Stoning to death those commiting Adultery, and lashing
By: Asadullah Ali
The punishments required in Islam for certain crimes are often considered “barbaric” by non-Muslims and liberal Muslims alike. However, I believe this is due primarily to a misunderstanding of what the punishments entail and what exactly is being punished.
For example, many consider the punishments for adultery to be extremely harsh (i.e. lashing and stoning), but what many people don’t understand is that adultery is not the thing that is actually punished — rather it’s the public display of adultery. This is why four witnesses are required; especially since Islam prohibits entering someone’s private property without permission.
In other words, for such a punishment to be enacted, you’d literally have to have illegal sexual intercourse in a public place (enough so that you’d be noticed in full detail by four people).
Now, there are those who will argue that even with such a clarification, the punishments are still “too harsh”. Why lash an unmarried couple for public displays of fornication? Why stone a married person for the same? Why not just fine them or jail them for a short amount of time?
But these questions display a lack of moral integrity and virtue when it comes to the issue of public displays of adultery. We are not just talking about the act of illegal intercourse here, but two people having the audacity to make it public — an open rebellion against the very foundations of society itself (i.e. the family). It is not some innocuous performance done out of ignorance, but a willing protest against all moral decency.
And it’s far worse when a married person does it. Not only are they spitting on the institution of marriage itself, but spitting in the face of their own family and children. Adultery is already such a heinous crime that one wonders why someone would have the gall to advertise it to the world. Even murderers and thieves try not to be as conspicuous.
Hence why the punishments are so harsh, because the very act that is being punished is so extreme — almost inconceivable.
Thus, I think there is a no more fitting statement than “they were asking for it”, because when you don’t even bother to hide such an indecency then you are literally asking for whatever punishment exist — no matter whether you perceive it as lenient or harsh.
At that point, neither of these categories matter, because you have agreed to the punishment by virtue of your behavior.
By- Asadullah Ali
Also, consider the West has many forms of physical discipline, such as using electric shock stun guns, police buttons, to punish those not conforming with the law.
Extra Rebuttal info:
Critic wrote:
“what many people don’t understand is that adultery is not the thing that is actually punished — rather it’s the public display of adultery.”
So suppose a case in which a man and a woman(both married) is proven to have commited adultery through medical tests, but at the same time it is discovered that they did so in private, behind closed doors. Will they be spared or have to face the punishment?
Muslim – Response:
Because they have agreed to take a medical test, that in its self is an agreement to somthing similiar to “Self confession”.
Therefore, it was their will to be transparent about it, thus they didnt keep it secret, therefore its the same as doing it in public display for why they get punished.
There was a case like this similiar when a Women came to the prophet and gave a self confession and wanted the hadd punishment, the Prophet turned her away three times, but she still insisted because she didnt wish an afterlife punishment which was worse than a worldy one.
One who reads the Qur’an and hadith literature cannot miss the several references concerning hell. While many would understandably appreciate why some of humanity’s worst criminals might deserve to burn in hell temporarily for their horrendous crimes, several would struggle with the idea of one enduring hell eternally for failing to believe in the correct religion.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was asked by his companions, “What is the biggest sin in the sight of Allah?” He said, “To set up rivals or those equal unto Allah, though He is the one who created you.” [Saheeh Al-Bukhari].
The Prophet described Shirk (polytheism) as the worst sin, as worship is a right due to Allah alone. It is wicked because it involves equalizing between He, who is the ultimate source of our existence and sustenance, with the creation that could barely help themselves. It is the pinnacle of ingratitude and treachery.
Allah is maximally quintessential in all His attributes. He is maximally perfect in His generosity, mercy, justice, power, knowledge, supremacy, etc. The utmost magnificence of His attributes makes Him one with an infinitely qualitative status. Allah’s sole right to the reception of worship is the logical and necessary outcome of His being ascribed with these attributes. It is the most significant right a maximally perfect being such as Allah lays claim to, and its infringement is the most severe crime that could be committed.
The severity of a crime is not only determined by how evil the crime itself is but also by the moral worth or status of the offending side. For instance, animal abuse is not as severe as human abuse because the moral status of the human being is worthier than the animals. Consistently, seeing that God is infinitely more worthy, dignified, and greater than any other being, the severity of a crime committed against God should not be subjected to human conceptions of justice that we are ordinarily accustomed to. This entails that the ultimate crime of Shirk committed against Him would justly warrant a maximal punishment which takes form in an endless sequence of epochs of suffering in hell, as it is a fitting testament to the infinite worth of the offended God.
Allah guides the one who is genuinely determined to seek the truth. He states: “Whoever Allah wishes to guide; He expands his breast to Islam” [6:125]. The individual must truly want to submit to God even if it means conceding that he has been wrong about his religious views all along, changing his moral paradigm, upsetting his family and friends, and changing his lifestyle. If that determination is truly there, then Allah would enable that individual by strengthening his willpower and guiding his decisions to take the measures necessary to acquire the truth of Islam. Allah would enable him to want to undergo his research correctly and in an unbiased fashion. Allah would assist him by emboldening him and instilling courage in him to confront his family and friends about the new religion he has embraced.
Those who willingly choose not to investigate the truth claims of serious contending belief systems such as Islam, either out of indifference or unjustified misplaced overconfidence in their current beliefs, are morally culpable, as they did not take the duty of religious inquiry seriously enough. If we contrast how much research and how factual people are when making decisions about some mundane matters (e.g., determining which car to buy) with finding out what the true religion is, we see that many fall short.
Allah states that He would not bear people’s burdens that they are not able to bear. [6:152] On the Day of Judgment, those entering hell will concede that they were wrong and worthy of blame. They will not be kicking and screaming that God was unfair to them, but rather that it was their fault. [67:10]
Some people say that we are born into our respective faiths and that it is unjust for us to be punished for something we did not choose. However, we do choose to remain in our faiths. Being born into a non-Muslim family is indeed a barrier, but it can be overcome. It is widely common to see people abandoning their parents’ belief systems and traditions for something else. The problem, however, is that many make wrong decisions when it comes to the new beliefs they decide to adopt.
Moreover, being born into something cannot be a blanket moral excuse. For instance, we would not excuse racists to remain, racists, simply because they were brought up in a racist household. We would expect them to know better and make the right decision of change later.
Some question how God can be All-Merciful, despite punishing some in hell for eternity. As was already stated, Allah will not place anybody in hell unless they have a fair opportunity to make decisions that would have placed them on the right course toward the path of guidance. Allah does not owe us salvation. Mercy is the remission or forgiveness of a penalty that is already fair to apply to begin with. This is especially the case when Allah Himself has assured us that He does not let anyone carry a burden too heavy for them to bear.
To understand “All-Merciful” as an attribute entailing that Allah is entirely merciful to everybody unconditionally is problematic. We need to understand that Allah’s attributes of mercy and wrath are appropriately relational to that, which is fitting to these attributes. For example, a rebellious Satan is not fit to receive Allah’s mercy. For Allah to never unleash His wrath on unrepentant criminals could not be loving and merciful to the victims who do not obtain justice in this life. And so on.
In summary, standard objections raised against hell stem from a lack of appreciation for God’s status as an infinitely majestic being and a misunderstanding of how His divine attributes are to be conceived. If one believes in God, as the vast majority of people do, then he ought to find out what God has to say about the purpose of our lives, how to treat people, whether there is salvation, whether God is pleased with us or not, whether we are indebted to God for our existence, etc. Man must find out what his duties are.
There is a lot at stake here, and the more there is a stake in something, the more vital it is that we have correct beliefs concerning that thing. The first essential step is to pray and yearn for God’s guidance genuinely and be willing to sacrifice all that it would take to attain it.
– By Bassam Zawadi
Let’s continue…….
Atheist: “Why is God unjust? How can He punish unbelievers for Eternity in Hell”?
Me: “Accept Islam. And God will admit you into paradise. But if you do not. Hell will be your Eternal abode”.
Atheist: “No I don’t wish to accept Islam”.
Me: But if you do not, then you will burn in hell forever”!
Atheist: I don’t care”.
Me: “You don’t care about going to an Eternal hell”?
Atheist: %@#÷^*
Me: See the point here folks, Allah is not unjust. Allah makes an “agreement” with Atheists or unbelievers “before” he puts them to hell “forever”. Atheists “accept” the condition of Eternal hell rather than paradise by refusing to “accept” Islam. Therefore an Atheist can not call: “Allah unjust” or that an Eternal punishment is “unjust”. If the Atheist refused to accept the invitation to Islam, then “technically” He has rather accepted an Eternal hellfire So why would an unbeliever claim Allah is unjust with him on the day of judgement?
Allah (SWT) makes it very clear to unbelievers in the Quran, that He warns them of Islam and warns them of the “consequences” if they refuse to accept Islam. Thus it is not unjust for hellfire for being Eternal for them, if that’s the fate Atheists have chosen for themselves!
This Day shall every person be recompensed for what he earned. No injustice (shall be done to anybody). Truly, Allah is Swift in reckoning. (Quran 40:17)
Furthermore:
Also please visit this short video response
Where Ali Dawah responds to critics that claim Allah is an unjust God, for punishing unbelievers for Eternity for a finite sin (crime), committed on earth. He explains using the (Quran 22:99-100) there is no such thing as a finite sin for unbelievers because Allah says in the Quran, Had we sent the Unbelievers back to earth, they will go back to their disbelief, and if we let them live forever on the earth, they would remain on disbelief forever, thus justifying an Eternal Hell. Also note, this verse doesn’t mean sending back to earth means, He will send a man that He judged back to earth, and with that same faculty of seeing Heaven, Angels, Day of Judgement, He will send back to earth, of course, no one would go back to disbelief after seeing such signs. Rather Allah when He speaks about sending them back, He is talking about making everything start all over again, where man has not seen Angels, heaven, God or hell. Allah says even if we did this, He would still go back to disbelieving even if we put him to the test again.
Bellow, is two Atheists who prove that type of arrogance listens:
Counter Rebbutal section:
Atheist wrote:
My response:
@Polymath Let me explain the I don’t care part: An Atheist says, “he doesn’t care, or consider the Proof for the evidence of God, nor accept the Evidence from theists arguments as valid evidence for the Proof of God. Thus in his rejection has ” technically accepted to refuse to accept the Evidence, thus in doing so, He has picked for himself a destination which warns unbelievers of a punishment. Thus now no unbeliever can accuse God that they have not been “warned” thus their punishment is now justified. Also, some Atheists say Even if God was real, they will still refuse to believe in him. Martin Rowson (Atheist editor-writer and Cartoonist” says:” if God proved He existed I still wouldn’t Believe in him. (Page 22.) Another Atheist named: Thomas Nagel( Atheist Professor of Philosophy) writes: I want Atheism to be true. Is that I hope there is no God. I don’t want there to be a God. I don’t want the universe to be like that. (Last Word p.g 130-131).
So of course there are Atheists who ” deliberately choose to disbelieve in the evidence”. Even if that evidence was black and white. Just as there are flat earthers who ” deliberately” chose to reject the earth is round, there are also Unbelievers who deliberately deny the clear evidence of intelligent design.
Also if a sceptic was searching for the truth, Allah will guide him to Islam, the truth is most Atheist sceptics are not genuinely sincere in searching and accepting the truth.
And the arguement still stands, even if God’s religion has not convinced you it’s the truth, you have rejected the arguement for God’s existence, so in doing so you have accepted the consequences of following a theory that rejects the Evidence, thus in doing so, you have technically “accepted the consequences of Eternal damnation. If that evidence you reject turns out to be true.
Atheist wrote:
My Response:
@Polymath
The truth? (It is not black and white)?
Quran: We shall show them Our signs in the horizons and themselves, till it is clear to them that it is the truth. Suffices it not as to thy Lord, that He is witness over everything? Quran 41:53
For they had denied the truth when it came to them, but there is going to reach them the news of what they used to ridicule. Quran 6:5
As one can see from the above verses, Allah tells us in the Quran the Unbelievers will receive the Truth, and this truth will be made clear for them (verses41:53). And Allah tells us in (verses 6:5) that they will still deny them.
So even if an Atheist claims his honesty about searching for truth, and claiming there is no evidence, Allah tells us they are liars.
