Terrorism in the Quran or The Bible?
Responding to yet another failure of Quennal Gale
(Round 4)
By Sami Zaatari
Quennal Gale has come up with yet
another supposed rebuttal against me, his supposed rebuttal can be found here:
http://www.answer-islam.org/counter_rebuttal_to_Sami_Zaatari_4.html
Quenn did post this rebuttal of
his to me some time ago, but I choose to ignore it for a while since I did not
really feel he addressed anything so I felt it would have been a waste of my
time. But since I don’t want to give this missionary the impression that he has
won the debate I decided to respond now to crush his response yet again.
Quennal Gale's words will be in red
followed by responses in black.
Saami Zaatari has finally finished his response to my articles in
which I refuted his gross ignorance on both the Biblical verses which he claims
promote terror along with other related issues. Mr. Zaatari
obviously had to really take the time and think over his material since it
literally took him over a month to formulate a response. He exchanged emails
with me weeks ago saying how his material would be out in a couple of days but
for some strange reason these days turn into weeks and finally over a month. As
usual Mr. Zaatari has managed to corner himself and
contradict his own statements that he made in his previous articles, as we
shall illustrate here in great detail.
Quennal Gale begins his article by trying to be smart, which as usual backfires
against him; Quennal Gale was saying that I had such
a hard time in refuting his 3rd rebuttal to me because my rebuttal against his
3rd rebuttal came out about 3-4 weeks after he published it. Let me silence Quenn on that and prove that this mean is a serious fool,
you see folks I usually write a rebuttal within one to two days after someone
publishes something against me, and this is what I was doing with Quennal Gale, when he first started writing against me I
would have a rebuttal out within two days, Quennal
Gale was so upset and fearful of this that he cried saying:
Wow it
seems like Saami Zaatari is
very desperate; he couldn’t even wait until I finished my second part of my
response this weekend before he responded
<http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/quennel_gale_rebuttal_2.htm>
(http://answer-islam.org/quennel_gale_rebuttal_2.html)
So note when I did
reply very quickly this loser started crying I was desperate, when I took my
time he claims that I find his articles so hard which is why it took me so long
to release my rebuttal. This proves that these missionaries are very sick in the
head, because no matter what you do they will bark against you, if you respond
quickly against them they claim you are desperate, if you take your time they
claim we found their material so hard and challenging and put a smirk on their
face. What can I say to that?
But you see folks,
the joke is on Quenn himself, because you see folks
in my last rebuttal to Quenn my rebuttal was a TWO
part rebuttal, Quennal was barking and acting so
smart by saying it took me so long to write my rebuttal when in fact he
COMPLETLY IGNORED AND DID NOT ATTEMPT TO REPLY TO MY REBUTTAL! That rebuttal
which Quenn failed to respond to and has yet to
respond to can be found here:
http://answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/counter_rebuttal_to_quennalgale_3_2.htm
This rebuttal completely
wiped the floor with Quenn and he did not even bother
in replying to it as he should have, so talk about STUPID! This guy was trying
to laugh at me when the joke is really on him! And since Quenn
is fond of saying how long it takes for someone to write a reply, it is now
roughly 6 months since I released that rebuttal, and Quennal
Gale has yet to respond to it, so using this fools logic this means he has
really hit a brick wall and has been shut down by my third rebuttal. Some
advice to Quenn and I mean it, please stop making a
fool out of yourself, since that is what you have done over and over again in
your rebuttals to me.
For readers who have
not followed this long debate between me and Quenn
please visit these rebuttals:
http://answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/rebuttal_to_quennal_gale_1.htm
http://answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/quennel_gale_rebuttal_2.htm
http://answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/continuation_to_quennals_response.htm
http://answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/counter_rebuttal_to_quennalgale_3_2.htm
http://answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/counter_rebuttal_to_quennal_gale_4.htm
Actually I
did more than respond to what Zaatari posted; I used
his very own criteria to refute his very claims. Notice that Zaatari calls all of his own words and my analysis of them “red-herrings”.
Of course, Mr. Zaatari fails to show how these are
red-herrings other than just stating this as some “established fact”. We will
repost it to show you just why he didn’t want his readers to view it:
I first
wrote how Muhammad beheaded the boys of the Banu Qurayzah tribe:
Al-Tabari also mentioned that Muhammad had the young boys of
the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayzah
beheaded:
The
Messenger of God had commanded that all of them who had reached puberty should
be killed. (The History of Al-Tabari, Volume VIII, p.
38)
Another
source tells us how they determined whether a person had reached puberty:
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among
the captives of Banu Qurayzah.
