned Bibles while tearing down the Tabernacle, destroying statues of saints, and damaging musical instruments, doors, windows, and other church property. Police were present but did not intervene.

Four young Christian women from a Bible college were attacked whilst handing out Gospel tracts in Orissa on August 13. Their attacker then tried to kidnap the wife of the pastor in charge of the team. When this failed, he went to the police and filed a false complaint against the Christians, leading the authorities to arrest the pastor and all four women. They were later released.

On September 12 a group of Hindu militants attacked a church in Udupi in Karnataka state. They attacked the Christians who had gathered to worship. Four Christians, including the church leader, Pastor Gopinathan, were injured and had to be taken to hospital. The militants also caused extensive damage inside the church.

On September 29 in Kerala, suspected militants vandalised the Saint Thomas Mar Thoma Church in the state capital Trivandrum.

Other minority communities have also suffered from violence recently. On August 28, six Muslims were hurt in blasts at two mosques in western India as unidentified men on motorcycles hurled bombs in two different locations in Maharashtra.

HomeNewsResourcesProjectsJoin UsAbout CSWGive OnlineLatest NewsVisit ReportsUK NewsCampaignsCountry Reports 2003Prisoner ListLetter writing guideCountry ProfilesCSW magazineCSW Videos/BooksPrayer DiaryChurch ResourcesAbout the UNTestimoniesYouthNepalRussiaBurmaJoin UsCSW EventsTell us what you thinkContact UsBoards Of ManagementCSW PartnersCSW LinksJob VacanciesThe Way We WorkSite map

crusadewatcher
I see you enjoy the comforts that only western society can provide to the Moslem.
Allah hasn’t the will or the time to improve any Moslems countries.
Ironic that you love Islam so much, yet chose to live in the west!
Every notice that Moslem counties are always way behind us (apes and pigs).

Well if us (apes and pigs) are smarter than Moslems, what does that leave you?

crusadewatcher thinks that “monotheism” means one god at a time!
(Mohammed then Allah)

No Mohammadanism, Know Peace

Bar,

I do enjoy living in Western Society, but i did not choose to live here i was born here, i deeply respect the tolerance in this country i have never been treated badly, as for other Muslim countries, yes there are many problems with them, i acknowlege that, but their problems do not come from Islam, it comes from their leaders, and puppet governments set up by imperialist western nations, And did i overwhelm you so much with my argument that u have to make up a lie? Mohammad is not the God in Islam, that is absolutly a false statement and a lie, he never told his followers to worship him, he is just a prophet and messenger like all the other ones before him ie. Jesus, Abraham, Noah Adam, etc, and he is also the last prophet.

The original Bible was lost!
Posted by: crusadewatcher

Did they really lose the whole thing batman?

When did they lose it, you caped crusadewatcher?

Bar since u really sound interested i will give u a long explanation of the bible's history

Introduction: We must first of all know that the entire Bible is corrupted and unreliable and is mostly filled with man-made laws and corruption! GOD Almighty Said: "`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)"

The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"

In either translation, we clearly see that the Jews had so much corrupted the Bible with their man-made cultural laws, that they had turned the Bible into a lie!

See Also 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. The Book of Jeremiah which came approximately 826 years after did indeed confirm this corruption.

Just who were the real authors of the Bible?

The sections of this article are:

1- Just who were the real authors of the Bible?
2- So who wrote the Bible then? Were they really the original Prophets and Disciples?
3- The New Testament was written in the 3rd century by Constantine and his church by their own words.
4- The Roman Catholic Encyclopedia admits that the Bible had been "altered".
6- Contradictions in historical claims and accounts.
7- Conclusion.

Note: Please also visit my My response to Quennel Gale's rebuttal to this article.

The quotes in green below are from the NIV Bible's commentary. Before each Book/Gospel, there are few pages explaining the history of it. I was shocked to see that most of today's Bible's Books and Gospels are doubtful and unreliable. I will start with the New Testament first, and then the Old Testament second. The bibliography of the NIV Bible that I used is listed at the end of this article.

After thoroughly reading this article, I would like you to answer the following questions:

1- Is all of the Bible GOD's Divine Revelations?
2- Did the Prophets of GOD really write the Bible of today?
3- Is the Bible perfect?
4- Did man indeed corrupt the Bible?
5- Is the Bible of today reliable?

If your answer is no to most of or all of the above questions except for #4, then allow me to say that your faith has serious problems!

You be the Judge: After all of the evidence provided in the article, should I as a non-Christian take the Bible as the word of GOD Almighty?

Exposing the New Testament's historical corruptions

The Gospel of Mark:

"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1488)"

So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not. And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?

I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!

Further regarding this Gospel, we read the following commentary about Mark 16:9-20:

"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"

This quote raises a very serious issue here. First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel". Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it. The issue of Mark 16:9-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying.

Removing Mark 16:9-20 is quite appreciated by me personally (to be quite honest with you), because it prevents people from dying from snake bites. But however, the serious issue of man's corruption of the Bible remains.

We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful. The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc... It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man. Let alone considering it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.

If John Mark wasn't the one who wrote Mark 16:9-20, then who did? And how can you prove the ownership of the other person? Let alone proving that it was GOD Almighty's Revelation. And as we saw in the first quote above, we don't even know that John Mark was indeed the one who wrote the so called "Gospel of Mark".

To say the least in our case here, we now have enough evidence to discard the entire Gospel of Mark from the Bible, because you can't take bits and pieces of it and say some of it belongs to him and some of it doesn't! Let alone considering the entire corrupted Gospel as the True Living Word of GOD Almighty, which is a complete blasphemy.

Please visit A dangerous forgery was inserted at the end of the so-called "Gospel of Mark".

Here is an email that I received from a Christian regarding Mark 16:17-18:

From: R. Mercer
To: truthspeaks@answering-christianity.com
Subject: I Totally Agree
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 13:41:57 -0700

"What credibility does Christianity have when it scriptures are littered
with such dangerous and obvious forgeries?"

You summed it up very well on your web page. That is my question
entirely. Just what are we to believe? If forgeries have been proven to
exist in the Bible, then how many more must there be? What about the
chapters and verses we all guide our whole life/styles by? Are they
forgeries, too?

This verse in Mark 16:17-18, has always bothered me. I have, and
still do believe the rest of that passage (laying on of hands, healing
the sick,...), so how can that part of the passage be true when the
serpent part is forged?

I know the part on drinking any poison says "IF", but the part on
taking up serpents says "SHALL", which has always been a problem for me
to believe. Imagine us all being forced to take up serpents in order to
serve God.

On the other hand, if this was forged, then that creates an even
bigger concern for me. Not knowing what text in our Bible is authentic
and what is not.

Thanks for letting me take up so much of your time. Like I said
before, this passage always bothered me, probably more so than any other.

Thanks, once again. Good Day.

The Book of Acts:

"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)"

So based on some conclusion, you're willing to die for defending the idea that the Book of Acts was the True Word of GOD Almighty? If the book was inspired by GOD Almighty, then how come it wasn't mentioned in the book itself to help us filter it out from the many other "Satanic false books"? Are we sure that this book too is not a man-made Satanic book?

After all, its just a conclusion, isn't it?

Beside, what evidence are they talking about?! The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus. So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering it as the True Living Word of GOD.

Please visit: Was Jesus crucified on a tree (according to Peter), cross (according to others), or never got crucified (according to Islam)?

None of Jesus' disciples witnessed the crucifixion. They "all fled" and "deserted" Jesus. This further confirms Islam's claims.

Hebrews 5:7-8 confirm Islam's claim about Jesus never got crucified and contradicts the Bible! According to the documentary film, "Banned from the Bible", which I watched on the History Channel, some of Saint Peter's apocalypse were banned from the current Bible, and these Epistles contain what Islam claims - that Jesus didn't get crucified on the cross and it only appeared that he was. This banned part also says that Jesus was standing next to the cross laughing. These are the parts of the Bible that only few people in the world know about.

According to the documentary film, the apocalypse was very popular among Christians during the 2nd century. They believed "it was spiritually inspired" by GOD Almighty to Saint Peter. They actually had doubts about "John's apocalypse", which is known today as "the Book of Revelation". Interestingly also, this apocalypse says that after GOD Almighty fills both Heaven and Hell with inhabitants from Mankind, and the people of Hell get tortured for a long period of time, the People of Heaven will ask and Pray to GOD Almighty to Forgive the people of Hell. GOD Almighty will then eventually listen to their Prayers, and will order the "Gates and the Steel Bars of Hell" to be opened and allow the people of Hell to enter Heaven for Good. This apocalypse of Peter seems to also perfectly fit Noble Verse 7:40 in the Noble Quran where Allah Almighty Promised that He will eventually open the Gates of Heaven to all disbelievers and empty Hell. Please visit: Hell will eventually be empty according to Islam.

Jesus is a hypocrite for bowing down to GOD only during his desperate times. See another proof in the Bible that Jesus can not be the Creator of the Universe.

The Gospel of Luke:

There is a serious forgery about Jesus' "resurrection on the third day" claiming that it was foretold in the OT when it wasn't! Let us look at Luke 24:44-48 from the NIV Bible:

Luke 24

44 He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."
45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.
46 He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day,
47 and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
48 You are witnesses of these things.