Let’s read the next verses: And, do not cloak (and confuse) the truth with falsehood. Do not suppress the truth knowingly. (Quran, 2:42)”
Yea, in their own (eyes), will become manifest what before they concealed. But if they were returned, they would certainly relapse to the things they were forbidden, for they are indeed liars. (Quran, 6:28)”
In these verses Allah tells us, that the Unbelievers conceal the truth, in other words, do not admit the truth even if it has convinced them, then Allah tells us, that they are liars when they claim there is no evidence for God or Islam. Therefore no matter how much an Atheist or an unbeliever claims his be sincere and still rejects Islam, Allah calls him a liar. For why now his Abode in hell is justifiable for Eternity. Because the Unbeliever has chosen the path of unbelief and accepted its consequence, therefore he can not blame Allah for the Eternal damnation the Atheist chose for himself by intentionally denying the truth. Only Honest and Sincere agnostics, unbelievers or Atheists will accept Islam, the liars and unsincere ones will die rejecting the truth, and this is clearly why they go to hell for Eternity, that’s the abode they chose for themselves. There they can not blame anyone but themselves, for accepting Eternal damnation, due to their arrogance, and insincerity.
I would also like to conclude by saying this, Atheists/Agnostics like to criticise God for eternal punishment, and how they think this is unfair, and how religion has no real justice.
However, let’s look at the Atheist worldview and the Secular system he believes to follow. Does following other than religion bring justice?
The answer is not. Take, for example, the 50 people shot and killed in the Christchurch massacre. The victim’s families in court spoke to the judge saying;
No punishment you impose on Brendan Tarrant will ever be enough for the perpetrator.
This is true when you think about it. Here is a ruthless man that killed 50 innocent people. So how is putting 1 man in jail for the rest of his already half-lived life, even compatible with the 50 lives? It is not. Even if capital punishment was imposed. Killing 1 life compared to the lives of 50 people is still not compatible.
However what would be compatible, is eternal punishment for those 50 people, and of course, compromised with the punishment of eternal unbelief.
See, religion unlike the Atheist world view gives much greater justice.
Also listen to the arguments here that Justifies why God created Hell for Unbelievers
Christians often tell Muslims there is no evidence in the Bible, of the Prophecy of Prophet Muhammed (PBUH), foretold in the Bible. So in this paper, I will prove to you using (1 John 4:1-4) to prove to the Christian readers that this passage no doubt give evidence of the coming of future Prophets. I shall include Christian responses, and show how these arguments can be countered. So let us begin:
Read the passage:
So what we can see from the above verse; the term spirit is in conjunction with a Prophet. Though this passage talks about how to recognize a false spirited Prophet. It also tells us how to recognize truthful spirited Prophets.
The verse above also tells us, that Prophets will come to you, in the future tense, and so it advises us, how to recognize them. This proves that the Bible endorsed accepting future Prophets so long as they fit well with the definition, of how we define who is the truthful spirited Prophet. So what are the criteria that need to be established to determine a truthful prophet?
He must acknowledge that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.
So does the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) fit this criterion? Certainly, there are many passages in the Quran, where the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) attested a Book, that clarifies Jesus to come in the flesh:
Christian will say Muhammed is in the Bible, but only when it refers to “False spirit in 1 john 4:1
Muslim-Response:
Yet all this time, Christians argue the Prophet is never in the Bible? But only when Christians want to prove he’s a “False Prophet”, he suddenly appears in 1 John 4:1?
Interesting Hey?
So if the Prophet can be in 1 john 4:1, why then He can not be in 1 john 4:2? As the Truthful spirited Prophet?
Answering Christian Objection 2:
Jesus said the one who denies the Son Denies the Father. Therefore Muhammed denies the “Sonship” and “Fathership”. Therefore he denied Jesus to come on flesh.
Muslim-Response:
The term “Son” can be understood in the Bible as “Servent”.
Jesus said, ” indeed, I am the servant of Allah He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet. (Quran 19:30)
So the term, Son is clearly “metaphorical” because it can mean Servant, just like the term” Father” is also understood as being Metaphorical. Because even Apostle Paul claimed to be All our ” Father” read:
Paul said; 15 Even if you had ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.
Therefore these terms such as Father and Son, do not mean in the real sense, rather they are more inclined to a metaphorical sense. Thus Prophet Muhammed does not Deny Jesus as a Servant of God nor denied the Father in a Metaphorical sense in the biblical language as the God of this Universe. Jesus in the Bible refers to himself even as the; “The Son of Man”. (Mathew 12:8)
But Jesus is not Man’s son, He’s God’s Son, right? So how can He be called Son of Man? Well, it’s now clear, that terms such as “Son of Man, or Son of God, are all “Metaphorical” Terms.
After all, Jesus spoke on, Parables, Metaphors and allegories
I find this one pretty hilarious, a Christian by the name of Tonu writes;
That Prophet Muhammed does not believe in Jesus quoting: (John 8:24) So I replied this was pretty idiotic. Because Muslims (I.e) the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) believe in the Personhood of Jesus.
Muslim-Response:
So what does the desperate Christian do, He tries to twist the Quran, to appeal that the Quran is talking about a “different Jesus”. However, this has been refuted here:
Now, this gets even more interesting, if Christians honestly believe that, the Qur’anic Jesus is a “different Jesus” and not the Jesus of Christianity who was born from a virgin? Then why do “Christians appeal to this Sureh:
Christians say this is “Evidence” Jesus died on the Cross” according to the Quran. “And the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive”.
Of course, the Islamic position is, this is talking about “Jesus second coming” where He (Jesus) will be sent to the earth a second time, will die a natural death, then rise from the dead.
In any case, Christians still use Sureh 19:33, to prove to Muslims, that the same Jesus of the Bible, who died on the Cross, is the very same Jesus in the Quran (Sarah 19:33).
So as you can see, we are seeing a huge inconsistency, from Christians like Tonu. Where He desperately tries to claim, Jesus of the Quran is a different Jesus to the Bible, but then His same Christian folks, try to selectively Quote certain verses of the Quran to prove the very same Jesus of the Bible!
Answering Christian Objection 3:
Christian writes, quoting 1 john 4:1-4 the part where it says; ……… Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God,
Muslim-Response:
Both, Mario and Tonu, are suggesting Prophet Muhammed’s God, is not the same God as Jesus.
However, it gets really, interesting because Christian Apologists like “Christian Prince” tries to even prove “Allah is a Trinity”.
See:
So if Christians like Mario and Tonu want to, prove Allah is a different God than the one Jesus had in the Bible, why then do other Christian Apologists appeal to the Quran, to prove that Allah is a “Triune God”, just as the Biblical God?
Interesting Hey?
As Dr James White says” Inconsistency is the sign of a failed arguement”
Anyhow, the fact is if we put to the side, the opinionated theological differences, then both the Qur’anic and the Biblical God are the “same God”, thus Prophets Muhammad’s God, and Jesus God is the same.
Answering Christian Objection 4:
Muslim-Response:
So the assertion here is, that if the Prophet Muhammed is a true Prophet and did confirm Jesus came in the flesh, He the Prophet Muhammed needs to confirm the correct theological belief about Jesus, that being is that the Prophet needs to affirm that Jesus is God. But let me just take you back for a moment, when we look at 1 John 4:1-4.
Nowhere in this “passage does it say, the spirit of truth “The prophet” must confess Jesus has come in the flesh “as God”. Thus this is not the criteria. Rather all the verse says is;
Quote: “This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God”.
Notice nowhere does the verse ever say, He must declare “God is with Us in Jesus”. Thus it’s clear, a Christian is forcing separate criteria to the one mentioned in (1 John 4:1-4).
Where we prove, that terms like being called “God” or “Son of God” are to be understood in Metaphorical Terms as Godly People.
Answering Christian Objection 5:
Muslim-Response:
Prophet, Muhammed (PBUH) is a sinner? Therefore He, can not be the Truthful Spirit, in 1 John 4:1-4?
Read what Apostle Paul said;
We are told that “Apostle Paul” who admits His the Worst of Sinners, Yet Christians don’t reject Paul, or his letters, now do they? They have no issue in accepting Paul as a Prophet. Also another reminder, the criteria of (1 john 4:1-4) does not say, the spirit of truth (Prophet) must be “Free of Sin”. So again a Christian has forced his criteria to the text. Additionally are Christians really, assuming that the Prophet to come, must be “Sinless”? And yet I thought, that the only one without “Sin” was to be Jesus Christ. So are Christians assuming that there is to come to another “sinless being like Jesus?
Interesting Hey?
Answering Christian Objection 6:
Jesus is the “only way”
Muslim-Response:
Now even more interesting if Jesus was “The only way” for all times, He wouldn’t be preaching about future Prophets to come would He? Which He did in (1 John 4:1-4).
Now I have a crossfire section with the Christian missionary:
Note: We already answered the claim for “Sinner”.
As you can see the Christian is in denial and does not wish to list the truthful spirited “foretold Future Prophets as prophecised in (1 John 4:1-4), and the Christian just wishes to talk about the False ones, so all I could do is get reminded by what Jesus said;
And what the Quran has said;
Allah, (SWT) Has spoken the Truth, they will continue to conceal the “Future Prophets”. Until Allah (SWT) confronts them on the Day of Judgement.
Ameen.
Note: even if a Christian claims Apostle Paul was a Prophet after Jesus, this does not disqualify the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) because “Testing the Spirits are in the Plural, as the Christian himself admitted, meaning it doesn’t have to refer to one. It could be one, but it doesn’t have to mean only one, according to the Bible, and of course one needs to also reason that, Paul himself never called himself “A Prophet”. Unlike the Prophet Muhammed. See our bellow article, where we talk about this further in yet another passage of the Bible indicating another Prophecy about Prophet Muhammed (Pbuh) see:
The Early Jews were seeking and asking around for the several personalities mentioned in many places in the Old Testament. They understood that these personalities will be coming in the future, so they started their enquiry based on the knowledge they had since they were learned about their books.
So the Jews went to first ask “John the Baptist” since he was a devotee to God in:
Notice there is a distinction between Christ Messiah and Prophet. Christians want to claim they were only enquiring a Prophet who is Jesus. However, what we can see is 3 distinct people are being enquired:
1 – Christ = Jesus
2 – Elijah
3 – That Prophet = Who is it?
It’s clear they were waiting for Messiah Jesus and a man called Elijah additionally a Prophet distinct from Messiah. Otherwise, they would have just said. Messiah and Elijah. However, they mentioned the 3rd identity. We dont dispute that the Prophecy in 1 john 20-21 is not about Jesus. It is about Jesus. But it’s not just about Jesus. The Enquiry is also about other people besides Jesus. One happens to be about Elijah and the third is That Prophet. That is why they asked three questions, as opposed to two questions. The three Questions refer to three distinct individuals. So let’s ask the Christians we know who the TWO that is being inquired Jesus and Elijah who is the third?
Some Christians when you push them to show you who is the third? I’ve had a Christian tell me it was ” Apostle Paul”. However there is one issue with this, Apostle Paul never specifically identified himself as a “Prophet”. Nor was He ever called a “Prophet”.
However, the Prophet of Islam was named a Prophet. Quran 7:158 Quran 33:40. Therefore the third enquiry can not be talking about Apostle Paul. And if a Christian claim, well Paul still did duties Prophets do, as one Christian article suggests here:
Then by that token, any other person besides Paul can also be that third Enquiry namely the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) who at least fits the definition of the enquiry head-on. It gets hilarious, Christians identify Paul namely as, “Apostle Paul” and not ” Prophet Paul”, but I guess if we continue to promote, Prophet Muhammed, being part of (John 1:20-21) Christians will probably start getting so annoyed and start naming Paul, Prophet Paul, instead of Apostle Paul, even though none of Paul’s Disciples or Jesus Disciples “EVER” called Paul a Prophet!
And isn’t it, interesting Christians will vigorously argue with Muslims, saying there is no passage in the Bible that talks about the coming of Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) after Jesus. But then they conveniently shove Paul into (John 1:20-21), to deny Prophet Muhammed (PBUH)
That’s Cute.
I once also engaged a Christian Apologist by the name of Nakdimon Yasmeen, one of the author’s at AnsweringIslamcom, who told Me, the Jews were ignorant, that’s why they mistakenly inquired about three separate individuals, rather they were only supposed to enquire about Jesus.
My Response to that would be, are we led to believe, that these early Jews, were “only wise” in their enquiry about Jesus? But foolish to enquire about other Prophets? Well, I find that interesting though, you accept Paul after Jesus.
They fail in the consistency department, don’t they?
” I believe the Lord gave peace this means; this is going to lead to healing, I believe this is coming from the “Holy Spirit”.
Of course, this False Prophecy turned out False, and Nabeel Passed away.
Please don’t be offended or think im mocking Nabeel death. I am not, im just questioning these apparent, feelings and revelations of the Holy Spirit telling Nabeel’s wife and assuring Her, that Her husband Nabeel illness “will lead to his healing”. She made a definitive statement, and claimed She believes it’s coming to her from “The Holy Spirit”
This is the same family that would say Nabeel had “visions” before his conversion to Christianity. And this was a “sign” Christianity was the true religion!
