Re: We don't want your Muslim trash in the USA. Keep it, or kill it.

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Oct 30, 5:24 am, "Ordinary Joe" <o...@usa.com> wrote:
> Muslims are dirty primitive heretics who worship false gods and
> practice pedophilia.  We do not want them here and no other
> country should accept them either.  Let the animals stay where
> they are.
>

Saying that Islam is a heresy is by itelf heretic because inaccurate
It is like Microsoft saying telling the crowd that Apple is heresy.
But those who really understand the issue and computing language
would disagree. Why? because Apple has its own operating System
which supports its applications. Islam has its Law and doesn't operate
on Caesar Law. It had its own kingdom  ...

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

On Oct 30, 10:24 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
<Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

" Islam has its Law "


KORAN commands to kill infidels:

Allah is an enemy to unbelievers. - Sura 2:98

On unbelievers is the curse of Allah. - Sura 2:161

Slay them wherever ye find them and drive them out of the places
whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. -
2:191

Fight against them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion
reigns supreme. (different translation: ) Fight them until there is no
persecution and the religion is God's entirely. - Sura 2:193 and 8:39

Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it. - 2:216
(different translation: ) Prescribed for you is fighting, though it is
hateful to you.

..... martyrs.... Enter heaven - Surah 3:140-43

If you should die or be killed in the cause of Allah, His mercy and
forgiveness would surely be better than all they riches they amass. If
you should die or be killed, before Him you shall all be gathered. -
3:157-8

You must not think that those who were slain in the cause of Allah are
dead. They are alive, and well-provided for by their Lord. - Surah
3:169-71

Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world
for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of God, whether he
is slain or victorious, soon we shall give him a great reward. - Surah
4:74

Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject
faith fight in the cause of evil. - 4:76

But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever you find
them. - 4:89

Therefore, we stirred among them enmity and hatred, which shall endure
till the Day of Resurrection, when Allah will declare to them all that
they have done. - 5:14

O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends; they are friends
of each other. Those of you who make them his friends is one of them.
God does not guide an unjust people. - 5:54

Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns
supreme - 8:39

O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there are 20 steadfast
men among you, they shall vanquish 200; and if there are a hundred,
they shall rout a thousand unbelievers, for they are devoid of
understanding. - 8:65

It is not for any Prophet to have captives until he has made slaughter
in the land. - 8:67

Allah will humble the unbelievers. Allah and His apostle are free from
obligations to idol-worshipers. Proclaim a woeful punishment to the
unbelievers. - 9:2-3

When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find
them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for
them. - 9:5

Believers! Know that idolators are unclean. - 9:28

Fight those who believe neither in God nor the Last Day, nor what has
been forbidden by God and his messenger, nor acknowledge the religion
of Truth, even if they are People of the Book, until they pay the
tribute and have been humbled. - 9:29 (another source: ) The
unbelievers are impure and their abode is hell. (another source: )
Humiliate the non-Muslims to such an extent that they surrender and
pay tribute.

Whether unarmed or well-equipped, march on and fight for the cause of
Allah, with your wealth and your persons. - 9:41

O Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites. Be harsh
with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end. -
9:73

Allah has purchased of their faithful lives and worldly goods, and in
return has promised them the Garden. They will fight for His cause,
kill and be killed. - 9:111

Fight unbelievers who are near to you. 9:123 (different translation:
Believers! Make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Let them
find harshness in you. (another source: ) Ye who believe! Murder those
of the disbelievers....

As for those who are slain in the cause of Allah, He will not allow
their works to perish. He will vouchsafe them guidance and ennoble
their state; He will admit them to the Paradise He has made known to
them. - 10:4-15

Allah has cursed the unbelievers and proposed for them a blazing hell.
- 33:60

Unbelievers are enemies of Allah and they will roast in hell. - 41:14

When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then when you have
made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds, then set them
free, either by grace or ransom, until the war lays down its burdens.
- 47:4
(different translation: ) When you meet the unbelievers in the
battlefield, strike off their heads, and when you have laid them low,
bind your captives firmly.

Those who are slain in the way of Allah - he will never let their
deeds be lost. Soon will he guide them and improve their condition,
and admit them to the Garden, which he has announced for them. - 47:5

Muslims are harsh against the unbelievers, merciful to one another. -
48:25

Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the
unbelievers but merciful to one another. Through them, Allah seeks to
enrage the unbelievers. - 48:29

Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal
sternly with them. Hell shall be their home, evil their fate. - 66:9

The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn
forever in the fire of hell. They are the vilest of all creatures. -
98:51

Fight them so that Allah may punish them at your hands, and put them
to shame. (verse cited in Newsweek 2/11/02)

-------



KORAN promises of houris in heaven:

Single-minded slaves of Allah... will be honored in the Gardens of
delight, on couches facing one another; A cup from a gushing spring is
brought round for them, white, delicious to the drinkers, wherein
there is no headache nor are they made mad thereby. And with them are
those of modest gaze, with lovely eyes, pure as they were hidden eggs.
- Surah 37:40-49

Lo, for those who ward off evil is a happy journey's end, Gardens of
Eden, whereof the gates are opened for the, wherein, reclining, they
call for plenteous fruit and cool drink therein. And with them are
those of modest gaze, companions. This it is that ye are promised for
the Day of Reckoning. - 38:50-54

Lo! Those who kept their duty will be in a place secure, amid gardens
and water-springs, attired in silk and silk embroidery, facing one
another.... And we shall wed them unto fair ones with wide, lovely
eyes. They call therein for every fruit in safety. They taste not
death therein, save the first death. And He hath saved them from the
doom of hell, a bounty from thy Lord. That is the supreme triumph. -
44:51-57

Lo! Those who kept their duty dwell in gardens and delight...
reclining on ranged couches. And we wed them unto fair ones with wide,
lovely eyes... and we provide them with fruit and meat such as they
desire.... - 52:17-22

...Reclining upon couches lined with silk brocade, the fruit of both
the gardens near to hand.... Therein are those of modest gaze, whom
neither man nor jinni will have touched before them.... - 55:54-56

Those are they who will be brought nigh, in gardens of delight...
reclining therein face to face. There wait on them immortal youths...
and fair ones with wide, lovely eyes, like unto hidden pearls, reward
for what they used to do.... Lo! We have created them a creation, and
made them virgins, lovers, friends. - 56:11-37
(Different translation) Companions with beautiful, big and lustrous
eyes... virgin-pure and undefiled.

--------

Koran "sharia" punishments:

As for the man who steals and the woman who steals, cut off their
hands as punishment for what they have earned, an exemplary punishment
from Allah. - Surah 5:38

http://www.wvinter.net/~haught/Koran.html

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Oct 30, 11:37 am, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

This is not what heresy means

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

On Oct 30, 12:02 pm, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews

<Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

" This is not what heresy means"

Jihadwatch

Muslim cleric preaches peace, Islamic supremacists promptly shoot him
dead
Why we don't see more genuine Muslim reformers -- not that Kalimulla
Ibragimov seems to have been much of one, anyway: "Russia Caucasus:
Imam shot dead in Derbent, Dagestan," from the BBC, October 30 (thanks
to The Religion of Peace):

Attackers have shot dead an imam and two of his male relations, as
they drove to a mosque in the Russian North Caucasus region of
Dagestan.
They were shot on their way to morning prayers, close to the imam's
home in the Caspian Sea town of Derbent, law enforcement sources told
reporters.

The cleric was named as Kalimulla Ibragimov, 49, who is said to have
delivered sermons calling for peace.

Islamists have been blamed for attacks on moderate Muslims in the
region.

Dagestan, a mainly Muslim region, has been gripped by an Islamist
insurgency since 1999, when militants backed by fighters from
neighbouring Chechnya launched an offensive against Russian control.

Three imams have been shot dead in the region since March, the Russian
news website utro.ru reports.

Mr Ibragimov is said by Russian media to have been a "Salafist", a
term used for Islamic radicals. Nonetheless, according to utro.ru, he
"often gave sermons and made appeals for peace and Muslim unity"....

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/10/muslim-cleric-preaches-peace-islamic-supremacists-promptly-shoot-him-dead.html

http://www.jihadwatch.org/

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Oct 30, 2:21 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

> http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/10/muslim-cleric-preaches-peace-islami...
>
> http://www.jihadwatch.org/

Again this is NOT what is meant by heresy.
When Constantine and His bishops defined heresy
they did in the context of the Roman Law and canonical
doctrines. They were in good faith trying to turn
their kingdom into a kingdom of God by turning it over to Jesus.
From Idol worship they were moving forward to the worship
of one God through Christ. Therefore we understand it
when they declare other belief system within the Roman
Empire heresies. But you, what do you mean when you
say Islam is HERESY?

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

Muslims rightly believe that only Sharia Law- Islamic Canon Law-
can save you from going back to idol worship. Your
constitution or Bill of rights and any other rights that the
Founding fathers gave out by thousand are useless before
the eyes of God

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

On Oct 30, 10:24 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews

ISLAM: A CHRISTIAN HERESY?
http://www.realclearreligion.com/islam_a_christian_heresy.html
20/03/07 12:04

Hilaire Belloc predicted the future rise of Islam in his book The
Great Christian Heresies. This prediction always fascinated me since
at least during the last century Islam seemed asleep and quite
inconsequential to the West. His prediction was certainly correct.
In fact Belloc, writing in the first half of the 20th century summed
up the West's thinking on Islam as follows:


"Millions of modern people of the white civilization-that is, the
civilization of Europe and America- have forgotten all about Islam.
They never come in contact with it. They take for granted that it is
decaying, and that, anyway, it is just a foreign religion which will
not concern them. It is, as a fact, the most formidable and
persistent enemy which our civilization has had, and may at any
moment become as large a menace in the future as it has been in the
past." (emphasis added)


In his book Belloc classifies Islam as a Christian heresy. It is
important to observe the similarities in christianity and Catholicism
specifically in order to understand the differences between it and
Islam.


Belloc states "It began as a heresy, not as a new religion....It was a
perversion of the Christian religion...an adaptation and a misuse of
the Christian thing."


Unlike all the other heresiarchs "[T]he chief heresiarch, Mohammed
himself, was not, like most heresiarchs, a man of Catholic birth, and
doctrine to begin with. He sprang from pagans. But that which he
taught was in the main Catholic doctrine, oversimplified. It was the
great Catholic world - on the frontiers of which he lived, whose
influence was all around him and whose territories he had known by
travel-which inspired his convictions."


"Thus the very foundation of his teaching was that prime Catholic
doctrine, the unity and omnipotence of God."


"But the central point where his new heresy struck home with a mortal
blow against Catholic tradition was a full denial of the
Incarnation."


"He taught that our Lord was the greatest of all the prophets, but
still only a prophet; a man like other men. He eliminated the
Trinity altogether."


"In other words, he, like so many lesser heresiarchs, founded his
heresy on simplification...Simplicity was the note of the whole
affair; and since all heresies draw their strength from some true
doctrine, Mohammedanism drew its strength from the true Catholic
doctrines which it retained: the equality of all men before God--"All
true believers are brothers."


"The Mohammedan movement was essentailly a "Reformation," and we can
discover numerous affinities between Islam and Protestant Reformers-
on Images, on the Mass, on Celebacy, etc."

http://www.realclearreligion.com/islam_a_christian_heresy.html

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

On Oct 31, 11:49 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews

<Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> Muslims rightly believe that only Sharia Law- Islamic Canon Law-
> can save you from going back to idol worship. Your
> constitution or Bill of rights and any other rights that the
> Founding fathers gave out by thousand are useless before
> the eyes of God
>

The Founding Fathers followed the true God..

We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

2Co 3:17 - Now the Lord is that Spirit:
and where the Spirit of the Lord is,
there is liberty.

> On Oct 30, 5:24 am, "Ordinary Joe" <o...@usa.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Muslims are dirty primitive heretics who worship false gods and
> > practice pedophilia.  We do not want them here and no other
> > country should accept them either.  Let the animals stay where

> > they are.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Olrik]

Le 2012-10-31 12:49, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews a �crit :

>
> Muslims rightly believe that only Sharia Law- Islamic Canon Law-
> can save you from going back to idol worship. Your
> constitution or Bill of rights and any other rights that the
> Founding fathers gave out by thousand are useless before
> the eyes of God

Hey! Cody is back! Hi Cody!

Still bat shit crazy, I see! Out for good behavior?

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Oct 31, 1:24 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

<jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com> wrote:
> On Oct 31, 11:49 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
>
> <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > Muslims rightly believe that only Sharia Law- Islamic Canon Law-
> > can save you from going back to idol worship. Your
> > constitution or Bill of rights and any other rights that the
> > Founding fathers gave out by thousand are useless before
> > the eyes of God
>
>   The Founding Fathers followed the true God..

