Friday, 19 August 2016

New York subway jihad plotter quotes Qur'an verse justifying suicide bombing

The last part of this, Ahmedzay's rant against "Zionist Jews," not reproduced below, was reported yesterday. This report is extraordinary for the fact that it shows Ahmedzay quoting Qur'an 9:111 to justify suicide bombing. This is a common tactic of suicide bombing recruiters, but to point it out in teh West usually brings one a charge of "Islamophobia." I guess Ahmedzay must be an "Islamophobe." "Zarein Ahmedzay's statement when he pleaded guilty to terrorist charges," from the New York Post, April 23 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

"Your Honor, I would like to quote from the Qur'an."

"Quote, Verily, Allah has purchased of the believers their lives and their wealth for the price of Paradise, to fight in the way of Allah, to kill and get killed. It is a promise binding on the truth in the Torah, the Gospel and the Qur'an, end of quote."

That's Qur'an 9:111, the justification for suicide attacks. The only guarantee of Paradise in the Qur'an is this verse, which guarantees it to those who kill and are killed for Allah. This once again underscores the jihadist contention that they represent Islamic authenticity -- a charge never yet refuted by Muslim "moderates" in any way that has proven effective to change jihadists' minds.

Sources. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/04/new-york-subway-jihad-plotter-quotes-quran-verse-justifying-suicide-bombing.html

IHS

Question to the Man of this Site

Mr Who ever you are I am 100% sure that your claims of being an EXmuslim is not true actually you are a Zionist who is creating a hate among different Faiths. On the other hand Why do you HATE Islam even if you left? I mean why dont you stay away for Islam for those who Love and will die A Muslims like me. All your claims contradict and there must be an agenda for this Site. I dont care what is the point of this site but it still shows that Islam is a Universal religion, Islam has enemies, and Islam is not the way you see and showing? Your are contributing to More people Embrace Islam because of knowing Islam and seeing your FAKE and FALSE claims tell the TRUTh. I think you sometimes call your self mr sina of Zina (the Arabic word of adultery). Is that What i said is true?
Fuaad

Hi Fuaad,
Don’t be so sure. If you read my articles you’ll see I speak the truth. I am not the only person who left Islam and is against it. We are many and we are growing in number fast.
As for being a Zionist, yes I have said it many times that I am a Zionist. Zionist means someone who believes Jews have a right to have a homeland to stay safe from discrimination and genocide. I happen to agree with that idea and therefore I am a Zionist. Do I have any transaction or dealings with Jews? No! I don’t receive a dime from them. I simply think they are human beings and entitled to have the same protection that all humans have. Any decent person must be a Zionist.
If you are not a Zionist you are a hatemonger racist. One who does not feel the suffering of others is less than a human.
You don’t have to be a Jew or have anything to do with Jews to be a Zionist, just as you don’t have to be a woman to be a feminist and believe that women should have equal rights. or a person of color to be against racism.
Why I hate Islam? It’s because I hate all ideologies that divide mankind. I hate Nazism, fascism, communism, racism and Islam equally. They are all the same filth. They are all evil and they must all be crushed and dumped in the toilet, where they belong.
My cl
aims do not contradict. Where is the contradiction?
I have no hidden agenda. I want to expose Islam and get the world rid of this lie that is causing so much hate and destruction. This is my stated mission, not a hidden agenda.
The fact that Muslims love to die for Islam does not make this evil cult a true religion. Muslims are brainwashed.That is why they love to die and love to kill others.
The fact that some people love to die for a doctrine does not make that doctrine true, but rather dangerous. Good teachings promote life and happiness. It is evil doctrines that encourage death and glorify martyrdom. Islam is a cult of death.
My goal is to show the truth, save Muslims and save their victims. I am saving lives and saving the world. This is a mighty work and I am proud of it. As of today, I have saved thousands of people and if only a fraction of them follow my footsteps together we will save millions and the whole world. Many famous apostates have said that they owe their enlightenment to me. Many of them are doing a lot more than me. They have surpassed me, as I had predicted long time ago when I was a lone voice in the wilderness of the Internet. I am proud of my achievements. I am filled with joy any time I see them on TV. Why should I stop?
I did not amass whealth in this life and have had my share of setbacks and vicissitudes. Life has not been kind to me, but I don’t consider my life a waste. Despite all the backstabbings, betrayals and injustices that I endured and despite all the hardships, I have set in motion a movement that will end the most evil doctrine ever created by man. How many people can make that claim? Even if I die today, this movement will continue and nothing will stop it.
Please do not misinterpret me. I am not claiming that this huge fire that is burning the filth of Islam is because of me. I have no streak of megalomania and narcissism in me to make outlandish claims like that. But I am proud to say that I was one of the first who started that fire. I am one of the first who exposed the dirty secrets of Islam through the Internet and showed to the world that this cult is evil and its founder was a psychopath.
When everyone was shadowboxing against the “radical Islam” and the “political Islam,” I was the one who said it is all about Islam itself. Unlike most so called pundits who try to save Muhammad from blemish and put all the blames on the Wahhabis I said that this tree is rotten from its root. The problem with Islam is not with its wrong interpretation, but with its correct application. It is with the psychopath that Muslims follow as their prophet and the demon that they worship as their god.
I was amongst the very few who knew where is the source of the problem. Still the majority of “experts” are lost. They have been receiving all the attention while misleading the public. Some of them have good intentions, but good intentions are not enough. A myth is still a myth with good intention or not. They are deceptive, but politically correct. I am ignored by the media because my message is revolutionary and who wants to rock the boat. But truth is more powerful than lies and if given equal chance it will always prevail. I was not given equal chance. I sent my articles to various mainstream media. They ignore them. Nonetheless, my message is winning. People are waking up and they are realizing the problem with Islam is deeper than what their pundits, the media and the politicians tell them.
If you think I am contributing to more people embracing Islam then why are you asking me to stop
? Please promote my faithfreedom.org so everyone can see my “falshood” and convert to Islam.
`Sina` (SEE-NAH) is a Persian name. `Sina` comes from a Hebrew word meaning: `explorer of knowledge`, the Arabic form of the word is `Bagher`. It is a popular name in Iran. http://www.encyclo.co.uk/define/SINA
Zina means adultery. Muslim apologists call me Zina. This shows the level of their intellectualism and how they respond to my criticism of Islam.
Islam has always had its critics, but it has crushed them with brute force.
I am not one of those idealists who think truth will always prevail. It is force that always prevails. This is the only reason behind the success of Islam. Truth can win only when it is allowed to compete with lies on equal footing. The light will win darkness only if it is allowed to enter the room. The proponents of lies cannot tolerate the truth. But the new millennium and the Internet have changed the rules of the game. Now, Muslims can no longer silence the truth and truth is winning over Islam.