Now for my interaction with a Christian on this Subject of False Prophecy foretold by Nabeels Wife.
Christian wrote:
More videos on nabeel from a Muslim but you’re all convinced you have no malice or ill intention when posting them. This is a propaganda video, watch the whole thing. For one he names his church in Texas, which is a baptist church. This is meant to continue to smear his name because he preached at bethel. How many young mothers and wives out there would love God to heal their husbands and not be left as single mums struggling to raise a child alone but you’ve twisted it to make it seem evil or not good to want to believe in a positive outcome. Why don’t you deal with Christians like Matt chandler who had stage 4 brain cancer or tumours however you say it and God healed him and he’s still preaching years after they took a huge chunk of his brain out. God does heal and making fun of people looking for it is sinful. If Islam is real why do you lot feel the need to dance and celebrate the death of this man?
Muslim-Response:
If you have seen the whole video what exactly did we misinterpret? Her statements are clear, she said along those lines, “she felt that the Spirit inspired her that Nabeel will be healed”. She passed on a definitive response. We wouldn’t have gone after Nabeel if he wasn’t making claims that he accepted Christianity and left Islam because one of those reasons was based on visions and dreams from the Holy Spirit. Why are you feeling so disheartening? Im 100% certain that had Nabeel Survived you Christians would have praised Nabeel Wife and her visions, but when it turns out false you want to play the victim card?
It’s not our fault that Nabeels Family were insisting on definitive statements to prove a Miracle through Nabeels Trauma. So my advice next time is “tone it down” and stop preaching that the Holy Spirit speaks to you with words of Healing, that way no one will complain when the guy doesn’t get healed, it is plain and simple. If any Christian makes such definitive claims and didn’t survive I can assure you we would have gone after him too. And “Yes” Mothers out there can ask for healing, but there is one thing asking, and another thing claiming you had a definitive response, which seems to be what Nabeel Wife suggested.
If Matt Chandler’s wife went on social media said she had a vision of Prophet Muhammed saying he will Survive in Hospital concerning her Husband. All the Christian Apologists would have criticized these visions, once He passed away.
Christian wrote:
Thanks for accepting that you’re going after him. All these posts and everyone is claiming no malice but at least you’re honest. My problem with this after he died Muslims were posting that he had lost his faith and was going to bizarre lengths to get healed. This video continues that thread. I wonder if you were dying your wife would give you and your people words of confronting or give you the worst-case scenario. She’s comforting her husband and giving him hope and it’s quite wicked to turn it into something to rejoice over. I wonder how many Muslims will start drinking after this, you seem so eager to celebrate a win that I think someone might buy some champagne to toast the death of this young father.
Muslim-Response
Again I dont know how much more clear I can make it, we are not going after and picking on Nabeels suffering rather going after and pointing out the false Prophecy made in the name of the Holy Spirit. Again, there is a difference between giving hope like, saying things like you believe that God will heal you and another thing claiming that you received a definitive response from the Holy Spirit that “he will heal you”. That is now a “Clear False Prophecy in the Holy Spirit name” And giving a False hope, which is quite sad. I couldn’t care less if you think we are celebrating, it’s another thing when you’re trying to wash it down like it is nothing. Like I said earlier, had Nabeel Survived you would have celebrated the Prophecy made by his Wife, and please stop pretending that you wouldn’t have. You guys would have lynched on the opportunity and made tons of videos about how Nabeel surviving this was another miracle healing promised by Nabeels Wife’s Holy Spirit.
Christian wrote:
Did she say it was a vision or a feeling inside of her like a hope.?
Muslim-Response
These are her words:
1- She said “I believe the Lord gave peace”
2- She said: “This meant: healing”.
3- She said: She believed: “it was from the Holy Spirit”.
So I dont know how you like to interpret it? vision or feeling?
Whatever floats your boat. She claimed to know how the Holy Spirit conveys the message. Nabeel’s wife said: “He will be healed”. Well more accurately the Holy Ghost. So stop pretending it’s not a ” failed Prophecy”. It is clear.
Christian wrote:
His wife was proven wrong and people need to stop putting words in Gods’ mouth, they end up looking stupid if proven wrong.
Muslim-Response
So you finally admit, his wife was proven wrong. Why then should anyone believe the rest of the stuff that comes out of their mouths concerning Nabeels visions? If his wife Got it wrong about the Holy Spirit working through her why should we accept Nabeel visions? Regarding one of the reasons why Christianity was true, Maybe that too are fraudulent tales like his own wife’s narrative.
Christian wrote:
The fact that he’s dead means she was wrong but I don’t see any malice in a wife comforting her dying husband. I wouldn’t have used those words but it’s wicked that the man hasn’t been buried and stupid little things like this are being thrown around. Goes to show just how well he lived his life because you’re all on a witch hunt and this is the level you’re stooping to over a dead man and his grieving widow.
Muslim-Response
So why is Nabeel’s wife, giving falsified Prophecy? Is this how Yahway looks after Nabeel gives him a false preacher wife, to lie or mislead Nabeel? And maybe Yahway gave Nabeel also a fake preacher like David Wood who also tricked him?
Christian wrote:
You’re taking something so small and making it so big. I don’t think anything changes whether you accept his visions or not. Many people in the Muslim world are having them. You’ve already rejected the guy, let him rest in peace.
Muslim-Response
Many Muslims are not having these visions. As even your bible says that the Devil can appear as the Angel of light. For all, I care they were getting false visions like Nabeel’s wife and possibly Nabeel himself. So yeh sad these guys got deceived. David wood his teacher the bigger deceiver sent this guy to hell if He did die indeed unrepented.
(Another) Christian wrote:
How is what you said any different than what I said? She BELIEVED God was going to heal her husband. Doesn’t Jesus tell us to ask and believe?? This is a ridiculous argument to me. I have Muscular Dystrophy which is 100% fatal and I’m in a wheelchair. I shouldn’t be alive right now yet I BELIEVE he’ll keep me around longer, but like Nabeels his wife, I’ll still believe EVEN IF he doesn’t. This doesn’t make me a false prophet because I’m doing what Jesus told me to do, ask, knock, believe.
Muslim-Response
You wrote: “She BELIEVED God was going to heal her husband”.
That’s not the only thing she believed. She said, that her belief, came to her by the Holy Spirit. So it wasn’t as though, she had her opinion that He would be healed, rather she mentioned, she believed this inspiration was coming to her from the Holy Spirit.
She acted as though she was having an interaction with the Holy Spirit as though he was some Golfing buddy, which slipped a bit of information to her that Nabeel will be healed. Now that’s very different from acknowledging God can heal. And like I said, had Nabeel been healed, Nabeel would have made a video glorifying his wife’s interaction with the holy spirit as a true Prophecy, saying this is how the Holy Spirit speaks to us, David wood would have also clinched on the opportunity and would have made Nabeels Wife his female “Saint”. So let’s not pretend they would have not jumped on the opportunity to make a miracle out of Nabeel’s wife’s inspirations she believed came from the Holy Spirit. So yes since she claims that the Holy Spirit told her by a feeling he will be saved. And since He died, Then “yes” she made a false Prophecy. There is no Escape!
Another Christian recently also posted a response, and I responded, He agrees that it was “a minor false Prophecy“
Also, more evidence: Nabeel didn’t exactly accept his fate. He never gave up on God sending miracles, while even going into palliative care, He requested Christians to “Pray for a Miracle” See here – https://youtu.be/kZpPhDzgdzg
It seems, no true Christians left out there to show us a greater miracle than Jesus, and raise Nabeel from the Dead?
(Bellow) The Christian again says, suppose they made an “Honest Blunder”:
And now (bellow) the Christian is pretty annoyed so his now trying to have a poke at Islam:
And here below is a Video ” indicating that Nabeel” was Skeptical about the Bible and doubted it, in his last days:
Nabeel was made to get on his knees to ask God for “Forgiveness” pushed on by his Bible adviser. Nabeel was at the very low point of his Faith in Christianity, towards the end days of his ministry.
Is this how strong, his conviction in Christianity was after all those years, bashing Islam?
Interesting!
Now for some Screenshots, of other Christians who have been left embarrassed by Nabeel Wife’s False Prophecy. And here are the comments of those Christians who also “Testify Nabeel Wife was proven; “Wrong, Stupid, a false Prophet, Foolishness and Ignorance.
As you can see, infighting began among Christians about this, and the fact is, it was “a False Prophecy” and whatever feeling Nabeel wife got, what she felt, she claimed it was from the Holy Spirit. And now that it’s been proven False, all Christians can do is label Nabeels Wife, ignorant for not understanding her feelings. Though I can almost guarantee if Nabeel Survived, the same people, accusing Nabeels wife of ignorance, would have put her on a pedestal and turned her into “Hail Mary” but since it turned out False, let’s just blame the individual and shift blame away from Christianity that teachers “inspiration through the Holy Spirit”. Yep, you guessed it, When a False Prophecy happens that’s the fault of the individual, if a true prophecy happens, that’s the Holy Spirit! Convenience perhaps?
These are the same Christians who have given us soap operas from Nabeel having “Visions and Dreams“, before his conversion from Ahmediya to Christianity, and that it was a sign Christianity was the True Religion! Nabeel speaks about being at some feast, and this feast represented heaven, and his friend David was blocking the door, and the only way He could come to the feast is if He accepts Jesus.
See here:
Perhaps they are false revelations also? Oh no of course not, they are “True” ones! Right.
Well let us see, evidence that Nabeel seems to make up a story due to clear contractions:
You may have constantly heard Islamic critics bring up the Hadeeth where the Prophet ordered some Bedouins to consume camel urine for medical use due to having a medical condition. Many critics laugh and mock this. However, in recent years, Science is beginning to confirm there are Medical benefits in Animal Urine.
Read:
Nonetheless, the product has been studied by a handful of researchers. A 2012 study published in the journal Ancient Science of Life suggested rats with diabetes that were fed Gomutra Ark had significantly lower blood glucose levels than rats in a control group did. “This study supports the traditional use of Gomutra Ark in diabetes,” the researchers wrote, noting that it has a “high therapeutic index and is safe for chronic use.”
And a 2013 study in the International Brazilian Journal of Urology claimed that distilled cow urine might help to prevent the development of kidney stones in rats.
However, these and other studies may not convince sceptics to start drinking urine anytime soon, even if it is part of a tasty soft drink.
“Just trust me on this — this drink really will require flavouring,” Keith-Thomas Ayoob, nutritionist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, told ABC News. “If they use sugar or a caloric sweetener, then the world probably doesn’t need another drink that’s just a source of sugar calories, although this drink will probably have its 15 minutes [of fame] because of its novelty
Also: Urea serves an important role in the metabolism of nitrogen-containing compounds by animals and is the main nitrogen-containing substance in the urine of mammals.
The World Health Organisation has said that camels are the source of the Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus and has urged people who have “diabetes, renal failure, chronic lung disease, and immunocompromised persons are considered to be at high risk of severe disease from MERS-CoV infection” to avoid contact with camels, drinking raw camel milk or camel urine, or eating meat that has not been properly cooked.
The Critics of Islam want you to believe, that Muslims sit around the table just conversing and enjoying a glass of Urine like it’s our culture. However you will not find this, among Muslim majority cultures, rather the hadith in Question, Camel Urine was recommended only for a specific medical condition, and thus the camel urine, is not just a Beveridge of passed time entertainment, as the Islamic critics want you to believe, and if ever a small “Ignorant group” of Muslims arise and drink the Urine as pure entertainment or pleasure, then they have no idea of its usage protocols. Some Muslim theologians have suggested that, during the prophet’s time, the Camel urine may have been boiled and sterilized before it can be administered for medical use, whatever the case is, the Camel urine, is only served for a particular medical condition and not to be used as a passed time Beveridge, as the Anti Islamist want to suggest, which is false. Disease outbreaks occur when some Muslims don’t adhere to the correct protocols.
See for example;
They quote: As of 2020 there is no specific vaccine or treatment for the disease,[3] but a number are being developed.[2] The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that those who come in contact with camels wash their hands and not touch sick camels.[2] They also recommend that camel-based food products be appropriately cooked.[2] Treatments that help with the symptoms and support body functioning may be used.[2]
The World Health organisation suggests, that “Sick Camels” could be the possible reason, for the transmission of Disease.
And we see this even in other diseases, like the Seafood market of Wuhan in China when correct protocols are not put in place in the handling of Seafood, can create disease from animals to humans, but we don’t tell humans they can’t eat seafood when there is a claim that there is a link between Seafood and Corona Virus.
