Responding to Quennal Gale's analysis of the terrorist Biblical verses.

Search and find articles and topics quickly and accurately!  See different advanced ways to search for articles on this site.

Further Topic Research:
Syntax help

Responding to Quennal Gale's analysis of the terrorist Biblical verses

 

By Sami Zaatari

 

 

 

 

 

 

In his second part response to me, Quennal Gale now tries to attempt to respond to a few of the Terrorist Biblical verses I posted in my initial rebuttal.

 

All red-herrings will be left out.

 

 

He Wrote

 

Deuteronomy 2:32-37

 

Zaatari believes this passage shows the killing of innocent women and children:

And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess, that thou mayest inherit his land. Then Sihon came out against us, HE AND ALL HIS PEOPLE, to fight at Jahaz. And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, AND ALL HIS PEOPLE. And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain. From Aroer, which is by the brink of the river of Arnon, and from the city that is by the river, even unto Gilead, there was not one city too strong for us: the LORD our God delivered all unto us. Deut 2:32-37

 

Now let’s show you more of Mr. Zaatari’s comments dealing with these related passages:

 

Also Quenn tried to be funny by saying I think down is up and up is down, how hilariously not funny, but what is funny is that Quenn believes ALL is SOME, since when did ALL become SOME? So it seems you are the one who probably thinks up is down, and down is up since you believe ALL is SOME.


This is why I say, you can never trust a missionary. NEVER.


Zaatari is expressively clear to holding that the meaning “ALL” means “everyone” and not “some” which would leave room for others to be left over. Therefore looking at Deuteronomy 2:32-37 we find that:



  1. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess, that thou mayest inherit his land. (God spoke to Moses and told him he will begin to give Sihon’s land for the Hebrews’ possession)

 

So far no aggressive action has taken place on the part of Moses and the Hebrews, they were only given a word from God and nothing more.

 

   2. Then Sihon came out against us, HE AND ALL HIS PEOPLE, to fight at Jahaz. (After getting the word from God, Sihon decided to attack the Hebrews)

 

Based on Mr. Zaatari’s criteria, Sihon’s people would be:

 

   1. Considered enemy combatants because they are now in a war.

   2. Their punishment would be considered just because they were fighting against the prophets.

   3. The people killed were not innocent so there is no crime here.

 

 

 

My Response

 

Basically what Quenn is arguing is that since the people of Sihon came to fight Moses and his army, it was therefore justifiable for Moses and his men to kill all the women and children.

 

In thinking he is refuting me Quenn further exposes his own book and cult.

 

Why do I say that? The reason I say that is because when you compare this with the prophet Muhammad they do not even come close, unlike the Bible, the prophet Muhammad has a far higher moral standard of warfare and how to conduct it.

 

We must ask ourselves, when the prophet went to war with the people WHO HAD FIRST ATTACKED HIM, did he kill them all? Did he slaughter each single one of them till he left non alive? The answer is a simple NO.

 

The prophet ALWAYS captured his enemies when they had won a battle, not kill them all, the prophet would also spare the women and children!

 

As we see, in the Bible there is no mercy, the so called men of God just fought till they killed everyone including the little helpless kids and babies.

 

Quenn also further digs a hole for himself, because note what the verses say:

 

And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess, that thou mayest inherit his land. Then Sihon came out against us, HE AND ALL HIS PEOPLE, to fight at Jahaz. And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, AND ALL HIS PEOPLE. And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain. From Aroer, which is by the brink of the river of Arnon, and from the city that is by the river, even unto Gilead, there was not one city too strong for us: the LORD our God delivered all unto us. Deut 2:32-37

 

Note it says ALL HIS PEOPLE, what does that mean? That means that even 3 month old babies were included in it!!!! And 1 month old babies! And 1 year old kids!!!!

 

Is Quenn that silly to actually believe it was okay and justifiable to not try and spare those kids once the battle had dwindled down?

 

What makes it more hilarious is that Quenn is calling them enemy combatants! Yes, little babies are enemy combatants indeed.

 

And once again, how did those babies fight? HOW.

 

Note he states:

 

 3. The people killed were not innocent so there is no crime here.

 

Yes, in your dreams pal. Those people who were killed included little helpless babies, the least God's chosen people could have done was spare them and take them as prisoners, or even adopt them as their own. Instead they kill those babies who did not even have a say in the fight, they just got dragged into the battle. Secondly, the whole episode of babies going into such a battle is very hard to believe anyway, which does throw some doubts into this whole event.

 

Quenn also basically gives the same response for:

 

Deuteronomy 3:1-7

Then we turned, and went up the way to Bashan: and Og the king of Bashan CAME OUT AGAINST US, HE AND ALL HIS PEOPLE, to battle at Edrei. And the LORD said unto me, Fear him not: for I will deliver him, and all his people, and his land, into thy hand; and thou shalt do unto him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. So the LORD our God delivered into our hands Og also, the king of Bashan, and all his people: and we smote him until none was left to him remaining. And we took all his cities at that time, there was not a city which we took not from them, threescore cities, all the region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan. All these cities were fenced with high walls, gates, and bars; beside unwalled towns a great many. And we utterly destroyed them, as we did unto Sihon king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city. But all the cattle, and the spoil of the cities, we took for a prey to ourselves. Deut. 3:1-7

 

 

He once again uses the same weak response which further hurts him and which further shows how superior Allah, Islam, and the prophet Muhammad is compared to his fake god.