You are such a liar. Those men were sissi and atheists
Their political theory was pagan NOT christian.
They were working against the KINGDOM OF GOD
but they have already met with their own fate

>
>   We hold these truths to be self-evident,
>  that all men are created equal,

Which was nothing but mere demagoguery.
Saint Paul had already proclaimed that 2000 years
ago when he said that there was no longer
jews, or greeks, or slave, or men or women but that we were
one in Christ. Those stupid founding father did nothing
but UNDO Christianity

> that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
> Rights,
>  that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

They were known to own slaves. Saling human being is hardly
Christian

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 1, 12:04 am, Olrik <olrik...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Le 2012-10-31 12:49, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews a écrit :
>
>
>
> > Muslims rightly believe that only Sharia Law- Islamic Canon Law-
> > can save you from going back to idol worship. Your
> > constitution or Bill of rights and any other rights that the
> > Founding fathers gave out by thousand are useless before
> > the eyes of God
>
> Hey! Cody is back! Hi Cody!
>
> Still bat shit crazy, I see! Out for good behavior?

Cody is back from where? Our God owns this country and the internet as
well
So we are still here and nobody can force us out.

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

On Nov 1, 10:20 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews

Jan 2, 1492:
Reconquest of Spain

The kingdom of Granada falls to the Christian forces of King
Ferdinand V and Queen Isabella I, and the Moors lose their last
foothold in Spain.

Located at the confluence of the Darro and Genil rivers in southern
Spain, the city of Granada was a Moorish fortress that rose to
prominence during the reign of Sultan Almoravid in the 11th century.
In 1238, the Christian Reconquest forced Spanish Muslims south, and
the kingdom of Granada was established as the last refuge of the
Moorish civilization.

Granada flourished culturally and economically for the next 200 years,
but in the late 15th century internal feuds and a strengthened Spanish
monarchy under Ferdinand and Isabella signaled the end of Moorish
civilization in Spain. On January 2, 1492, King Boabdil surrendered
Granada to the Spanish forces, and in 1502 the Spanish crown ordered
all Muslims forcibly converted to Christianity. The next century saw a
number of persecutions, and in 1609 the last Moors still adhering to
Islam were expelled from Spain.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/reconquest-of-spain

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 1, 12:56 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

This does NOT make Islam into heresy.
I thought you were going to brag about that misguided Thomas Jefferson.

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

St John of Damascus on Islam
by Kevin P. Edgecomb
St John of Damascus is a very important witness to early Islam. He was
born into a very privileged family in Damascus (his grandfather had
been the administrator of the city at the time the Muslims took it)
and he grew up and served in the court of the caliph. He was entirely
familiar with Islam (a name it did not yet possess, apparently), and
thus what he has to say about it, and the context in which he places
it, is of great historical importance. For one thing, this is a single
chapter in his work On Heresies, part of his larger work, The Fountain
of Knowledge. Thus, during his lifetime, St John did not consider
Islam to yet be a separate religion, but rather a Christian heresy. In
any case, he mentions several suras of the Qur’an by name, and refers
most interestingly to one which is no longer extant. St John, in this
work, as characteristically, pulls no punches. Enjoy.


~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~

And there is also the up until now strong and people-deceiving
superstition of the Ishmaelites, being the forerunner of Antichrist.
And it is born from Ishmael, who was born from Hagar to Abraham, from
which they are called Hagarenes and Ishmaelites. And they call them
Saracens, as from Σαρρας κενοι (those empty of Sarah), because of what
was said by Hagar to the angel: “Sarah has sent me away empty.” So
then, these were idolaters and reverenced the morning star and
Aphrodite, who they indeed named Khabar in their own language, which
means great. Therefore, until the time of Heraclius, they were plainly
idolaters. From that time and until now came up among them a false
prophet called Mamed, who, having encountered the Old and New
Testament, as it seems, having conversed with an Arian monk, he put
together his own heresy. And under the pretext of seeming pious,
attracting (?) people, he reported that a book was sent down to him
from heaven by God. Therefore some of the compositions written by him
in a book, worthy of laughter, which he handed down to them as an
object of reverence.


He says there is one God, the Maker of all things, neither having been
begotten nor having begotten. He says Christ is the Word of God and
His Spirit, only a creation and servant, and that he was born without
seed from Mary the sister of Moses and Aaron. For he says the Word of
God and the Spirit went into Mary and she bore Jesus who was a prophet
and servant of God. And that the Jews, acting against the law, wanted
to crucify him and having seized (him), they crucified his shadow. For
Christ himself, they say, was not crucified nor did he die, for God
took him to himself into heaven because he loved him.

And he says this, that when Christ went up into the heavens, God
questioned him, saying, “O Jesus, did you say that ‘I am the Son of
God and God’?” And Jesus, they say, answered, “Have mercy on me, O
Lord; you know that I did not say (that), nor am I too proud to be
your servant, but men who have turned aside wrote that I said this
word and lied about me, and are wandering.” And God, they say,
answered him, “I know that you did not say this word.” And many other
astonishing sayings in this same writing, worthy of laughter, he
boasts God sent down to him.

But we say, “And who is the witness that God gave the writing to him,
or which of the prophets foretold that such a prophet would arise?”
And they are at a loss, as Moses received on Mount Sinai, in the sight
of all the people, the Law of God who appeared in cloud and fire and
darkness and storm. And that all the prophets, from Moses and onward,
foretold the coming of Christ, and that Christ is God, and the Son of
God, being flesh, will come, and will be crucified, and will die, and
will rise again, and he will be the judge of the living and the dead.
And we say, “Why did your prophet not come in this way, with others
witnessing about him, nor coming among you as God gave the Law to
Moses on a smoking mountain with all the people watching, and, as you
claim, provide this book, so you also might have certainty?” They
answer that God does as he wills. We know this too, we say. But, we
ask, how did the writing come down to your prophet? And they answer
that while he was asleep the writing came upon him. And we jokingly
say to them that since he received the writing while sleeping, and did
not sense the activity, in him is fulfilled the popular proverb (“You
are spinning me dreams”).

Again we ask, “Why, when he commanded us in your writing not to do or
to receive anything without witnesses, did you not ask him that ‘First
you show through witnesses whether you are a prophet, and that you
came from God, and which Scripture witnesses about you?’” They are
silent, ashamed. To whom we say, “For good reason! Since it is not
allowed for you to marry a woman without witnesses, nor to buy, nor
acquire property (?), nor do you allow yourselves to have a donkey or
an animal unwitnessed. For you indeed also have wives, and properties,
and donkeys, and all the rest through witnesses, and you have only a
faith and a writing unwitnessed. For he who handed this down to you
has in no way an assurance, nor is any previous witness of him known,
but he received this also while sleeping.”

And they call us Associators, because, they say, we introduce an
associate to God by saying Christ is the Son of God and God. To whom
we say that this is what the Prophets and Scripture have handed down.
And you, as you insist, accept the Prophets. If, therefore, we are
wrong saying Christ is the Son of God, they also are who taught and
handed it down to us. And some of them indeed say that we have
allegorized the Prophets, imputing (sayings) to them. Others say that
the Hebrews, hating (us), have deceived us, having written as from the
Prophets, so that we might be destroyed.

And again we say to them, “You say that Christ is the Word of God and
the Spirit. How then do you rebuke us as ‘Associators’? For the Word
and the Spirit are each of them unseparated from Him in Whom they have
been born. If, therefore, in God is His Word, it is obvious he is also
God. But if he is outside of God, as according to you, God is
irrational (αλογος) and lifeless (απνους). Therefore, in avoiding to
associate with God, you have mutilated him. But it would be better for
you to say that he has an associate than to mutilate him, and
represent him like a stone, or wood, or any of those insensible
things. Thus, indeed, falsely accusing us, you call us ‘Associators.’
But we call you ‘Mutilators of God.’”

They also accuse us as idolaters for reverencing the Cross, which they
despise. And we say to them, “Why, therefore, do you rub yourselves
against the stone by your Khabathan, and love kissing the stone?” And
some of them say Abraham had relations with Hagar upon it, and others
that he tied up the camel around it when about to sacrifice Isaac. And
we respond to them, “The Scripture says that there was a mountain like
a grove, and wood from which also Abraham cut for the whole burnt
offering on which he laid Isaac, and that he left the donkeys with the
servants. Therefore, from what source is your foolish saying? For
there is no wood of a forest lying in that place, nor travelling by
donkeys.” They are indeed ashamed. Nevertheless, they say the stone is
of Abraham. Then we say, “If it is of Abraham, as you foolishly say,
therefore are you not ashamed, kissing this thing only because Abraham
had relations with a woman upon it, or that he tied up a camel? But
you censure us because we show reverence to the Cross of Christ
through which the strength of the demons and the deceit of the Accuser
is destroyed?” And this thing which they say is a stone is the head of
Aphrodite which they reverenced, who they also called Khabar, upon
which also even up to now the shadow of an inscription appears to
careful observers.

As we have said, this Mamed composed many foolish sayings, and he laid
upon each of them a title, like the writing “The Women,” in which also
he plainly legislates (for a man) to take four wives and one thousand
concubines if he is able, however many he might put under his hand,
aside from the four wives. And he legislated to divorce whichever one
he wishes, or if he wishes, also to take care of another, for this
very reason: Mamed had a companion named Zeïd. This one had a
beautiful wife, whom Mamed loved. Therefore, when they were sitting
together, Mamed said, “Oh, by the way, God has ordered me to take your
wife.” And he answered, “You are the Apostle; do as God has said to
you. Take my wife.” Or rather, so we might tell it from the beginning,
he said to him, “God has ordered me, that you divorce your wife” And
he divorced. And after several days, he says, “But God has ordered
that I will also take her.” Then he took (her) and committed adultery
with her (and) made this law: “He who wills may divorce his wife, but
if after divorcing, he would return to her, another must marry her;
for it is not allowed to take (her back) if she has not been married
by another. And even if a brother divorces, let his brother marry her,
if he is willing.” And in the same writing, he transmits this message:
“Plough the land which God has given to you, and beautify it” and do
this, and in this way—so I might not say all the obscene things as he
did.

Again, there is the writing of the Camel of God, about which he says
that there was a camel from God, and she drank a whole river, and she
could not pass between two mountains through which she could not fit.
Therefore, he says, a people was in that place, and indeed on one day
they would drink the water and the camel on the next. And while
drinking the water, she maintained (?) them by providing milk instead
of water. Therefore those men, being wicked, rose up, he says, and
killed the camel. But there was a small camel of her offspring which,
he says, when the mother had been done away with, cried out to God,
and He took her to Himself. To them we say, “From where was that
camel?” And they say that it was from God. And we say, “Did any other
couple with this camel?” And they say, “No.” We say, “Therefore how
did she give birth? For we see you camel is without father, without
mother, without genealogy. And having given birth, she suffered evil.
But neither does the coupler appear, and the little camel was taken
up. Therefore, why did not your prophet, to whom, as you say, God has
spoken, learn about the camel: where she pastures, and if any drank
milk (?) by milking this one? Or was she not at some time, like her
mother having met evil men, destroyed? Or did she enter into Paradise,
your forerunner, from whom is your river which you foolishly say is of
milk? For you say three rivers are to flow for you in Paradise: of
water, wine, and milk. If your forerunner camel is outside of
Paradise, it is obvious that she has dried up from hunger and thirst,
or that others are enjoying her milk. And your prophet is boasting
foolishly as having spoken with God, for the mystery of the camel was
not revealed to him. And if she is in Paradise, she again drinks the
water, and waterless, you will dry up in the midst of the delights of
Paradise. But if you desire wine from the river flowing by, since
there is no flowing water, for the camel drank it all, you will be
inflamed (?) drinking unmixed wine, and collapse (?) in drunkenness,
and fall asleep. And also, being heavy-headed after sleep, and having
a headache from the wine, you will forget the pleasures of Paradise.
Therefore, why did your prophet not think of these things that might
happen to you in the Paradise of delights? Nor did he consider about
the camel, where she now lives. But neither did you ask him, as the
dream-teller was telling you about the three rivers. But we tell you
definitely, your wonderful camel has run ahead of you into the souls
of donkeys, where you are soon to live like animals. And in that place
is the outer darkness, and endless punishment, the roaring fire, the
unsleeping worm, and demons of Tartarus.

Mamed speaks again (in) the writing of The Table. And he says that
Christ asked God for a table, and he gave it to him. For God, he says,
said to him that “I have given to you and to yours an incorruptible
table.”

Again, the writing of The Cow, and some other foolish sayings worthy
of laughter, I think I should skip because of their number. He
legislated that they be circumcised, including the women, and also
commanded not to keep the Sabbath, nor to be baptized, and to eat some
of the things forbidden in the Law, and to avoid (some of) those it
permitted. And he entirely forbade the drinking of wine.