So the bottom line is this, when correct protocols are implemented, like obtaining urine from “Healthy Camels”, followed by Sterilization, through boiling, and only under strict measures of administering the Urine, due to a specific body ailment, is the correct protocols, anything other then this could cause health issues. And that’s how even Modern-day drugs or medicine work, there are so many protocols on how to take medicine, just turn the medicine packet and read the label, such as do not mix medicine and alcohol, or only take 1 tablet a day. Thus there are also guidelines with Camel Urine, and anytime a guideline is breached is when the spread of diseases or problems occurs.
Now to conclude, forget about the Islamic justification for Camel urine being used for Medical purposes, and Westerners find this revolting.
Did you know that Westerners are actually starting to drink, coffee that’s extracted from Animal feces.
Kopi luwak is a coffee that consists of partially digested coffee cherries, which have been eaten and defecated by the Asian palm civet https://coffeeaffection.com/kopi-luwak/
Check it out how Americans are drinking this Beverage:
What is so peculiar unlike Camel urine in Islam which is for medical purposes only, these Westerners drink coffee beans from animal feces, for just random taste and enjoyment!
And then they have the audacity to mock Muslims, think again.
Wife beating Verse in Sureh 4:34? Muslim-response:
Responding to Truth will set you free;
Beating Humans is also endorsed by the West. They just changed the authority from husband and gave that authority to the state. Now the state can use legal proportionate force, to use against even women. And beat them like a dog, using either an open hand, batons and Tasers, if anyone goes against public order.
But alhamdulillah for Islam if your wife gets out of order, then a mild tapping can occur, where the Quranic Scholars such as the Prophets companion known as Ibn Abbas said, this beating should be conducted in a non-violent fashion. Meaning no marks to be left, no bruising, no punching on the face..etc etc. In other words, the (ayah) in the Quran is only meant to be a “symbolic beating” only to express the seriousness of the matter, for extremely foul women. Because even the mildest taps, can insult women. Now compare that “patriarchy” to the ” “patriarchy” you created in your systems, where you have given the power to a state to conduct some of the most brutal beatings, where people have died as a result. And here you are wanting to Question Islam about women beating and human rights.
As Muhammed Hijab would say,” You got destroyed, bro”.
Sureh 4:34 correct interpretation is how the earliest Muslim Scholar ibn Abbas interpreted and understood it. He says ” a beating that is (Non-Violent)”.
Ask yourself now the question what type of beating is non-violent?
Answer: a tap. Like taping extremely (lightly) like taping a drum.
Here I’ll shall show how an Islamic Sheik shows how the (tap) Is done using the (Miswak lightly where it’s non-violent) https://youtu.be/40KAJ6Jgu_0
We see from the Quran, in conjunction with the Tafsir: That woman should not be treated “Harshly” except of course if she has cheated on her husband like committing Adultery.
Ibn abbas are the companion of the prophet. The narrator of many hadiths.
So who would know the Quran better than Prophets companions? The Prophet himself, in multiple Sahi Narrations also spoke about a beating done in a non-violent way. For example, he said,
How does one beat his wife then go to bed with her?
The Prophet (PBUH) also expressed astonishment at the cruelty of certain men when he said: “Could any of you beat his wife as he would beat a slave, and then lie with her in the evening ?” (Bukhari and Muslim).
Narrated Mu’awiyah ibn Haydah: “I said: Apostle of Allah, how should we approach our wives and how should we leave them? He replied: Approach your tilth when or how you will, give her (your wife) food when you take food, clothe when you clothe yourself, do not revile her face, and do not beat her. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2138)
He also said, when one beats. He should avoid the face. And He also said, when one beats it should not leave a mark.
Abu Hurayrah, may Allah be pleased with him, narrated that the Prophet  said, “If one of you were to hit, he should avoid the face…” [Musnad Ahmad]
So as you can see, Ibn Abbas interpretation is actually “in line” with the many “Sahi Hadith”. That also demonstrates a non-violent beating.
New video where a Scholar explain the verse:
A Critic wrote in response:
Muslim – Response:
Your name is Follower of logic. But it seems logic and reasoning isn’t what you claim to be.
Where in the Quran, it uses the term (Sex, or Rape) Slaves. But you critics have to add the word (Sex or Rape) in order to portray that taking slaves was about Sex and Rape?
Where in the Quran does it use the word (suicide bomber) but you critics use the verses of war to show that the Prophet endorsed Terrorism to target women and children?
Where in the verses of the Quran, does it use the word, Pedophilia but use critics add your own words into the Quran, saying the Quran allows sex with minors?
Where in the Quran, does it say that Allah is a pagan moon god. But use add the term moon to Allah?
Should I continue with your stupid logic or does it now make sense how silly you sound?
We use the Hadith to explain certain verses of the Quran, because the Quran specifically says, “We sent you o Muhammad to explain to men what’s in the Quran. So we unlike the critics don’t just make things up, we use the Prophet’s life and how he applied the verses as to how we fully grasp and understand the Quran. The Term ” idrooboona” can mean “strike” and strike can mean hitting or tapping a drum. Can you tap a drum very lightly and very hard? If you can tap a drum hard, why can’t you tap it very light?
The Prophet understanding is, whenever one strikes, never allow the skin to break. Never cause a bruise or a mark, and never strike on the face.
Ibn Abbas who is the companion of the prophet who narrated the second most hadith, says regarding the verse on the beating, to be conducted in a (non-violent manner) this report is recorded by (Tafsir ibn Kathir) one of the highest known commentaries on the Quran.
Examples:
So Muslims are not just simply adding verses into the Quran. Rather they are taking authoritative external explanation which is how we conclude our understanding of verses. Islam unlike your secular liberal stand on human abuse is so much more humane, go see what secular liberal law enforcement agencies do when they try to discipline people during public order, where they use, baton, open hand punching, capsicum spray, and tasers, which can be pretty brutal at times.
And here you are having a go at the Quran for endorsing violence.
Now answering the Hadith where the Prophet “Struck Ashia his Wife on the Chest: (Listen from minute 9.24)
Also, see this video response:
CHRISTIANITY ENDORSES VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN:
Jesus Endorsed women to get beaten up”.
See:
Imagine this verse for a moment? If you beat your slave with a baseball bat black and blue, blood all over the place, as long as the Slave doesn’t die, then their is no sin upon you?
And yet these Triniterians want to attack the Quran for the supposed condoning violence?
Seriously what leg do these Christians have to stand upon? The real joke is on them.
Jesus as the God of the Old Testament apparently inspired the verses in the Old Testament. Now even if a Christian asserts they have the New Testament. And the Old law no longer needs to be followed.
Can I say, is that because your God didn’t know about “human rights”? And it took him time to work out what abuse looks like? How are we expect to believe that the Biblical God, is so perfect and ethical that He passed such a law like this in the first place?
I can see why Atheists have a field day of fun with the Christian concept of God.
Finaly let’s now turn our attention to the Secular Western Moral values regarding using violence? No I mean real violence.
But now let’s point the finger at you, What’s the verse in the West? That say’s Police officers can use, Capsicum Spray, Electric stun guns, and Baton to smack protesters who are acting disorderly? Security guards can use proportionate force to evict people acting disorderly.
Isn’t that insensitive towards human beings?
Women beating in Islam vs the West.
Beating Humans is also endorsed by the West. They just changed the authority from husband and gave that authority to the state. Now the state can use legal proportionate force, to use against even women. And beat them like a dog, using either an open hand, batons and Tasers, if anyone goes against public order.
But alhamdulillah for Islam if your wife gets out of order, then a mild tapping can occur, where the Quranic Scholars such as the Prophets companion known as Ibn Abbas said, this beating, should be conducted in a non-violent fashion. Meaning no marks to be left, no bruising, no punching on the face..etc etc. In other words, the (ayah) in the Quran is only meant to be a “symbolic beating” only to express the seriousness of the matter, for extremely foul women. Because even the most mildest taps, can insult a women. Now compare that “patriarchy” to the ” “patriarchy” you created in your own systems, where you have given the power to a state to conduct some of the most brutal beatings, where people have died as a result. And here you are wanting to Question Islam about women beating and human rights.
A Critic Wrote back saying:
The West doesn’t specifically encourage violence towards women. Rather state laws have measures against both sexes.
Secondly, you can legally be sued for violently removing somebody from the premises. What are you talking about?
Yes, some kind of authority is bound to exist because we are not anarchists. But one that gives more freedom and minimal suffering is appreciated in the liberal paradigm.
My counter Response:
For example you said you can be legally sued for forcing and evicting a person.
Um, not exactly. Security guards in Australia for example can place people in legally abiding painful submission holds and force them out of a night club for example. This means they can bend your hand into certain very painful positions known as: Such as this https://youtu.be/9mxLQLULJB
This is all legal and part of the law.
Also, Police officers carry tasers and batons. Thats the law. You can’t sue a police officer for using proportionate force.
You then said I believe the Liberal west, does not specifically encourage the beating of women.
Um, that doesn’t matter. It still encourages to hurt both men and women. So the argument still stands.
Also if you watch my video, you can scroll through, where we show that the beating of women in Islam is not meant to be conducted violently. Therefore the Quranic verse is still much better than the Western standard, when it comes to dealing with matters of taking disciplinary measures.
After, reading the above link, you can get a real grasp to the events, basically Satan tries to come to the Prophet, to try and confuse him, and Satan tries to reveal false verses to the Prophet, and then Allah jumps in to tell the Prophet those verses are incorrect, and Allah then removes those verses, and then rectifies to the Prophet that Allah never gave the Prophet those verses. Again this remained Privart between Allah and his Prophet, and the Prophet never recited those verses to any of his companions. So in other words, this whole narrative proves the Prophet is a true, Prophet. If He were false, then the narration or the Qur’anic passage would never say, Allah corrected the truth, which proves the Prophet and the Quran was “protected”. Even Samuel Green a Christian Apologist who is a “Author” at the AnsweringIslam website, agrees the Quran, was “Corrected”. In otherwords there was “No satanic verses”, that were left, or made part of the Quran:
So as you can see, the Prophet never walked around preaching the satanic verses, or never said to any companion this is part of the Quran.
It was a very short lived moment, Satan comes tries to deliver the Prophet verses, then Allah quickly intervenes telling the Prophet, I didn’t give you those verses, so then Allah removes those verses, before those verses reach other companions. Christians assume, that the satanic verses were revealed, and then the Prophet narrated them to a companion, then those companions and scribes wrote those verses down, and made it part of the Quran. However none of this is true, and it never got to that point. Allah (swt) quickly removed what was casted in the mind or toung of the Prophet and it was all quickly removed, which proves again that his a True Prophet, and not a false one.
Other Christians bring arguements such as: Satan can play tricks by putting some truth in the Quran?
Muslim-Response:
Its funny how he says Satan put some Truth in the Quran to make you believe its true then added lies to decieve you its true. Well same could be said about your bible. And your Bible says Satan can not say truth or else he will be destroyed. So your got owned by the standard of your bible.
Read:
(Mark 3:26) Satan will not work against himself.
Now Quran says (26:210); No evil one has brought down this Revellation.
Hence according to your Bible. If there are satans words in Quran it can’t be, because He will be destroyed according to your Bible. Satan will not work against himself be revealing Truth. Sure 26:210; declares no evil one brought down the Quran. If these words were Satan’s words, that would mean his working against himself, which the bible declares can’t happen, and Satan would be destroyed!
And here is another “inconsistency” Christians says it’s very very clear ALLAH = SATAN
Inconsistency much?
Christianities main two figures effected by (Iblis) Satan according to their own Bibles:
Christian say’s; Allah is best deciever, and gets Humiliated. After back and forth discussion admits;
Christian say’s in text comment bellow his own God (Yahway) sent Allah to Muslims as (Strong delusion) meaning Deceived the Muslims, when he tries answering: 2 Thessalonians 2:11
So Yahway is Responsible for sending deception and causing people to be “decieved ”
😁
Now let’s see what, strong delusion means according to the English dictionary?
Yep, it means Deception.
So according to Christians there own God (Yahway) sent “Muslims a deception. He decieved Muslims basically, by sending them a False God called Allah?
Yet these Christians accuse Allah for being a Deciever? Yet they agree their own Biblical God sent a false Allah to Muslims?
Watch the video response: Ali Dawah gives a wonderful Response:
Now watch this:
Also, see:
And finally, watch this also before we continue…
Now watch this video;
An 11-year-old in the West has sexual intercourse!
The lowest age of consent is in Nigeria (11), followed by the Philippines and Angola (12). The age of consent is 13 in three countries – Niger, Comoros, and Burkina Faso. The countries where the age of consent is 14 include a number of South American countries: Brazil, Columbia, Peru, Paraguay, Ecuador, and Bolivia.19 Sept 2023
Interesting that in our Modern World Non-Muslim nations still have relatively low age consent laws
Let’s first show Christianity before we continue…..