Luke 24:44-48 says that it is written in the Law of Moses (i.e., the Torah) that Jesus will die and resurrect on the third day. Where in the entire Old Testament (not just in the 5 books of Moses that make up the Law of Moses or the Torah) do you have that?! Show me one Old Testament verse that prophesized about Jesus' third day resurrection?

In fact, in my article Answering Isaiah 53, I clearly proved that the Old Testament actually confirms the Noble Quran's claims about Jesus never got crucified! Let alone dying and resurrecting on the third day!

Anyway, Let us see what the NIV Bible's theologians said about this book:

"The author's name does not appear in the book, but much unmistakable evidence points to Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1529)"

Again, we don't know for sure whether it was Luke or not who wrote the "Gospel of Luke" since his name doesn't appear in the Book. The Gospel itself seems to be a compromising one to the Word of GOD. Let us look at the following:

"Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, (Luke 1:3)"

Few problems with this Gospel from the quote above:

1- The author was not inspired, and knew for sure that he was not inspired by GOD Almighty to write the Book since he didn't mention about any divine inspiration, and he said "...since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning..." Where do we see GOD's inspiration in this?

2- The author wrote it for the purpose of "his most excellent Theophilus." Since when we compromise GOD Almighty and document His Holy Words for the purpose of other higher (in rank) human beings?

I say it again, I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!

Also, beside, what evidence are they talking about?! The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus. So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering as the True Living Word of GOD.

Further from brother Vipor Poison; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:

Luke 1:3

Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,

The following is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625b.htm

http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625a.htm

If Theophilus existed in either the 2nd or the 4th centuries then how could the writer of this gospel be the same Luke who is supposed to be with Jesus in the 1st century.

Maybe he lived to about 200 years.. :)

From brother Amir AbdulRahim; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:

The subject of Mankind's Corruption of the Bible has interested me greatly, and I have taken a closer look at this subject. Its seems it's not only your site that brings this subject up, but a couple of Christian sites too.

For example, an article in the Catholic Encyclopaedia that you mentioned in regard to the 'Theophilus' mentioned in Luke's Gospel (from your Just Who Are The Real Authors Of The Bible? article) testifies to this fact (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14530a.htm):

"IV. TRANSMISSION OF THE TEXT

No book of ancient times has come down to us exactly as it left the hands of its author-- all have been in some way altered. The material conditions under which a book was spread before the invention of printing (1440), the little care of the copyists, correctors, and glossators for the text, so different from the desire of accuracy exhibited to-day, explain sufficiently the divergences we find between various manuscripts of the same work. To these causes may be added, in regard to the Scriptures, exegetical difficulties and dogmatical controversies. To exempt the sacred writings from ordinary conditions a very special providence would have been necessary, and it has not been the will of God to exercise this providence."

Lets just go through that again - "No book of ancient times has come down to us exactly as it left the hands of its author--all have been in some way altered." All have been in some way altered! In view of this blatant admission, how can anyone expect me, or any muslim, to follow an impure book?

When you compare this to the great lengths taken to preserve the original Qur'an, there's no contest!

The Book of Hebrews:

"The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)"

So because the guy was supposedly "well known (which we don't really know that for sure anyway)", then would that give us the right to consider his words as the Words of GOD Almighty?! I am sorry, but I don't really see the logic behind this! The Book of Hebrews is one of the highly used Books among Christians. I hear references from it a lot when listening to Christians preaching. Yet, no one really knows who wrote it!. This is quite ironic, because Christians use such highly doubtful books in their teachings as if they were the True Living Words of GOD Almighty. I don't care what you call this, but I call it blasphemy, because it is the most ridiculous insult to GOD Almighty and His Holy Words that I have ever seen.

I just hope you see the real cheap quality in the religion of Christianity, with all my respect due to every Christian reader.

Please visit: Was Jesus crucified on a tree (according to Peter), cross (according to others), or never got crucified (according to Islam)?

None of Jesus' disciples witnessed the crucifixion. They "all fled" and "deserted" Jesus. This further confirms Islam's claims.

Hebrews 5:7-8 confirm Islam's claim about Jesus never got crucified and contradicts the Bible! According to the documentary film, "Banned from the Bible", which I watched on the History Channel, some of Saint Peter's apocalypse were banned from the current Bible, and these Epistles contain what Islam claims - that Jesus didn't get crucified on the cross and it only appeared that he was. This banned part also says that Jesus was standing next to the cross laughing. These are the parts of the Bible that only few people in the world know about.

According to the documentary film, the apocalypse was very popular among Christians during the 2nd century. They believed "it was spiritually inspired" by GOD Almighty to Saint Peter. They actually had doubts about "John's apocalypse", which is known today as "the Book of Revelation". Interestingly also, this apocalypse says that after GOD Almighty fills both Heaven and Hell with inhabitants from Mankind, and the people of Hell get tortured for a long period of time, the People of Heaven will ask and Pray to GOD Almighty to Forgive the people of Hell. GOD Almighty will then eventually listen to their Prayers, and will order the "Gates and the Steel Bars of Hell" to be opened and allow the people of Hell to enter Heaven for Good. This apocalypse of Peter seems to also perfectly fit Noble Verse 7:40 in the Noble Quran where Allah Almighty Promised that He will eventually open the Gates of Heaven to all disbelievers and empty Hell. Please visit: Hell will eventually be empty according to Islam.

Jesus is a hypocrite for bowing down to GOD only during his desperate times. See another proof in the Bible that Jesus can not be the Creator of the Universe.

The Gospel of John:

"The author is the apostle John, 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' (13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20,24). He was prominent in the early church but is not mentioned by name in this Gospel--which would be natural if he wrote it, but hard to explain otherwise. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1588)"

They claimed that it was John who wrote the Gospel, but yet, his name was not signed on his Gospel! How is it possible for us to be absolutely sure that it was indeed John who wrote the so called "Gospel of John" when "his name is not mentioned in this Gospel" so we can then take it as a 100% True Error-free Word of GOD Almighty?

When one reads this gospel, he would immediately notice that it was not written by John himself. Let us look at the following verses from the gospel:

"And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:19)"

"John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:26)"

"For John was not yet cast into prison. (From the King James Version Bible, John 3:24)"

etc...

Whoever wrote the gospel, was he appointed or inspired by GOD Almighty? If yes, then who is that man? It can't be John for it is quite obvious from the above verses and many more throughout the gospel that John wasn't the original author. One has to be ridiculously biased and blind in faith to deny that.

So now, what about these most popular verses:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:1)"

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (From the King James Version Bible, John 3:16)"

These verses were obviously written by mysterious men and not by any of Jesus' original disciples. Therefore, it is blasphemy to consider such verses as Divine and to try to prove Jesus is the Creator of the Universe through them. The lie of trinity was born between the years of 150 to 300. It is quite possible and highly probable that some church wrote the so-called "Gospel of John" from excerpts that they found. Notice that there are 24,000 "letters" or papers found that were not included in today's New Testament, which means that the excerpts that were used for writing the "Gospel of John" and all of the other books and gospels of the NT are highly doubtful and contain no proof what so ever that they were written by any of Jesus' original disciples. The Gospel of John was written about John but not by the original "Saint John". Big difference and big corruption! You can't consider such rubbish as GOD Almighty's Divine Holy Words.

Again, please visit: The Gospel of John, Gospel or gossip? to see proof about early Christians rejecting the so-called Gospel of John. They believed it was all man-made.

Was Jesus crucified on a tree (according to Peter), cross (according to others), or never got crucified (according to Islam)?

None of Jesus' disciples witnessed the crucifixion. They "all fled" and "deserted" Jesus. This further confirms Islam's claims.

Hebrews 5:7-8 confirm Islam's claim about Jesus never got crucified and contradicts the Bible! According to the documentary film, "Banned from the Bible", which I watched on the History Channel, some of Saint Peter's apocalypse were banned from the current Bible, and these Epistles contain what Islam claims - that Jesus didn't get crucified on the cross and it only appeared that he was. This banned part also says that Jesus was standing next to the cross laughing. These are the parts of the Bible that only few people in the world know about.

According to the documentary film, the apocalypse was very popular among Christians during the 2nd century. They believed "it was spiritually inspired" by GOD Almighty to Saint Peter. They actually had doubts about "John's apocalypse", which is known today as "the Book of Revelation". Interestingly also, this apocalypse says that after GOD Almighty fills both Heaven and Hell with inhabitants from Mankind, and the people of Hell get tortured for a long period of time, the People of Heaven will ask and Pray to GOD Almighty to Forgive the people of Hell. GOD Almighty will then eventually listen to their Prayers, and will order the "Gates and the Steel Bars of Hell" to be opened and allow the people of Hell to enter Heaven for Good. This apocalypse of Peter seems to also perfectly fit Noble Verse 7:40 in the Noble Quran where Allah Almighty Promised that He will eventually open the Gates of Heaven to all disbelievers and empty Hell. Please visit: Hell will eventually be empty according to Islam.