This entry was posted in Patristics. Bookmark the permalink.
← Migne’s Patrologia Graecae

http://www.bombaxo.com/blog/?p=210

[Ordinary Joe]

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 1, 5:24 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
wrote:

> drinking the water, she ...
>
> read more »

So your knowledge of Islam is based on what Saint John
of Damascus a trinitarian dogmatic has to say?
Trinity also according to Moses Law is also heresy.
A heretic John claiming that Islam, whose CHRISTOLOGY
is entirely Mosaic, is heresy.
Again we don't give a damn about what John thought.
Trinity is already heresy
God having a son is heresy according to Moses Law
Again it is like Microsoft claiming that Apple is heresy
but Apple has its own operating system which is Moses
Law in this context as opposed to Caesar Law and its
trinitarian tone. But you still can't get it

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 1, 5:24 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
wrote:

>

> As we have said, this Mamed composed many foolish sayings, and he laid
> upon each of them a title, like the writing “The Women,” in which also
> he plainly legislates (for a man) to take four wives and one thousand
> concubines if he is able, however many he might put under his hand,
> aside from the four wives. And he legislated to divorce whichever one
> he wishes, or if he wishes, also to take care of another, for this
> very reason: Mamed had a companion named Zeïd. This one had a
> beautiful wife, whom Mamed loved. Therefore, when they were sitting
> together, Mamed said, “Oh, by the way, God has ordered me to take your
> wife.” And he answered, “You are the Apostle; do as God has said to
> you. Take my wife.” Or rather, so we might tell it from the beginning,
> he said to him, “God has ordered me, that you divorce your wife” And
> he divorced. And after several days, he says, “But God has ordered
> that I will also take her.” Then he took (her) and committed adultery
> with her (and) made this law: “He who wills may divorce his wife, but
> if after divorcing, he would return to her, another must marry her;
> for it is not allowed to take (her back) if she has not been married
> by another. And even if a brother divorces, let his brother marry her,
> if he is willing.” And in the same writing, he transmits this message:
> “Plough the land which God has given to you, and beautify it” and do
> this, and in this way—so I might not say all the obscene things as he
> did.

Mohammad was NOT living under Caeasar's Law
and was not planning to pay allegiance to Caesar
Therefore he was free to legislate according to the
Law of Moses

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

The Truth About Muhammad:
Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion [Hardcover]
Robert Spencer (Author)


Editorial Reviews
From the Inside Flap
Muhammad: a frank look at his influential (and violent) life and
teachings
In The Truth about Muhammad, New York Times bestselling author and
Islam expert Robert Spencer offers an honest and telling portrait of
the founder of Islam-perhaps the first such portrait in half a century-
unbounded by fear and political correctness, unflinching, and willing
to face the hard facts about Muhammad's life that continue to affect
our world today.

From Muhammad's first "revelation" from Allah (which filled him with
terror that he was demonpossessed) to his deathbed (from which he
called down curses upon Jews and Christians), it's all here-told with
extensive documentation from the sources that Muslims themselves
consider most reliable about Muhammad.

Spencer details Muhammad's development from a preacher of hellfire and
damnation into a political and military leader who expanded his rule
by force of arms, promising his warriors luridly physical delights in
Paradise if they were killed in his cause. He explains how the
Qur'an's teaching on warfare against unbelievers developed-with
constant war to establish the hegemony of Islamic law as the last
stage.

Spencer also gives the truth about Muhammad's convenient "revelations"
justifying his own licentiousness; his joy in the brutal murders of
his enemies; and above all, his clear marching orders to his followers
to convert non-Muslims to Islam-or force them to live as inferiors
under Islamic rule.

In The Truth about Muhammad, you'll learn

- The truth about Muhammad's multiple marriages (including one to a
nine-year-old) - How Muhammad set legal standards that make it
virtually impossible to prove rape in Islamic countries - How
Muhammad's example justifies jihad and terrorism - The real "Satanic
verses" incident (not the Salman Rushdie version) that remains a
scandal to Muslims - How Muhammad's faulty knowledge of Judaism and
Christianity has influenced Islamic theology--and colored Muslim
relations with Jews and Christians to this day.

Recognizing the true nature of Islam, Spencer argues, is essential for
judging the prospects for largescale Islamic reform, the effective
prosecution of the War on Terror, the democracy project in Afghanistan
and Iraq, and immigration and border control to protect the United
States from terrorism.

All of which makes it crucial for every citizen (and policymaker) who
loves freedom to read and ponder The Truth about Muhammad.


About the Author
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David
Horowitz Freedom Center, and author of the New York Times bestseller
The Politically Incorrect GuideTM to Islam (and the Crusades), as well
as four other books on Islam and terrorism, including Islam Unveiled:
Disturbing Questions about the World’s Fastest Growing Faith and
Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the
West, as well as eight monographs and hundreds of articles. He lives
in a secure, undisclosed location.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Truth-About-Muhammad-Intolerant/dp/1596980281

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

The Error of Theonomy in a Nutshell, by Greg Loren Durand
"[Theonomists] . . .cannot see Paul's cogent argument in his epistle
to the Galatians that any attempt to carry the Mosaic economy over
into the New Covenant era is a denial of the very Gospel itself, and
instead read this epistle as a diatribe against the use of "the
ceremonial law," and circumcision in particular, as a means of
justification."


The Error of Theonomy in a Nutshell, by Greg Loren Durand
Although it has some roots in New England Puritanism and historic
Covenant Theology, Theonomy, or Christian Reconstruction, is a
distorted version of both and may perhaps be classified as "hyper-
Puritanism." Its adherents often will claim that they hold to the
classic three-fold division of the Mosaic law into ceremonial,
judicial, and moral categories, but they actually collapse the
judicial into the moral and therefore think in terms of only a two-
fold division. This presupposition may be seen in their frequent
reference to the "moral case laws" found in the Old Testament, which
they insist were binding on the nations outside of Israel and remain
perpetually binding. However, this division is much different than in
conventional Reformed thought, amounting to a radical separation of
"the ceremonial law" from "the moral-judicial law" so that the one may
be abolished while the other remains intact.

As a result, Theonomists are forced to redefine Covenant Theology and
posit a continuity where Reformed commentators generally have not. For
example, the traditional Reformed position sees a continuous unfolding
of redemptive history in various administrations of the one Covenant
of Grace, beginning with the promise of the Redeemer in Genesis 3:15,
continuing with the establishment of the Noahic, Abrahamic, and
Davidic covenants, and finding its clearest pre-Christian expression
in God's promise of the "New Covenant" in Ezekiel 37:36 and Jeremiah
31:31-34. The Mosaic covenant, or "Old Covenant," is seen as a
temporary "parenthesis" period existing from its establishment at
Mount Sinai 430 years after Abraham until its judicial termination on
Calvary and its actual termination with the expiration of the nation
of Israel in A.D. 70. It was "added because of
transgression" (Galatians 3:19) — the rebellious and "stiff-necked"
nature of the Israelites (Exodus 32:9-10; Acts 7:51) — and served to
"shut [them] up unto the faith" (Galatians 3:23) which was
foreshadowed in the various sacrifices and ceremonies and would later
be fully revealed in Christ Himself. It was the Mosaic covenant itself
that separated the Jews from the Gentile nations of the world and made
them a distinct people, and it was this covenant which has now passed
away.

This is clearly the doctrine of the New Testament, particularly the
Pauline epistles. However, Theonomists deny the provisional character
of the Mosaic economy and instead view it as one of the two
administrations of the Covenant of Grace. The terms "Older Covenant"
and "Newer Covenant" were coined by Greg Bahnsen in Theonomy in
Christian Ethics, and have been used by other writers such as Brian
Schwertley, in order to distinguish between the previous
administration of Moses and the new administration of Christ without
implying discontinuity between them. Consequently, Theonomists have
two different things in mind when they speak of "the law," depending
on the context. When Scripture speaks of "the law" as having been
"established," as in Romans 3:31, or "fulfilled," as in Matthew
5:17-19, they interpret this to mean "the moral-judicial law."
However, whenever Scripture speaks of the Mosaic law as having been
"done away" (2 Corinthians 3:7-11) or "abolished" (Ephesians 2:15),
Theonomists invariably interpret this to refer to "the ceremonial
law." They wrongly identify only "the ceremonial law" as the
covenantal barrier between Jew and Gentile which was "added" at Mount
Sinai and later "nailed to the cross" (Colossians 2:14), thus ending
forever the covenantal separation of Jew and Gentile (Ephesians
2:14-15). Consequently, they cannot see Paul's cogent argument in his
epistle to the Galatians that any attempt to carry the Mosaic economy
over into the New Covenant era is a denial of the very Gospel itself,
and instead read this epistle as a diatribe against the use of "the
ceremonial law," and circumcision in particular, as a means of
justification.
This underlying error leads to other errors, some of which are quite
serious. Chief among these is their concept of "taking dominion" using
"God's law-word" (the "moral judicial law") — a novel version of
Postmillennialism which arises from R.J. Rushdoony's theory of
"restitution." Briefly stated, Reconstructionists view themselves as
having been restored to the covenantal relationship which Israel
forfeited by disobedience, together with its mission to make
restitution to God for Adam's rebellion by subduing the world, or
reconstructing the nations of the earth in God's image. They believe
that this covenantal restoration, or "justification," is through faith
alone, but that the dominion mandate, or "sanctification," is
fulfilled individually through the application of "moral judicial law"
to "every area of life," and nationally through the application of
that same law to society by the civil magistrate. When a five-fold
restitution has been paid to God by the Christian Church, according to
the principle of Exodus 22:1, her mission will be complete and Christ
will return to consummate history. To reject this "restitution gospel"
in favor of the mainstream eschatologies such as either historic
Postmillennialism or Amillennialism, or even Dispensationalism, is to
be "antinomian" and thus an enemy of the true covenant people of God.
Thus, no more subtle re-packaging of the ancient Judaizing heresy may
be found than in the modern Reconstruction movement.


http://reasonablechristian.blogspot.com/2009/11/error-of-theonomy-in-nutshell-by-greg.html

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 3, 10:54 am, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

Spencer is a Jew and as a Jew probably he does NOT believe
that Jesus is the Messiah. Mohammad does. I am baffled
how a true Christian would appeal to a dubious scholarship
from Jewish sources to argue against Mohammad.
How one would praise Jefferson while denigrating Mohammad
yet call himself a Christian.
Y'a truly messed up

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 3, 11:30 am, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

> http://reasonablechristian.blogspot.com/2009/11/error-of-theonomy-in-...

The above is rabish and a waste of time.
This is nothing but mere biblical litteralism.
To come back to the original topic, I would
say that Mohammad did more for the kingdom
of God than all the american founding fathers combined.
These are the true heretics, yet you have have nothing
but praise for them

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

On Nov 3, 12:58 pm, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews

> Y'a truly messed up-

Robert Spencer
Jihad Watch, Director

BRIAN LAMB, C-SPAN
LAMB: What’s your own religious background?

SPENCER: My own religious background is that I’m a Melkite Greek
Catholic.

http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1086

So, much for your scholarship.

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

Did Muhammad Exist?:
An Inquiry into Islam's Obscure Origins
Robert Spencer (Author)

Book Description
Publication Date: April 23, 2012
Are jihadists dying for a fiction? Everything you thought you knew
about Islam is about to change.

Did Muhammad exist?

It is a question that few have thought—or dared—to ask. Virtually
everyone, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, takes for granted that the
prophet of Islam lived and led in seventh-century Arabia.

But this widely accepted story begins to crumble on close examination,
as Robert Spencer shows in his eye-opening new book.

In his blockbuster bestseller The Truth about Muhammad, Spencer
revealed the shocking contents of the earliest Islamic biographical
material about the prophet of Islam. Now, in Did Muhammad Exist?, he
uncovers that material’s surprisingly shaky historical foundations.
Spencer meticulously examines historical records, archaeological
findings, and pioneering new scholarship to reconstruct what we can
know about Muhammad, the Qur’an, and the early days of Islam. The
evidence he presents challenges the most fundamental assumptions about
Islam’s origins.

Did Muhammad Exist? reveals:

How the earliest biographical material about Muhammad dates from at
least 125 years after his reported death
How six decades passed before the Arabian conquerors—or the people
they conquered—even mentioned Muhammad, the Qur’an, or Islam
The startling evidence that the Qur’an was constructed from existing
materials—including pre-Islamic Christian texts
How even Muslim scholars acknowledge that countless reports of
Muhammad’s deeds were fabricated
Why a famous mosque inscription may refer not to Muhammad but,
astonishingly, to Jesus
How the oldest records referring to a man named Muhammad bear little
resemblance to the now-standard Islamic account of the life of the
prophet
The many indications that Arabian leaders fashioned Islam for
political reasons
Far from an anti-Islamic polemic, Did Muhammad Exist? is a sober but
unflinching look at the origins of one of the world’s major religions.
While Judaism and Christianity have been subjected to searching
historical criticism for more than two centuries, Islam has never
received the same treatment on any significant scale.