Joseph “90 Years old” married 12-Year-old St.Mary According to Christian (Historical Record) http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm { According to the Roman Catholics’ Encyclopedia “New Advent”Mary was as young as 12 when she married 90-year-old Joseph. This means that she was around 11 when she got pregnant with Jesus.}
Nabeel Qurashi a Christian Apologist even admits that Mary and Joseph were “Young Children” when they conceived Jesus.
So Christians, lie and say Jospeth was only a caretaker and not a husband. This is a lie because then it would have said, He fostered her, but it doesn’t say that rather it says wedded her.
Now a Christian may deny all of this, especially if you non catholic like a Protestant. And you may argue and say that’s just a Catholic source.
I would argue back and say, well it’s still a historical document, and I would say what do your Protestant history books say that conflicts with the history of Catholics and contradicts it? The answer is nothing. They have no other historical information to contest the historical age mentioned in Catholic sources.
But we can show you other historical sources where the bible endorses taking very young girls a read:
Bible: We also have a clear verse in the Bible. KILL women but keep virgins (young) girls to yourselves.
Numbers 31:17-18. In this passage of the Bible, a priest was given 32 virgin girls as “war booty”.
Christian scholars even admit, these girls were taken as slaves and after one month time, you can marry them. So after killing their parents in war, you take them as slaves and you can desire to wed them.
So as you can see, age 13 was the tradition back then. That’s only 3 years older than Aisha who was 9 years and 11 months old, because Book Tabari says she was 10 years old when married to the Prophet. All though (Sahi Bukhari) says she was 9, book Tabari may have indicated she was closer to being 10 years old because Bukhari didn’t count in the months. So technically speaking Aishia was around 3 years short from 13 years. So if these accusers want to have a go at the Prophet then they now need to bring into question the entire Judeo-Christian tradition of marrying minors.
I believe Allah has punished the Christians for their slandering of our Prophet so Allah has exposed them. So they are taking their anger out on Islam.
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) had many enemies and they claimed many things against him but never of Pedophilia ( astaghfirullah) It’s unfair to judge people of 1400 years to even as far back as 100 years according to today’s laws and customs, you have to judge them if they were doing something wrong or not, by their laws and customs during their time.
Age of consent was set at Puberty in History: Age of Consent & customs The Encyclopaedia of Britannica 15th edition volume 26 page 850. Definition of puberty: In human physiology, puberty is the stage or period of life when a child transforms into an adult normally capable of procreation
100 years ago Islamaphobes and ignorant people went to read history in “1889 American age of consent was 7 to 10years old in history in the WEST. Clearing the Prophet of going against the laws in history hence clearing Pedophilia.
This is taken directly from Wikipedia:
They also write:
The American colonies followed the English tradition, and the law was more of a guide. For example, Mary Hathaway (Virginia, 1689) was only nine when she was married to William Williams.[6] Sir Edward Coke “made it clear that the marriage of girls under 12 was normal, and the age at which a girl who was a wife was eligible for a dower from her husband’s estate was 9 even though her husband be only four years old.”[3]
Alexios II Komnenos Byzantine emperor married Anna of France at 8 years old she was born in 1171 married in 1179 died in 1204 Isaac II Angelos Byzantine emperor married Margaret of Hungry (empress) in 1184 when she was only 9 years old she was born in 1175 and died in 1204
Today around the world the average is between 13 and 16 Spain 13 Argentina 13 Austria 13 Bulgaria 14 Germany 14 Italy 14 Portugal 14 Brazil 14 Ecuador 14 Canada 14 and many more. The list is on the link below. proof: http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24
So if we look at it with a sound mind; Your ancestors can be classified as a pedophile as well. Your family is born from pedophiles. I am ashamed of you, you are an outcome of pedophilia, Perhaps?
Not to mention throughout history people would get married young because the average life span was short. And it was normal during the customs of that time. Take a look at 1700 to mid-1900.
25 years to 35 years was the age expectancy. So this is more proof that people would have married much earlier.
Also, this begs the question if life expectancy was low, then girls developing early to womenhood would have been a factor too. Some people ask, would you give your 9-year-old daughter to a 50-year-old man? The answer is, that we don’t live 200 years ago let alone, 1400 years ago, when girls matured much earlier based on puberty. Just as life expectancy had evolved so could girls maturing later.
Just 200 years ago, the American constitution had laws that set marriage between 7 and 10 years old. These days it’s not the same, so no I wouldn’t condone 50-year-olds marrying today’s 9-year-olds. Because we know that, they can hardly be developed as today’s human biology has changed significantly.
We can see even the age of puberty dramatically changes:
So who can say for sure, that girls didn’t develop earlier back 1400 years ago, Just as age death expectancy changes and so does puberty, it’s then possible girls and boys developed into women and men much earlier than today’s standard.
Christian Apologist Sam Shamoun admits on his Website. at Answering-Islam.com
Thus, we have a biblical text establishing that the age for marriage begins when a girl has become post-pubescent, i.e. when she has reached a point where she is past puberty. Source:http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/marriage_age.htm
According to experts in the medical field, the average age for the start of puberty is between 9 and can end at 15 or 16. So this would mean Sam Shamoun is suggesting that after the age of 15 or 16. Then a girl can be wedded. However, if we follow Sam’s explanation there are laws in both Australia and most states in the United States of America that have the legal age set at 18. However, the Bible says “Post- Pubescent which would mean around 15 or 16. That’s still two to three years younger than the legal requirement. So will the critics also believe the Bible condones Pedophilia because it would now allow a 30 or 40 or 50-year-old man, to get married to a 15 or 16-year-old? Sam Shamoun now has to accept that a 50-year-old man wedding a 15-year-old is not then defined as Pedophilia because He argues the Bible says that post-prebuscent is when she can get married.
Now, this gets more interesting, though “the average” age for the start and end of puberty can be between 9 and 15. It can even start much earlier depending on which ethnicity race, or geographical region you belong to. For example in the African or Hispanic continent, it can start much earlier like age 7 and can take 3 to 4 years of the process of puberty to end. That would mean by age 10 a girl can be Postpubescent!
Therefore Sam Shamoun technically accepts that Young marriages to even 10-year-old girls are Biblical!
So again when the Prophet Muhammed consummated his Marriage with Ashia, she could have been 9 years and 11 months old. (i.e) close to 10 years old.
And we know Islamic sources do say, she was 9 when Marriage was consummated. And not 6.
At age 6 she was only betrothal to the Prophet, (a mutual promise or contract for a future marriage) meaning only worded contract, nothing more than that. There was no “sexual intimacy”.
So now going back to the Bible and looking at this book for approval of the Prophet’s marriage, which is approved Biblically and scientifically as being PostPrebuscent.
The West understands the difference between a child and an adolescent is the onset of Puberty. Ashia (r.a) the Prophet’s youngest wife after becoming post prebuscent was married according to the norm of the society at the time.
Christian Apologist Dr James white reminds Christians not to use the pepedophiliarguement because Young Marriages were common back then: Source: https://youtu.be/wyvPhcsWbzY
Read this: 2000 to 2010, the most recent year for which most states were able to provide information. We learned that in 38 states, more than 167,000 children — almost all of them girls, some as young 12as — were married during that period,
Makes you wonder, how the WEST is confused about the specific age of sexual consent. Having sexual relations between a 40-year-old and a 15-year-old, would be considered rape in the UK, Australia and Most states of the U.S., well not so now in France. But again who gets to call they are “Progressed”? France or the Rest?
Young Teenagers in History who went through Puberty were able to give consent according to The Journal of Human development. As the onset of Puberty marked Maturity, Responsibility and Behavior. The link i provided attests to that for why the age of consent coincided with the Age of Puberty.
Go to the Anti-Islam responses section bellow the page, we deal with all the twisted lies in the hadith that Ashia. Did not reach puberty at 9 years of age. Playing with Dolls, Does the Quran allow sex with prebubscent children? Did Abu Bekir Refuse Marriage? Also above the page we deal with the lie that she was only SIX years old. When this is not exactly correct, all though there was marriage at age 6, this wasn’t consummated until she was 9. We explain it further here:
All though we do not condone Child marriages or sex with minors check out this point from a Atheistic point of reference;
Atheist can not even say from a Scientific perspective that child marriages are wrong or raping people is wrong. Take a listen here; there are no real objective morals in Science. https://youtu.be/ZQgN5RIr9-s
Again I’m not condoning Child marriages just showing the double standards according to their own Atheist world view.
Should we now say, Pedophilia is Australian Culture?
Rebuttal section:
The critics write; Muslims follow Pedophile/ Warlord Prophet as the “Best Exemplar”.
Response:
The West still has laws in the Modern West that still allow sexual relations on the onset of Puberty. Look at America the age of consent still set at 12 in some states. Our Prophet has nothing wrong as being the best exemplar since he never brock the ruling of young marriages which were accepted through out history. So yes his still the best exemplar for ALL time. Ashia marriage age was certainly normal and even today U.S laws still have the age of consent as low as 12. Just because your subjective opionion raises it to 18 does not mean who ever disagree is a false exemplar. Its a straw man arguement its like argueing if i change the consent law to age 28, who ever does not full fill this and disagrees and marry’s people who are 18 is the wrong exemplar.
So whos the best exemplar? Puberty at 9 is wrong for sexual maturity. But puberty at 13 is O.K for sexual maturity according to West? Teen pregnancy isn’t encouraged but still acceptable in West but marriage to a 13 year old is wrong?
Furthermore even if you like to dispute and say his not the best examplar due to our current laws. That still a incoherent arguement because his life was the best exampler through out history. As you are aware his young wife was not the only wife, he had wives that were even older then him, therefore he was still the best exempler as he full filled both pre-modern laws and full filled Modern laws by marrying women whos ages of consent was accepted in the past and future. So to then judge him with todays modern laws proves nothing since he still married older women within even his own life time. Who knows maybe in the future Westerners may drop the age of consent back to Puberty, just like today they still accept teen pregnancies in the West so to try and character assisinate him on today’s subjective laws is quite unfair and illogical. And since when is the West the measuring stick of the best exemplar? The same West that has legal necrophilia, incest, sodomites, even having sex with animals. Girls who identify themselves as being Male, and then you have a lady marrying her piano, you can find these laws legal in parts of Western countries. So “No” the West is not the measuring stick of what is determined as best Exemplar. For Muslims engaging in these sorts of behaviours such as man on man is the wrong exemplar. Therefore imagine i used my subjective opionion and criticized West for being the wrong exemplar for human kind? See im showing you that its a incoherent arguement to apply a subjective opionion to determin what makes or makes not a good exemplar.
Response:
“Your Prophet was a pedophile! He was married to and cohabited with Aisha when she was just nine years old!”
You trolls need to find some new lines. The Prophet, peace be upon him, married Aisha with the blessing and approval of her parents and he was committed to her, took care of her, taught her, and, through his care, she became one of the most knowledgeable and influential scholars of Islam and a leader of the community. This was the kind of marriage practiced by Muslims and Christians and Jews and every other culture and religion for nearly all of human history. Girls were married young by their parents to committed husbands. My own great grandmother was married at 13.
In contrast, the pedophilia pioneered in the modern West, practiced by rich and poor Western perverts alike, involves, among other things, diddling one’s child relatives secretly in closets and dark rooms, orgies with underage girls that are essentially kidnapped, the most evil child pornography, sex rings with thousands of abducted children, where once they have drugged up the children, used them and put them through the most degrading, vile sex acts, passing them around among their friends like broken objects, these children are discarded like trash. Some are killed and never heard of again. This is the pedophilia of the “superior” west that you disgusting trolls want to equate with the noble, pure marriage of the Prophet peace be upon him to our mother, Aisha.
Don’t project the filthy degeneracy found in the “superior” West onto the superior religion.
-Daniel Haqiqatiu
Also for those that have a problem with the Age gap between Ashia and the Propeht.
SEE this video bellow, women in Europe says She doesn’t have a problem with Her brother who’s in his 40’s to marry a girl that’s 19 years old. She says if they love each other then that’s all that matters. She also said, men don’t mature till there 30 years of age.
A Critic Wrote: Yes I do know catholic’s also have a problem in Child Molestation but most of them seem to be historic cases, they seem to have got their house in order, We no longer have Grooming Modern day gangs as prolific in the West unlike the Muslim ones.
My Response: Predominately Christian cases are only Historic are they?
Most of the top 5 countries in the World are Predominately Christian countries who have a significant Child Abuse Cases. So Child abuse is part of your filthy non-Muslim Modern day culture, not just history.
One child is raped in South Africa every three minutes, according to a 2009 report by trade union Solidarity Helping Hand.