Jesus is a hypocrite for bowing down to GOD only during his desperate times. See another proof in the Bible that Jesus can not be the Creator of the Universe.

The Gospel of 1 John:

"....Unlike most NT letters, 1 John does not tell us who its author is. The earliest identification of him comes from the church fathers...(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1904)"

"The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1905)"

This is really ironic! with all respect due to Christians. If the Book's author is not for sure known, then why assume that it was Saint John who wrote it?

Please visit The lie of 1 John 5:7. This verse was later discovered to be a Satanic lie. The Roman Catholic Theologians don't believe in it, and it doesn't exist in their Bibles.

The same case where no author is really known exists in the Gospels of 2 and 3 John.

The Book of Revelation:

"Four times the author identifies himself as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8).....In the third century, however, an African bishop named Dionysius compared the language, style and thought of the Apocalypse (Revelation) with that of the other writings of John and decided that the book could not been written by the apostle of John. He suggested that the author was a certain John the Presbyter, whose name appears elsewhere in ancient writings. Although many today follow Dionysius in his view of authorship, the external evidence seems overwhelmingly supportive of the traditional view. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1922)"

Again, we don't know who wrote the Book of Revelation. It is certainly highly doubtful that it was written by Apostle John. The Theologians and Historians of the NIV Bible seem to agree with the invalidity of this book from the above quote. So are you now going to consider the other John's words as the Words and Inspirations of GOD Almighty?

As we see, the style of writing in the book of Revelation is different from the books that are believed to be from John which are the Gospel of John, 1 John, 2 John and 3 John. The book of Revelation's style seems to be closer to John the Presbyter's writings. This man is known in ancient writings. There are also many Christian theologians today that hold the same view about the falsety of the book of Revelation.

Isn't this sufficient enough to prove that the book is doubtful?

Notice that in the sections of "Gospel of John" and "Gospels of 1, 2 & 3 John" above, the author did not identify himself and it was ASSUMED without actual proofs that it was Saint John who wrote them. Notice how they said that if he were to identify himself, then it would be hard for them to explain it.

Now, notice the author in the Book of Revelation does identify himself as John, but he has a complete different language and style of writing from the other books, which created much uncertainty about its validity in the Church.

My questions here are: Who wrote the Books? And is or is not Saint John supposed to identify himself in his books? And where are his books that have his name on them?

Again, keep in mind that the NT was not even documented on paper until 150 to 300 years after Jesus (depending on what Christian you talk to). So the dating is way too long for us to be assuming books to belong to certain people. Let alone considering their nonsense (contents) as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.

Please visit: Jesus the "Alpha and Omega". Not only this quote doesn't prove Jesus as GOD, but it was also written in a book that is unreliable in later bibles. In the original Bibles, the quote doesn't even exist!!

False and failed Prophecies about the Hour put in the mouth of Jesus in the books of Mark, Luke and Revelation in the New Testament.

Arche of the Creation of God as Alpha and Omega. The "Alpha and Omega" doesn't even exist in the original Bibles! It's a lie that was later inserted by trinitarians. See the historical proofs in the article. If their site is down, then you can read the article at this link ON MY SITE.

Hebrews 5:7-8 confirm Islam's claim about Jesus never got crucified and contradicts the Bible! According to the documentary film, "Banned from the Bible", which I watched on the History Channel, some of Saint Peter's apocalypse were banned from the current Bible, and these Epistles contain what Islam claims - that Jesus didn't get crucified on the cross and it only appeared that he was. This banned part also says that Jesus was standing next to the cross laughing. These are the parts of the Bible that only few people in the world know about.

According to the documentary film, the apocalypse was very popular among Christians during the 2nd century. They believed "it was spiritually inspired" by GOD Almighty to Saint Peter. They actually had doubts about "John's apocalypse", which is known today as "the Book of Revelation". Interestingly also, this apocalypse says that after GOD Almighty fills both Heaven and Hell with inhabitants from Mankind, and the people of Hell get tortured for a long period of time, the People of Heaven will ask and Pray to GOD Almighty to Forgive the people of Hell. GOD Almighty will then eventually listen to their Prayers, and will order the "Gates and the Steel Bars of Hell" to be opened and allow the people of Hell to enter Heaven for Good. This apocalypse of Peter seems to also perfectly fit Noble Verse 7:40 in the Noble Quran where Allah Almighty Promised that He will eventually open the Gates of Heaven to all disbelievers and empty Hell. Please visit: Hell will eventually be empty according to Islam.

The Book of Revelation is a very important, probably the most important Book in the Bible today, because it has prophecies in it of what Christians believe is for our future today, even though it has nothing to do with our current world. It talks about Jesus soon (1800 to 2000 years ago) will return (Revelation 22:7). I don't know how soon is 2000 years to the Bible. All the people that this book was told to had died.

It also talks about the great battle of Gog and Magog fighting the righteous; "and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth [The earth DOES NOT have four corners and no the earth is not a square or rectangle. It is round almost like an egg!!]--Gog and Magog--to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. (From the NIV Bible, Revelation 20:8)"

The thing that we need to notice here beside the grave error about the shape of the earth in this false book (sorry to say that), is that the Gog and Magog existed before. Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal (Ezekiel 39:1), is the name of the leader and Magog is the name of his nation (Ezekiel 38 and 39). The Gog and Magog army had already been defeated and the Noble Quran confirms their story. There had been historical discoveries that perfectly match the Noble Quran's claims regarding the Gog and Magog, such as the discovery of the "Iron Gates", and other literature that mentions the Gog and Magog army and location. There is even historical documentation about them which matches the Noble Quran in London, England.

Please visit The story of Gog and Magog and the Iron Gates in the Noble Quran and the Bible to see the references and proofs of these historical discoveries and several more.

The Bible says: The earth is flat! See all the verses in the Bible that claim the earth is flat.

It is a common Christian answer to say "We support Israel because it is God's promised land to the Jews, and He will prevail them against the army of Gog and Magog who seems to be mainly an Islamic army today." They mostly rely on the Book of Revelation from the Bible to support this claim.

The story of the Gog and Magog army attacking the Jews exists in both the Book of Ezekiel and the Book of Revelation in the Bible. The Book of Ezekiel which came literally thousands of years before the Book of Revelation predicted the attack and defeat of the army of Gog and Magog.

The Noble Quran (The Muslims' Holy Scripture) talks about the army of Gog and Magog in details and explains the events that ALREADY took place. As I mentioned above, there had been historical discoveries that perfectly match the Noble Quran's claims regarding the Gog and Magog, such as the discovery of the "Iron Gates", and other literature that mentions the Gog and Magog army and location.

Please visit The army of Gog and Magog and the Iron Gates in the Noble Quran and the Bible.

The lie (sorry to say that) of the Book of Revelation, however, also predicts the coming of the army of Gog and Magog. But as I said, the army of Gog and Magog were ALREADY predicted in the Bible thousands of years before the Book of Revelation.

So, the prediction in the Book of Revelation proves that the writer of the book, lacked a great deal of knowledge about history, because as I said, the event of the Gog and Magog battle (i.e., the battle of Armageddon) already happened!

The point is that the Book of Revelation, however, like most of the Bible today seems to be nothing but a big hoax (sorry to say that). It is very doubtful, but yet ironically, very important to the Christians of today.

Would you honestly deep inside yourself call nonsense of this kind the True Living Words of GOD Almighty, especially after knowing that very important early Christian resources thought "the book could not been written by the apostle of John"?

Please visit What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe in?

The Books of Paul:

Before we start on the analysis of Paul's Books, we must first know that Paul who's Books are believed to be inspired by GOD Almighty Himself and who is a disciple of Jesus peace be upon him never actually met Jesus in person. Jesus had 12 disciples when he was on earth. Paul was not one of them!. Paul much later after the disappearance of Jesus came and claimed that Jesus came to him and ordered him to be his disciple. Paul is really taken on faith only and not on proofs. He could be well be another smart deceiver who made his way into the world of the current corrupted Bible (sorry if I offended you).

Exposing Paul's Lies PAUL, the self-appointed Prophet, was proven to be a deceiver who contradicted the teachings of Jesus and mocked the Law of Moses.
Are these Paul's words or GOD Almighty's Divine Revelations????

Paul of Tarsus: The Clear-Cut Hypocrite

The Problem of Paul Regarding Esau

The Problem of Paul

Paul of Tarsus: The False Apostle According to Islam

'The Apocryphal Books of Elijah' & Paul

Epimenides Paradox: Was Paul "Inspired"?

Paul's Dependency on Talmudic Writings: Evidence of New Testament Borrowing

Paul and The 'Inspiration' of Scripture

The Influence of the Pauline Epistles Upon The Gospels of The New Testament: Study and Criticism

Famous Theologians and Historians believe that Paul was not truthful.

How can you say that the Bible has corruption in it when Saint Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16 clearly said that "All Scripture is God-breathed"?

Paul, Peter and John are in clear contradiction with each others regarding the disbelieving husbands to believing wives!

Paul nullified and contradicted the point of Baptism.

My rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's "Demonstrating how Paul's writings nullify Osama's desperate attempts to finding Bible Contradictions" article.

Is circumcision allowed or not allowed in the Bible? See the clear contradiction between Jesus and Paul.