Ali Sina

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/wordpress/?p=8808

IHS

Questions regarding “The Challenge”‎

Dear Ali Sina, In regrads to your challenge on faithfreedom.org

Because some of your views are very akin to my own, I thought I would share with you where I am in my quest for the truth. I am trying to ponder and make sure what i am doing is truly what I believe. Although it would be easy for me to become a moral atheist, something inside me denies me from becoming that. The world has its ills, yes, but it is too ordered and structured not to have a controlling force behind it. There is no question the Quran and hadith have many problems but maybe the “uncorrupted” state we were taught was never true. Or it all has to do with interpretation of the original arabic. This seems quite likely to me. You question Muhammad’s prophethood by some of his actions, but like you said youself, Joshua did far worse in the bible. However please answer me these regarding his character:

1) He was offered wealth, status as king, women and many other worldly items by the Meccan leadership in exchange to stop his preaching. Why did he refuse?
2) He fought alongside his own men in battles and was himself injured. Why did he do that if he was egocentric? You will never see a modern day leader in charge of an army put himself in harms way.
3) Was he not illiterate by all accurate unbiased accounts? Why did he wait till age 40 to start such a hard and difficult task of change the entire views of a pagan society?
4) If he liked beuatiful young woman, why were most of his wives old and divorced? If he was a pedophile as you claim because of Ayesha’s age, I never heard of a pedophile only being with one child. Why didnt he marry and surround himself with several?
5) Why does he validate Moses and Jesus so much. He continued to do this even after problems with the Jewish tribes and Christians. The story of Moses and pharoah is the most repeated in the Quran? At the end of time, he said Jesus would return, not him. He stated all prophets wer on equal footing to himself. He states that every prophet including himself was “touched” by Satan except Jesus. Why wouldnt he say this about himself if he was a fake narcissist as you claim?
6)He forbade pictures and glorifying of himself. He wanted people to worship only God and not him. Does this sound like a self-absorbed egotist?
7) When he was victorious and return to take over Mecca, he declared general amnesty for all who had previously fought him. Is this the merciless maurader you are talking about?
8 ) Even after accumulating wealth, he slept on a mattress of palm fibers on the floor of his small house and chose a life of poverty. Anything hypocritical here?
9) He constantly helped his wives with household chores. His final speech makes mention to treat the womanfolk well and that the best man is the one who is best to his wife. I know you are well versed in these hadiths. Is this the chauvinist you are talking about?

Now, I am not saying this proves his prophethood to you. But if I was sitting in a jury box, in modern day america, it adds enough reasonable doubt that I cannot deny that he could have been.

So maybe I dont get the $50,000 reward, but if you cannot explain away these questions with logic, you’ll have to send me a check for at least $25 grand.
Be well and take care, SS AKA “the challenge winner”

Dear SS the self adjudicated challenge winner,
Yes indeed the universe has its order. That is why Einstein said, God does not play dice. Of course Einstein was talking about God in an allegorical way. What he meant was that universe is governed by laws. This is agreed by all scientists. However, what is not agreed by everyone is whether there is a lawmaker.
We can envision that natural laws can exist on their own, but it when we talk about a law maker, the question that arises is who made this lawmaker.
However, this is not my argument and in no ways I want to convince people in becoming atheists. I have said it time and again that atheism does not make humans better. Atheists also have committed horrendous crimes and have shown they can be evil.
What can elevate people is consciousness not beliefs.
Consciousness comes with maturity and it has nothing to do with beliefs. So if you wish to believe in a creator, I will respect your choice. Believers or unbelievers are the same to me. I have no preference. I pick my friends from among those who have evolved enough to know not to harm others. This is often the question of psychological health and not religion.
Yes I said Joshua committed heinous crimes. But did I say that I believe he was a prophet of God? I actually believe that Moses, Joshua and many ancient personages of the Old Testament were myths. Jews made up these stories in captivity to make their youths feel better and endure the tyranny of their captors. This is not just a mere opinion. There is plenty of evidence that prove this claim.
Assuming Joshua was real, he would have been a war criminal no better than Genghis Khan. By the same token Muhammad was also a criminal. It makes no sense to follow one criminal because another group holds another criminal as a prophet.
Furthermore, Jews do not follow Joshua. He is a historic figure, like Omar or Abu Bakr and not someone to foll
ow. Muslims follow Muhammad to the tee. There lies the problem.

Now let me answer your questions.
1) He was offered wealth, status as king, women and many other worldly items by the Meccan leadership in exchange to stop his preaching. Why did he refuse?
Who said Muhammad was offered any of these things? This claim was made only by him and he was a pathological liar.
People of Mecca laughed at him and thought he is a mad man. Why would they want to lavish a mad man with so much gifts? Has it ever happened anywhere that someone claims to be a prophet and people who think he is crazy offer him wealth and women? Come on please. Why is it so hard for Muslims to be rational? No one offered Muhammad any wealth. He lied, just as he lied about being persecuted and the Meccans plotting to kill him. Please read my book and see how I have debunked all these claims.

2)
He fought alongside his own men in battles and was himself injured. Why did he do that if he was egocentric? You will never see a modern day leader in charge of an army put himself in harms way.
Obviously you have not read Muhammad’s biographies. Please read the books of Tabari, Ibn Sa’d and al Moghazi of Waqidi. Muhammad never fought personally in any battle. He ordered 74 or 78 raids (depending which historian you believe) in 27 of those raids he himself participated, but he stood behind his men, wearing two coats of mail that made him so heavy that he could not walk. All he did was gather dust from the ground and throw it in the direction of his enemies while cursing them. In Ohod he did not have enough men, so he sent everyone to the front leaving no one to protect him. Someone came and found him hiding between two rocks. He hit him with his sword but his heavy armors protected him. He shouted for help and his men arrived and the Quraishi escaped. There he lost a tooth. Courage is not a quality that distinguished Muhammad at no moment in his life. Even in the war of Sacrilege, when he was twenty years old, all he did was collect the arrows during the cease fires and hand them to his uncles. That coward never put his life in danger. Not even once. But he gave fiery speeches promises his followers all sorts of rewards if they die in the battle field.