The real story of Muhammad and early Islam has long remained in the
shadows. Robert Spencer brings it into the light at long last.

http://www.amazon.com/Did-Muhammad-Exist-Inquiry-Obscure/dp/161017061X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1351969925&sr=1-1&keywords=spencer+muhammad#_

[Ordinary Joe]

[Aviroce]

I can see why you do not like Muslims. Your beliefs are mysterious:
Fornicate with 3-year olds, Jesus is a wicked bastard witch, kill all
gentiles, women fornicating with animals marry rabbis, non-Jews are
non-humans. Extra, Extra. Read all about it.


"Kike Online: Ilan Ramon" <lost_jew_in_sp...@yahoo.com> posted the
following articles about the Talmud:

***************************************************************************­
*************************************


Jewish Talmudic Doctrine: Non-Jews are Not Humans


The Talmud specifically defines all who are not Jews as non-human
animals,
and specifically dehumanizes Gentiles as not being descendants of
Adam. We
will now list some of the Talmud passages which relate to this topic.


Menahoth 43b-44a. A Jewish man is obligated to say the following
prayer
every day: Thank you God for not making me a Gentile, a woman or a
slave.


Kehuboth 6b. [Now] does it not mean that if he had yet no intercourse
[with
his wife] he may have intercourse [with her] even on Sabbath? Said
Raba: No,
except Sabbath. Said Abaye to him: But it says, `until the night
following
the Sabbath [one gives her] four nights'? Only, said Raba, when he
already
had intercourse [with her]. If [it were, as you say,] after he
already
had
intercourse, what does he let us hear? He lets us hear that it is
allowed to
have intercourse on Sabbath, as that [statement] of Samuel [teaches],
for
Samuel said: One may enter into a narrow opening on Sabbath, although
he
causes pebbles to break loose.


Uses of Oil of Annointing. Our Rabbis have taught: He who pours the
oil of
anointing over cattle or vessels is not guilty; if over gentiles
[Hebrew:
goyim] or the dead, he is not guilty. The law relating to cattle and
vessels
is right, for it is written: "Upon the flesh of man [Hebrew: adam]
shall it
not be poured [Exodus 30:32]"; and cattle and vessels are not man
[adam].
Also with regard to the dead, [it is plausible] that he is exempt,
since
after death one is called corpse and not a man [adam]. But why is one
exempt
in the case of gentiles [goyim]; are they not in the category of man
[adam]?--No, it is written: "And ye my sheep, the sheep of my
pasture,
are
man [adam] [Ezekiel 34:31]": Ye are called man [adam] but gentiles
[goyim]
are not called man [adam]. (Ed. but by implication, Cain),


In the above passage, the Rabbis are discussing the Mosaic law which
forbids
applying holy oil to men. In the discussion, the Rabbis state that it
is not
a sin to apply the holy oil to gentiles, since gentiles are not human
beings
(literally, Adam, and are by implication, Cain).


Yebamoth 61a: It was taught: And so did R. Simeon ben Yohai state
[61a] that
the graves of gentiles [goyim] do not impart levitical uncleanness by
an
ohel [standing or bending over a grave], for it is said, "And ye my
sheep
the sheep of my pasture, are men [adam]" [Ezekiel 34:31]; you are
called men
[adam] but the idolaters are not called men [adam].


The Mosaic law states that touching a human corpse or grave imparts
uncleanness to those who touch it. But the Talmud here teaches that
if
a Jew
touches the grave of a gentile, it does not make him unclean, since
gentiles
are not human (literally, Adam).


Baba Mezia 114b: Said he [Rabbah] to him: Art thou not a priest: why
then
dost thou stand in a cemetery? - He replied: Has the Master not
studied the
laws of purity? For it has been taught: R. Simeon ben Yohai said: The
graves
of gentiles [goyim] do not defile, for it is written, "And ye my
flock, the
flock of my pastures, are men [adam]" [Ezekiel 34:31]; only ye are
designated men [Adam].


A Jewish priest was standing in a graveyard. When asked why he was
standing
there in apparent violation of the Mosaic law, he replied that it was
permissible, since the law only prohibits Jews from coming into
contact with
the graves of humans [adam], and he was standing in a gentile
graveyard.


Since the so-called Scriptural proof text (Ezekiel 34:31) repeatedly
cited
in the above three Talmud passages in reality does not prove that
only
Jews
are human, it is self-evident that the Talmudic sages who asserted
the
preceding absurdities about Gentiles were already anti-Gentile
racists
or
ideologues who, in desperate search of some proof of their position,
distorted an Old Testament passage in order to justify their bigotry.
Their
ideology came first, their "proof" second.


Berakoth 58a R. Shila administered lashes to a man who had
intercourse
with
an Egyptian woman. The man went and informed against him to the
Government,
saying: There is a man among the Jews who passes judgment without the
permission of the Government. An official was sent to [summon] him.
When he
came he was asked: Why did you flog that man? He replied: Because he
had
intercourse with a she-ass.


They said to him: Have you witnesses? He replied: I have. Elijah
thereupon
came in the form of a man and gave evidence. They said to him: If
that
is
the case he ought to be put to death! He replied: Since we have been
exiled
from our land, we have no authority to put to death; do with him what
you
please.


While they were considering his case, R. Shila exclaimed, "Thine, Oh
Lord,
is the greatness and the power" [1 Chronicles 29:11] What are you
saying?
they asked him. He replied: What I am saying is this: Blessed is the
All-Merciful who has made the earthly royalty on the model of the
heavenly,
and has invested you with dominion, and made you lovers of justice.


They said to him: Are you so solicitous for the honor of the
Government?
They handed him a staff and said to him: You may act as judge. When
he
went
out that man said to him: Does the All-Merciful perform miracles for
liars?


He replied: Wretch! Are they not called asses? For it is written:
"Whose
flesh is as the flesh of asses" [Ezekiel 23:20]. He noticed that the
man was
about to inform them that he had called them asses. He said: This man
is a
persecutor, and the Torah has said: If a man comes to kill you, rise
early
and kill him first. So he struck him with the staff and killed him.
He
then
said: Since a miracle has been wrought for me through this verse, I
will
expound it."


Our apologies for subjecting our readers to the preceding lengthy
Talmudic
drivel, but it is best to include all of it to demonstrate its
depravity.


In addition to having Elijah float down from heaven to deceive the
Gentile
court, the Talmud teaches that Gentiles are in reality animals, hence
Rabbi
Shila (and Elijah) did not really lie at all. It also teaches that
anyone
(even a Jewish man) who reveals this Talmud truth about non-Jews
deserves
execution, since revealing it makes Gentiles angry and causes
persecution of
the Jews.


We can only rejoice that the majority of Jews today do not follow
such
heinous teachings; only a few openly espouse the Talmud as divinely
inspired, although unfortunately these few are sometimes to be found
in
influential leadership positions.


(Parenthetically, the above Scripture proof-text cited by the rabbis,
does
not prove that Gentiles are not human, being animals. The passage
from
Ezekiel in the Bible only says that some Egyptians had large sex
organs and
copious emissions. This does not in any way prove or even connote
that
the
Egyptians being referred to in the Bible were considered animals).


Having sufficiently proven our point from the Talmud, namely that the
Talmud
teaches that Gentiles are not human [Hebrew: Adam], and are really
animals,
we will list a few other passages which expound on the Ezekiel 23:20
"proof
text", allowing our readers to research them on their own: Arakin
19b,
Berakoth 25b, Niddah 45a, Shabbath 150a, Yebamoth 98a.


The original text of Sanhedrin 37a applies God's approval only to the
saving
of Jewish lives. This is demonstrable by referring to Jewish books
such as
the Hesronot Ha-shas.


http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/judaism/closer.htm#06


***************************************************************************­
***********************


Genocide Advocated by The Talmud


Minor Tractates. Soferim 15, Rule 10. This is the saying of Rabbi
Simon ben
Yohai: Tob shebe goyyim harog ("Even the best of the Gentiles should
all be
killed").


This passage is not from the Soncino edition but is from the original
Hebrew
of the Babylonian Talmud as quoted by the 1907 Jewish Encyclopedia,
published by Funk and Wagnalls and compiled by Isidore Singer, under
the
entry, "Gentile," (p. 617).


This original Talmud passage has been concealed in translation. The
Jewish
Encyclopedia states that, "...in the various versions the reading has
been
altered, 'The best among the Egyptians' being generally substituted."
In the
Soncino version: "the best of the heathens" (Minor Tractates, Soferim
41a-b].


Israelis annually take part in a national pilgrimage to the grave of
Simon
ben Yohai, to honor this rabbi who advocated the extermination of
non-
Jews.
(Jewish Press of June 9, 1989, p. 56B).


On Purim, Feb. 25, 1994, Israeli army officer Baruch Goldstein, an
orthodox
Khazar from Brooklyn, massacred 40 Palestinian civilians, including
children, while they knelt in prayer in a mosque. Goldstein was a
disciple
of the late Rabbi Kahane who has stated that his view of Arabs as
"dogs" is
"from the Talmud." (Cf. CBS 60 Minutes, "Kahane").


Univ. of Jerusalem Prof. Ehud Sprinzak described Kahane and
Goldstein's
philosophy: "They believe it's God's will that they commit violence
against
'goyim,' a Hebrew term for non-Jews." (NY Daily News, Feb. 26, 1994,
p. 5).


Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg declared, "We have to recognize that Jewish
blood and
the blood of a goy are not the same thing." (NY Times, June 6, 1989,
p.
5).


Rabbi Yaacov Perrin says, "One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish
fingernail." (NY Daily News, Feb. 28, 1994, p.6).


http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/judaism/closer.htm#06


***************************************************************************­
********************
A Great Rabbi Deceives A Woman


Kallah 51a (Soncino Minor Tractates). Teaches that God approves of
rabbis
who lie: "The elders were once sitting in the gate when two young
lads
passed by; one covered his head and the other uncovered his head. Of
him who
uncovered his head Rabbi Eliezer remarked that he is a bastard. Rabbi
Joshua
remarked that he is the son of a niddah (a child conceived during a
woman's
menstrual period). Rabbi Akiba said that he is both a bastard and a
son of a
niddah.


"They said, 'What induced you to contradict the opinion of your
colleagues?'
He replied, "I will prove it concerning him." He went to the lad's
mother
and found her sitting in the market selling beans. "He said to her,
'My
daughter, if you will answer the question I will put to you, I will
bring
you to the world to come.' (eternal life). She said to him, 'Swear it
to
me.'


Rabbi Akiba, taking the oath with his lips but annulling it in his
heart,
said to her, 'What is the status of your son?' She replied, 'When I
entered
the bridal chamber I was niddah (menstruating) and my husband kept
away from
me; but my best man had intercourse with me and this son was born to
me.'
Consequently the child was both a bastard and the son of a niddah.


It was declared, '..Blessed be the God of Israel Who Revealed His
Secret to
Rabbi Akiba..."


In addition to the theme that God rewards clever liars, the preceding
discussion is actually about Christ (the lad who 'uncovered his
head'). The
reference to the lad's mother is of course to the mother of Jesus,
Blessed
Mary (called Miriam and sometimes, Miriam the hairdresser, in
Talmud).


http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/judaism/closer.htm#06


***************************************************************************­
******************
Deception and Dissimulation


The response of the orthodox rabbis to documentation regarding the
racism
and hatred in the Talmud is simply to brazenly lie, in keeping with
the
Talmud's Baba Kamma 113a which states that Jews may use lies
("subterfuges")
to circumvent a Gentile. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, a powerful,
multi-million dollar rabbinical propaganda center dispatched Rabbi
Daniel
Landes in 1995 to deny that the Talmud dehumanizes non-Jews. "This is
utter
rot," he said. His proof? Why, his word, of course.


We however, in this writing, have furnished the reader with
documentation
direct from the original Talmudic texts, as well as from the writings
of the
Jews' own "greatest" Talmud authority, Moses Maimonides.


In 1994, Rabbi Tzvi Marx, director of Applied Education at the Shalom
Hartman Institute in Jerusalem, made a remarkable admission
concerning
how
Jews in the past have issued two sets of texts: the authentic
Talmudic
texts
and commentaries with which they instruct their own youth in the
Talmud
schools (kollels) and "censured and amended" versions which they
disseminate
to the gullible goyim (non-Jews) for public consumption.