 

 

 

 

He Wrote

 

Deuteronomy 6:17-27


Zaatari
believes this passage shows the killing of innocent women and children:


And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent. And ye, in any wise keep yourselves from the accursed thing, lest ye make yourselves accursed, when ye take of the accursed thing, and make the camp of
Israel a curse, and trouble it. But all the silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and iron, are consecrated unto the LORD: they shall come into the treasury of the LORD. So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword. But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the country, Go into the harlot's house, and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath, as ye sware unto her. And the young men that were spies went in, and brought out Rahab, and her father, and her mother, and her brethren, and all that she had; and they brought out all her kindred, and left them without the camp of Israel. And they burnt the city with fire, and all that was therein: only the silver, and the gold, and the vessels of brass and of iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the LORD. And Joshua saved Rahab the harlot alive, and her father's household, and all that she had; and she dwelleth in Israel even unto this day; because she hid the messengers, which Joshua sent to spy out Jericho. And Joshua adjured them at that time, saying, Cursed be the man before the LORD, that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho: he shall lay the foundation thereof in his firstborn, and in his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it. So the LORD was with Joshua; and his fame was noised throughout all the country. Deut. 6:17-27


Here Zaatari posted a passage which obviously doesn’t fit under his established criteria for being considered justified. In this offensive war, Joshua, in the celebrated story of “fighting the battle of Jericho”, is instructed by God to march around the city for seven days before the wall “come tumbling down,” allowing the Hebrews to take the city and its inhabitants. Even though this passage is outside the realm of what Zaatari considers just we actually have more of Zaatari’s words that we present:


 

He Wrote

 

Muhammad judged according to the Torah and professed complete belief in it. Unlike Zaatari, he didn’t believe that its instructions to kill women and children were vile and violent. Zaatari must obviously know more than his own prophet on this issue, and Muslims should therefore trust him rather than what their own prophet and Islamic sources say! As for Zaatari’s anger about Joshua and his conquests (which included the killing of women and children) this source says:

 

 

Joshua

 

Joshua is not mentioned by name in the Quran but Muslim exegetes claim that he is the "companion" [Ar. fata] of Moses mentioned in Q 18:60-65 and inherited prophethood after Moses. Exegesis on the narratives in the Quran referring to the Israelites' conquest of the Holy Land detail the stories associated with Joshua b. Nun. Ibn Kathir reports that Joshua was a great warrior and lived for 127 years. (Source)


 

My Response

 

I never denied the prophet of Joshua did I? It seems all Quenn can do is attack straw man. I don’t BELIEVE what your corrupted Bible says, now do you get it? These stories are not mentioned in Quran or hadith, if they were important enough and truthful enough, they would at least be found in the hadiths, but they are not neither.

 

Secondly, the prophet Muhammad simply judged with the Torah on one simple law, the law of stoning. Even that event didn’t help Quenn as we saw it severely backfired against him, because it showed how corrupt the Torah really was that they needed a MUSLIM to come and judge them with the Torah. (Source)

 

Even though Zaatari claims to not deny the prophethood of Joshua, his defense is that “he doesn’t believe what the Bible” says about the story of Jericho. According to him, if they were truthful and important they would have been at least found in the Hadiths but aren’t. Apparently Zaatari is ignorant of this verse:

 

Moses said, "Thou knowest well that these things have been sent down by none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth as eye-opening evidence: and I consider thee indeed, O Pharaoh, to be one doomed to destruction!" So he resolved to remove them from the face of the earth: but We did drown him and all who were with him. And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land (of promise)": but when the second of the warnings came to pass, We gathered you together in a mingled crowd. S. 17:102-104

 

The problem for Zaatari is that Allah does mention how he gave the Children of Israel THE PROMISE LAND. Surah 17 is named “The Children of Israel”! Here is more from the Quran:

 

O People of the Book! Now hath come unto you, making (things) clear unto you, Our Messenger, after the break in (the series of) our apostles, lest ye should say: "There came unto us no bringer of glad tidings and no warner (from evil)": But now hath come unto you a bringer of glad tidings and a warner (from evil). And Allah hath power over all things. Remember Moses said to his people: "O my people! Call in remembrance the favour of Allah unto you, when He produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave you what He had not given to any other among the peoples. "O my people! ENTER THE HOLY LANDE which Allah hath assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin." They said: "O Moses! In this land are a people of exceeding strength: Never shall we enter it until they leave it: if (once) they leave, then shall we enter." (But) among (their) Allah fearing men were two on whom Allah had bestowed His grace: They said: "ASSAULT THEM at the (proper) Gate: when once ye are in, victory will be yours; But on Allah put your trust if ye have faith." S. 5:21-24