3)
Was he not illiterate by all accurate unbiased accounts? Why did he wait till age 40 to start such a hard and difficult task of change the entire views of a pagan society?
Muhammad had a hallucination at the age forty. He thought he was demon possessed. His co-depended wife convinced him that he had become a prophet. I have explained the psychological state of Muhammad and what let him to believe in his hallucinations in my book. Countless people write to challenge me. I ask them to read my book first. Those of them who agree and read it either don’t write back or write to say they have left Islam.

4)
If he liked beuatiful young woman, why were most of his wives old and divorced? If he was a pedophile as you claim because of Ayesha’s age, I never heard of a pedophile only being with one child. Why didnt he marry and surround himself with several?
Muhammad’s wives were all teenagers or in their early twenties. The oldest one was Sauda. No mention of her age is made. But Ibn Sa’d in Tabaqat V.8 says she died during the rule of Muaviyah in the year 54 Hijra. We know that Muhammad married Sauda about 40 days after the death of Khadijah, i.e. three years before Hijra. So Sauda died 57 years after she married Muhammad.
What is the normal age of a person? Sauda was a big fat woman. Often overweigh people don’t live long. But let us say she died at the age of eighty. 80-57=23 So Sauda was 23 years old when she married Muhammad who was 50 years old at that time. If Sauda died at the age of 90, which is unlikely, she must have been 33 years old when she married the 50 year old Muhammad.
Now let me quote a hadith reported by Ibn Sa’d to debunk the claim that Muhammad married old women for their protection.
Barra narrated that the prophet sent message to Sauda that I have divorced you.  When Sauda heard the news, she went and sat in the way of the Prophet to Aisha’s house. When she saw the prophet she told him. I swear thee by the one who has sent you the Quran and has exalted you over all the creation to tell my why did you divorce me. Have I done something wrong that has offended you? The Prophet said no! Sauda said, I then beg you for the sake of the same God to not divorce me. I am getting old I don’t need to be with a man. You can use my turn to stay with Aisha, but I wish that in the day of resurrection to be counted amongst your wives. The Prophet agreed and Sauda said that since then the Prophet spent the nights there were her turn with his favorite wife Aisha.” [Tabaqat V. 8 p. 53-54 Persian translation]

Sauda was not old for Muhammad. She was half his age. However, she was much older than his other wives who were 40 to 44 years younger than him.
Sauda was a big woman and not very attractive. So Muhammad wanted to get rid of her to spend more time with his petite younger wives.
How could Sauda survive on her own in that society? She thought that as long as she remains nominally a wife of Muhammad her material needs will be taken care of – and in fact they were. The same historian tells us that the share of Sauda from the loot of the Khaibar was 80 camel load of dates and 20 camel loads of barley or wheat.
From every loot the wives of Muhammad received their share of goods and slaves. Omar, during his caliphate Sauda a sack filled with Dirhams (Probably the proceeds of the loot from Persia or Egypt). Sauda asked, what is this? They said it is Dirhams. She said Subhanallah, they send me money in a sack of dates?”
[Tabaqat V. 8 p. 55]
I can write a book about the sexual life of Muhammad.
This man had no respect for women. He used them like an object and disposed of them when they no longer satisfied his animalistic needs. Muslims are so ignorant of the truth about their prophet that is appalling.

5)
Why did he validate Moses and Jesus so much? He continued to do this even after problems with the Jewish tribes and Christians. The story of Moses and pharoah is the most repeated in the Quran? At the end of time, he said Jesus would return, not him. He stated all prophets were on equal footing to himself. He states that every prophet including himself was “touched” by Satan except Jesus. Why wouldn’t he say this about himself if he was a fake narcissist as you claim?
Muhammad started his prophetic career in the footsteps of biblical prophets. He thought this would attract the Christians and the Jews. Once his dream was dashed he turned against the Jews, banished some and massacred others. However, he could not change his so called revelation of 13 years and start beating a different drum. He had to stick with Jesus and Moses. After he came to Medina and faced the rejection of the people of the Book, there is very little talk about Jesus and Moses in the Quran. Instead there is an unbounded vitriol against their followers.
Muhammad changed his qibla and started prying towards temple filled with idols. He called the Jews and Christians all sorts of names, but it was too late for him to change his story about being another prophet in the same line of biblical prophets.

6)
He forbade pictures and glorifying of himself. He wanted people to worship only God and not him. Does this sound like a self-absorbed egotist?
You must definitely read my book. All your questions are answered there. Muhammad suffered from Acromegaly. This disease deforms the bones and cartilages. In the later years of his life he looked like a monster. Muhammad was a narcissist and his image meant a lot to him. He did not want people to draw his picture when he was so ugly and deformed. The prohibition of drawing his picture is not out of modesty but out of his fear of leaving an ugly image of himself for the posterity.

7)
When he was victorious and returned to take over Mecca, he declared general amnesty for all who had previously fought him. Is this the merciless maurader  you are talking about?
This was part of the deal for the Meccans to surrender with no fight. Abu Sufian accepted the deal to avoid bloodshed. Muhammad also knew that the Arab tribes that had accompanied him would not stay long if the fight gets bloody.
Despite his promises to not to kill anyone he sought ten Meccans who had mocked him many years ago, among them two dancing girls and killed them.

8) Even after accumulating wealth, he slept on a mattress of palm fibers on the floor of his small house and chose a life of poverty. Anything hypocritical here?
These are myths that have held Muslims hoodwinked. I have demystified the mystique of Muhammad in my book. Once you read it you’ll have answer to all these questions. Muhammad was a narcissist. Narcissists are master manipulators and when they put a show of piety or humility they do it in exaggeration. Please refer to my book for detailed explanation of Muhammad’s show of humility and his psychological make up.