They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair
(pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those
who had not grown hair. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4390)
From (Source
<http://answer-islam.org/childkiller.html>)
Notice how Quennal Gale's own source refutes him! Quennal
Gale adds his own commentary to a text that says something he doesn’t, not Quenn says that the prophet Muhammad had the young boys
beheaded, yet the text tells us that the men who had reached puberty had been
executed, how convenient that Quenn
leaves this out. Under God's eyes boys who reach puberty and who are going
through puberty are no longer considered as children or kids, they are
considered as young men, not children, this is what Quennal
keeps on forgetting. Secondly Quennal Gale needs to
learn a bit about Islamic history, since it was not the prophet Muhammad who
ordered this execution, rather it was a former Jewish
man who was an ally of the Banu Qurayza
clan:
The Campaign against Banu Qurayzah
We have already noted
that when the Confederates came and camped outside Al-Madinah,
Banu Qurayzah
broke the covenant that existed between them and the Messenger of Allah . This happened by the agency of Huyay bin Akhtab An-Nadari, may Allah curse him, who entered their stronghold
and would not leave their leader, Ka`b bin Asad, alone until he agreed to break the covenant. Among
the things that he said to him was, "Woe to you! This is the opportunity
for glory. The Quraysh and their company of men from
various tribes, and the Ghatafan and their followers,
have come to you, and they will stay here until they eliminate Muhammad and his
companions.'' Ka`b said to him, "No, by Allah,
this is the opportunity for humiliation. Woe to you, O Huyay,
you are a bad omen. Leave us alone.'' But Huyay kept
trying to persuade him until he agreed to his request. He laid down the
condition that if the Confederates went away without doing anything, he [Huyay] would join them in their stronghold and would share
their fate. When Banu Qurayzah
broke their covenant and news of this reached the Messenger of Allah , he and the Muslims were very distressed by that.
When Allah helped him by suppressing his enemy and driving them back
disappointed and lost, having gained nothing, the Messenger of Allah returned
to Al-Madinah in triumph and the people put down
their weapons. While the Messenger of Allah was washing off the dust of battle
in the house of Umm Salamah, may Allah be pleased
with her, Jibril, upon him be peace, came to him
wearing a turban of brocade, riding on a mule on which was a cloth of silk
brocade. He said, "Have you put down your weapons, O Messenger of Allah''
He said, "Yes.'' He said, "But the angels have not put down their
weapons. I have just now come back from pursuing the people.'' Then he said:
"Allah, may He be blessed and exalted, commands
you to get up and go to Banu Qurayzah.''
According to another report, "What a fighter you are!
Have you put down your weapons'' He said, "Yes.''
He said, "But we have not put down our weapons yet, get up and go to these
people.'' He said: "Where'' He said, "Banu Qurayzah, for Allah has commanded me to shake them.'' So
the Messenger of Allah got up immediately, and commanded the people to march
towards Banu Qurayzah, who
were a few miles from Al-Madinah. This was after Salat Az-Zuhr. He said,
«??? ????????????
?????? ???????? ????????? ?????????? ????? ?????????»(No one among you should
pray `Asr except at Banu Qurayzah.) So, the people set out, and the time for the
prayer came while they were still on the road. Some of them prayed on the road,
saying, "The Messenger of Allah only wanted to make us march quickly.''
Others said, "We will not pray it until we reach Banu
Qurayzah.'' Neither of the two groups were rebuked for what they did. The Messenger of Allah
followed them. He left Ibn Umm Maktum,
may Allah be pleased with him, in charge of Al-Madinah,
and he had given the flag to `Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him. Then the Messenger of
Allah went to them (Banu Qurayzah)
laying seige to them for twenty-five days. When this had gone on for too long, they
agreed to accept the judgement of Sa`d bin Mu`adh, the leader of `Aws
because they had been their allies during the Jahiliyyah,
so they thought that he would treat them kindly as `Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Salul had done for his
allies of Banu Qaynuqa`
when he had asked the Messenger of Allah to set them free. So, these
people thought that Sa`d
would do the same for them as Ibn Ubayy
had done for those people. They did not know that Sa`d had been struck by an arrow in his medial arm
vein during the campaign of Al-Khandaq. The Messenger
of Allah had had his vein cauterized and had brought him to stay in a tent in
the Masjid so that he could keep a close eye on him.
One of the things that Sa`d, may Allah be pleased
with him, said in his supplication was, "O Allah, if there is still
anything that has to do with the war against Quraysh,
then keep me alive for it, and if You decree that the war between us and them
is over, then let the bleeding be renewed, but do not let me die until I get my
satisfaction with regard to Banu Qurayzah.''
Allah answered his prayer and decreed that they would agree to be referred to
him for judgement, and this was their own free choice. When this happened, the Messenger of Allah called him to come from
Al-Madinah to pass judgement on them. When he
arrived, riding on a donkey that had been specially equipped for him to ride,
some of the `Aws began to urge him not to be too
harsh, saying, "O Sa`d,
they are your clients so be kind to them, trying to soften his heart.'' But
he kept quiet and did not answer them. When they persisted in their request, he
said, "Now it is time for Sa`d
to make sure that no rebuke or censure will divert him from the path of
Allah.'' Then they knew that he would not let them live. kWhen he reached the tent where the Messenger of
Allah was, the Messenger of Allah said:
«??????? ????? ??????????»(Stand
up for your leader.) So the Muslims stood up for him, and welcomed him with honor and respect as befitted his status and so that his
judgement would have more impact. When he sat down, the Messenger of Allah
said:
«????? ?????????