Paul contradicted himself regarding the women's head covering.

My response to Sam Shamoun's rebuttal to my article "Paul, Peter and John are in clear contradiction with each others regarding the disbelieving husbands to believing wives!".

The Book of Romans:

"The writer of this letter was the apostle Paul (see 1:1). No voice from the early church was ever raised against his authorship. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1705)"

Ok, but notice how in this Book, we see the actual author himself, and in the ones above, we see nothing but conclusions. If GOD was the actual inspirer of all of these Books, then He wouldn't put us in the agony of making some conclusions to figure out His Words. Is GOD the author of confusion? Paul is also clear about his ownership of the Books of 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians.

But why must we take every single word that Paul spoke especially during his conversations with others as Words of GOD Almighty?!

Is Paul GOD Himself? No Christian believes in that. Paul fought with Saint Peter and accused him of being "clearly in the wrong" (Galatians: 2:11-12), and had a huge argument with Saint Barnabas (Acts 15:36-39).

Did GOD favor Paul over Barnabas and Peter and inspired him the words while he was fighting with them? I don't think so!.

Paul himself admitted before that he wasn't always inspired by GOD Almighty himself (1 Corinthians 7:25-30).

And since Paul never met Jesus in person, and only claimed that Jesus came to him in person then there is always the possibility of him being untruthful. Since Paul never performed any miracles to help us believe his claim of Prophet hood, then his claim about him being GOD's apostle is just as good as me for instance claiming to be GOD's apostle.

Benny Hyne, one of today's famous Christian missionaries who have millions of fans world wide, claims and shows on TV how he could cure the paralyzed and makes him walk again. He claims that Jesus is inside him when he performs his so-called miracles. Why can't it be a bunch of liars that he paid and brought on TV, pretend to act paralyzed and pretend to act healed?

Paul could just as well be another Benny Hyne, except that Benny Hyne performed miracles (that are fake of course), but Paul never performed anything.

I hope you see how confusing the Bible really is. Its books are believed today from conclusions only as you've seen above, and it is only to be believed by blind faith. Blind faith is not the way to believe in GOD Almighty's Words, because GOD is not the author of confusion.

Please visit: Famous Theologians and Historians believe that Paul was not truthful.

Christian Scholars refuting the status of the NT as an inspired scripture.

Paul, Peter and John are in clear contradiction with each others regarding the disbelieving husbands to believing wives!

What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe in?

The Book of Philippians:

"The early church was unanimous in its testimony that Philippians was written by the apostle Paul (see 1:1). Internally the letter reveals the stamp of genuineness. The many personal references of the author fit what we know of Paul from other NT books. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1803)"

Again, it was assumed that this book was written by Paul himself. No one knows for sure whether it was Paul or somebody else. The New Testament wasn't even documented until 150-300 years after the disappearance of Jesus peace be upon him. If we're going to assume that Books that look appealing to us as the True Word of GOD Almighty, then we are committing a great crime against GOD Almighty and His Holy Words. No where in this Book we see a statement saying that it was inspired by GOD Almighty Himself.

The Book of Colossians:

"That Colossians is a genuine letter Paul is not usually disputed. In the early church, all who speak on the subject of authorship ascribe it to Paul. In the 19th century, however, some thought that the heresy refuted in ch. 2 was second-century Gnosticism. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1813)"

Again, it was assumed that Paul was the one who wrote the Book. But again, who's to say that it was inspired by GOD Almighty Himself?

The Books of 1 and 2 Thessalonians:

"Paul's authorship of 2 Thessalonians has been questioned more often than that of 1 Thessalonians, in spite of the fact that it has more support from early Christian writers. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1829)"

So basically we're not certain whether or not Paul wrote the Book. And even if Paul was the one who wrote it, we still don't know whether it was the True Words of GOD Almighty or not, because no where in the Book we see any indication that it was inspired by the Almighty GOD.

Exposing the Old Testament's historical corruptions

As we see in the introduction above in Jeremiah 8:8, the entire Bible is doubtful and full of man-made lies that were inserted into it through the scribes and other means of alterations. The Bible is obviously a corrupted book!

The Book of Genesis:

"Historically, Jews and Christians alike have held that Moses was the author/compiler of the first five books of the OT. These books, known also as the Pentateuch (meaning "five-volumed book"), were referred to in Jewish tradition as the five fifths of the law (of Moses). The Bible itself suggests Mosaic authorship of Genesis, since Ac 15:1 refers to circumcision as "the custom taught by Moses," an allusion of Ge 17. However, a certain amount of later editorial updating does appear to be indicated (see, e.g., notes on 14:14; 36:31; 47:11). (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 2)"

So in reality, the book of Genesis had been tampered with by man. It had been corrupted. It is dangerous to consider all of it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty, because by doing so, we are running into the risk of committing a crime against Him since we are claiming that He spoke words that He never spoke.

The Book of Numbers:

"It is not necessary, however, to claim that Numbers came from Moses' hand complete and in final form. Portions of the book were probably added by scribes or editors from later periods of Israel's history. For example, the protestation of the humility of Moses (12:3) would hardly be convincing if it came from his own mouth. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 183)"

So in reality, we don't know who were all the authors who wrote the book of Numbers. How is it possible then to call the book of Numbers the True Living Revelations of GOD Almighty if the book had been tampered with by the man-made laws of the scribes?

As you clearly saw in Jeremiah 8:8 in the introduction above, GOD Almighty condemned the laws of the scribes and accused them for turning the Bible into a lie.

The book of Deuteronomy:

"The book itself testifies that, for the most part, Moses wrote it (1:5; 31:9,22,24), and other OT books agree (1Ki 2:3, 8:53; 2ki 14:6; 18:12)--though the preamble (1:1-5) may have been written by someone else, and the report of Moses' death (ch.34) was almost certainly written by someone else. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 240)"

As we clearly see, there is ample evidence that proves beyond the shadow of the doubt that Moses was not the sole author of the book. He couldn't have possibly have written about his own death. Again, another corrupted book by man in the Bible. How can you claim that the book of Deuteronomy was indeed all revealed by GOD Almighty? If you're not sure, and you still insist on your claim, then you are committing a crime against GOD Almighty's Revelations.

The book of Joshua:

"It seems safe to conclude that the book, at least in its early form, dates from the beginning of the monarchy. Some think that Samuel may have had a hand in shaping or compiling the materials of the book, but in fact we are unsure who the final author or editor was. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 286)"

Again, another book whom we don't know who in the world wrote it. Yet, Jews and Christians consider this nonsense as a Revelation from GOD Almighty.

The book of Judges:

"Although, according to tradition, Samuel wrote the book, authorship is actually uncertain."

"The date of the composition is also unknown, but it was undoubtedly during the monarchy."

(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322).

Another book with many doubts had been inserted into the Bible. How much more evidence do you need to be convinced that the Bible is corrupted, or to say the least, not a perfect book?

The book of Ruth:

"The author is unknown. Jewish tradition points to Samuel, but it is unlikely that he is the author because the mention of David (4:17,22) implies a later date. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 360)"

Same as above.

The books of 1 and 2 Samuel:

"Many questions have arisen pertaining to the literary character, authorship and date of 1,2 Samuel."

"Who the author was cannot be known with certainty since the book itself gives no indication of his identity."

(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 368).

Again, unknown books with unknown authors had been inserted into the Bible and are now considered GOD's Revelations. What a joke! Since when do we consider man-made stories and narrations as GOD's Revelations?

The books of 1 and 2 Kings:

"There is little conclusive evidence as to the identity of the author of 1,2 Kings."

"Whoever the author was, it is clear that he was familiar with the book of Deuteronomy."

(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459).

Again, another unknown books with unknown authors had corrupted the Bible.

The books of 1 and 2 Chronicles:

"According to ancient Jewish tradition, Ezra wrote Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah (see Introduction to Ezra: Literary Form and Authorship), but this cannot be established with certainty. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 569)"

Again, another doubtful nonsense had been considered to be GOD's Revelations.

The book of Esther:

"Although we do not know who wrote the book of Esther, from internal evidence it is possible to make some inferences about the author and the date of composition. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 707)"

Same as above.

The book of Job:

"Although most of the book consists of the words of Job and his counselors, Job himself was not the author."

"The unknown author probably had access to oral and/or written sources...."

(From the NIV Bible commentary, page 722).

Ironically, the book is named as "The book of Job", but yet, Job was not the author, and no one in this world knows who wrote the book. Today, it is considered GOD's Revelations.

It's quite pathetic to consider unknown people as GOD's Messengers and attribute their work to GOD's real Messengers.

It's obvious that like most of the Bible's book and gospels, the Book of Job had been lost.

The books of Psalm:

"Regarding authorship, opinions are even more divided. The notations themselves are ambiguous since the Hebrew phraseology used, meaning in general "belonging to", an also be taken in the sense of "concerning" or "for the use of" or "dedicated to". The name may refer to the title of a collection of Psalms that had been gathered under a certain name. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 773)"

"The Psalms consist of one hundred fifty poems of Israel written at different times by different authors, though mainly by David, around 1000 B.C.
..........
Because of the vast range of human feelings expressed in the Psalms, this book remains one of the best loved and most used books of the Bible. (From the King James Version Bible Commentary, page 801)"

As we clearly see above from the NIV and KJV Bibles' commentaries, this book can not be considered as the True Words of GOD Almighty, because it was written by many unknown authors! There is no proof that these authors were True Messengers of GOD Almighty. Another corruption and man-made alterations had invaded the Bible and corrupted it.