9)
He constantly helped his wives with household chores. His final speech makes mention to treat the womanfolk well and that the best man is the one who is best to his wife. I know you are well versed in these hadiths. Is this the chauvinist you are talking about?
Muhammad’s words and deeds were different. The narcissist has all the good advices for others but they consider themselves about those advices. Muhammad was not good to his wives. He beat even Aisha who was the youngest and most favorite of his wives. He divorced anyone who was not satisfying his sexual needs and threatened to divorce all of them when they were upset of him for sleeping with a maid, Maryah.
What they feed you as the history of Muhammad is all lies.
You need to read the original books of history of Islam or read my book that is based on those stories to get the facts. So you don’t get $50,000, not $25,000 and not even one dollar. But if you ask for it, I will send you my book for free. After you read it and leave Islam, you may want to finance its translation to any language spoken by Muslims. It will only cost a few hundreds, but you’d be saving millions.

Cheers
Ali Sina

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/wordpress/?p=8816

IHS

The Muslim Misuse of Hebrews 5:7‎

Does this verse teach that Jesus never died?      

Keith Thompson

Around 30 A.D. Jesus Christ was crucified on the cross. He died for our sin appeasing the wrath of God and taking it upon himself. He lived a perfect sinless life of obedience to the Father; a life that we could not live. Because of that as well as the fact that Jesus is God in the flesh; Jesus’ crucifixion was of infinite value or worth. God has infinite value and worth. Since Jesus is God, Jesus’ crucifixion is of infinite value and worth and thus his atoning death as a sacrifice is sufficient to pay for the sins of humanity. This is the good news (gospel) that has come down from heaven for humanity. This is what the first-century scriptures teach. This is the earliest view of Christians. There are early secular sources outside of the Bible that speak about the crucifixion of Christ as a historical event which gives validity to Christian belief.1

However, 600 years after Jesus died on the cross for our sins a false prophet named Muhammad started receiving revelations or messages from a being that he believed to be the angel Gabriel. Many theologians recognize that this was a demonic encounter, perhaps even Satan himself appearing as an angel to Muhammad to deceive him so that he will create a false religion which denies the real truth about Jesus and Christianity – including Jesus’ death on the cross for our sins.
Muhammad received a message about Jesus’ crucifixion which was put into the Islamic (un) holy book – the Quran. It states:

because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain (Quran 4:157, Pickthall Translation)

It is because of this one verse in the Quran that was written 600 years after Jesus was alive, in another language and culture that Muslims deny that Jesus died for the sins of the world. Contrary to the testimony of first-century scriptures, early first-century extra-biblical Christian testimony from Polycarp, 1 Clement, and Ignatius,2 as well as the early non-biblical secular attestation, we are led to believe that this one verse in the Quran is enough to overthrow this evidence. To the outsider looking at this from a purely historical perspective it’s clear that the Muslim proposition is obviously absurd. Even critical atheist, agnostic and liberal scholars agree that Jesus’ death on the cross is a historical fact.3

Because of this dilemma Muslims will try to prove that the Bible doesn’t actually teach that Jesus died on the cross for our sins but instead was raised up by God prior to the event and that someone else (Judas?) was put in his place to go on the cross and made to look like Jesus. Therefore according to Islam there is no atonement for our sin on the cross at all because Jesus never died for us. The Muslim apologist will isolate certain biblical texts that, when removed of their immediate context, may appear give the impression that Jesus didn’t actually die. One such abused text is Hebrews 5:7 and this is what we will be examining to see if it teaches that Jesus never died for our sin, as various Muslims contend, or if these Muslims are guilty of misusing this text. Hebrews 5:7 states:

In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. (Hebrews 5:7, ESV)

When Muslims look at this verse many of them incorrectly understand the words “him who was able to save him from death” as affirming the Islamic position that Jesus was raised into heaven before the crucifixion could take place and that someone else was put on the cross to look like Jesus. One can find hundreds of Muslim articles on the web that appeal to this verse as evidence that Jesus was not crucified. But is this what the author of the book of Hebrews is telling us? This verse can be understood in two ways. 1.) Jesus was saved from dying – thus he never died at all. 2.) Jesus did die and was saved from death by being raised from the dead – the resurrection from the dead. When one reads the book of Hebrews cover to cover they will see that this author held the position of interpretation 2. If we can demonstrate that the context of the book of Hebrews is that Jesus died for our sins as a sacrifice then we have to understand Hebrews 5:7 as Jesus dying and then being saved from death by rising from the dead – the way Christians have always believed.

So does the book of Hebrews teach that Jesus died for our sins?
All throughout this book it either indicates crucifixion for the propitiation of sin or explicitly makes reference to Jesus’ death on the cross. For example, right in the first chapter we read:

After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high … (Hebrews 1:3)

Christians hold that Jesus made purification for sins by dying on the cross as a sacrifice so that whoever believes in Jesus will be regenerated by God and will be saved. Moving further, we read in Hebrews 2:

But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.” “Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. (Hebrews 2:9-10, 14-17)

Then, in Hebrews 6 we receive a warning passage about those who learn the truth but live in sin with no fruit:

For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.
(Hebrews 6:4-6, ESV)

Notice the phrase “they are crucifying once again the Son of God.” This necessitates Jesus already having died for our sin the past. The only way he can be crucified again is if he was already crucified once. This proves that the author believed that Jesus died on the cross. In Hebrews chapter 7 Jesus’ priestly role is discussed as being final and absolute in that his own sacrifice perfectly atones for our sin as opposed to the previous priestly sacrifices to God for the sins of the people of Israel being temporary sacrifices. It was always the high priest who first offered a sacrifice for his own sin and then one for the people so as to pay for their sin. However, Jesus is the high priest for all of humanity as well as the sacrifice itself. This sacrifice would atone for all sin forever.