 

If you read this Quranic passage, Allah himself is saying that he is for the Children of Israel “assaulting” the people of the Promised Land! This would include Sihon, Bashan and all the others the Hebrews fought! These same wars were considered atrocities by Zaatari. According to the God-fearing men, whom the Quran mentions, the way to enter the Holy Land was to fight for it in offensively! Just because the Quran isn’t as detailed as the Bible regarding the wars doesn’t mean IT WAS NEVER MENTIONED IN THE QURAN! If Zaatari tries to argue that this didn’t refer to all the Hebrew battles with the specific inhabitants of the Holy Land then by his own words he must show us where this specific information is given in the Quran and the Hadiths! Logically we can conclude that:

 

   1. Zaatari believes the Quran is totally true

   2. The Quran mentions that the Israelites must assault the people of the Holy Land to get the land

   3. Allah promised the Holy Land to the Israelites

   4. Because the “assault and issue of the Holy Land is mentioned in the Quran” it is therefore true.

 

 

 

 

My Response

 

Note how Quenn cannot respond to the verse, so what he has to do is run around the bush like a coward by bringing up the argument that I to have to believe in this story.

 

First things first, how is me believing in this story or not an answer to the massacre of women and children in the Bible? HOW? This is a simple run around by Quenn in trying to skip away from the un-deniable terrorist verses in the Bible.

 

Secondly, Quenn's attempt in trying to show that The Quran confirms this story is even worse. Let us Quote the verses he posted and let us see if it says what he believes it does:

 

 

Moses said, "Thou knowest well that these things have been sent down by none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth as eye-opening evidence: and I consider thee indeed, O Pharaoh, to be one doomed to destruction!" So he resolved to remove them from the face of the earth: but We did drown him and all who were with him. And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land (of promise)": but when the second of the warnings came to pass, We gathered you together in a mingled crowd. S. 17:102-104

 

The problem for Zaatari is that Allah does mention how he gave the Children of Israel THE PROMISE LAND. Surah 17 is named “The Children of Israel”! Here is more from the Quran:

 

O People of the Book! Now hath come unto you, making (things) clear unto you, Our Messenger, after the break in (the series of) our apostles, lest ye should say: "There came unto us no bringer of glad tidings and no warner (from evil)": But now hath come unto you a bringer of glad tidings and a warner (from evil). And Allah hath power over all things. Remember Moses said to his people: "O my people! Call in remembrance the favour of Allah unto you, when He produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave you what He had not given to any other among the peoples. "O my people! ENTER THE HOLY LANDE which Allah hath assigned unto you, and turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin." They said: "O Moses! In this land are a people of exceeding strength: Never shall we enter it until they leave it: if (once) they leave, then shall we enter." (But) among (their) Allah fearing men were two on whom Allah had bestowed His grace: They said: "ASSAULT THEM at the (proper) Gate: when once ye are in, victory will be yours; But on Allah put your trust if ye have faith." S. 5:21-24

 

Where in any of those verses does it mention children and women being killed to the full? WHERE? It seems that Quenn has read something that is not even in the text! Note non of the passages he posts state anything about women and children being killed, all Quenn does is invent this lie on his own!

 

All the verses say is that the Holy land was given to Moses and his people, and to the children of Israel, and it tells them to assault the people living there, and victory will be yours.

 

Hmmm is it just me or what? WHERE IN THOSE VERSES DOES IT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WOMEN AND KIDS BEING KILLED.

 

What a nice missionary deception tactic by Quenn, Quenn believes that saying assault them means kill their women and kids! HILLARIOUS! This is what you call the Christian tafsir, which is making an interpretation of something that is not there. Christian tafsir at its best.

 

Quenn also posts a hadith on Joshua, yet the hadith doesn’t mention anything about women and children being killed!

 

Quenn then does an amazing red-herring on the ending of his article which does not even deserve a response. Although it did give me a good laugh.

 

Let me make it clear, if the Quran mentions something, then I will believe it, however if there is something mentioned in the Bible which CONTRADICTS the Quran, and is not even mentioned in the Quran, nor the hadiths, then I will surely not believe in it. Do I make myself clear Mr.Quenn? It doesn’t mean that I wont believe anything not mentioned in the Quran, what I don’t believe is things that CONTRADICT the Quran found in a supposed holy book which ascribes things to men of God which contradict God's true word.

 

Had these events really happened in the way they did, we would find that it would be in the Quran. But as we see, the Quran does mention some of the stories, but no where does it mention the killing and slaughter of children, this is sufficient enough to show that the Quran corrected the Bible's wrong version. :)

 

 

 

 

Rebuttals, and exposing the lies of the Answering Islam team section.

Rebuttals to Quennel Gale's Articles section.

Sami Zaatari's Rebuttals section.


Send your comments.

Back to Main Page.