A 2009 survey by the country’s Medical Research Council found that one in four men admits to raping someone, 62% of boys over 11 believe forcing someone to have sex is not an act of violence and a third believe girls enjoy rape, the Independent reported
India
In its 2013 report India’s Hell Holes: Child Sexual Assault in Juvenile Justice Homes, the Asian Centre for Human Rights said that sexual offences against children in India have reached epidemic proportion.
The report stated that more than 48,000 child rape cases were recorded from 2001 to 2011 and that India saw an increase of 336% of child rape cases from 2001 (2,113 cases) to 2011 (7,112 cases).
“Imagine 48,838 children raped in just 10 years
Zimbabwe
Police spokesperson Assistant Commissioner Charity Charamba said in 2012 that rape cases against children continued to increase countrywide, according to NewsdeZimbabwe.
“The (rape) cases are on the increase and during the week ending 25 September 2012, the cases rose to 81 from 65 the previous week. Evident from our investigations is the fact that relatives commit most juvenile rape cases,” said Charamba. 30,000 boys and girls sexually abused
United Kingdom
A quarter of a million Britons – more than one in every 200 adults – are paedophiles, according to figures released by Scotland Yard, the Telegraph reported in 2000.
In 2012/13, there were 18,915 sexual crimes against children under 16 recorded in England and Wales, according to the National Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC). Included in that figure were 4,171 offences of sexual assault on a female child under 13 and 1,267 offences of sexual assault on under-13 male children.
In the UK, one in 20 children (4.8%) have experienced contact sexual abuse and over 90% of children who experienced sexual abuse, were abused by someone they know, NSPCC said.
A paedophile ring linked to Britain’s worst abuser Robert Smith, arrested in 2005, is ‘still at large’, the Herald reported in 2013.
United States
“Even if the true prevalence of child sexual abuse is not known, most will agree that there will be 500,000 babies born in the US this year that will be sexually abused before they turn 18 if we do not prevent it,” according to the Children Assessment Centre (CAC).
What is more “Shocking is that even in our modern World some states it is legal to Wed girls as young as 12 years old read:
2000 to 2010, the most recent year for which most states were able to provide information. We learned that in 38 states, more than 167,000 children — almost all of them girls, some as young 12 — were married during that period,
We need to understand we live in a Modern new world. Things that were practised in the past, were done in the context of environmental differences from today. 200 to 300 years ago, Marriages to adolescents were accepted even in the West, between ages 7 to 10 years old. Now since then the age of consent has been raised to 14 or 18 depending what part of the Western World you live in.
The reason being in our modern era, girls tend to develop much later. This is part of human evolution. And no, I’m not talking about Darwinian evolution, but rather accepted changes that naturally fluctuate depending on nutrition and environmental circumstances. For example they say, girls and boys who live in hotter climates tend to develop earlier then those who live in colder climates. And so if we accept that these changes can occur, who is to say 1400 years ago the climate was much diffrent and so was the science behind girls developing much younger? So for example todays 15 or 16 year old girl could be equivalent to a 9 or 10 year old back 1400 years ago?
And so based on that, it would be unfair to judge the Prophet based on the age He married Ashia, when she most probably did not look anything like todays 9 year old girls, but rather looked like she was 14 or 16 for the matter.
1400 years ago was awfully a long time ago, and many things may have changed by then. Thus the critics trying to attack the character of the Prophet have no real arguement at all, since they conflate our modern era, to that of very ancient times. For those who dispute and claim there is very little evidence that, biological changes occur or that there is no evidence that girls developed earlier in pre-modern times, well i would ask you to read this article:
So to sum up:
There you will read that even in our modern times, people are going back to maturing earlier based on nutritional factors . So I ask what makes you think it wasn’t possible for girls to mature earlier during the Pre-modern era? If changes are observed today then its also possible changes occurred in ancient times, thus the fact that there is now evidence that biological development fluctuates in our modern times what makes you think it didn’t fluctuates back in the ancient times? If it’s possible now, then it was possible back then, end of story.
Also makes me laugh, when a critic claims back in the ancient times there are no records to suggest that girls in ancient times matured earlier. This makes me laugh, because they think almost 1500 to 2000 years ago, there were scientists collecting data from all parts of the globe measuring when girls conclusively went through development. These fools think, that science back then was interested in those findings as if there were hundreds of universities collaborating with one another on such findings, well news flash things of that nature and interests about such topics were very vague and not conclusive and hardly was there investigation agenda as there is like in today’s modern world, they just didn’t have that sort of accessibility, people back then would spend months and years travelling from one continent to another let alone, attain all the knowledge about human development of the time. Science and data was hardly even collected for conclusive rulings, so yes it does make me laugh when today’s Modern critic rules out the evidence of early development in girls in pre-modern time because he thinks there is no evidence. Well, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, all it means is that people didn’t pay attention to collecting data more broadly back then, because of environmental factors, or other circumstances like the development of science. So for these silly critics to dismiss possibilities based on no data is foolish ignorant and arrogant indeed. Because that’s not how things are to be dismissed. Just because there was no data in ancient times about the existence of DNA does not mean that DNA isn’t true, is it? Well, it is, even if there wasn’t supporting evidence for it in ancient times. Just as we have supporting evidence today of the existence of human DNA and the genome, we also have evidence of human development evolving at times maturity comes much later and at times much earlier which in itself also evidence those changes could have occurred much earlier in ancient times.
A Christian wrote;
Response:
Clearly this person is a liar. The Prophet did not explain how the rules of the religion made it possible. Rather Abu Bekir hesitation was due to Aisha being already engaged to someone else at the time. And So Abu Bekir didn’t know how to approach this and end it, He later then found it a good idea to help end his daughters engagement to another man who was a member of the Qurashe who were enemies of the Muslims, so infact Abu Bekir thought this was eventually a good idea to end that engagement. Which begs another question, if Islamic rules were there to convince Abu bekir to so those rules favour the Prophet, why was Abu Bekirs daughter already engaged to someone else before the Prophet?
This in itself debunks the accusers, and that young marriages were practised before the Prophet engaged with Abu Bekirs Daughter. This now refutes the notion that the Prophet was like a cult figure trying to introduce a law to suit the Prophet, when there was already customs of young marriages being implemented before the Prophet wish to engage with Aisha R.A.
Finally:
Child Marriages and Western Boy & Girl Friend relationships are really the same thing. In fact Lauren the non Muslim agrees, the West is even worse. 🤦🤷
Take a read:
This Sureh
Sureh 65:4.
Does not conflict with Ashia going through Puberty.
As Islam allows, Marriage before 9. But this marriage is just a mutual contract and not sexual. But once Puberty occurs, and she develops, then you can consummate the official marriage, and that’s why Hadiths say Aisha only moved into the Prophets house after the age of 9. If Prebuscent marriages were accepted then she would have moved into the Prophets house before the ages of 9. This in itself debunks the idea you can consummate the marriage to prebuscent girls between the ages of 6 and 8. In other words she must at least go through Puberty. Of course it’s very rare girls do these days, but 1400 year’s ago it was quite common for girls to develop much earlier. These days girls are developed 14 to 15, 16 etc. And that’s why most of the Laws around the World have variances between the ages I mentioned.
Also Muslim Theologians argue Sureh 65.4
Can also be in relation to women with a condition known as delayed puberty and hypogonadism. Meaning it’s a medical condition where girls have already become adult however due to a medical condition there physical changes have been delayed. In such circumstance then Marriage can still take place.
Yes in our modern era, girls start menstruating a lot later, 11 to 14. But why would you judge that biological standard to 1400 year’s ago, when it’s possible girls menstruated much earlier? There are in fact studies and cases where even in our modern world some girls start even menstruating earlier as we have provided in the article. Also it’s funny how you say, U.N set the age to 18. Despite the U.K setting it at just 16. So not even the U.K believes in the U.N standard for age of consent 😂
Mohammed and Islam made girls sexually available early?
U.S Law
1885 – 1889 age of consent 7 to 10. Delaware United States 😅
That’s only 200 years ago.
Also read many Europeans in the past among the Nobel people married as early as 8 to 9/years old.
😂 Will you now say, they are all interested in Children?
Also according to the Hadith, a women called Khawalah came to the Prophet and advised Him to Marry Ashia. Meaning a Female asked the Prophet to marry young Aisha. Also there are hadith where Aisha father asked the Prophet why are you not consummating your marriage. Because the Prophet waited 3 year for her to grow up and so some of the Muslims at the time who are relatives to Aisha urgerd the Prophet not to wait any longer. So are you now suggesting all of the arabs including Aisha family members were too interested in marriages with young girls 🥱👍
As for minors going through birth difficulties
Watch the debate
Bye bye ya, fruit loop. I don’t waste my time with trolls who are hypocrites and don’t understand history just good at copy pasting from doodle and try and act smart 🥱👍
Now for the Atheists:
Atheists have no moral ground to stand on when it comes to the arguement of Pedophilia.
First of all, you are a liar, the text says He consummated the marriage at 9 not 6. This was 1400 years ago, and people back then may have developed much earlier, as environmental circumstances changed. Just like how 30 to 40 years ago, girls as young as 14 to 16 used to get married, which was normal back then, but now it would be considered child abuse, furthermore, Atheists have no ground to stand on when it comes to morals values,
Why because we can use the arguement of extinction. As you maybe aware, Atheists alwayse give an exception to the Rule in a situation where you have been left with no alternative choices. Let me explain, hypothetically speaking if human beings were at the verge of extinction, for example there are only a handful of people left on the face of the Earth, and if something wasn’t done as soon as possible, meaning if extreme measure are not taken, then this could be the very end of human civilisation, and so if only a group of female children existed between the ages of 5 and 10. And the only male that ever existed was a 78 year old man. Atheists would encourage the old man to rape these children in order to save humanity from going into extinction. In other words, Atheists will justify rape and pedophilia if that was the only means necessary to save humanity from going into extinction. Famous Atheist Sam Harris even praised rape, saying it was beneficial because it forced the existence of life and diversity between species to come to be. Again I’m not justifying Rape or Pedophilia just showing how Atheists will accept both rape and pedophilia so long it has a purpose that outways the bad with the good. Of course, Atheists like to attack Islam, and talk about Pedophilia because it’s the very last straw of an argument they have against Islam and Muslims, also just so you know in the West, in the year 1889 the age of consent in the United States was just 7 years old and was later raised to 10. So perhaps one can define your ancestry with pedophilia, you come from Pedophiles.
Also as for your comment regarding something that was written 7th century is an argument to dismiss it because it was written so long ago?
My response to that would be: “Truth doesn’t have an expiry date”. 😊
Orthodox Christian, says the Truth about Islam regarding Shariah law.
Christian Professor admits He prefers Shariah Law over Modern Laws.
A White Nationalist Christian concedes to the idea that Secular liberal beliefs have caused a lot of our modern-day problems, that we detest, see the debate;
Confession from more conservative Christians;
Source for comment taken from Youtube. Anthony Bourdain, Parts unknown Istanbul.
Shariah Law vs Secular Liberal Values.
Let’s analyse the difference and its impacts……
Number 1
Modern-day 20th-century deaths caused by Muslims vs Westerners
Are you that incompetent and dishonest? People suffering at the hands of Mujahideen.
Atheist and agnostic fighting for someone in the sky?
Of course, they do, Atheists and agnostics join the U.S military to invade Muslim countries to fight a religion that believes in a God in the sky
By the way, just recently we heard a militant atheist got arrested in America where He attacked a Mosque again attacked people who believe there was a God in the sky
See:
Also, you have no answer, religion has no involvement in the Russian and Ukrainian conflict. It’s nationalism and human greed. Nothing to do with religion and yet you think Religion is the problem.
I also laugh at how you use, a fallacy known as a false dilemma. Look at Japan it’s peaceful without religion. Yeh, that’s now proof religion causes conflict?
Well was Japan always peaceful? What about pearl harbour?
They are only now peaceful because they got Nuked…not because they somehow became progressed and enlightened.
If you took away nuclear warheads, the West including Japan and all the other peaceful nations your site would have all killed each other by now.
Take a read are Atheists really peaceful as they claim to be?
Secular Liberalism = Claims to give Human rights. But if this is true, we need an explanation from them. Such as;
– Where is the right to leak information. the [1] – No right to have dual citizenship.[2]
– Where is the right to wear what you want.[3] – Where is the right to burn a flag.[4] – Where is the right to Hate speech.[5] – Where is the right to Polygamy. [6] – Where is the right, for religion in Politics.[7]
Should I continue with Liberal intolerance? Or perhaps you still think liberal values make more sense?
A Critic wrote:
My response:
So basically what we are seeing is a minority group’s human right depends on if there are enough politicians in favour of voting for that human right. If there aren’t enough numbers those human beings are denied their human rights.