For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. (Hebrews 7:26-27, ESV)

Notice this verse affirms that he offered himself up as a sacrifice for our sin. How did he achieve this? He achieved this by being crucified on our behalf. In Hebrews chapter 9 we see more passages which support the crucifixion of Jesus:

But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves butby means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant … But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him. (Hebrews 9:11-15, 25-28, ESV)

In the next chapter we read:

And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God … Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water …For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:10-12, 19-22, 26-29, ESV)

In chapter 12 we read:

looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:2, ESV)

And finally the last chapter of Hebrews states:

So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. (Hebrews 13:12, ESV)

Notice in the next verse it states that the Father brought Jesus from the dead:

Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in us that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. (Hebrews 13:20-21, ESV)

The book of Hebrews clearly teaches that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. We see this before and after Hebrews 5:7, the verse in question. We also see in Hebrews 13:20 that God brought Jesus from the dead. Therefore when deciding between interpretation 1 (that Jesus was saved from dying and thus didn’t die), and interpretation 2 (that Jesus was saved from death after dying by resurrecting from the dead), we must go with interpretation 2. In light of the context of the book of Hebrews we should understand the words “Him who was able to save him from death” in Hebrews 5:7 as a reference to the Father raising Jesus from the dead after he was crucified on our behalf as the worthy and willing substitute.

Christ has risen, He is Lord, Amen.

Footnotes
1 Early non-Christian non-biblical sources for Jesus’ crucifixion include Stoic philosopher Mara Bar-Serapion who wrote: “What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished.” (Mara Bar-Serapion, cited from F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1981], p. 114). In his historical work Annals XV.44 written around 117 A.D. the early second-century Roman historian Tacitus wrote: “Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.” The second-century satirist Lucian of Samosata wrote: “The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account … You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 11–13 inThe Works of Lucian of Samosata, translated by H. W. Fowler (Oxford: Clarendon, 1949) vol. 4). The Babylonian Talmud reports: “It is taught: On the eve of Passover they hung Yeshu and the crier went forth for forty days beforehand declaring that "[Yeshu] is going to be stoned for practicing witchcraft, for enticing and leading Israel astray. Anyone who knows something to clear him should come forth and exonerate him." But no one had anything exonerating for him and they hung him on the eve of Passover.” (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a. 70-200 A.D.).
2 Early non-biblical Christian testimony of the crucifixion includes 1 Clement: “On account of the love He bore us, Jesus Christ our Lord gave His blood for us by the will of God; His flesh for our flesh, and His soul for our souls.” (1 Clement, Letter to the Corinthians, Ch. 49, 95-97 A.D.) Ignatius of Antioch in his epistle to Smyrna states: “I glorify Jesus Christ as God, who has made you so wise. For I have observed that you are perfected in an immoveable faith, just as if you were nailed on the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ, both in the flesh and in the spirit, and are established in love in the blood of Christ, being fully persuaded unto our Lord that he was truly from the seed of David according to the flesh, son of God according to the will and power, truly born from a virgin, baptized by John in order that all justice might be fulfilled by him.” (Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans 1.1, 107 A.D.). Student of the Apostle John, Polycarp of Smyrna wrote: “For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist; and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is of the devil …” (Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, Ch. 7, 110-135 A.D.)
3 Atheist, Agnostic and liberal scholars who affirm that Jesus died on the cross include Gert Lüdemann who stated: “The fact of the death of Jesus as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable, despite hypotheses of a pseudo-death or a deception which are sometimes put forward.” (Gert Lüdemann, What Really Happened to Jesus: A Historical Approach to the Resurrection, p. 17). Agnostic scholar Bart Ehrman states: “In any event, Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate.”
(Bart Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, Oxford University Press, 2000], p. 197). Liberal scholar John Dominic Crossan states: “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.” (John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, p. 145).

Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/thompson/hebrews5_7.html

IHS

Thursday, 23 June 2016

Reexamining Islam’s Divine Insurance Scam Pt. 2‎

Sam Shamoun

We continue with our refutation to Zawadi’s “reply.”

This is what Zawadi has to say about the hadith where the man who murdered 100 people was forgiven.

First of all, justice does not necessarily denote punishment. If a person is genuinely sincere (something God could only judge, for humans cannot only rely on outward actions) and the victims were to be recompensed in the afterlife and possibly even forgive their murderer, then why can't we say that justice has been served?

This is where Zawadi tries to wax eloquent in order to impress the readers without actually addressing anything. In the first place, justice wasn’t met in any sense whatsoever since there was no retaliation, no recompense demanded from the guilty party, nor reparation made to the victims’ families.

Secondly, it is the Quran that prescribes either death as the just punishment for the unlawful murdering of individuals or a sum payment to the victim’s family:

O you who believe! Al-Qisas (the Law of Equality in punishment) is prescribed for you in case of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. But if the killer is forgiven by the brother (or the relatives, etc.) of the killed against blood money, then adhering to it with fairness and payment of the blood money, to the heir should be made in fairness. This is an alleviation and a mercy from your Lord.
So after this whoever transgresses the limits (i.e. kills the killer after taking the blood money), he shall have a painful torment. S. 2:178 Hilali-Khan

It is not for a believer to kill a believer except (that it be) by mistake, and whosoever kills a believer by mistake, (it is ordained that) he must set free a believing slave and a compensation (blood money, i.e. Diya) be given to the deceased's family, unless they remit it. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you and he was a believer; the freeing of a believing slave (is prescribed), and if he belonged to a people with whom you have a treaty of mutual alliance, compensation (blood money - Diya) must be paid to his family, and a believing slave must be freed. And whoso finds this (the penance of freeing a slave) beyond his means, he must fast for two consecutive months in order to seek repentance from Allah. And Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise. S. 4:92 Hilali-Khan

Say: Come, I will recite unto you that which your Lord hath made a sacred duty for you: That ye ascribe no thing as partner unto Him and that ye do good to parents, and that ye slay not your children because of penury - We provide for you and for them - and that ye draw not nigh to lewd things whether open or concealed. And that ye slay not the life which Allah hath made sacred, save in the course of justice. This He hath command you, in order that ye may discern. S. 6:151 Pickthall

And come not near unto adultery. Lo! it is an abomination and an evil way. And slay not the life which Allah hath forbidden save with right.Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, but let him not commit excess in slaying. Lo! he will be helped. S. 17:32-33

However, leaving aside for the moment whether some of those requirements are actually just – specifically the difference in payment for the death of a man or woman, free or slave, or whether a Muslim can be killed in recompense for killing an infidel woman etc.
Allah simply forgave the man without demanding any satisfaction whatsoever to the victims’ families thereby violating his own requirements of justice.

Now Zawadi may argue that these Quranic injunctions were not in force when the man committed these murderous acts and therefore cannot come under the punishment prescribed by Islamic law.