Rabbi Marx states that in the version of Maimonides' teachings
published for
public consumption, Maimonides is made to say that whoever kills a
human
being transgresses the law.


But, Rabbi Marx points out "... that this only reflects the censured
and
amended printed text, whereas the original manuscripts have it only
as
"whoever kills an Israelite." ("Tikkun: A Bi-Monthly Jewish
Critique,"
May-June, 1994).


The Jewish book, "Hesronot Ha-shas" (i.e. "that which is removed from
the
Talmud," cf. William Popper, "The Censorship of Hebrew Books," p.
59),
is
important in this regard.


"Hesronot Ha-shas" was reprinted in 1989 by Sinai Publishing of Tel-
Aviv.
Hesronot Ha-shas is valuable because it lists some of the original
Talmud
texts that were later changed or omitted, with the resulting
falsified
texts
nowadays being cited for Gentile consumption as authentic.


Popper (pp. 58-59), states: "It was not always that long passages ...
were
censored ... but often single words alone were omitted; ... Often, in
these
cases, another method of correction was used in place of omission -
substitution."


Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, the translator of the most recent English
version of
the Babylonian Talmud, says, "Indeed, almost every passage dealing
with
non-Jews must be suspected of having undergone some change." (Talmud
Reference Guide, by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, Random House, New York,
1989, p.
50).


For example, the translators of the English Soncino version of the
Talmud
sometimes translate the Hebrew word goyim (Gentiles) under any number
of
terms such as "heathen, Cuthean, Egyptian, idolater" etc. But these
are
actually references to Gentiles (all non-Jews). In footnote 5 of the
Soncino
edition Talmud it is stated: "Cuthean (Samaritan) was here
substituted
for
the original goy ..." Christians are sometimes referred to by the
code
word
Min or Minim.


It is the standard disinformation practice of the Pharisees to deny
the
existence of the racist Talmudic passages we have cited, in order to
claim
that such passages are the "fabrications of 'anti-Semites'."


In 1994, the 80 year old Dowager Lady Jane Birdwood was arrested and
prosecuted in a criminal court in London, England for the "crime" of
publishing in her pamphlet, "The Longest Hatred," the truthful
statement
that the Talmud contains anti-Gentile and anti-Christian passages.


In the course of her trial, which was ignored by the U.S. media, a
rabbi was
called as a prosecution witness. The rabbi proceeded to flatly deny
that the
Talmud contained anti-Gentile and anti-Christ passages and on the
basis of
the rabbi's "prestige," the old woman was convicted and sentenced to
three
months in jail and fined the equivalent of $1,000.


We have here provided the reader with authentic documentary passages
from
the Talmud proving that the Talmud constitutes Jewish supremacist
hate
literature. Hebrew University Professor Israel Shahak, in his
monumental
1994 work, Jewish History, Jewish Religion (Pluto Press), has also
confirmed
the hate and racism contained in the Talmud.


http://www.catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/judaism/closer.htm#06


***************************************************************************­
******************

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

Calvin and Luther saw the Antichrist as both the papacy and Islam: The
papacy was the Western Antichrist and Islam the Eastern Antichrist.
Calvin refered to them as the two "horns" and Luther called them the
two "legs" of the Antichrist. (Luther's Works, Weimer ed., 53, 394f)

"Lyke as Mahomet saith ty his Alcoran is ye soveraine wisdome, so
saith the Pope of his owne decrees: For they be the two hornes of
Antichrist."
—John Calvin
The Sermons of M. John Calvin upon the Fifth Booke of Moses called
Deuteronomie, translated by Arthur Golding, first published in London,
1583, from a facsimile reprint by Banner of Truth Trust, 1987.


http://www.leftbehindanswered.com/antichrist.htm

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 5, 10:32 am, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

As far as Islam is concerned they were all wrong.
So why quote people who have no clue as what Christianity is about.
Their commentaries on some biblical verses are laughable.
Mohammad understood the Kingdom of God better than they did.
Hence 400,000 denominations that we are confronted with in the world
and of course secularism

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 3, 2:10 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
wrote:

Spencer is a Jew and a liar

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 3, 2:15 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
wrote:

> http://www.amazon.com/Did-Muhammad-Exist-Inquiry-Obscure/dp/161017061...

Mohammd apostolic mission ended Idol worship in Arabia.
And since God hates Idol worshipers, I am sure God is pleased
with Mohammad.
Where are now Al Huza, Al Manath and other demons
that the Meccans used to worship? They have been crushed
with the sword of Monotheism, that is what matters
in God's eyes and not Spencer stupid opinions

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 5, 10:32 am, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"
<jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com> wrote:

They probably read the Qur'an but it was way over their heads.
The kingdom that Mohammad left behind reflect more the
rules of God on earth as it is in heaven.
Mohammad worked harder to make the Lord prayer come
literally true. And he never paid allegiance to Caesar and his Law
And he would not join the UN because we know he rejected
the different councils and their trinity, the kind of UN of his time

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

THE PAGAN SOURCES OF ISLAM

by Silas



GENERAL



As Muhammad developed Islam he borrowed from the other
regional religions present in the Mideast. These religions include
Judaism, Christianity, Sabeanism, Zoroastrianism, and forms of
paganism. Judaism is the largest contributor to Islam, followed by
Christianity, then followed by the various pagan religions, and
Muhammad’s mind. These pagan borrowings constitute significant facets
of Islam and this article details some of these pagan contributions.







1) PAGANISM IN ISLAM



Islamic theology has some of its roots in various pagan
beliefs. Primary to Islam is it's most holiest shrine: the Kaba.





THE KABA

The Kaba is now the most revered sanctuary of Islam. It
is located in Mecca. Muslims throughout the world direct their
prayers toward the Kaba.





PHYSICAL SHAPE

The Kaba's shape is somewhat cubical. Of note in the
Kaba's structure is a black rock built into the wall in its eastern
corner. The black rock's diameter is about 12 inches. It is reddish
black in color, and has red and yellow particles. The black rock is
kissed during the perambulation, (the circulation of the Muslims
around the Kaba). The Kaba is about 50 feet high, and the walls are
about 40 feet long. The facade contains the door, which starts at 7
feet off the ground, and faces N.E.. To enter the Kaba, a ladder must
be used. Also built in the eastern corner, is another stone called
"lucky". This stone is only touched, not kissed.





KNOWN PAGAN HISTORY

Apart from Muslim myths, little is really known about the
history of the Kaba. About 60 years before Christ, the Roman
historian Diodorus Siculus commented that there was in Arabia a temple
greatly revered by the Arabs. It is probable that he had the Kaba in
mind. It was later mentioned to have existed in the 2nd century;
Ptolemy, the geographer mentions it in his work, calling it the
'macoraba'. The Kaba was a sanctuary dedicated to one or more pagan
deities. The accounts of the campaigns of Abraha note that it was a
place of pagan worship in the 6th century. Information on the
distribution of the offices among the sons of Kusayy show that the
worship of the sanctuary had developed into a regulated cult several
generations before Muhammad.

One historian (Hurgronjes) said that sacred worship may
have developed around the area because the Zamzam spring was found in
this waterless place.



Pre-Islamic history tells us that many Arabian tribes were
stone worshippers. This is also mentioned in Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol 5,
#661. The Old Testament even talks about Mideast pagan groups that
worshipped stones. Muhammad incorporated the Kaba's paganistic roots
into Islam to give the Muslims a sense of identity, legitimacy, and
uniqueness. He also wanted to ease the Arab's strain of moving from
paganism to Islam, by continuing the practices of their fathers.







PAGAN GODS AND RITUALS

There were 360 idols around the Kaba. The pilgrimages to
the Kaba were all pagan pilgrimages, the ritual processions around the
Kaba were part of pagan beliefs and custom, the white robes worn by
the pilgrims were from pagan faiths, the veneration of the Kaba and
black stone are derived from pagan rituals and beliefs. Pagans called
out the names of their pagan gods as they circled the Kaba, today,
Muslims call out Allah's name. Pagans ran between the nearby hills,
Muhammad authorized Muslims to do that in the Quran, and probably ran
between the hills himself.

The chief pagan god worshipped there was Hubal, who could
be called the god of Mecca and of the Kaba. Hubal is not mentioned in
the Quran. The goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat were also
worshipped there and are mentioned in the Quran.



It is thought that the Kaba was originally set up for
astral worship. Golden suns and moons are repeatedly mentioned as the
votive gifts. Some pagans regarded the Kaba as a temple devoted to
the sun, moon, and 5 planets.







THE BLACK STONE

The black stone played a prominent role in pagan worship.
The pagans offered animal sacrifices there. But the idol of the black
stone replaced the alter; on the black stone they smeared the blood of
the sacrificed animals.







QURANIC MYTHS

Muhammad made up historical references for the Kaba.
Muhammad claimed that Abraham and Ishmael laid the foundations of the
Kaba (Q. 2:127). Muhammad claimed that God ordained the Kaba as a
sacred house (Q. 5:97). Muhammad also claimed that it was the first
temple ever built for mankind (Q. 3:97).



Only Muhammad claimed that it was a place built by
Abraham. In looking in the O.T., we find no mention of Abraham
traveling to Mecca to build a house of worship.



Further, the late Taha Hussein, one of the most famous
Egyptian professors of Arabic literature said that the Islamic myth of
Abraham building the Kaba came into vogue just before the rise of
Islam. He comments:

"The case of this episode is very obvious because it is of
recent date, and came into vogue just before the rise of Islam. Islam
exploited it for religious reasons". Quoted in 'Mizar al-Islam' by
Anwar al-Jundi.







THEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS

Every man living in Mecca before and during Muhammad's
life had some relationship with the Kaba. If the Kaba was the house
of God, why did Muhammad order his followers to face Jerusalem?
Muhammad's 'revelation' in the Quran says that when Allah had Muhammad
change prayer directions, it was a test of the Muslims. This sounds
like a lame excuse on Muhammad's part. What's the test? Face another
direction? That does not appear to be such an incredible challenge!



Probably the real answer is that through his early
contacts with Christians and Jews, Muhammad knew that their faiths,
centered in Jerusalem, where monotheistic. Muhammad abhorred
polytheistic worship, consequently he aligned himself with faiths that
he believed were from the true God. He selected Jerusalem as the
direction of prayer. He hoped that the Jews would receive him as a
prophet.



About a year and a half after the migration to Medina,
after the Jews had thoroughly rejected him, he turned the direction of
prayer to Mecca - the center of pagan worship in the Arabian peninsula
(Q. 2:144). Just as he had compromised with the pagan idol
worshippers in Mecca, by sanctioning and worshipping the pagan
goddesses Lat, Uzza, and Manat, so now he hoped to gain favor with the
pagan Arab tribes that worshipped at the Kaba in Mecca. He
authenticated the pagan focus of attention.



After Muhammad took Mecca, he cleansed the Kaba. Inside
the Kaba were many representations of the prophets. When his men
began to cleanse the Kaba, and wash out the representations, Muhammad
placed his hands on the pictures of Jesus and Mary, and said "Wash out
all except what is below my hands". Again, Muhammad went against his
own principles, and sanctioned his definition of idolatry.



Muhammad then sanctioned the pagan rituals concerning the
Kaba, i.e. kissing the black stone, touching the Kaba, circling the
structure, running between the two hills, etc. Later, Umar said to
the black stone "I know that you are a stone, that neither helps nor
hurts, and if the messenger of god had not kissed you, I would not
kiss you". (Sahih al-Bukhari, volume 2, #667). But then he kissed
the stone. Like Umar, many other Muslims follow the prophet in their
practice of veneration of a pagan idol.



Before Muhammad, there was a group of people in Arabia who
also abhorred idolatry. They were known as the Hanifites. Even the
Hanifites saw that kissing the black stone was pagan idolatry. During
one of the pre-Islamic Eids, the Qurayshi were worshipping their
idols, slaying sacrifices, praying, and making circuits around the
Kaba. Just as they did each year for this festival. Some Hanifites
saw them, and stood apart from them, and said:

"By the Lord!, our people have nothing left of the faith
of Abraham. What is this stone that we should encircle it? It can
neither hear nor speak, neither hurt nor help. O our people, look out
for your souls, for by the Lord are you altogether wanting."

One of the Hanifites was Obeidallah... later he embraced Islam.
He immigrated to Abyssinia with other Muslims. Later he became a
Christian. After his conversion, he said to his Muslim friends 'We
(Christians) see, but you are only blinking' - that is, cannot see
plainly.



So, why then does Muhammad kiss the black stone? Why did
he incorporate paganism into his faith. There is even the Quranic
story of Abraham - how he chided those who worshipped idols sura 6,
21, etc., and said it was sinful in God's sight. Yet here we have
Muhammad walking around the Kaba, just like the pagans, kissing the
stone, just like the pagans. Even Umar knew it was empty and false,
yet he followed Muhammad in kissing the stone.