This corrupted book claims that the Earth is flat and never moves:

"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 104:5)"

Since when the Earth is flat and can never move?! We all know that the Earth and the other planets rotate and move in space around the Sun.

For those Jews and Christians who would like to see where in the Noble Quran does Allah Almighty say that the planets in space rotate and move, read the following Noble Verse:

"It is He who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its orbit with its own motion. (The Noble Quran, 21:33)"

For more information and other Noble Verses, please visit:

Science in the Noble Quran and Islam.

The Earth is round according to Islam.

Also visit The Earth is flat according to the Bible.

The book of Proverbs:

"Although the book begins with a title ascribing the proverbs to Solomon, it is clear from later chapters that he was not the only author of the book. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 935)"

Can anyone please tell me who that other author was? And did GOD Almighty speak those words through his tongue?

These are fair questions, aren't they?

The book of Ecclesiastes:

"No time period or writer's name is mentioned in the book, but several passages strongly suggest that King Solomon is the authors. On the other hand, the writer's title, his unique style of Hebrew and his attitude toward rulers may point to another person and a later period. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 988)"

Was it or was it not Solomon who wrote this book? If you say it was Solomon, then how can you prove it?

And by the way, was this book a revelation to Solomon, or just Solomon's own personal writings, if it were Solomon's book from the first place?

This corrupted book claims that the Sun hurries back to where it rises:

"The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises. (From the NIV Bible, Ecclesiastes 1:5)"

Since when the Sun hurries back to where it rises, like if there is some hole it rises from and another hole it sets through on Earth?!

For those Jews and Christians who would like to see where in the Noble Quran does Allah Almighty say that the planets in space rotate and move, read the following Noble Verse:

"It is He who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its orbit with its own motion. (The Noble Quran, 21:33)"

For more information and other Noble Verses, please visit:

Science in the Noble Quran and Islam.

The Earth is round according to Islam.

Also visit The Earth is flat according to the Bible.

The Book of Ecclesiasticus:

This book does not even exist in the NIV Bible! It however exists in the Roman Catholics "The New Jerusalem Bible" [3]. This book consists of 51 chapters that apparently the NIV Bible Historians and Theologians don't believe that they are the True Words of GOD Almighty.

Talk about major and serious differences and corruptions in the Bibles today.

Let us look at this verse from this book: "....and the birth of ANY daughter is a loss. (From the New Jerusalem Bible, Ecclesiasticus 22:3)" Since when does GOD give stupid generalizing statements for ALL the members of a certain group of His creation?

The Book of Wisdom:

Again, this book does not even exist in the NIV Bible! It however exists in the Roman Catholics "The New Jerusalem Bible" [3]. This book consists of 19 chapters that apparently the NIV Bible Historians and Theologians don't believe that they are the True Words of GOD Almighty.

Again, talk about major and serious differences and corruptions in the Bibles today.

The book of Song of Songs:

"Verse 1 appears to ascribe authorship to Solomon. Solomon is referred to seven times, and several verses speak of the 'king', but whether he was the author remains an open question. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 997)"

"Two lovers, Solomon and a Shulamite girl, express their feelings for one another, with occasional comments made by friends. (From the King James Version Commentary, page 945)"

Again, we don't know who wrote the book. Please visit X-Rated Pornography in the Bible regarding this pornful and sick book; the book of:

1- She wished if her lover was her brother nursed at her "mother's breasts" so she wouldn't have to take him home in secret.

2- Her breasts and vagina taste like wine for him.

The KJV Bible's Theologians and Historians say that the porn-full book talks about Solomon and his lover. But we don't know whether it was Solomon who wrote this book or not, nor do we know whether this is some ridiculous poem and a lie written after he died or not.

One must ask a simple question here: Why should there be "lovers" in the Bible? Why should there be illegal sex and disgusting pornography in the Bible?

The book of Lamentations:

"Although Lamentations is anonymous and we cannot be certain who wrote it, ancient Jewish and Christian tradition ascribes it to Jeremiah. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1207)"

What a joke! Christians and Jews point the book to Jeremiah without any certainty to who wrote the book. How is it possible for us to consider this book as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty?

Christians and Jews have yet to find and prove the original author of the book and all of the books mentioned above, and then prove that they were indeed Revelations from GOD Almighty.

Failure to accomplish the two tasks and inserting this type of nonsense into the Bible and claiming that it was the Words of GOD Almighty is A CRIME AGAINST GOD!

Embrace Islam, the religion of The One True Living Undivided GOD Almighty, and you will be saved! Please visit What is the Wisdom of Islam?

So who wrote the Bible then? Were they really the original Prophets and Disciples?

This section is an article and a small chapter of a book that was forwarded to me. I thought it would be very good to add it to this article.

So, who then are the authors of the books of the Bible? Obviously the Church must know them very well since they are popularly believed to have received divine inspiration from God Himself. Right? Actually, they don't. For example, we will note that every Gospel begins with the introduction "According to....." such as "The Gospel according to Saint Matthew," "The Gospel according to Saint Luke," "The Gospel according to Saint Mark," "The Gospel according to Saint John." The obvious conclusion for the average man on the street is that these people are known to be the authors of the books attributed to them. This, however is not the case. Why? Because not one of the vaunted four thousand copies existent carries its author's signature. It has just been assumed that certain people were the authors. Recent discoveries, however, refute this belief. Even the internal evidence suggests that, for instance, Matthew did not write the Gospel attributed to him:

"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus). (Matthew 9:9)"

Did "Matthew" write this about himself? Why then didn't Matthew write for example: "he (Jesus) saw ME, and my name is Matthew. I was sitting at the receipt of custom…" etc.

Such evidence can be found in many places throughout the New Testament. Granted, it may be possible that an author sometimes may write in the third person, still, in light of the rest of the evidence that we shall see throughout this book, there is simply too much evidence against this hypothesis.

This observation is by no means limited to the New Testament. There is even similar evidence that at least parts of Deuteronomy were not written by their claimed author, prophet Moses . This can be seen in Deuteronomy 34:5-10 where we read

"So Moses....DIED... and he (God Almighty) BURIED HIM (Moses)... He was 120 years old WHEN HE DIED... and there arose not a prophet SINCE in Israel like unto Moses....(Deuteronomy 34:5-10)"

Did Moses write his own obituary? Similarly, Joshua too speaks in detail about his own death in Joshua 24:29-33.

"And it came to pass after these things, that Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, DIED, … And they BURIED HIM … And Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that over lived Joshua, and which had known all the works of the Lord, that he had done for Israel ….(Joshua 24:29-33)"

Such evidence is part of the large cache which has driven the Biblical scholars to come to the current recognition that most of the books of the Bible were not written by their supposed authors. For example, the authors of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible by Collins honestly say that the author of "Kings" is "Unknown." But if the author is unknown then why attribute it to God? How can it then be claimed to have been "inspired"? Continuing, we read that the book of Isaiah is "Mainly credited to Isaiah. Parts may have been written by others." Ecclesiastics: "Author. Doubtful, but commonly assigned to Solomon." Ruth: "Author. Not definitely known, perhaps Samuel." and on and on.

Let us have a slightly more detailed look at only one book of the New Testament, that of 'Hebrews':

"The author of the Book of Hebrews is unknown. Martin Luther suggested that Apollos was the author...Tertullian said that Hebrews was a letter of Barnabas...Adolf Harnack and J. Rendel Harris speculated that it was written by Priscilla (or Prisca). William Ramsey suggested that it was done by Philip. However, the traditional position is that the Apostle Paul wrote Hebrews...Eusebius believed that Paul wrote it, but Origen was not positive of Pauline authorship."

From the introduction to the King James Bible, New revised and updated sixth edition, the Hebrew/Greek Key Study, Red Letter Edition

and one book of the Old Testament:

"In tradition, [David] is credited with writing 73 of the Psalms; most scholars, however, consider this claim questionable."

Encarta Encyclopedia, under "David"

Is this how we define "inspired by God"?

I asked a reverend of the local church in my neighborhood, on what gospel most often quoted and used, he quickly answered, the Gospel of St. John!

Let us examine the Contextual Problems of the Gospel of John - Highly Recommended! Even though this is a Darwinist site, but it has some very good and important historical facts about the Bible's corruption. What makes it interesting is that many of their articles were written by former Christian missionaries.

The New Testament was written in the 3rd century by Constantine and his church by their own words:

As we clearly see above, the books and gospels of the bible were written by mysterious authors. The New Testament of today was written in the third century by Constantine and his church. That is why you read things such as:

"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus). (Matthew 9:9)"

"And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:19)"

"John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:26)"

"For John was not yet cast into prison. (From the King James Version Bible, John 3:24)"

etc.....