The problem here is that death has been the prescribed punishment for murder from the very beginning and is found in the ordinances and legislation which God gave to previous prophets such as Noah and Moses:

But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.’” Genesis 9:4-6

Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death.”
Exodus 21:12
Whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death.” Leviticus 24:17

Moreover, you shall accept no ransom for the life of a murderer, who is guilty of death, but he shall be put to death. And you shall accept no ransom for him who has fled to his city of refuge, that he may return to dwell in the land before the death of the high priest. You shall not pollute the land in which you live, for blood pollutes the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it.” Numbers 35:31-33

Verily, We did send down the Taurat (Torah) [to Musa (Moses)], therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah's Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged the Jews by the Taurat (Torah) after those Prophets] for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun (i.e. disbelievers - of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allah's Laws). And We ordained therein for them: "Life for life eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation. And whosoever does not judge by that which Allah has revealed, such are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrongdoers - of a lesser degree).
S. 5:44-45

And since the man in the story was said to be an Israelite he was to be put to death according to the Law that God gave to Moses.

Zawadi continues:

Shamoun and Katz say that the outward actions of the man illustrate that his repentance wasn't sincere, since he killed someone who made him lose hope in God's mercy.
Well, firstly we can't always judge something to be sincere or not strictly based on one's outward actions. For all we know the man was so eager and sincere to repent that he probably temporarily "flipped" and killed the guy who made him lose hope in God's mercy since he felt like there was no more purpose to living and that he was already doomed. However, once he realized that there was hope for repentance he struggled the best he could with sincerity to repent to God.

First, assuming that Zawadi’s explanation is correct the problem still remains that losing one’s temper because he despaired of Allah’s mercy is not a valid reason to unlawfully kill anyone and we thereby challenge Zawadi to quote a Quranic verse to support his rather desperate attempt of justifying these immoral and unethical actions.

Secondly, Zawadi misses the entire point of the hadith which is to show how Allah’s mercy extends to even the most heinous of criminals. It is apparent that Muhammad wanted to convey the notion that Allah is willing to forgive the most evil and wicked sinners imaginable, even individuals who commit premeditated murders, despite the fact that they had done nothing good or made no reparation for their heinous crimes. To therefore say that the person “flipped” out is to lessen the impact of the story and undermines the point that it seeks to make. It shows that the person really wasn’t as evil as Muhammad made him out to be since he was not in control of his actions and therefore not really accountable for his crimes.

Moreover, Zawadi is rather clever in a cunning and deceptive way since he clearly sees the problem with Muhammad’s focus on the mercy of Allah at the expense of his justice but still seeks to justify (pun intended) it nonetheless. Muhammad’s view of mercy basically sabotages the justice and holiness of his god. In the story Allah’s mercy pretty much trumps his holiness and righteousness. Muhammad’s tale basically turns Allah into a rather unjust and unholy deity who is willing to pervert his own demands of justice in order to show mercy.

To put it another way so that Zawadi starts to finally get it, Muhammad’s fable essentially means that his deity is not completely holy or just since he is willing to forgive the most evil acts without demanding justice. This inevitably turns Allah into an imperfect and capricious being who is indirectly responsible for and complicit in all such evil acts because he is willing to simply overlook these heinous offenses.

I may identify with Shamoun and Katz on the fact that outwardly this man's repentance could possibly be viewed as insincere, but at the end of the day we must read all Islamic literature together. Once we read a verse like Surah 66:8, which states that repentance must be sincere, we automatically understand by reading the hadith on the murderer of one hundred people that Allah understood this man's repentance to be sincere.

The problem with this skewed interpretation is that the Quran itself insists that righteous deeds and obedience are the necessary signs of sincere repentance and faith:

Verily, those who conceal the clear proofs, evidences and the guidance, which We have sent down, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book, they are the ones cursed by Allah and cursed by the cursers. Except those who repent AND DO RIGHTEOUS DEEDS, and openly declare (the truth which they concealed).
THESE, I WILL ACCEPT THEIR REPENTANCE. And I am the One Who accepts repentance, the Most Merciful. S. 2:159-160 Hilali-Khan

Truly those who believe, and do deeds of righteousness, and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat, they will have their reward with their Lord.
On them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. S. 2:277 Hilali-Khan

Allah has promised those who believe AND DO DEEDS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, that for them there is forgiveness and a great reward. S. 5:9

Cut off (from the wrist joint) the (right) hand of the thief, male or female, as a recompense for that which they committed, a punishment by way of example from Allah. And Allah is All-Powerful, All-Wise. But whosoever repents after his crime AND DOES RIGHTEOUS GOOD DEEDS (by obeying Allah), then verily, Allah will pardon him (accept his repentance). Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. S. 5:38-39 Hilali-Khan

But those who believed, and worked righteousness - We tax not any person beyond his scope, such are the dwellers of Paradise. They will abide therein. S. 7:42

Those who turn to ALLAH in repentance, who worship HIM, who praise HIM, who go about in the land serving HIM, who bow down to HIM, who prostrate themselves in Prayer, who enjoin good and forbid evil, and who observe the limits set by ALLAH. And give glad tidings to those who believe. S. 9:112 Sher Ali

Verily! As for those who believe and do righteous deeds, certainly! We shall not suffer to be lost the reward of anyone who does his (righteous) deeds in the most perfect manner. S. 18:30

Then, there has succeeded them a posterity who have given up As-Salat (the prayers) [i.e. made their Salat (prayers) to be lost, either by not offering them or by not offering them perfectly or by not offering them in their proper fixed times, etc.] and have followed lusts.
So they will be thrown in Hell. Except those who repent and believe (in the Oneness of Allah and His Messenger Muhammad), AND WORK RIGHTEOUSNESS. Such will enter Paradise and they will not be wronged in aught. (They will enter) 'Adn (Eden) Paradise (everlasting Gardens), which the Most Beneficent (Allah) has promised to His slaves in the unseen: Verily! His Promise must come to pass. S. 19:59-61 Hilali-Khan