It cannot be denied that an entire pagan theology and
ritual, was adopted by Islam, after Muhammad had one of his convenient
'revelations' and made it 'religiously' correct.



Another Muslim myth, concerning the Kaba, is that 'anyone
who prays under the Kaba's water-pipe becomes as pure as on the day
when his mother bore him'. Muslims have a hard time accepting
Christ's atonement, but will allow for total forgiveness of sins by
uttering a prayer under a spout!







POST MUHAMMAD HISTORY

In one of the early Muslim civil wars (a.d. 683), al-
Zubayr in Mecca was besieged by al-Husayn. Husayn's men used
catapults and damaged the Kaba. It looked like 'the torn bosoms of
mourning women'. Zubayr and his men pitched their tents next to the
Kaba, and a conflagration caught the Kaba on fire. The Kaba was
severely damaged, and the black stone was split into three pieces.



A short time later, al-Hadjdjadj conquered Mecca and
killed Zubayr. He modified the Kaba's structure.



In 929, the Karmatians invaded Mecca and carried off the
black stone! 20 years later it was returned.



Other natural events (bad weather) have also caused the
Kaba to need repair.



Muslims erroneously claim that God has protected the Quran
from corruption, yet their god was not able to protect his sacred
house!







POST MUHAMMAD ISLAMIC MYTHOLOGY

Later Muslim theologians invented a number of myths about
Mecca and the Kaba.



One Islamic tradition is - according to Ibn Abbas:
Muhammad said, 'The black stone came from Paradise and at the time of
its descent it was whiter than milk, but that the sins of the children
of Adam have caused it to be black, by their touching it. That on the
Day of Resurrection, when it will have two eyes, by which it will see
and know all those who touched it and kissed it, and when it will have
a tongue to speak, it will give evidence in favor of those who touched
and kissed it'!



Muslim writers also said that the Kaba was first
constructed in heaven, 2000 years before the creation of the world,
where a model of it still remains. Adam erected the first Kaba on
earth exactly below the spot its perfect model occupies in heaven!
10,000 angels were appointed to guard Adam's Kaba, but obviously they
didn't do a good job! God then instructed Abraham to rebuild it.



There are a number of other myths about the Kaba. Among
them are that Mecca is the navel of the world, that the Kaba was
established at the creation of the world, destroyed during the flood,
re-built by Abraham, that Gabriel provided the black stone. There are
also legends about the Zamzam water from the nearby well.



Some Muslims say that there are references to the Kaba in
the O.T. Here are a few mistaken claims:



1) Muslims hope that Gen 35:4, 14, 15 refer to the Kaba. Since "Beth-
El" = House of God, and that the Jewish temple wasn't built until much
later. But as the Bible shows, Bethel is a town, in Palestine -
Genesis chapter 12. Also, Jacob built an altar, not a temple to God.
Abraham also built an altar to the Lord in Gen 12:7.



2) Muslims claim that David mentions the Kaba in Psalm 84:6. If
'Baca' was a location, it was not known where it existed in the
Bible. But a more correct interpretation, taken in context of the
whole Psalm, is that since 'baca' means weeping, it means 'valley of
tears'. David could be saying that he longs for the presence of God,
and that even through difficult times (baca) God will be with him, and
will turn his tears to joy.



3) Muslims also think that Isaiah 60:7 "All the flocks of Kedar"
refers to Arabian people worshipping at the Kaba. Reading thru Isa
60:7, it shows that Kedar's flocks are going to be sacrificed on the
alter. Are Muslims saying that Arabs were going to be human
sacrifices?



4) Some Muslims think that since the New Jerusalem in the book of
Revelation is cubic, it also resembles the Kaba and thus is a prophecy
of the Kaba! But the Kaba is not a perfect cube, not even close. The
structure is 50 ft high, with a sloping roof, the shorter walls are 35
feet long, and the facade is 40 ft. long.





SUMMARY FOR THE ISLAMIC RITES CENTERED ON THE KABA



Every Muslim that makes the Hajj, every Muslim that runs
between the hills, every Muslim that bestows a kiss on the black
stone, is performing pagan rituals, founded on pagan superstitions,
sanctioned by Muhammad himself.



Muslims have accused Christianity of incorporating
paganism, and to an extent, some exterior cultural aspects have been.
But paganism is an integral root of Islam; paganism is part of it's
theology, history, ceremony, and veneration.



My references for this section are from the original
Hughes Dictionary of Islam (not the recent one that has been sanitized
by a Muslim publisher), the Shorter Ency. of Islam, and the Ency. of
Islam, pub. by E. J. Brill, and 'The Sources of Islam' by Tisdall.







MORE ISLAMIC PAGANISM



THE NIGHT JOURNEY

The Night Journey describes Muhammad's ascent into
heaven. It is briefly mentioned in sura 17:1, and described in Sahih
al-Bukhari, in several of his volumes, notably in vol 1, #345.



Muhammad's story parallels a Zoroastrian story. It is
found in an old Pahlavi book known as "The Book of Arta Viraf". The
Zoroastrian story describes the journey of a saintly priest (Arta
Viraf), who went into a trance and his spirit went up to the heavens
under the guidance of an angel named Sarosh. He passed from one
utopia (7 heavens?) to another until he reached the presence of
Ormazd, the great deity of the whole universe. When Arta saw
everything in heaven and that the inhabitants were very happy, Ormazd
commanded him to return to earth as his 'messenger' and to tell the
people all that he saw and heard.



Also, the Zoroastrians taught, long before Islam, there
was a marvelous tree in Paradise called 'humaya', which corresponds
very closely to the 'sidrah', the lote tree of Islam.



Finally, there is another Zoroastrian work the
'Zerdashtnama', which has a story of how Zoroaster himself ascended
into the heavens and obtained permission to visit hell, where he found
Ahriman, the Devil.



All of these stories are paralleled in the Quran. No
doubt Muhammad heard these stories and decided to put himself on a
level with Zoroaster and others. So, now we have Muhammad copying the
Zoroastrian stories and claiming to have these experiences.



Again, while Muslims claim that paganism influenced Christianity,
we see that paganism is part of the core of Islamic faith and
theology.





AZAZIL - THE DEVIL

In the Muslim Hadith, the Devil has a certain name -
Azazil.

The name does not occur in the Quran. The name may come from
Leviticus 16:8, 10, 26 - the scapegoat in Hebrew is Azazil. From
another source it means 'the demon of the desert'.



There are Apocrypha Jewish books - Enoch and Apocalypse of
Abraham, that mention Azazil. Islamic traditions - Hadiths develop
their story. Muslims associate Azazil with the fallen angels Harut
and Marut. Ibn Abbas tradition has the strongest Islamic reference
developing it as Satan's name, before the fall of Adam.



Here is Tisdall's view on it (taken from "The Sources of Islam"):



Muslims take the name Azazil from the Jews, but put the
Zoroastrian story behind the name. Muslims believe that God created
Azazil, who worshipped God for a 1000 years while he was in the 7th
hell. Then he ascended a stage at a time, all the while worshipping
God. Finally, he reached the earth. Elsewhere, Muslim tradition says
he stayed 3000 years by the gate of paradise, with hostile intentions
against Adam and Eve. He was very jealous of them.



Compare the above with the Zoroastrian account:



Ahriman (Azazil) remained in the abyss, there to commit
hurt and injury, and mischief and darkness. Ormazd (God) knew of his
existence and plans. It went on like this for 3000 years. The evil
spirit was ignorant of Ormazd's existence, but eventually rising out
of the pit, saw Ormazd's light. Then Ahriman was filled with
hostility and envy, he set out to destroy.





THE SABEANS

Who were the Sabeans? Why did Muhammad regard them as
believers in the true God? The Sabeans are mentioned at least 3 times
in the Quran:



1) 2:62 - "Believers, Jews, Christians, and Sabeans; whoever believes
in God and the last day and does what is right, shall be rewarded by
their Lord; they have nothing to fear or regret."



2) 5:69 - "Believers, Jews, Sabeans and Christians; whoever believes
in God and the last day and does what is right, shall have nothing to
fear or to regret."



3) 22:17 - "As for the true believers, the Jews, the Sabeans, the
Christians, the Magians, and the pagans, God will judge them on the
day of Resurrection. God bears witness to all things."





Although what is known about the Sabeans is not
comprehensive, enough has been written about them to determine a basic
understanding of their practices and beliefs. Most of the writings
are from Islamic sources. Some of the writers are Ibn Hazm in 'Fisal
wa-Milal', Ibn al-Nadim in the 'Fihrist', Shahrastani in 'The Treaty
on Sects', and Masudi in 'Muruj al-Dhahab.



Ibn Hazm, writing in 'Fisal wa-Milal', identifies the
people then known as 'Harranians' as the 'Sabeans' mentioned in the
Quran. Hazm writes that they honored the seven planets and the twelve
constellations, they have 5 times of prayer, (the same times as the
Muslims pray), they fast in Ramadan, they venerate and turn to the
Kaba in prayer. Hazm also says they also worshipped the stars and
idols. Hazm further claims that Allah sent Abraham to turn them away
from pagan worship, but Abraham didn't succeed.



Comparing all the early writings on the Sabeans, we find
that they inhabited Syria, and spread from there, they were definitely
pagans, having a mixture of Babylonian and Helenic religion. The
'prophets' they professed to follow were Hermes and Agathodaemon, who
they identified in Shahrastani's time with Seth and Idris (O.T.
Enoch). Gods who were worshipped were the gods of the 7 week-days, the
god of the Jinn, the lord of the Hour, the god who makes arrows fly,
the god Tammuz (a variation of the one previously mentioned), Hamam
the prince, the father of the gods, the god 'North', the lord
'Fortune', etc. They also kept the Eid of their own. Further, the
Sabeans made star worship a chief characteristic of their system.



So, did Islam get the 5 times a day prayer? --From the
star worshipping Sabeans. What about fasting during Ramadan? - from
the Sabeans. The Eid? - from the Sabeans.



It seems very odd to me that Muhammad, the man who's
central doctrine was the oneness of God, would include pagan
worshippers as those who were believers in the true God. If Muhammad
were truly a prophet, how could he have made such a big mistake? How
did astral worshippers get included into the Quran as those that
worship the true God? How could Muhammad's 'revelation' be in such
error?



It is noteworthy that just as Muhammad incorporated the
pagan veneration of the Kaba and black stone into Islam, so he
incorporated the Sabean times of prayer, Eid, and fasting into Islam.



Once again, Muhammad didn't fully know the subject he was
synthesizing into Islam. I have read nothing about their doctrine
that would have led Muhammad to include them as followers of the one
true God he preached about. Perhaps he learned a small portion about
their religion, and believed it to be right. Little did he know that
under that veneer of words, lay many theological differences.



HOURIS

The Quran mentions 'houris' several times 44:50, 52:20,
55:60, 56:20, 78:33. Who or what are they? They are 'bashful
virgins', 'fair as coral and ruby', 'dark eyed youths', 'high bosomed
maidens (big breasted)'. In sum, they are creatures put in Paradise,
primarily for men's sexual pleasures. Each man will have at least two
of them.



This concept is derived from the Zoroastrian sources. In
Zoroastrian writings they are referred to as 'Faries' - spirits in
bright array and beautiful to captivate the heart of man. The name
'Houris' comes from a Pehlavi source, as does the Islamic 'Jinn' for
Genie.



CONCLUSION



It's not difficult to see how Muhammad heard various
sacred religious stories, and incorporated them into Islam. Perhaps
he thought that parts of those religions contained truth, so he
adopted what he thought to be correct. But nevertheless, part of the
foundation of Islam is paganism.

http://answering-islam.org/Silas/pagansources.htm

[︰ones]

Yeah, most of 'em are negros, anyway!

Jones

[Olrik]

Le 2012-11-05 17:47, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews a �crit :

> Mohammad worked harder to make the Lord prayer come
> literally true. And he never paid allegiance to Caesar and his Law

That's because by then, the Roman Empire was almost extinct:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_Roman_Empire>

BTW, Caesar died in 44 BC, nearly 700 years *before* islam.

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 5, 5:49 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
wrote:

> ...
>
> read more »

You overlook the pagan source of Paul's doctrine
of justification by the blood? Hmmmmmmm
The NT is a mixture of Greeco-Roman paganism
and Jewish Monotheism. This is why you need to know
the Greeco-Roman culture and religions before you read
Paul's epistles to the Romans, the Galatians and even to the
Hebrews. But all has been purified for the Messiah

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 5, 11:59 pm, Olrik <olrik...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Le 2012-11-05 17:47, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews a crit :

>
> > Mohammad worked harder to make the Lord prayer come
> > literally true. And he never paid allegiance to Caesar and his Law
>
> That's because by then, the Roman Empire was almost extinct:
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_Roman_Empire>
>
> BTW, Caesar died in 44 BC, nearly 700 years *before* islam.