It is quite possible and very highly probable that Constantine and his church selectively collected some letters from among 24,000 letters and wrote the 30 books and gospels of the New Testament with their OWN WORDS. Keep in mind that the 2nd century Christians mostly and widely believed that Jesus never got crucified. See the proof at: www.answering-christianity.com/early_christians.htm.

The following links contain details about Constantine, his work in the Bible and history:

http://www.kenanderson.net/bible/constantine.html
http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/cea.stm
http://www.bibleufo.com/anomlostbooks.htm
http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/constantine.html

The point from this is that when you read "Jesus is the Son of God", please keep in mind that it is quoted from a corrupted book. The Old Testament makes numerous references about "son of God" to many people. As I proved at: www.answering-christianity.com/son_translation.htm, the word "son of God" literally means "SERVANT OF GOD" in the original Hebrew.

The Roman Catholic Encyclopedia admits that the Bible had been "altered":

From brother Amir AbdulRahim; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:

The subject of Mankind's Corruption of the Bible has interested me greatly, and I have taken a closer look at this subject. Its seems it's not only your site that brings this subject up, but a couple of Christian sites too.

For example, an article in the Catholic Encyclopaedia that you mentioned in regard to the 'Theophilus' mentioned in Luke's Gospel (from your Just Who Are The Real Authors Of The Bible? article) testifies to this fact (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14530a.htm):

"IV. TRANSMISSION OF THE TEXT

No book of ancient times has come down to us exactly as it left the hands of its author-- all have been in some way altered. The material conditions under which a book was spread before the invention of printing (1440), the little care of the copyists, correctors, and glossators for the text, so different from the desire of accuracy exhibited to-day, explain sufficiently the divergences we find between various manuscripts of the same work. To these causes may be added, in regard to the Scriptures, exegetical difficulties and dogmatical controversies. To exempt the sacred writings from ordinary conditions a very special providence would have been necessary, and it has not been the will of God to exercise this providence."

Lets just go through that again - "No book of ancient times has come down to us exactly as it left the hands of its author--all have been in some way altered." All have been in some way altered! In view of this blatant admission, how can anyone expect me, or any muslim, to follow an impure book?

When you compare this to the great lengths taken to preserve the original Qur'an, there's no contest!

Further from brother Vipor Poison; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:

Luke 1:3

Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,

The following is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625b.htm

http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625a.htm

If Theophilus existed in either the 2nd or the 4th centuries then how could the writer of this gospel be the same Luke who is supposed to be with Jesus in the 1st century.

Maybe he lived to about 200 years.. :)

Contradictions in historical claims and accounts:

Consider the following few examples that consist of historical contradictions in the Bible:

II Samuel 10:18 talks about David slew the men of 700 chariots of the Syrians and 40,000 horsemen and Shobach the commander.
I Chronicles 1:18 says that David slew the men of 7000 chariots and 40,000 footmen

I Chronicles 9:25 says that Solomon had 4000 stalls for horses and chariots.
I Kings 4:26 says that he had 40,000 stalls for horses

Ezra 2:5 talks about an exile Arah having 775 sons.
Nehemiah 7:10 talks about the same exile Arah having 652 sons.

II Samuel 24:13 So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, shall SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue. thee?
I Chronicles 21:11 SO God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee. Either THREE YEARS OF FAMINE or three months to be destryed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;

How did Judas die?
"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (Matthew 27:5)
"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18)

2 Samuel 6:23 Therefore MICHAL the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.
2 Samuel 21:8 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of MICHAL the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite.

2 Kings 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
2 Chronicles 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

26th year of the reign of Asa I Kings 16:6-8
36th year of the reign of Asa I 2 Chronicles 16:1

How old was Ahaziah when he began to reign?
22 in 2 Kings 8:26
42 in 2 Chronicle 22:2

Who was Josiah's successor?
Jehoahaz - 2 Chronicle 36:1
Shallum - Jeremiah 22:11

Also, your original scriptures are all doubtful according to the Bible's own theologians and historians. It's quite hilarious that even the Bible itself admits that it has been tampered with and corrupted by man's garbage:

"`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of

Did they really lose the whole thing batman?

When did they lose it, you caped crusadewatcher?

Bar

pretty funny Bar, but dont confuse what batman (I prefer to call him the "Dark Knight") did with the true crusaders, the crusaders are the equivalent of what u call "militant Muslims", I think thats why they decided to change batman from being called the "caped crusader" to the "Dark Knight"

crusadewatcher-

Thanks God I'm an agnostic! I don't have to waste my life with dead men's thoughts clogging my neo-cortex and can simply do some good, oppose all forms of tyranny over the mind of Man and Woman, and aim for reasonably accurate knowledge (curing disease, feeding the hungry, exploring the Universe) and not swallowing petrified dogma.

The stars are our destiny, not arguing about whose 'God' is bigger or smarter or cuter or less-(or more) bloodthirsty than whose.

With this exegesis-vomiting and re-vomiting, you spin forever in the headlock of the past, throwing the patent insanities of the Bronze Age Torah ("kill the Canaanites!") at those who throw the patent insanities of the Iron Age Koran ("kill the infidels!") at you.

Wake up. Be compassionate.

The rest is mere footnotes.

Posting articles of fundamentalist
hindus, christians, Buddhists or jews does not prove your point. The trouble with Islam is not that extremists exist but that moderates are fake
and unwilling.

India is not a theocratic state. Nor does it desire an Islamic Caliphate.
Nor is sharia imposed. Nor is polygamy legal (except for muslims). The prime minister is a Sikh. There are three christian chief ministers.
(Even US cannot make such claims about its governers.)
Sonia Gandhi, the most powerful politician, is
a Roman catholic. The president is a muslim. So is the richest man in India and the film actors. The strife will keep happening in a developing nation but statistics does not lie in a long term. The percentage of christian and sikh population has remained constant since independence. The muslim population has increaded from 9 % to 13 %.
(The hindu population in Pakistan declined from
15% to 0.5 % in the same period).

There would not be a need for www.jihadwatch.org if Islamic republics could make such claims about its minority population.

So long as 'moderate muslims' dream of Islamic Caliphate and indulge in passion play of perceived offense and extremists are out to kill anyone who disagrees, Islamic republics will be in continuous
conflict with other civilizations. If it wasnt US and Britain, it would have been Russia or Japan or Brazil.

Mohammad put the slam in Islam....

No, Moslems countries are wretched and poor only because they worship Mohammad’s image.

“There is no god but Mohammad, and all Moslem will worship his image”

That’s a fact. The Palestinians prove it on the news every night!

The former pig know as a man Mr Yessir Airafart proved it also. My he rot in hell not to Mohammad and every islameic jihadist form begging to end.

No Mohammadanism, Know Peace

Ban Islam!

Ah dear Crusadewatcher,

you are totally lost my friend.

islam is unworthy of mankind,

and nothing can change that.

There is no other like islam on this planet,

and one day, there will be no islam,

because its followers will simply.....leave.

I wish i could help you in some way

- read of Buddha to learn how to live, if
Christianity is difficult for you.

Or is this sudden intense blogging to find the next person to murder, in the name of your messenger, as those Coptic Christians were murdered for speaking their mind about islam.

That is how much trust we have in moslems, after 1300 years of experience with islam. Should islam be proud of its well earned reputation ?

I see a hijacked thread. Somebody ban this guy, he's writing a book.
Allah is not Yahweh, the Scriptures have not been corrupted over 2500 years to thwart a 6th century fake "prophet", Allah doesn't exist, nothing was written in Muhammad's time, the Hadith and Surah were written from hearsay in Baghdad nearly 2 centuries after the fact, from father to son over several generations.
In the end, my opinions don't count, read the Islamic scriptures yourself, from the earliest known authentic transcripts, with the Surah reordered chronologically to correspond with events in Muhammad's life. No one would trust their soul to belief in this prophet and his god.
Islam was invented by Muhammad's great, great, great grandfather Quasayy as pagan rites, the five pillars. Muhammad added Jihad and monotheism.

To all- (but, lately especially "crusadewatcher")

PLEASE! (with marzipan on top!)

Fewer cut-and-pastes! Fewer GIANT chunks of the lifted thoughts of others and a little more of your own thinking (if it is possible)!

Spare us the tedious scroll-down time bypassing your massive pilfered columns of tiresome regurgitation!

I HAVE a Koran! I have a Bible! I have a Torah!

(AND A Bhagavad Gita, Tripitaka, Tao Te Ching, Book of Manu, Zoroastrian texts, Popul Vuh, Tibetan and Egyptian Books of the Dead, Poetic Eddas, etc. etc. etc...) or can go online and read any religious text not on my shelves.

As Cervantes said:

"Think! Don't vomit!"

ITA this thread was hijacked...

Crusadewatch....the topic is the illegal abduction of the Christian bishop by Muslims in Iraq.

Crusadewatcher:

I`m Indian. Your forefathers were forced to convert to the raping, plundering religion of a moon worshipping bandit. You see fit to dwell in the evil and set with the sun in the slime - that`s what your filthy, thieving bandit said. You can spew that rubbish in Bangla Desh.

