Answering Christianity Research Center

Osama Abdullah has blocked editing of posts on his forum, apparently because editing of personal posts allowed some miscreant users to more maliciously use the forum. By editing their posts it was possible for them to lie, change their arguments mid-debate, deny getting refuted etc.

I think we should also refute the Arguments of Takfeeris and try to limit them because they're also a threat
they're not any better than Christians or Atheists who criticize Islam

If I understand you correctly, it is quite unfair to count Christians or Atheists, just because they criticise Islam, with Daesh. I believe, little if any, evidence can be provided to draw a parallel between the two. Criticism often is a primary mode of learning and understanding something while improving oneself or others in the process.

They aren't real Muslims anyway, they are just paid to make Islam looks bad, it's very hilarious to believe  that Isis are real Muslims. They are simply paid...

Are you talking about some Daesh supporters, or all of them? It is difficult to imagine that the ones who carry out lone-wolf attacks are paid to do so.

First of all just because a person might suffer some obsessions related to OCD, does not mean that he suffers from all of them. If a person feels obsessively compelled to wash again and again it does not naturally conclude that he also suffers from "disturbing sexual or religious thoughts" or "feelings of fear, disgust and doubt". If what you have mentioned above is all the evidence that Sina has put up regarding OCD, then it becomes easy to prove that Sina is trying to prove Prophet Muhammad being obsessed with remaining clean or washing (which has hardly anything wrong with it) and very maliciously and fallaciously link that to "disturbing sexual or religious thoughts".

Furthermore, if the entirety of the "proof" of Prophet Muhammad's alleged OCD consists only of "washing three times" then this accusation is pretty much easily refuted. The fact is that, washing three times in ablution is not obligatory. It is the recommended approach but not compulsory.

"Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The Muslims are unanimously agreed that what is obligatory is to wash each part once, and that washing each part three times is Sunnah."

What is really damning evidence against the OCD allegation is that according to the recorded narrations Prophet Muhammad varied the number of times he washed each part.

"There are saheeh ahaadeeth which mention washing each part once, and each part three times, and washing some parts three times, some two times and some once."

This variation, depending on the severity of the disorder, is hell for a person suffering from OCD. A lot of times it is extremely disturbing, if not entirely impossible, for an OCD person to vary their routines. This causes much frustration in the person and in some cases such persons might even feel like losing their sanity. Such variation is very solid evidence supporting the fact that the person does not suffer from OCD, at least not presently.

Reference source: https://islamqa.info/en/72450

For the Islamic Moral Code by Osama Abdullah, I noticed you were using screenshots in parts, in case you wanted one complete screenshot/image you can use the image temporarily hosted here: https://filenurse.com/download/cea8a2ec41985557a95b8f23bc297fea.html

Do not know the exact reference number of the Hadith, but one reference is:

"From Imam Ahmed (Good Hadith according to Ibn Hajar in Fathul Bari, with other hadiths corroborating many of the details including Tabarani as good, Al Hakim in Mustadrak as authentic, and Abdulrazaq in Mustadrak)"

It is quoted in entirety as the first reference on this article: http://www.muhaddith.org/earlymarriage/EarlyMarriage-part2.html

From what I remember, these weren't actual Wiki sites but just domain names which redirected back to answering-christianity.com.

- "We Muslims just get carried away by emotions that is why there are some people in .mY native village who support ISIS ... Muslims have not yet reformed and they desperately need to !!!"

From a sociological point of view, one of the most significant issues that has restricted Muslim progress in the past one century has been the non-acceptance of the wrongs done to them by Western powers. As long as, an honest understanding and recognition of past resentment has not been made, effected societies are unable to move forward. Societies continue to exist in a mess of contradiction. There is one, usually disenfranchised, group that cannot get over the injustice and decide to do something. The usual method of obtaining their version of "justice" happens to involve violent means. The other group, usually having access to more opportunities and education find it easier to either ignore those injustices or see better more peaceful ways of obtaining justice. In addition, this group for a variety of reasons restricts the workings of the violent group. These two contradictory views in the same society lead to an inevitable violent confrontation, which harms no other people more than the society itself.

Apparently, a partial reason (from a sociological point of view) of why "Muslim" extremists end up fighting so fervently with other Muslims from their own societies instead of the root of their anger i.e. Western powers.

On one hand, I completely accept the right of Muslims to their anger and frustration. It is one thing to have your people's children blown away by foreign powers; but the fact of utter callousness and unregretful attitude to these innocent deaths and the continued audacity to keep the status quo (such as the unashamed American support to Israel), are what make the situation much worse.
But on the other hand, Muslims should understand one of the lessons from God’s holy books. When the Jews were humiliated, taken slaves by the Babylonian king and became the target of much hardship, God instead of criticising their captors criticised the Jews themselves. That they broke the covenant, that their misfortune was the fault of their own hands etc. Whatever the external circumstances might be, at the end of the day, the fault and the burden of responsibility lies squarely on the shoulder of Muslims, themselves and no one else.

- “Is for the Fact that [Khyber] area is incredibly dangerous, most people cannot travel that area without a gun or protection from the local  groups that control that area.”

While this is what most foreigners are likely to believe, it is not very accurate. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) is one of the four provinces of Pakistan. In the North-West, it used to have a very porous border with Afghanistan. Insurgents often used to travel between the two countries from these areas and because of mountainous terrain those crossings are difficult to control. The insurgents, especially belonging to TTP who precede Daesh but parallel its ideologies, were the primary source of the lawlessness. Things have settled down to quite an extent now, due to a large-scale military operation there.

- “Many people from there are very extreme in religion.”

Many people from all over Pakistan are pretty “extreme in religion”. While KP people are likely to be stricter in their following of religious tenets, they are not especially extremist, and even if they were, KP has suffered more than any other Pakistani province from the extremist insurgency. They have suffered enough loss of life from insurgent activities to have changed their minds.

- “Also i heard that after the muslim brotherhood defeated the soviets they settled in the area of kyber.”

Many different Muslim groups fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan. After the war, a lot of them went back while some stayed but mostly in Afghanistan.

- “Pakistan has great difficulty putting that area under it's laws.”

The main problematic areas were places called Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). These areas although in the same location are technically and officially not part of Khyber. These places, until the arrival of TTP in the area, used to be run by local people. Because of the centuries-old local laws, customs and traditions of the tribal areas, Pakistan governments had until recently never really tried to control them. After the military operation is over, those places are likely to go back under the governance of the local people.

- “This also explains why there was no quick police response. Also i am quite surprised that there even is a University in Kyber to begin with.”

These events develop very quickly, Usually, no one has any idea how dangerous is the situation, until it is too late. Apparently, although the Police were able to save one other blasphemy accused person, they were faced by a mob of “thousands”; there wasn’t much the Police could have done.

The university is located at a different location from those troubled areas. KP is an entire province, most of it is peaceful. And there are many, many universities in that province. Among all the events of blasphemy that I can recall, this is the only one which happened in this province. More of such events have occurred in Punjab province which is the richest, most populous, and most developed area of the country. These unfortunate events appear to have a direct relationship with the population of the area, higher the population, higher the likelihood of such instantaneous mobs.

Whether Pakistani blasphemy laws are right or wrong, practically on-the-ground realities show that they don't have much effect. As I mentioned earlier, from what I know, all blasphemy accused never got convicted by a court. So the law itself never even got invoked. The real issue is embedded much deeper in the society with Pakistani Muslims willing to blindly follow and believe anything and everything just because someone claimed something to be "Islamic".