But his kingdom survived him. A metamorphosis occured at that time
but that is exactly my point. The popes took over the job suposed
to be Caesar's on the authority of Deut. 17:14, 18:15-19.
The Bible has the best political theories, but Jefferson and
his acolytes chose to revert pagan Democracy.
But they have already met with their own fate.

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 6, 10:49 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews

> ...
>
> read more »

It there anything more pagan than TRINITY
and Paul's doctrine of blood sacrificet?
To understand Paul's epistle to the Romans, the Hebrew
Ephesians and Galatians, you must first
understand the Greeco-Roman
culture and religion and the whole pagan philiosophy. But
as I understood them, they have been purified by Christ.
So it was with Islam. The Messiah came to clean up
cultures and save nations from the darkeness of Idol
worship and take them into the light of the One God
Israel within the setting of their own history.
Euro-centric is the one who thinks that unless you learn
European history and take european names you can't be a christian

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

On Nov 6, 10:09 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews

<Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

"It there anything more pagan than TRINITY"

HOW ANCIENT IS THE TRINITY DOCTRINE?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Wesley P. Walters

As different as para-Christian groups or cults are from each other,
most have one thing in common: they hate the biblical teaching of the
Trinity. They want their God to be simplistic, uncomplicated, and less
complex than the world He created. They want a God reduced to terms
they can get their finite minds around.

Modern advances in science have shown that the created world is an
extremely complex mechanism. Those who work in nuclear physics or
molecular biology are continually discovering the complexity of the
world God has created.

In fact, some complex, seemingly contradictory data has yet to be
fitted into a rational system that explains the relationships. A
simple thing like "light" is known to move like "waves" yet strike
like "particles." Atomic physicists are still struggling to put
together a theory that can fully explain this apparent contradiction.

Those who work in the complex mathematical equations of quantum
mechanics are told by their instructors that "If you think that you
really understand quantum mechanics and how it applies to reality,
that proves you do not understand it." One of the basic theorems is
that if the speed of a particle is known, then its location can not be
known, and the more accurately you know its location, the less
accurately you know its speed. This does not seem very logical to the
average person, but it works very well in atomic physics, in which
scientists get very close to the essence of matter.

Thus, while scientists are continually learning more about how complex
and even apparently contradictory the world of created reality is,
cults that reject the complexity of the God who made this reality are
proliferating. They, along with Moslems and modern Jews, taunt
Christians, saying: "How can there be just one God, and yet the Father
be God, the Son be God and the Holy Spirit be God? Is He the Son of
Himself and the Father of both?"

Even though Christ Himself taught that the name [singular] of God in
which we baptize is Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19), all
cults falsely assert that the doctrine of the Trinity is a teaching
that grew out of fourth century paganism. So unified are the cults in
this assertion that they appear to be using the same erroneous Church
history book and parroting one another.

The truth is that by the time of Christ, the first century A.D., the
Jews themselves, on the basis of the Old Testament, were coming to an
understanding of the complexity of Yahweh.



The Teachings of The Targums
When the Jews returned from Babylonian captivity 450 years before the
birth of Jesus, they had adopted Aramaic as their native language.
Although it is a dialect of ancient Hebrew, Aramaic is about as
different from it as modern Italian is from its classical Latin
ancestor. Consequently, during the first and early second centuries
A.D., Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Old Testament were made.

These translations, called Targums, were The Living Bibles of their
day, an interpretive paraphrase of Scripture. They help us see how
these first-century Jews understood their Old Testament.

One of the striking things these Targums show is that first century
Jews had come to understand the phrase "the Word of God" as referring
to a divine entity within God Himself, yet distinguishable at times
from God. J.W. Etheridge, in the introduction to his translations of
the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, has given us a number of examples
of this Jewish understanding of the term, "the Word" (Aramaic: Memra).

In Genesis 18:1, where the Hebrew Bible says Yahweh (Jehovah) appeared
to Abraham, the Targum says, "The Word of the Lord appeared to
Abraham." Further on, where the Hebrew reports "Yahweh rained down
upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh out of
heaven," the Targum states that "the Word of the Lord sent down upon
them sulphur and fire from the presence of the Lord out of
heaven." (Genesis 19:24)

In Genesis 16, when Hagar sees "the Angel of the Lord," the Targum
says she saw "the Word of the Lord." After seeing this "Word" (Memra)
she says, "Here has been revealed the glory of the Shekineh of the
Lord." Then, according to the Jerusalem Targum, "Hagar returned thanks
and prayed in the name of the Word of the Lord, who had appeared to
her." Thus the Word not only is regard- ed as the presence of deity,
but is in some manner personally distinguishable from the Lord.

In Genesis 28:20 the Targum of Onkelos paraphrases Jacob's vow, "If
God will be with me... then Yahweh will be my God" with the words, "If
the Word of the Lord will be my help... the Word of the Lord shall be
my God." Again, the Angel of Yahweh who spoke to Moses at the burning
bush (Exodus 3:14) is designated by the Jerusalem Targum as "the Word
of the Lord."

The distinct personality of this Divine Word is seen pointedly in
Jonathan's Targum of Isaiah 63:7-10. There, where the Hebrew text
speaks of Yahweh being their Savior, the Targum reads, "the Word
(Memra) was their Redeemer." (vs. 8) When the Israelites continued to
disobey, then "His Word (Memra) became their enemy, and fought against
them" -- an action ascribed to Yahweh in the Hebrew text. Again in
Isaiah 45:22 the Targum of Jonathan exhorts, "Look unto My Word and be
saved."

While this personalizing of the Word was being expressed in Palestine
in the Targums of Jesus' day, Philo, an Egyptian Jew and contemporary
of Jesus, was expressing similar thoughts in even more distinct words.
In his essay "On the Creation," Philo states that man was not made in
the image of some creature, but in the image of God's own uncreated
Word. He wrote: "for the Creator, we know, employed for its making no
pattern taken from among created things, but solely, as I have said,
His own Word."

Philo continues: "Man was made a likeness and imitation of the Word,
when the Divine Breath was breathed into his face. ("On the Creation,"
XLVIII: 139, Loeb Edition I, pp. 110-111)

In his work on Noah, Philo again expresses the teaching that man is
made by "the First Cause" (that is, God) in the image of "the Eternal
Word:" "Our great Moses likened the fashion of the rea- sonable soul
to no created thing, but averred it to be a genuine coinage of that
dread Spirit, the Divine and Invisible One, signed and impressed by
the seal of God, the stamp of which is the Eternal Word."

He continues: "...man has been made after the Image of God (Genesis
1:27), not however after the image of anything created... man's soul
having been made after the image of the Archetype, the Word of the
First Cause." ("Noah's Work as a Planter," I:18-20, Loeb III, pp.
222-223)

Thus, the eternal Word is in some sense distinguishable from God, and
yet at the same time is, like God, uncreated, rational and the bearer
of the divine image. This comes very close to the teaching of the New
Testament that the Word was distinguishable from God, and yet was God.
As John 1:1 expresses it, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word
was with God, and the Word was God." It also appears similar to Paul's
teaching that the Son is "the image of the invisible God" (Colossians
1:15); and the writer of Hebrews statement that the Son "is the exact
representation of His being." (Hebrews 1:3)

Philo, however, goes further. He says that God is the king and
shepherd of all creation, but rules and controls it through his
eternally existing Word, whom Philo calls God's "First-born Son."

His "hallowed flock" of created things God directs by his divine laws,
setting over it His true Word and first-born son, who shall take upon
Him its government like some viceroy of a great king. ("On Husbandry,"
I:51, Loeb III, pp. 134-135)

Philo has God expressing Himself in this manner: "I alone... sustained
the Universe to rest firm and sure upon the Mighty Word, who is My
viceroy." ("On Dreams," I:241, Loeb V, pp. 424- 425)

Therefore this eternal Word, God's first-born Son, is the upholder of
the whole creation, "the everlasting Word of the eternal God is the
very sure and staunch prop of the Whole. He it is, who extending
Himself from the midst to its utmost bounds... keeps up through all
its length Nature's unvanquished course, combining and compacting all
its parts. For the Father who begat Him constituted His Word such a
Bond of the Universe as nothing can break." ("Noah's Work as a
Planter," I:8-9, Loeb III, pp. 216-217)

This reflects the same thought that Paul expressed about the Son as
being the one "in whom all things hold together." (Colossians 1:17) It
also reminds also reminds us of Hebrews 1:3, which depicts the Son as
"sustaining all things by his powerful Word."

Philo continues his discussion of the Word by maintaining that to
those incapable of seeing the supreme cause, God Himself, He appears
to them in the form of His Angel, the Word: "For just as those who are
unable to see the sun itself, see the gleam of the parahelion and take
it for the sun, and take the halo round the moon for that luminary
itself, so some regard the image of God, His Angel, the Word, as His
very self." ("On Dreams," I:239, Loeb V, pp. 422-423) This sounds very
similar to the teaching tha t the Son is "the radiance (or outshining)
of God's glory" (Hebrews 1:3), the only part of God's nature that
people are allowed to see. This is true because "no one has ever seen
God," but "the only begotten God... He has made Him known." (John
1:18) Thus, Jesus, the Son, can say, "Anyone who has seen me has seen
the Father." (John 14:9)

Philo further explained that God, being light, is "the archetype of
every other light." As such He is "prior to and high above every
archetype." Thus He holds the position of "a model of a model," that
is, He is the model for His Word, which Word becomes the model for
creation. The Word, therefore, contains all the qualities of God. As
Philo expressed it, "the model or pattern was the Word which contained
all His fullness -- light, in fact." ("On Dreams," I:75, Loeb V, pp.
336-337) Paul expressed a similar thought when he wrote that in the
Son all God's fullness dwells. (Colossians 1:19; 2:9)

To Philo, therefore, the Word of God is the eternal, uncreated Word
containing all the fullness of God and bearing His image. That divine
image which the Word bears is the image in which man was created. The
Word is further the sustainer, upholder and ruler of the world,
carrying on the governing of all things, as God's viceroy, and
containing all God's fullness.

While the Word is not a created thing and carries on all the functions
of God, Philo is clear that there are not two gods -- although he does
not attempt to explain how this can be. Philo's teaching is,
therefore, very close to the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. Philo
reached his conclusions without the aid of the New Testament and
certainly without deriving his ideas from pagan notions of deity. The
Old Testament teaching that the Angel of Yahweh is really the presence
of Yahweh Himself seems to have strongly influenced Philo's ideas.

To relegate the doctrine of the Trinity, therefore, to a fourth-
century adaptation of paganism is to ignore the conclusions that
several Jewish theologians and teachers had reached four centuries
earlier, from God's revelations given to Israel before the time of the
coming of Christ. At the very time that the Word was becoming flesh
(John 1:1, 14), Jewish writers were already beginning to see that
God's Word could in some way be distinguished from God the Father
Himself, yet have all the fullness of God contained in Him.

http://www.barr-family.com/godsword/trinity.htm

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 5, 11:59 pm, Olrik <olrik...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Le 2012-11-05 17:47, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews a crit :

>
> > Mohammad worked harder to make the Lord prayer come
> > literally true. And he never paid allegiance to Caesar and his Law
>
> That's because by then, the Roman Empire was almost extinct:
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_Roman_Empire>
>
> BTW, Caesar died in 44 BC, nearly 700 years *before* islam.

Yes Caesar, the Son of God, the sole ruler of the lands and
the sea died way before Mohammad, but Mohammad
understood that the proclamation of faith such as
Jesus being the Son of God was nothing but a declaration
of allegiance to Caesar and the roman power.
Since Israel rejected their Messiah, God divided his
kingdom between the Romans and the Arabs.
Read Acts of Apostles chapter 1; Roman Chapters 9, 10, 11

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

If islam is against idolatry
why do muslims worship the kaaba stone
and pelt the devil with stones?

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

Paul, Leader of a Jewish Revolution
(N.T. Wright, Bible Review, December 2000.
Paul’s theology--grounded in Jewish thought and scriptures--propelled
him to confront the powers of Rome and the pagan gods that stood
behind them.

Did Paul think Jesus was the long-promised Davidic Messiah?

The first Christian writer seems to say so at the very start of
Romans, his most famous letter. His gospel, he writes, is about God’s
son, “who was descended from David’s seed according to the flesh, and
designated son of God in power, according to the spirit of holiness,
by the resurrection of the dead” (Romans 1:3-4). But most scholars,
until recently at least, have denied that Paul himself really wanted
to say this. He was, they say, just pacifying his Roman hearers by
quoting a creedal formula they would have known, to assure them he was
on track with their faith.