The Sikhs know what you muslims really are. Remember your foundations in Mecca were moved by Guru Nanak and Muslims converted to Sikhism. Take your filthy crap and sink in the mud which your bandit has damned you to.

`Smite Turks with immense vigour. A Singh who obeys the Rahit does not bow when he meets a Turk. Never serve Turks, never greet a Turk, never trust Turks. Serve only the Khalsa. Avoid Muslim huttha meat. By fighting them face to face the Muslims will be defeated. Remain ever alert against the Turks. A Turk should be neither accepted as a master nor treated with deference. Keep Muslims away from your cooking-square when preparing for a langar. Muslims are polluted. [16, 20, 21, 30, 45, 46, 62, 94]`

http://allaboutsikhs.com/rehat/rehat_17.htm

Soor aur soorian dhey batcheh -i`m sure you understand what that means.

"Once the Arabs had acquired an empire, a coherent religion was required in order to hold that empire together and legitimize their rule. In a process that involved a massive backreading of history, and in conformity to the available Jewish and Christian models, this meant they needed a revelation and a revealer - a Prophet - whose life could serve at once as a model for moral conduct and as a framework for the appearance of the revelation. Hence (Ubu'l Kassim was selected to be the Prophet), the Koran, the Hadith (Sayings of the Prophet), and the Sira were contrived and conjoined over a period of a couple of centuries. Topographically, after a century or so of Judaeo-Moslem monotheism centered on Jerusalem, in order to make Islam distinctively Arab... an inner Arabian biography of Mecca, Medina, the Quraysh, the Prophet and his Hegira (flight from Mecca to Medina alleged in 622, Year One in the Islamic calendar) was created as a purely literary artifact. An artifact, moreover, based not on faithful memories of real events, but on the fertile imaginations of Arab storytellers elaborating from allusive references in Koranic texts, the canonical text of the Koran not being fixed for nearly two centuries." (p.104)

Al-Rawandi concludes that the Sira, the life of Mohammed in Mecca and Medina is a myth, a "baseless fiction." This is the conclusion of a substantial number of serious academic historians working on Islamic Studies today. They include Mohammed Ibn al-Warraq, Mohammed Ibn al-Rawandi, John Wansbrough, Kenneth Cragg, Patricia Crone, Michael Cook, John Burton, Andrew Rippin, Julian Baldick, Gerald Hawting, and Suliman Bashear. Yet they and their research are virtually unknown.
http://www.davidstuff.com/historical/mecca.htm

The 45 Bonus Questions for Muslims:

by Robert Morey

The outline below contains the very answers to the very questions Muhammad did not want his followers to know, namely that Islam is a sanitized version of ancient polytheistic moon worship which he invented to exercise military control.

Does the Qur’an define the word "Allah"? No.
Was the name "Allah" revealed for the first time in the Qur’an? No
Does the Qur’an assume that its readers have already heard of "Allah"? Yes
Should we look into pre-Islamic Arabian history to see who "Allah" was before Muhammad? Yes.
According to Muslim tradition, was Muhammad born into a Christian family and tribe? No
Was he born into a Jewish family or tribe? No
What religion was his family and tribe? Pagans
What was the name of his pagan father? Abdullah (Abd + Allah)
Did Muhammad participate in the pagan ceremonies of Mecca? Yes
Did the Arabs in pre-Islamic times worship 360 gods? Yes
Did the pagans Arabs worship the sun, moon and the stars? Yes
Did the Arabs built temples to the Moon-god? Yes
Did different Arab tribes give the Moon-god different names/titles? Yes
What were some of the names/titles? Sin, Hubul, Ilumquh, Al-ilah.
Was the title "al-ilah" (the god) used of the Moon-god? Yes
Was the word "Allah" derived from "al-ilah?" Yes
Was the pagan "Allah" a high god in a pantheon of deities? Yes.
Was he worshipped at the Kabah? Yes.
Was Allah only one of many Meccan gods? Yes
Did they place a statue of Hubul on top of the Kabah? Yes.
At that time was Hubul considered the Moon-god? Yes.
Was the Kabah thus the "house of the Moon-god"? Yes.
Did the name "Allah" eventually replace that of Hubul as the name of the Moon god? Yes.
Did they call the Kabah the "house of Allah"? Yes
Did the pagans develop religious rites in connection with the worship of their gods? Yes.
Did the pagans practice the Pilgrimage, the Fast of Ramadan, running around the Kabah seven times, kissing the black stone, shaving the head, animal sacrifices, running up and down two hills, throwing stones at the devil, snorting water in and out the nose, praying several times a day toward Mecca, giving alms, Friday prayers, etc.? Yes.
Did Muhammad command his followers to participate in these pagan ceremonies while the pagans were still in control of Mecca? Yes (Yusuf Ali, fn. 214, pg. 78).
Did Islam go on to adopt these pagan religious rites? Yes. (Yusuf Ali: fn. 223 pg. 80).
Were al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat called "the daughters of Allah"? Yes.
Did the Qur’an at one point tell Muslims to worship al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat? Yes. In Surah 53:19-20.
Have those verses been "abrogated" out of the present Qur’an? Yes.
What were they called? "The Satanic Verses." Yes.
Was the crescent moon an ancient pagan symbol of the Moon-god throughout the ancient world? Yes.
Was it the religious symbol of the Moon-god in Arabia? Yes
Were stars also used as pagan symbols of the daughers of Allah? Yes
Did the Jews or the Christians of Arabia use the crescent moon with several stars next to it as symbols of their faith? No
Did Islam adopt the pagan crescent moon and stars as it religious symbol? Yes.
As Islam developed over the centuries, did it adopt pagan names, pagan ceremonies, pagan temples and pagan symbols? Yes
Is it possible that most Muslims do not know the pagan sources of the symbols and rites of their own religion? Yes.
Are they shocked to find out the true sources of their ceremonies and stories? Yes
Can Islam be the religion of Abraham if it is derived from paganism? No
What then is Islam? A modern version of one of the ancient fertility cults.
Is the "Allah" of the Qur’an, the Christian God of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? No
Do the Jews say that the Muslim "Allah" is their God too? No
Then whose god is Allah? Paganism

The 45 Bonus Questions for Muslims:

by Robert Morey

The outline below contains the very answers to the very questions Muhammad did not want his followers to know, namely that Islam is a sanitized version of ancient polytheistic moon worship which he invented to exercise military control.

Does the Qur’an define the word "Allah"? No.
Was the name "Allah" revealed for the first time in the Qur’an? No
Does the Qur’an assume that its readers have already heard of "Allah"? Yes
Should we look into pre-Islamic Arabian history to see who "Allah" was before Muhammad? Yes.
According to Muslim tradition, was Muhammad born into a Christian family and tribe? No
Was he born into a Jewish family or tribe? No
What religion was his family and tribe? Pagans
What was the name of his pagan father? Abdullah (Abd + Allah)
Did Muhammad participate in the pagan ceremonies of Mecca? Yes
Did the Arabs in pre-Islamic times worship 360 gods? Yes
Did the pagans Arabs worship the sun, moon and the stars? Yes
Did the Arabs built temples to the Moon-god? Yes
Did different Arab tribes give the Moon-god different names/titles? Yes
What were some of the names/titles? Sin, Hubul, Ilumquh, Al-ilah.
Was the title "al-ilah" (the god) used of the Moon-god? Yes
Was the word "Allah" derived from "al-ilah?" Yes
Was the pagan "Allah" a high god in a pantheon of deities? Yes.
Was he worshipped at the Kabah? Yes.
Was Allah only one of many Meccan gods? Yes
Did they place a statue of Hubul on top of the Kabah? Yes.
At that time was Hubul considered the Moon-god? Yes.
Was the Kabah thus the "house of the Moon-god"? Yes.
Did the name "Allah" eventually replace that of Hubul as the name of the Moon god? Yes.
Did they call the Kabah the "house of Allah"? Yes
Did the pagans develop religious rites in connection with the worship of their gods? Yes.
Did the pagans practice the Pilgrimage, the Fast of Ramadan, running around the Kabah seven times, kissing the black stone, shaving the head, animal sacrifices, running up and down two hills, throwing stones at the devil, snorting water in and out the nose, praying several times a day toward Mecca, giving alms, Friday prayers, etc.? Yes.
Did Muhammad command his followers to participate in these pagan ceremonies while the pagans were still in control of Mecca? Yes (Yusuf Ali, fn. 214, pg. 78).
Did Islam go on to adopt these pagan religious rites? Yes. (Yusuf Ali: fn. 223 pg. 80).
Were al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat called "the daughters of Allah"? Yes.
Did the Qur’an at one point tell Muslims to worship al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat? Yes. In Surah 53:19-20.
Have those verses been "abrogated" out of the present Qur’an? Yes.
What were they called? "The Satanic Verses." Yes.
Was the crescent moon an ancient pagan symbol of the Moon-god throughout the ancient world? Yes.
Was it the religious symbol of the Moon-god in Arabia? Yes
Were stars also used as pagan symbols of the daughers of Allah? Yes
Did the Jews or the Christians of Arabia use the crescent moon with several stars next to it as symbols of their faith? No
Did Islam adopt the pagan crescent moon and stars as it religious symbol? Yes.
As Islam developed over the centuries, did it adopt pagan names, pagan ceremonies, pagan temples and pagan symbols? Yes
Is it possible that most Muslims do not know the pagan sources of the symbols and rites of their own religion? Yes.
Are they shocked to find out the true sources of their ceremonies and stories? Yes
Can Islam be the religion of Abraham if it is derived from paganism? No
What then is Islam? A modern version of one of the ancient fertility cults.
Is the "Allah" of the Qur’an, the Christian God of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? No
Do the Jews say that the Muslim "Allah" is their God too? No
Then whose god is Allah? Paganism

Oh no. Terribly sorry for the double post. I must be just bloody pissed with that moon worshipping crusadewatcher.