She wrote back:
My Response;
Look’s like you haven’t done your homework when it comes to Australian Law. They have changed Helal slaughter requirements, where Animals need to now be stunned, first. Before slaughter. So much for your claim, about giving rights to minorities even if they don’t have a majority vote.
By the way, even those minorities who are given some rights are, need to still be elected by the majority of voters. So it still requires a majority vote to give minorities a right.
Furthermore (Yes) certain exemptions are given, only when it’s convenient to do so even to minorities who don’t have a voice. Certain Politicians might at times who win elections may promise rights to minorities. But this is done purely to win public support, to help him secure a seat. Think about how some white politicians might speak great about a certain ethnic community to win over the Mexicans or BLM movements.
We also need to look at other things like economical gain. The Australian government profits from the Helal industry. That’s why in some instances it may give Islamic rights to certain minorities, it may at times even give certain rights to religious practise like building mosques, this is all done because it wants to prove that it is inclusive, and unbiased or tries to live on liberal principles of freedom and diversity.
But let’s be honest, is allowing helal meat affecting or Islamasizing the West? Is Helal as confronting in your face practice? I mean having meat in your bread isn’t the same as displaying a second wife which Is pretty confronting and challenging Western ideals isn’t it? I mean a lot of non-Muslim are anti-immigration because they don’t want to see more mosques go up which can be confronted with the Australian culture and landscape. And a reason why they are doing their best is to shut down Islam in the West. That’s why they will often say, go back to your own country. Especially to those who are more conservative and confronting such as those who wear the Hijab or Burka. Is it to know to wonder why France banned the burka or Australia banned polygamy, but they had no real interest in banning a kebab did they. Because helal meat isn’t as confronting or changing the landscape as the Burka.
So yes, the Liberal government will give some form of religious freedom so long as it’s not changing too much society, but soon as the numbers grow they place a squeeze. So it’s false to say, minorities still get rights. They get rights only when it’s not much of a loss for the West, and they may give to make a gain out of it. Otherwise, minorities are not a priority for them especially if they happen to be Muslims.
So giving some basic rights to Muslims isn’t about because they care about Muslims and human rights, if they do give a right, it usually is about a political stunt to win an election or to help him retain their seat in office, it’s certainly not about caring about human rights or minorities I can assure you.
Human rights values for minorities depend upon the decision of those who are in authority and are not based on the decision of minority groups. In other words, minorities only gain rights if those in power give them rights. If those in power decide to never give them rights then those in a minority are denied basic human rights. You do realise this is how it works right.
For example, the LGBTIQ were denied same-sex rights for many many years. Only after hard campaigning were those rights given. So basically you need to fight tooth and nail to get a right, though suppose there was never a majority view giving LGBTIQ a right, then the LGBTIQ would have to continue to submit to the law even though they live in a liberal democracy. And that’s the thing, most French politicians have voted against the Burka, therefore it’s now outlawed as it stands in France this right is denied basic human rights? Yes!
Secular liberal democracy can discriminate and go against human rights depending on who approves the law. If those in power decide, that they will never be in favour of the burka, and this goes on for the next 50 years or 150 years for the matter, they can easily deny human rights under their so-called liberal values.
So what exactly are you trying to defend here?
Let’s continue……
In addition an explanation of the Human rights abuses of the Afghani people.
[3] The French ban on face covering (French: LOI nThis0-1192: Loi interdisant la dissimulation du visage dans l’espace public,” Law of 2010-1192: Act prohibiting concealment of the face in public space”) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban_on_face_covering
[7] There is a separation between church and state. Generally, Western constitutions are not to be governed under religious law. Secular liberal laws, are above any religious influence and must be upheld as the highest form of authority. (This means no Freedom for the religious doctrine to influence or mandate modern-day politics). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state
NUMBER 3
TERRORISM
Shariah Law = Forbids Terrorism. In other words, intentionally going and targeting the civilian population, women and children for example. Also, note that there are more Terror attacks committed by Non-Muslims in the US than Muslims. For example, Muslim extremist’s who go ahead and commit acts of Terror, only account for 6% of Terrorist Attacks in the U.S
Non-Muslims however account for 90% Of all the Terrorism cases in the U.S.
Secular Liberalism = All though Secular liberal countries forbid acts of terrorism, many war crimes have been committed by the West, from raping and killing Afgan civilians to Iraqis, and then you have the Bosnian Massacre committed by Western forces and the list goes on. Westerners even justify acts of Terrorism see video:
Number 4
MURDER
Shariah Law =Capital Punishment. Has least cases of Murder.
Secular Liberalism = Punishment to lenient. Therefore Has the Highest amount of Murder rates compared to the predominantly Muslim Population watch: https://youtu.be/t_gPky76zHc
See this video:
A 13-year-old Child killer is given another chance to get released from prison after murdering a Child.
See the story anthe d thheartbreakak caused to this family:
All this sympathy towards the murderer. Imagine this for a moment. The parents live 28 years of pain, thinking about the killer that murdered their child. Because they’re constantly reminded of Parole, Parole, Parole, Parole, Parole, Parole…..and on and on.
And then after suffering for 29 years, those parents finally say our hearts came to rest (relief) that his out of prison and things can now rest. She said this because she’s tired enough inside, she rather him out than in, because him being in prison keeps sending her parole reminder letters. And to add insult to injury the Media documents the killer wanting to start his own family after burning someone else family to the ground.
Know wonder people no longer put their faith in your Western system.
If this murderer was executed from day one, thvictim’sms families would have rested 28 years ago.
Critic wrote:
My Response:
A child who’s brain isn’t fully developed, despite him telling the jury, “He enjoyed killing that child?
That seems developed to Me. Developed enough to have the mind of a serial killer.
No child says I enjoy Murder.
If He was a child, then why give him any sentence at all? The fact that He received 27 years, proves his more than just a child. Are all those judges “Monsters” for putting him in Prison for 27 years?
I’m sure if it were your child that got murdered, you would want the full force of the law. But when it’s someone elses child, will make excuses. It’s the double standards of society.
#PleaseReflect stops from making excuses for adolescence.
Critic wrote:
My response:
Critic wrote:
My Response:
Critic wrote:
My response:
Let’s also look at this case, see how Americans fear their society
Not to mention all the school shootings, that are constantly on the news, but hey America is so peaceful 😅🤫
See now statistical information how homocide is much lower in Muslim countries compared to non-Muslim
Here it from Western Media:
Predominantly, Muslim countries average 2.4 murders per annum per 100,000 people, compared to 7.5 in non-Muslim countries. The percentage of the society that is made up of Muslims is an extraordinarily good predictor of a country’s murder rate. More authoritarianism in Muslim countries does not account for the difference. I have found that controlling for political regime in statistical analysis does not change the findings. More Muslims, less homicide.
Shariah Law = Allows freedom of speech with certain boundaries. Except No other Religion being Taught in Mecca or Medina but allows it everywhere else in Addition, Islam allows constructive criticism, debate and peaceful dialogue, when it comes to politics under Shariah law, Islam may censor false news and propaganda that is promoted for the west to fight against Muslims.
Secular Liberalism = Allows Hate Speech in some U.S states ( but some western countries Ban hate speech like Race, Anti-Semite or Sexism. Australia, Germany, France and other European countries. They Also Ban, Burka in France and Ban aspects of Islam law like Azthan from Minarets, also Polygammy recognition.
Also, consider that the West bans hate speech towards LGBTIQ and censors anti-LGBTIQ statements. Facebook is one mechanism the West censors free speech. See more here:
I love how He says that comedy is the last thing standing to uphold free speech.
But let me see him do, free speech on supporting homophobic views, having anti-feminist views also having anti-Semitic views, pro-white supremacy views or pro-masculinity views.
Trust me he will get shut down very quickly by those who advocate free speech 😂👍
Most of these comedians will resort to targeting minority groups they can pick on, but if they tried challenging the views of the ones greater in power, see what happens.
They will classify him as a hate preacher and if they could revoke his citizenship
This non-Muslim named Jim supported the idea of Shariah law. He received ” likes” from non-Muslims;
See guys and girls, if I was a Muslim who said the same thing, I would have been called a Radical Jihadist. But when a non-Muslim suggests cutting the hands of thieves, then He gets all the support and likes.
This goes to show that these non-Muslims say one thing to Muslims to tease them, saying how Shariah law is backward and ancient but deep down they are in favour of stricter and much harsher laws like Shariah when it comes to dealing with thieves, the irony!
Now it gets funnier when Jim wrote back!
I reply below
He wrote back;
I replied:
So there you have it, folks, this is what happens when they get exposed and accidentally agree with “Shariah law” and it’s dealing with thieves. Jim clearly said He would like to see us go back to ancient laws such as cutting the hand of thieves, but soon as Shariah law was mentioned, He suddenly wishes to deny He agrees to Shariah law when in fact He admitted to cutting off the hand!
These non-Muslims are laughable. 😹
Read the comments from both Muslims and non-Muslims travelling to Qatar in the comments to this video: Source:
Now let’s show how the West has theft and robbery supportered and overlooked by the Law.
We often blame a certain ethnic group about comming to Australia breaking our laws about money laundering commiting crimes like robbery or selling drugs. We look at these people as economically poor and useless and uncivilized backward savages. Rightfully so, but we tend to ignore the people at the very top. The ones who work in the corporate world, who pretend to be progressed and civilised.
Now, as you are aware. The Westerns glorify how the West is so morally up rights and they are ethical. But make know mistake they only act morally up right, when there economy is in good shape, but soon as there is a spike.
Now I know what you thinking, why are there two Muslim nations leading the pack?
There is an easy explanation. Firstly Iran is a Shia nation and is not Sunni. And dont follow Shariah requirements as understood by Sunni Jurisprudence. As for Afghanistan, that country has been stricken by War and displacement for the last 20 years, and Afghanistan was institutionalized by Western Values due to the U.S invasion to liberalise the nation which may explain the High level of Drug use. Now that the Taliban are just recently back in power in late 2021, we hope to see a significant reduction in drug use since they will most likely apply Shariah rule of law of corporal punishment to stamp out drug Trafficking. This of course will take some time perhaps years.
Where they assert, that most of the top countries that watch Pornography are Muslims, like Pakistan, Egypt Turkey, Saudi Arabia etc. The publishers of this article seem to be ( Indian publishers ) who are biased towards Pakistan and Muslims, and their sources are questionable to a claimed survey conducted over 11 countries. Again it seems like an outdated survey that most likely has very little authenticity.
I mean even if it were true, one could argue that both Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey, are “Secularisized nations” that are non-Shariah-compliant. Nevertheless, another study, which is conducted by one of the biggest Porn stations on social media, known as PornHub. And not a single Muslim country is found in the TOP 20.
So these two strong evidences clearly puts doubt to suggest Muslim nations rank the highest in Porn searches when not a single Muslim nation is found in the top20 countries. The claims that Muslim nations top the watch list for Porn, Contradicts other Western sources that tell a very different story.
What is even more shameful is that when these pornacters have children, imagine how much their kids would get bullied at school, by other kids?
“O you who believe! Intoxicants (all kinds of alcoholic drinks), gambling, idolatry, and divining arrows are an abomination of Satan’s handiwork. So avoid that so that you may be successful. Satan only wants to cause obesity and hatred through intoxicants and gambling and to avert you from the remembrance of Allah and prayer. So will you not desist?” (Verses 90 and 91of Surat Surat Al-Ma’idah).
By the way, their education system for drinking in moderation has failed. Because they always have a new wave, of the new generation who like to test the limits, and thus the cycle of damage continues.
See the story of a 20-Year-old student having an incurable illness
Those studies are inconclusive because it doesn’t compare the life style of conservative Muslims VS Atheists. Rather it looks more at the behaviour of Christians VS Atheists, and we already know the behaviour and lifestyle of most Christians, we know their lifestyle and practices are not very far from Atheists.
But if you looked at the life style of a conservative Muslim and compared it to the life style of most Atheists, you can immediately see that most things that are not good for ones health is acceptable under Atheism that includes even things like as you said drinking, Narcotics, but then there’s things like sexual intimacy outside marriage which has many risk factors like STD’S, and then we can talk about things like suicide. And there have been studies to show the effects of Pornography to ones health.
Many of these things are even condoned by Atheists and Liberalists.
A true follower Muslim has a more healthier lifestyle for sure, even when we look at the many health benefits of Fasting for example which is made compulsory on every Adult Muslim.
Finally:
Furthermore, this may challenge the view that drinking in moderation is safe
Shariah Law= Forbids it. Though some scholars argue it’s permissible before the 6O day period. As the soul has not reached the fetus as understood by Islamic theology. This is a period before any shape has taken place.