The doom will be doubled for him on the Day of Resurrection, and he will abide therein disdained for ever; Save him who repenteth and believeth AND DOTH RIGHTEOUS WORK; as for such, Allah will change their evil deeds to good deeds. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful. And whosoever repenteth AND DOETH GOOD, he verily repenteth toward Allah with true repentance - And those who will not witness vanity, but when they pass near senseless play, pass by with dignity. And those who, when they are reminded of the revelations of their Lord, fall not deaf and blind thereat. And who say: Our Lord! Vouchsafe us comfort of our wives and of our offspring, and make us patterns for (all) those who ward off (evil). They will be awarded the high place forasmuch as they were steadfast, and they will meet therein with welcome and the ward of peace, Abiding there for ever. Happy is it as abode and station! S. 25:69-76 Pickthall

This is similar to what the Holy Bible teaches:

Bear fruit in keeping with repentance.” Matthew 3:8

“Therefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance.” Acts 26:19-20

The Quran further says that Allah will only accept the repentance of a person who has committed evil in ignorance and foolishness:

Allah accepts ONLY the repentance of those who do evil in ignorance and foolishness and repent soon afterwards
; it is they to whom Allah will forgive and Allah is Ever All-Knower, All-Wise. And of no effect is the repentance of those who continue to do evil deeds until death faces one of them and he says: "Now I repent;" nor of those who die while they are disbelievers.
For them We have prepared a painful torment. S. 4:17-18

When those who believe in Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) come to you, say: "Salamun 'Alaikum" (peace be on you); your Lord has written Mercy for Himself, so that, if any of you does evil IN IGNORANCE, and thereafter repents AND DOES RIGHTEOUS GOOD DEEDS (by obeying Allah), then surely, He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. S. 6:54 Hilali-Khan

Since the man in Muhammad’s story was neither ignorant nor foolish, but was very calculated and knew exactly what he was doing, and continued to do evil by murdering his 100th victim even after seeking repentance, this means that his repentance should have been unacceptable to Allah.

What makes this rather ironic is that Zawadi quotes a particular hadith which further confirms that this man’s repentance was unacceptable according to Islam and therefore the indvidual should have been thrown into the fire!

Saheeh Muslim Book 032, Number 6251: Abu Huraira. reported Allah's Messenger as saying: Do you know who is poor? They (the Companions of the Holy Prophet) said: A poor man amongst us is one who has neither dirham with him nor wealth. He (the Holy Prophet) said: The poor of my Umma would be he who would come on the Day of Resurrection with prayers and fasts and Zakat but (he would find himself bankrupt on that day as he would have exhausted his funds of virtues) since he hurled abuses upon others, brought calumny against others and unlawfully consumed the wealth of others AND SHED THE BLOOD OF OTHERS and beat others, and his virtues would be credited to the account of one (who suffered at his hand). And if his good deeds FALL SHORT TO CLEAR THE ACCOUNT, then his sins would be entered in (his account) and he would be thrown in the Hell-Fire.

According to this specific narrative the murderer in Muhammad’s fairy-tale should have been thrown into hell since he shed the blood of others and didn’t have any good deeds to efface all the evil he had done. And even if he had performed any virtuous acts they would not have been reckoned to him but credited to his victims’ account who suffered at his hands.

However, since Allah is a capricious god who can choose to act deceptively and pervert his own justice it is not surprising that Muhammad taught that he actually accepted the man’s insincere repentance.

Zawadi proceeds to attack a straw man by raising the following false comparison.

Shamoun and Katz after presenting hadiths showing that a man was forgiven for his fear of Allah stated:

Again, this man did not even show any signs of repentance. He merely was afraid of Allah, but he did not say he regretted his actions or tried to repent and restitute anything to those whom he had harmed. Without even being asked for forgiveness, Allah simply forgives him?
Is that Islam's superior justice when compared with the biblical concept?

It's ironic that Shamoun and Katz are saying what they are saying. They are objecting to someone being forgiven for a sin that he did not repent for, yet they as Protestants believe the same exact thing regarding their faith. Shamoun and Katz don't believe that a Christian is required to repent for every single sin that he commits in order to avoid hell. Rather, the Protestant Christian is to believe and accept Jesus's sacrificial death and he is pretty much Scot free! Yes sure, the Christian from time to time is said to repent in order to "restore his relationship back with God continuously" (whatever that means), however Protestant Christians don't believe that if a Christian committed a sin and didn't repent for it then he would go to hell for it or be punished for it, since Jesus already took care of that for them according to them. For them they think that it is justice.

Talk about attacking a straw man and chasing red herrings! As anyone reading what we actually wrote can testify, our point wasn’t that a person must necessarily repent and ask forgiveness for every single sin s/he has committed otherwise s/he will not be forgiven. Our point in context was that here was a man who clearly knew he had sinned and instead of showing genuine signs of repentance and asking for forgiveness he chose to be cremated so as to escape Allah’s judgment! The man actually thought that by being cremated he would manage to avoid punishment for his sins.

This, again, is hardly the signs of a genuine believer since the Quran says that a person must turn to Allah and seek his forgiveness as opposed to running away from him in order to avoid him:

Will they not rather turn unto Allah and seek forgiveness of Him? For Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. S. 5:74

The man’s actions showed that he didn’t truly believe that Allah was merciful enough to forgive his wickedness. This individual despaired of the mercy of Allah:

Say: O my servants! who have acted extravagantly against their own souls, do not despair of the mercy of Allah; surely Allah forgives the faults altogether; surely He is the Forgiving the Merciful. S. 39:53

However, only the wicked despair of Allah’s mercy:

He said: And who despaireth of the mercy of his Lord save those who are astray? S. 15:56

Therefore, this person was of those who stray and deserving of hell. That was our point which Zawadi obviously didn’t understand or comprehend.

The fact is that we all commit innumerable sins each day, sometimes without even realizing that we have done so. We believe and trust that God in his mercy will wipe away these sins that we have failed to repent and ask forgiveness for or were unaware of because of the perfect righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ and his vicarious sacrifice.

Moreover, Biblical Christianity commands that those who have turned to Christ in faith seeking his forgiveness must strive to live holy lives to the best of their ability. They cannot continue in willful sin:

What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin— because anyone who has died has been freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God. In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness. I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness. When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Romans 6:1-23

Nevertheless, God's solid foundation stands firm, sealed with this inscription: ‘The Lord knows those who are his,’ and, ‘Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness.” 2 Timothy 2:19

“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say ‘No’ to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.” Titus 2:11-14

It is actually the teachings of Muhammad and his false god that justifies all sorts of evil, vile acts and immoral behavior.