Crusaderwatch:

Please let's have the exact chapter and verses in the Old Testament that approve sex with young girls.

Prove it, please.

He has been freed
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,144680,00.html
Greetings and Thank to Christ

Thanks Hutchrun,
for that info on Sikhs,
way prefer to have those fine folk
with me,
and they very obviously are.

islamics,
you are alone in this world,
no one trusts you,
no one fears you,
all oppose you.

Crusade watcher. You posts are a bother but no one is reading them. I skimmed one and it's full of the usual Islamic bullshit. Now I just scroll past.

Soon you will be blocked from cluttering up this website.

Mohammad is not the God in Islam, that is absolutely a false statement and a lie, he never told his followers to worship him.

Your pagan moon god cult does indeed worship Muhammad. That's why we call it Mohammedanism. You are commanded to act like robots and copy the life of Muhammad. The mass murderer who you call the best example for ALL MANKIND to emulate. Who you idiots claim, lead the perfect life. LOL!LOL! LOL!

Mr. crusadewatcher-
Waco just shows how the left deals with its enemies. They massacre them. Funny, at the time of Waco I was a left-leaning fool who thought the government should have just stormed the place ala Russia and gotten it over with immediately.

Yes, in the serious no bullshit world Waco was an example of totalitarian enforcement of political correctness in the extreme.

Dear Crusadewatch

Since you do not speak Aramaic or Hebrew or Greek how can you comment on what is in the bible. As well, you are taking biblical writings out of context. And again, since you are neither a Christian nor a Jew, how can you possibly know the truthfulness and beauty of our religions?

Funny aint it?? How the mussi book says the people of the Book and want to be like them in Gods favor so they knew that the book was right but could not read that book to know what it said??

So ?? Now they bash the Book??

Just Funny aint it??

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH, WISDOM, SIGHT, AND COURAGE TO STAY THE COURSE TO VICTORY TO DESTROY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM OPEN THE WORLDS EYES TO THEIR EVIL AMEN

My dear beloved fellow JWers:

You have allowed this cut-and-paste spammer to completely hijack this thread and establish her own agenda. She isn't even intelligent nor articulate enough to make her own arguments but just quotes others' propaganda. You have allowed her to waste Spencer's valuable bandwidth, so I would suggest ponying up at the donations link on the homepage.

Remember, as I've said many times, when you engage the savages, it only encourages them. DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.

Talk about Taqiyya & Da'wa Fest 2005.

"...but their problems do not come from Islam, it comes from their leaders, and puppet governments set up by imperialist western nations..."

That's for suckers.
Their problem is that there are too many suckers and cowards in the Middle East, and suckers and cowards don't make good governments. They would rather put up with their dictators in Syria, their theofascists in Iran and their monarchies in Saudi Arabia rather than run them out of power.
As for Islam, there's no question it is part of the problem - where it is rigidly enforced, you have the grossest human rights problems (Sudan, Iran, Saudi Arabia).
Honest Middle Easterners recognize that their problems are at home, not elsewhere. It's in hearts and minds where change has to come - that's their problem.

Was it all about money, power and sex? Yes.
Was Muhammad demon-possessed? Yes.
Did anyone in Mecca believe him? Hardly anyone.
Did anyone in Medina believe him? No.
Did Muhammad then go on a rampage for booty? Yes.
Is Allah's paradise a brothel? Yes
Does Allah attend to the torturing of souls in Hell? Yes.
Did Muhammad break every one of the 10 commandments?
Yes.

"The only Ilah(god) is Allah". Therefore Allah is his name, not the word for God, and Yahweh is the name of the Judeo-Christian god. And thus, Islam collapses.

Are we preaching to the choir here? Yes.

Dear Crusade Watcher,
What are you trying to prove by talking about bad Christians, Hindus, Buddhist or Jews? Every religion have their share of fundamentalists who do not want coexist with others. For Islam that number is 100%, for other religions it is probably 1-5%. There lies the difference.

Muslims talk about ill treatment of Muslims in India. Do you know how Kashmir became muslim majority? During the time of Akbar, Hindus, Buddhists and Muslims could get married and keep their own religion. However, his decendents FORCED every Hindu/Buddhist who had a Muslim spouse to convert to Islam. You know what the Muslims are taught after they are coverted/reverted? They are taught to HATE the culture and religion their fore fathers practiced.

I read a testimony of an Indian Muslim about how his family converted to Islam. A Pir (muslim religious leader) came to their village and put a chunk of beef in the village well. Then he proclaimed as Hindus cannot drink from that well tainted with beef, they should convert to Islam. And that is what the helpless people from that village did. His great-grandfather was supposed to become a scholar but ended up being a butcher because of his "forced" conversion. Is this a noble way to propagate religion?

Tell me why millions of buddhist and hindus were butchered by Muslims? Why Buddhist sites in Afganistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh are vandalized? Why hindus and buddhist are fleeing Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh?

You also mention you were born in the west and you have no choice but to live here. Yes, you do. Go back to an Islamic country if you have so much hatred against the "kafirs". But remember, you forefathers were "kafirs" too. When you go to your islamic heaven, you will not see your ancestors because they were "kafirs".

Since you gave sooo many articles about bad kafirs hurting Muslims, here is one that will prove bad people exist every where - even in your religion.

Please stop hating kafirs, we are all human beings - just like you.

Hindu marries Muslim, angry mob kills brother
Press Trust Of India
Posted online: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 at 1220 hours IST
Updated: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 at 1249 hours IST

Vadodara, January 18: A mob killed a youth in Gajipura locality in neighbouring Kheda district, police said.

The youth identified as Pappu Rana was killed by the mob because his brother Vijay Rana had married a Muslim girl, Minaz, police said.

The minority community members had protested Vijay getting married to Minaz.

Police authorities had set up a police point with three policemen in the area to provide protection to the Rana family.

Despite police protection the group belonging to minority community managed to attack Pappu Rana with sharp weapons and killed him.

Dear Crusade Watcher,
What are you trying to prove by talking about bad Christians, Hindus, Buddhist or Jews? Every religion have their share of fundamentalists who do not want coexist with others. For Islam that number is 100%, for other religions it is probably 1-5%. There lies the difference.

Muslims talk about ill treatment of Muslims in India. Do you know how Kashmir became muslim majority? During the time of Akbar, Hindus, Buddhists and Muslims could get married and keep their own religion. However, his decendents FORCED every Hindu/Buddhist who had a Muslim spouse to convert to Islam. You know what the Muslims are taught after they are coverted/reverted? They are taught to HATE the culture and religion their fore fathers practiced.

I read a testimony of an Indian Muslim about how his family converted to Islam. A Pir (muslim religious leader) came to their village and put a chunk of beef in the village well. Then he proclaimed as Hindus cannot drink from that well tainted with beef, they should convert to Islam. And that is what the helpless people from that village did. His great-grandfather was supposed to become a scholar but ended up being a butcher because of his "forced" conversion. Is this a noble way to propagate religion?

Tell me why millions of buddhist and hindus were butchered by Muslims? Why Buddhist sites in Afganistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh are vandalized? Why hindus and buddhist are fleeing Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh?

You also mention you were born in the west and you have no choice but to live here. Yes, you do. Go back to an Islamic country if you have so much hatred against the "kafirs". But remember, you forefathers were "kafirs" too. When you go to your islamic heaven, you will not see your ancestors because they were "kafirs".

Since you gave sooo many articles about bad kafirs hurting Muslims, here is one that will prove bad people exist every where - even in your religion.

Please stop hating kafirs, we are all human beings - just like you.

Hindu marries Muslim, angry mob kills brother
Press Trust Of India
Posted online: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 at 1220 hours IST
Updated: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 at 1249 hours IST

Vadodara, January 18: A mob killed a youth in Gajipura locality in neighbouring Kheda district, police said.

The youth identified as Pappu Rana was killed by the mob because his brother Vijay Rana had married a Muslim girl, Minaz, police said.

The minority community members had protested Vijay getting married to Minaz.

Police authorities had set up a police point with three policemen in the area to provide protection to the Rana family.

Despite police protection the group belonging to minority community managed to attack Pappu Rana with sharp weapons and killed him.

Crusadewatcher, why don't you go over to

http://faithfreedom.org/ and try to convince Ali Sina of the goodness of Islam, please.

Should have been,
http:/www.faithfreedom.org/

CGW,
I've just posted a few facts, - not propaganda. If you call it propaganda its because you don't want to face the truth.

whitequeen = caped crusadewatcher
?