When I first met this line of thought, I suspected it was an attempt
to de-Judaize Paul. I still think that’s correct. By arguing that
Paul didn’t believe Jesus was the Davidic Messiah, some would-be
Christian scholars were trying to enlist Paul in support of a non-
Jewish type of faith. Alas, some Jewish readers have been eager to
agree, hoping to blame Paul for changing Jesus’ Jewish message into
something different.

But these attempts to distance Paul from Judaism find no real
foundation in the opening lines of Romans. The formulaic nature of
Romans 1:1-7 gives us no reason to question whether Paul wrote these
lines, still less to deny that he believed them. In any case, why
would Paul quote a powerful formula that he didn’t believe in, simply
to introduce himself to new readers? That makes no sense. To do so
would be stupid at best and dishonest at worst.

In this passage and throughout his other writings, Paul’s thinking
remained Jewish through and through.

I now see that the attempt to rescue Paul from believing in Jesus’
Davidic messiahship not only de-Judaizes Paul, but also de-politicizes
him. The claim that Jesus was the Messiah places Paul, of course, in
conflict with those Jews, both ancient and modern, who take a
different view. But it also places him in conflict with Rome-the city
to which this letter was written. If Jesus was the true king, Caesar
was not.

In Paul’s day, the cult of Caesar was the fastest-growing religion in
the Mediterranean world. In Rome itself the emperors did not claim
full divine honors, but they did adopt the title “son of god”-the god
in question being their recently deceased, and newly deified,
predecessor. And in the provinces, from Greece and Turkey through the
Middle East to Egypt, divinization was standard. The people had
worshiped rulers before; why shouldn’t Augustus and his successors,
with their extraordinary powers, receive the same divine honors?

So the imperial cult grew. Its “good news” was that Caesar, the son
of God, was now the lord of the whole world, claiming allegiance from
everybody in return for bringing salvation and justice to the world.
Resistance was met with crucifixion. The system was based on sheer
power.

When Paul wrote Romans, he wasn’t offering a benign religion or faith
detached from the world of Roman power. He was confronting imperial
power head-on. In the opening lines of his letter (1:1-17), Paul
announces that he is coming to Rome as the messenger of God’s “good
news,” the news about his son, the royal heir of David (in Psalms, the
Davidic king will rule the whole world). The resurrection marked
Jesus as God’s son. He is now the world’s true lord, claiming
allegiance from Jew and gentile alike. Paul is not ashamed of this
“good news,” because this message-announcing Jesus as the risen
Messiah and Lord, the one true God-unveils salvation and justice for
the whole world.

A close comparison of the “good news” of the Caesar cult with Paul’s
words shows that Romans is, among other things, a deliberate parody of
the pagan message. Paul’s readers in Rome must have understood this,
and he must have intended them to.

Paul’s ideas do not derive from the Caesar cult, as some have
suggested; they confront it. His theology, his understanding of the
Messiah, remains rooted in Jewish thought forms and in the
scriptures. Texts like Exodus, Isaiah and the Psalms propelled him
towards just this sort of confrontation with the pagan powers and the
gods that stood behind them. He is, perhaps, at his most Jewish when
he is confronting and undermining paganism.

Further proof that Paul thought this way in Romans comes in the often-
neglected theological conclusion to the letter, Romans 15:7-13. There
Paul tells us that the aim of the gospel is the united, multiethnic
worship of the one true God; Paul quotes a string of verses climaxing
with Isaiah 11:10: “There shall be a root of Jesse [in other words, a
descendant of David], one who rises up to rule the nations; in him
shall the nations hope.” This completes the circle begun with 1:3:
The resurrection establishes Jesus as the Davidic Messiah, the world’s
true Lord. Paul, coming to Rome, must have known how subversive this
would sound.

True, Romans 13:1-7 urges Paul’s readers to obey the authorities, but
this is more subversive than is often supposed. Rulers are not
divine; they are answerable to God. God wants order, not chaos; there
is no point in overthrowing the official tyranny of appointed rulers
only to have it replaced by the unofficial tyranny of the bullies, the
strong or the rich. The revolution Paul has in mind is deeper than
mere civic disobedience. It is about giving to the Davidic Messiah
the total allegiance that, in his day, was claimed by Caesar. After
all, Caesar killed Jesus, but God raised him from the dead.


http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_BR_Jewish_Revolution.htm

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 6, 11:36 am, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

> the image of some creature, but in the image of God's own uncreatedWord. He wrote: "for the Creator, we know, employed for its making no

> Philo further explained that God, ...
>
> read more »

Trinity was known in some egyptians and Greek
religions.
Though it follows Paul's doxology in its Nicean
Constantinople formulation

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 6, 12:09 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

<jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com> wrote:
> Paul, Leader of a Jewish Revolution
> (N.T. Wright, Bible Review, December 2000.
> Paul’s theology--grounded in Jewish thought and scriptures--propelled
> him to confront the powers of Rome and the pagan gods that stood
> behind them.
>
> Did Paul think Jesus was the long-promised Davidic Messiah?

I don't know what you mean by Davidic Messiah
but I know about Moses' Messiah.
The Lord your God, said Moses to the Children
of Israel, will send you the Messiah, a prophet
like myself, him you must listen. Moses in
Deuteronomy 18:15-19
This tells us about the covenant between God and Israel
in the desert.
This is the Messiah Paul and Mohammad have been
preaching to the Romans and to the Arabs Idol worshipers
respectivelly

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

The Quran Confesses Allah Was a Pagan God before Islam
Mohammad A. Khan
While Muslims deny it, Allah was the pre-Islamic "Moon-God" of the
Arab pagans; Islamic Allah Himself says it in the Quran...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For many centuries, Muslims have been boasting and exaggerating that
the Quran is the only book on earth that is still in its original
form, without a word or letter being altered since it has been passed
through Muhammad to their followers some 1,400 years ago. But in the
last century, it has been researched widely to probe whether the Quran
is the word of God (Allah) or made up by a human or humans. After
thorough research, many intellectuals and historians prove that there
are not only numberless flaws and errors in this book, but also it
shows us the high degree of misconception of Muslims. All Muslims
believe that if a Muslim has any doubt about the Quran, he/she will be
considered murtad (infidel) and the punishment of such an infidel,
according to Islamic law, is death with brutality in this life, and
eternal Hellfire in the hereafter. Thus, every Muslim is bound to be
staunch in his/her belief that the Quran is a book that stands today
as it was revealed 14 centuries ago.

The topic of this article is that the same Quran proves that Allah was
a pagan god before Islam, whom the Arabians, especially Meccans,
venerated, and prayed to, in pre-Islamic days. But Muslims’ belief
regarding Allah (god) is totally different. They firmly deny that
Allah is or was the god of the pagans, also known as “Moon God”. We
will probe this point in light of the Quran as to how Allah,
unknowingly, made a mistake and got himself caught in Sura Nahl, verse
57 (Quran 16:57). The verse goes as follows:




Translation: "And they attribute to Allah daughters - exalted is He -
and for them is what they desire."

If we think logically for a moment, this verse itself proves that
Allah, without doubt, was a god of the pagans of Arabia. It should be
noted why Allah felt guilty of, or angry about, having offspring that
were attributed to him by the pagans. If Allah was not the god of the
pagans, but rather god of Adam, Jews, Christians, Muslims and of all
universe, why the pagans needed to claim Allah have daughters that
made no sense to him. In this verse Allah uses his name, who, the
pagans attributed, had daughters. If Allah would be different god from
one of those of pagans of Arabia, the pagans would never have claimed
that Allah has daughters. Instead, they would have attributed
goddesses al-Lat, la--Mannat and al-Uzza to being the daughters of
their own pagan god, not Allah.

Likewise, similar are the verses 53:19-21, in which Allah again
complains that the pagans associating Allah with having daughters.
Though, Allah didn’t reveal his name in such verses but referred to
himself. Verses are as follows:



Translation: "So have you considered al-Lat and al-'Uzza?" [53:19]



Translation: "And Manat, the third - the other one?" [53:20]



Translation: "Is the male for you and for Him the female?" [53:21]

This is crystal-clear that Allah was same god worshiped by masses of
the Arab pagans.

I have stated earlier that Muslims firmly believe in originality of
the Quran; that they can never doubt, at any cost, that Quran was ever
been corrupted. I don’t know how Muslims see these verses, and how
they explain them. But one thing I know, a large number of Muslims,
unintentionally, ignore many flaws and errors when they read the
Quran.

Conclusion

If, after this clear truth, Muslims are still adamant to their false
belief that Allah was not a pagan god, then I think they are rejecting
the verses, therefore, blaspheming against the Quran. So, they should
be considered infidels, because they do not entertain the basic and
essential requirements of the Islamic beliefs and shariah laws.

http://islam-watch.org/authors/112-mohammad/322-the-quran-confesses-allah-was-a-pagan-god-before-islam.html

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 6, 12:26 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"

<jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com> wrote:
> The Quran Confesses Allah Was a Pagan God before Islam
> Mohammad A. Khan
> While Muslims deny it, Allah was the pre-Islamic "Moon-God" of the
> Arab pagans; Islamic Allah Himself says it in the Quran...
>

Then post the reference where the Qur'an confesses that
Allah was a pagan God before Islam. Please do so.
But as far as I know a rose is a rose in any language.
Because I know that the Qur'an attests that there is but
one God who gave the Torah to Moses, sent Jesus
the Messiah, the Messenger of light to mankind, the word
of God that was described in the Torah of Moses
and the Gospel. I don't think a moon-god had foretold
the Messiah for Israel. Besides Allah is a short for
Allaha, the name for God in aramaic, the language spoken
by Jesus himself.

[jwshe...@satx.rr.com]

The Quran: the Sun Sets in a Mud Puddle?
by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


The Quran contains a considerable amount of uninspired folklore from
Jewish (and other) sources. It also occasionally incorporates elements
of mythology and fairytale in its pages. In a surah that Muslim
sources identify as one in which Muhammad answered questions designed
by Jewish rabbis to challenge his prophethood (Pickthall, n.d., pp.
211-212), the Quran relates the story of Dhu'l-Qarneyn--"The Two-Horned
One." In conveying the story, the Quran gives credence to the
outrageous superstition that the Sun sets in a mud puddle:

They will ask thee of Dhu'l-Qarneyn. Say: I shall recite unto you a
remembrance of him. Lo! We made him strong in the land and gave him
unto every thing a road. And he followed a road till, when he reached
the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring,
and found a people thereabout: We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish
or show them kindness. He said: As for him who doeth wrong, we shall
punish him, and then he will be brought back unto his Lord, who will
punish him with awful punishment! But as for him who believeth and
doeth right, good will be his reward, and We shall speak unto him a
mild command. Then he followed a road till, when he reached the
rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We
had appointed no shelter therefrom. So (it was). And We knew all
concerning him (Surah 18:84-92, emp. added).

Observe that the Quran's account is not worded in such a way as to be
allowable on the basis of accommodative or phenomenal language--even as
we speak of the Sun setting or rising. The inclusion of the location
of the Sun's setting--a muddy spring--places the account squarely into
the realm of myth.

The same mistake is made earlier in the same surah (vss. 10-27) when
the Quran lends credibility to the legend of the "Seven Sleepers of
Ephesus" (see Campbell, 2002; Gilchrist, 1986). The legends (which
predate the Quran) spoke of seven (the number varies) noble Christian
youths who fled persecution during the reign of Decius the Emperor who
died in A.D. 251. The youths took refuge in a cave near Ephesus, but
then were sealed in to die. Instead, their lives were miraculously
preserved by falling into a deep sleep that lasted for nearly 200
years, a sleep the Quran claims lasted 309 years (vs. 26). For the
Quran to dignify such outlandish tales is to disprove its own
inspiration.

REFERENCES
Campbell, William (2002), The Quran and the Bible in the Light of
History and Science, [On-line], URL: http://answering-islam.org.uk/Campbell/contents.html.

Gilchrist, John (1986), Muhammad and the Religion of Islam, [On-line],
URL: http://answering-islam.org.uk/Gilchrist/Vol1/5c.html.

Pickthall, Mohammed M. (n.d.), The Meaning of the Glorious Koran (New
York: Mentor).

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=8&article=702

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

On Nov 6, 1:53 pm, "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com" <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com>
wrote:

> The Quran: the Sun Sets in a Mud Puddle?
> by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.
>
> The Quran contains a considerable amount of uninspired folklore from
> Jewish (and other) sources. It also occasionally incorporates elements

That is because the Bible too is full of Greeco-Roman mythologies.
A God who died for salvation of the servants in known in Greece.
An incarnate God too is also in Athens and Rome before Christianity.