Zawadi raises more red herrings and strawman arguments by referencing scholars to prove that when the hadiths say that the man didn’t perform any good deeds whatsoever it doesn’t mean that. It really means something else, i.e. he didn’t do them perfectly or completely! This, however, IS NOT WHAT THE HADITHS SAY! Zawadi is simply reading into the narratives his own interpretation since he cannot accept the implications of the plain and literal reading of the texts. These hadiths prove that Zawadi’s god is a wicked and unjust being who has no problems whatsoever in perverting justice.

However, it seems that Zawadi himself doesn’t buy his own explanation since he quotes a Shaykh who offers a different explanation:

Shaykh Safar Al Hawali states regarding this hadith…

This person has not done any good, even though he used to pray and worship, however he had no good deeds on his account. Why did he not do any good? That is because his good deeds went away with the accumulation of the bad deeds and the marks of prostration remained with him. (Source)

What Shaykh Safar is saying is that this hadith shows a man who as an end result has done no good because of the outweighing bad deeds he has done, nevertheless he still actually did do some good deeds in his life.

Notice that the Shaykh does not say that the man’s good deeds were imperfect or incomplete. Rather, the Shaykh interprets the phrase to mean that his good deeds were nullified by his bad deeds which obviously means that the bad greatly outnumbered all the good he had done.

Again, not only is this NOT the plain reading of the hadiths but this explanation actually provides further evidence that Allah is unjust and wicked because he should have sent the man to hell according to the following Quranic verses: 

The balance that day will be true
(to a nicety): those whose scale (of good) will be heavy, will prosper: Those whose scale will be light, will find their souls in perdition, for that they wrongfully treated Our Signs. S. 7:8-9

We shall set up scales of justice for the Day of Judgment
, so that not a soul will be dealt with unjustly in the least, and if there be (no more than) the weight of a mustard seed, We will bring it (to account): and enough are We to take account. S. 21:47

Then when the Trumpet is blown, there will be no more relationships between them that Day, nor will one ask after another! Then those whose balance (of good deeds) is heavy,- they will be successful: But those whose balance is light, will be those who have lost their souls, in Hell will they abide. S. 23:101-103

According to these verses Allah will weigh a person’s good and bad deeds on scales and if his/her good deeds are light, meaning less than his/her bad actions, then s/he will end up in hell.

Since the man’s good deeds in Muhammad’s story were outweighed by his bad actions this means that Allah was obligated to send him to hell, that is if he were truly just and consistent with his own "revelation." However, seeing that Allah is an unjust deceiver it doesn’t surprise us that he again contradicted his statements in the Quran and acted unjustly.

Zawadi thinks that William Lane Craig’s court analogy somehow refutes our assertion that no Christian would claim that a murderer or a defrauder who genuinely repents and accepts Jesus as his Savior from sin and Lord over his life should not be punished (here on earth) because s/he has been forgiven by God. Here is what Craig said:

The more accurate analogy is that the murderer in the story has genuinely repented of his crime and that you, having once been in his place yourself, want the judge to forgive him.
But the judge is obligated to see that justice's demands are met. So the judge himself volunteers to have the responsibility of the crime imputed to him, so that he will die in the murderer's place. I think you'll agree that if such imputation is possible, then justice will be served, even if vengeance is not wrought. The real issue, therefore, is imputation.

This only provides further evidence that Zawadi doesn’t understand the objections and statements of those whom he seeks to refute. Craig said absolutely nothing about the courts letting a murderer or defrauder go on the grounds that s/he received forgiveness for his/her sins by turning to Christ in repentance and faith. Craig was using the analogy of a human judge volunteering to take the punishment of a criminal in order to demonstrate that the Christian understanding of Divine forgiveness and imputation is thoroughly just.

What makes all of this rather amazing and ironic is that Zawadi has the audacity to attack the Christian doctrine of God volunteering to take the punishment of sinners upon himself in order to satisfy his perfect justice and righteousness while also demonstrating perfect love and mercy to all who would turn to him in faith and repentance. And yet he has absolutely no shame justifying and even defending the perverted and corrupt justice of his god and false prophet!

Zawadi has the temerity to think that there are no problems with Muhammad’s teaching that Allah simply forgives anyone who says the shahadah, despite the fact that these individuals have done no good or have lived very evil, perverted, and outright immoral lives! He truly believes that there is absolutely nothing unjust with Allah ransoming vile, wicked Muslims by punishing Jews and Christians in hell for the sins committed by Muhammad’s umma!

Islamic Concept of god
This wicked and capricious god fails to hold people accountable for their sins. Allah has absolutely no shame in perverting justice and contradicting his own commandments in the book which he supposedly sent down to his messenger.
Allah’s decision to forgive is not based on justice or righteousness but upon his own arbitrary desires and whims. These individuals could have wronged others, murdered people, raped young girls and women, and enslaved young boys and it wouldn’t matter in the least. All they would have to do is profess the shahadah and Allah could choose to forgive them without demanding justice for their wicked crimes or for their victims. Clearly, Muhammad’s god resembles Satan more than he does the all-holy, all-just, all-merciful and all-loving God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Protestant Christian Concept of God
The true God of the Holy Bible doesn’t simply wink at sin or arbitrarily forgives whomever he wills like Muhammad’s false god. Rather, the true God demands that all sins be justly punished and that righteousness be observed. However, seeing that God is perfectly loving and merciful he also desires to forgive all those who truly repent and seek his forgiveness. This is why God chose to take the punishment that sinners deserved in order to maintain his perfect justice and righteousness while also exhibiting the greatest display of love and affection that mankind has ever seen. God then sends his Holy Spirit upon all true believers in order to transform them so as to live holy and godly lives, turning away from their wickedness and sin. This is unlike Muhammad’s deity who allows his followers to commit sexual immorality, rape, adultery, murder and theft as long as they profess that he is god and that Muhammad is his messenger!

Once again we want to praise the Triune God that we are not Muslims and do not follow a deceptive, unjust, amoral god or his murdering, lying, immoral prophet. We are truly grateful and eternally thankfully that we worship, serve, and love the infinitely just, holy, righteous, merciful, gracious and loving God of the Holy Bible, namely Father, Son, and Holy Spirit!

Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/zawadi/perverted_justice2.html

IHS