Secular Liberalism= Legal. Murders more than 1.21 million babies annually. And it can even allow it at a developed staged we’re it’s recognisable its a baby human.
Shariah Law= Women in Islam do not have to share their wealth. The husband must provide everything. If his wife works she is not required to spend on him, every money she does spend on him is only out of her good will but again this is not required from Her.
Secular Liberalism = Husband is not obligated to buy anything for Her it’s only optional. He’s not required to buy her a house, His not obligated to pay for the entire amount o the rent, buy her clothing and pay for Her bills or even buy her shopping like groceries. Under these secular liberal values, his not even required to do this, there are no laws to even force him to pay for her living expenses. Where as in Islam if a husband refuses to pay for all her maintenance she can seek for divorce since his breaking Islamic requirements, this reflects how women in Islam have greater assistance then non Muslim women get where she has none of those entitlements, of course the Islamic critics will talk about how Muslim women get less of a inheritance compared to Muslim men, but the reason which they refuse to acknowledge why this is, again it’s because Men are obligated to provide for the opposite sex, while women are not obligated to provide for the opposite sex, for why men are entitled to more in the share of inheritence.
Number 12
SEXISM
Shariah Law= We Created men and women equal in Allah’s sight, though Islam understands they have biological differences. And Men and Women can understand they are different, but they can also work their differences harmoniously without trying to live up to man’s and women’s expectations. They each go at their own pace. Islam does believe however in certain gender roles.
We have written a short paper here on Gender roles in Islam outlined:
Also consider: The Term (Feminism) originates from Western Activists. This Term is Un-Known in the Muslim World due to Female oppression being Low in Muslim World. Most Feminist Movements are located in Western World.
U.S soldier, sexist comment?
American Soldier tells Iraqi soldiers that they are acting like a bunch of women. Due to them being scared and coward.
Also, note that the West believes in gender roles. That’s why they will never choose a woman to jump in the boxing ring to fight Mike Tyson. They will always pick a Man to do that.
Some unfortunate ignorant Muslim wrote, I responded to (bai lo) regarding women’s testimony in the Quran.
If you think that the West isn’t gender-biased? Check it out:
We as Muslims don’t expect anything, of course, true Muslims believe women are more responsible with the caretaking responsibility while Men are more prioritised in duties like Jihad.
But that is not what Feminists like to preach, instead they preach that there must be complete equality between Men and Women, and despite this, the Ukrainian government makes it mandatory for men but not women.
What is even more peculiar the Ukrainian government doesn’t make it mandatory to go to war, for 18-year-old girls who don’t have children or are not married. So even single girls who have no family or small kids to take care of nor any elderly member of the family to look after, despite this these girls are still exempted from fighting and are not given the same mandatory war duty as 18-year-old men. And what about if 18-year-old men, don’t have any younger brothers or siblings, or mum to look after, well He still needs to serve. He has no option, not to serve.
So saying 15% of females make up the Ukrainian army is irrelevant as their service to their country in war is not mandatory.
So this begs the question if young men are required to fight why not single independent young women?
Why isn’t that made mandatory?
This goes to show how these liberals deep down believe in gender roles, and there is no such thing as true equality, when shit hits the fan, everyone suddenly knows their place.
Also, I bet if the Ukrainian government said, every Ukrainian woman aged between 18 to 60, must stay home and look after their family and children with all cleaning and, cooking.
Then watch how they all get outraged hurling misogyny slurs.
Interesting though, bellow she wanted to be courier driven and nkw shes having a melt down despite having a very supportive husband. Price of womens doing a mans role
Notice the comments from non Muslim they tease women playing sport saying no one watches them play, they even make fun saying WET-Tshirt this is mockery and sexual objectification of women. So do they care and respect women participating in sport, not really for them it’s a mockery. So what are these women in West trying to prove by trying to fit in? When there not respected. But of course the same Western men will most likely accuse Islamic countries who are more conservative to ban certain sports for women like ice skatting In tight shorts which exposes a women’s awrah, but these Western men deem that oppressive despite Western men oppressing their own women folk in sport passing comments like the ones above Wet Tshirt and who watches them play
😊
Number 13
Nuclear Weapons
Shariah Law = Forbids its use. All though Pakistan has Nukes, which is a Democratic constitution. A Real Shariah Law State forbids its use due to breaking Rules of engagement like Innocent lives, cutting down trees and livestock, and poisoning the crops. These are all forbidden in Islamic war protocols.
Secular Liberalism = Legal, Example of use: Hiroshima/Nagasaki 120,000 Dead innocent women children including livestock, poisoned crops and land through depleted uranium causing years of Birth defects for generations to come.
We ask is Islam a threat for the extinction of humanity or the West, pointing Nuclaer warheads at one another? Russia VS the West?
Number 14
Homosexuality (Lgbtiq+)
Shariah Law = Forbids it.
Watch:
Secular Liberalism = Legal. One of the main factors of the Spread of HIV.
Over 690 000 [500 000− 970 000] people died of HIV-related illnesses worldwide just alone in 2019.
Secular Liberalism= all though most Western countries make it illegal, under true Secular Liberal dogma, it is not illegal as it is Freedom of right to do it. So long as you use contraception and it’s a consensual agreement.
See here:
Number 17
Fornication/Adultery
Shariah Law = Forbidden.
Also: Answering stoning
Secular Liberalism= Legal and encouraged. Fornication/Adultery caused the spread of Sexual Transmitted Disease 1 in 6 Females in West Contract STI
It is a scientifically clinically proven fact that the more sexual partners a person’s had the less likely the person is to pair-bond (be committed) to a single partner in a long term relationship.
“women who have more than one intimanationsmarital relationship have an increased risk of marital dissolution.”
Since the West has no laws to punish people who cheat on their partners, as Islam does. Take a look to see the TOP 10 countries all happened to be non-Muslim
Thus Muslim nations are more faithful, because they are God-fearing nations, unlike the West which takes God out of the equation and focuses more on individual liberty and personal choices including a state to achieve maximum pleasure at the expense of raising your children fatherless or motherless. Praise be to Allah the Islamic community is much better when it comes to being faithful to one’s partner.
See here how an American father catches his wife cheating and tells her, he’s going to show the kids what their mother has done:
JUST SEE – A site created by the West encourages you to commit Adultery and to have a secret affair called Ashley Madison, which had 30 million members that’s bigger then the population of Australia. Their evil narrative is: “Life is to shirt, why don’t you have an affair “.
To be clear all though a lot of Westerners may disagree to Adultery and cheating, but under their freedom of values they don’t ban or stop websites that encourage Adultery and cheating on spouse, in fact their goverments fully support it as a right. Imagine how many suicides this website caused due to the leaked information, just imagine how many marriages break up and kids get caught up in this mess of divorce, and Western government are being complicit in this because they gain revenue and tax money from these evil websites, and we are told that Western Secular governments work for the betterment of society and communities, no by God that don’t they care about their own pockets at the expense of destroying and ruining families.
The sickening support for committing Adultery
Number 18
Polygamy
Shariah Law = The only religion that has the phrase “only marry 1” but we can marry 2, 3 or 4 with the condition we act justly between them all.
Secular Liberalism = In the West you can be married and have 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 girlfriends you can be intimate with on the s, ide there is no law to forbid this act.
In fact: More than 30,000 married Australians are found ‘cheating’ every month:
Furthermore, ExMuslim Atheist liberal, Harris Sultan boasts about having more women than Prophet Muhammed (pbuh)
See:
Interesting that they mock Muslims for heaven with 72 Houri? And here they are these Ex-Murtads bragging behind closed doors how many women they have been with?
The irony hey? Maximum pleasure hey Harris? 😁
Number 19
Interest/Usuary
Shariah Law = Forbids it.
Secular Liberalism= Legal. In the United States of America since “Interest” is part of their economy the U.S financial system is under a Debt of 21 Trillion+ Dollars which f d a bt Crisis. http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/
See also this video, how Interest has ruined nations
If anyone tries to say how Capitalism has taken millions out of poverty. Show them this report. Capitalism only serves the Rich and kills proper fair distribution of Wealth. Rich get Richer and the poor get poorer, and those in-between work from paycheck to paycheck as modern slaves.
Shariah Law = Islam continuously encourages you to donate your Wealth. Islam is favoured by Allah when it comes to Wealth. But has also either blessed or cursed some nations by Wealth to Test them or as a form of punishment.
Secular Liberalism =
They write;
Many Islamic countries are poor. This is due to their backwardness
Response:
You say, so many Islamic countries are poor. That may be true, but 5 out of the 25 richest countries in the world happen to be Muslim. With the highest ranking GDP.
That said, most Muslim country’s GDP is pretty much the standard of the majority of the Western countries:
See:
I know what a Westerner will say, they will say the reason why Muslim countries top the GDP is because of all that oil, and not because of their hard work.
Well, my response would be that it just shows how Allah blessed those Muslims, and they didn’t even have to work for it, like dogs.
Is it to know wonder that most of the biggest volumes of natural resources are found in the middle east? Is that just a coincidence or divine intervention?
Also, consider most Western countries did a lot of bad deeds to get where they did, besides the industrial revolution. Take for example how Brittian looted over 45 trillion Dollars from India. https://youtu.be/SElZ29Al4Sw
Much more looting by the West could be mentioned, how they looted blood diamonds out of Africa.
And how the West invaded almost the whole globe, from the West to the East. Like South Africa, India, Australia to America where it reaped from all its natural resources, and then to add insult to injury took slaves out of Africa to work forcefully and build the West.
But yeh, please go on and tell us more about how the Western world is so rich compared to the Muslim nations, was it really all just hard work, or did a lot of looting really gave you a great head start?
Also, consider all though Western countries are rich, they also have the biggest debt out of any other nation. See the next post below. Also about Western comments about Muslims giving charity to religious institutions, instead of using the money to help the poor. This comment is stupid, because when Muslims donate money to their religious organisations, that money is used to help the poor people as most of those funds go to help projects such as building orphanages, and water wells in Africa so people can have access to fresh clean water, including the donations to help the poor with food and clothing. See our post under “Charity and Donations ” it’s Religious people who donate more money to the poor than those who call themselves Atheists who appeal to secular liberalism.
Critic wrote:
Response:
By the way, notice how these scum Atheist agnostics put all eggs in one basket saying religion keeps us backwards, despite predominantly Christian nations being rich wealthy and educated, perhaps these Atheists are so shallow that they think Christian nations are predominately Atheist?
As for Christians themselves who boast about the Wealth of the West and look down upon majority Muslim natuins, Jesus (pbuh) has a message for you;
Finally;
Sometimes if your wondering, why Muslim nations are suffering much more compared to the West nations? Financially, economically, technologically, and so forth.
Majority if not all the Muslims agree that this is because Allah is not happy with Us. I agree this can be one of the reasons, but it’s not overall the ONLY reason.
Indeed, Allah has bigger plans for Us, if indeed life was too easy, then surely you will see corruption on the earth.
So notice, Atheists and materialists will have you believed that, when you become so technologically advanced, you become powerful, economically as a result people come out of poverty, or poor living standards, and get to enjoy life to its maximum, but what they don’t realize is that, these so-called good times, turn people obesity, their minds become morally bankrupt, as they have too much spare time on their hands, so they will resort to drugs and alcohol as their go-to party drug, they will always be thirsty for more pleasure, and to entertain new desires, due to the ample time, they lose focus with raising a family, cause all they care about is themselves and how to make life as enjoyable for them, why would anyone want to waste their lives raising a crying child. That’s why Homosexuality is very appealing, house has two men, to male income, no children to worry about, no nagging wife. Just hold your gay husbands hand and enjoy the world with two male incomes.
Of course this ends up, being a destruction for them in the long wrong, where Men no longer identify as Men and Women don’t identify as women, the decrease of fertility rates, and divorce rates, and the use of illegal substances, is just the tip of the iceberg for these people, so do not be swayed by their living standards, it is only designed to create weak men, and awful times, but Satan (iblis) will make it look pleasurable, but underneath is a dark sad reality.
Number 21
Nations most Debt
Shariah Law = Encourages not to get into financial debts and Forbids things like loans that have “interest”. And so when we look at the world debt crises, the Muslim nations are doing much better, when it comes to debt.
Secular Liberalism= Non-Muslim countries have the worst record in” take a look at the top countries:
Number 22
Charity and Donations
Shariah Law = Compulsory if you’re able. Known as Zakah. Hence a solution to end world poverty.
Secular Liberalism= Not compulsory but rather optional even if you are a billionaire. Hence has contributed to World Poverty. The Poor give more money to charity than the rich a study finds. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5937100
MustafaSahinBlog 