????????? ?????????? ???? ???????? ????? ????????? ????????? ??????? ?????
?????»(These people) -- and he pointed to them --
(have agreed to accept your judgement, so pass judgement on them as you wish.) Sa`d, may Allah be pleased with him, said: "My judgement will be
carried out'' The Messenger of Allah said: "Yes.'' He said, "And it
will be carried out on those who are in this tent'' He said, "Yes.'' He
said, "And on those who are on this side'' -- and he pointed towards the
side where the Messenger of Allah was, but he did not look directly at the
Messenger of Allah out of respect for him. The Messenger of Allah said to him:
"Yes.'' So Sa`d, may
Allah be pleased with him, said: "My judgement is that their fighters
should be killed and their children and wealth should be seized.'' The
Messenger of Allah said:
«?????? ????????
???????? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????????»(You have judged according
to the ruling of Allah from above the seven heavens.) According to another
report:
«?????? ????????
???????? ????????»(You have judged according to the ruling of the Sovereign.)
Then the Messenger of Allah commanded that ditches should be dug, so they were
dug in the earth, and they were brought tied by their shoulders, and were
beheaded. There were between seven hundred and eight hundred of them. The children who had not yet reached
adolescence and the women were taken prisoner,
and their wealth was seized. All of this is stated both briefly and in detail,
with evidence and Hadiths, in the book of Sirah which we have written, praise and blessings be to
Allah. Allah said:
[????????? ?????????
???????????](And those who backed them, Allah brought them down) means, those
who helped and supported them in their war against the Messenger of Allah .
[????? ?????? ??????????](of the People of the Scripture) means, Banu
Qurayzah, who were Jews from one of the tribes of
[???????? ????????
???? ????????? ????????? ????](then when there came to
them that which they had recognized, they disbelieved in it) (2:89).
May the curse of Allah be upon them.
[??? ????????????](from their forts) means, from their strongholds. This was
the view of Mujahid, `Ikrimah,
`Ata', Qatadah, As-Suddi
and others of the Salaf.
[???????? ???
??????????? ?????????](and cast terror into their
hearts;) means fear, because they had supported the idolators
in their war against the Messenger of Allah and the one who knows is not like
the one who does not know. They had terrified the Muslims and intended to kill
them so as to gain earthly power, but their plans backfired; the idolators ran away and the believers were victorious while
the disbelievers were losers; where they had aimed for glory, they were
humiliated. They wanted to eradicate the Muslims but they were themselves
eradicated. In addition to all this, they are doomed in the Hereafter, so by
all acounts they are counted as losers. Allah says:
[???????? ???????????
????????????? ????????](a group you killed, and a
group you made captives.) Those who
were killed were their warriors, and the prisoners were their children and
women. Imam Ahmad recorded that `Atiyah Al-Qurazi said, "I was shown to the Prophet on the day of
Qurayzah, because they were not sure about me. The
Prophet told them to look at me to see whether I had grown any body hair yet. They looked and saw that I had not
grown any body hair, so they let me go and I was put with the other prisoners.''
This was also recorded by the Sunan compilers, and
At-Tirmidhi said it is Hasan
Sahih.'' An-Nasa'i also
recorded something similar from `Atiyah.
[??????????????
?????????? ????????????? ??????????????](And He caused you to inherit their
lands, and their houses, and their riches,) means, `He gave these things to you
after you killed them.'
[????????? ?????
??????????](and a land which you had not trodden.) It
was said that this was Khaybar, or that it was the
lands of the Persians and Romans. Ibn Jarir said, "It could be that all of these are
referred to
[??????? ???????
????? ????? ?????? ????????](And Allah is able to do all things.)'' (Ibn Kathir's tafsir)
So several things are
to be noted, firstly it was not the prophet Muhammad who had ordered this
execution, rather it was Sa'd who was an ally to the Banu Qurayza, and it was the Jews
who had called on Sa'd to pass judgement on them! So Quenn must read his sources more carefully next time and I
am sure he did not miss this point, but simply conveniently left it out.
Secondly notice how
they kept the children ALIVE, and the women as well, the ones who were killed
were only the ones who had gone through puberty and were going through puberty,
hence no children were killed. So therefore Quennal
Gale has no case and he knows it himself, yet he will keep trying to build one
which is fun and amusing to watch. What Quennal has
to show is young boys who had not gone through puberty being killed, including
little babies, this we find in the Bible:
Isaiah 13:15-18
Anyone who is
captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed
to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives
raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes
against
John Gill commentary:
15
Every
one that is found shall be thrust through…
With a sword, spear,
or lance, and be slain; that is, everyone that is found in the city of
``and everyone that
is found in it shall be slain;''
so Kimchi, in the midst
of it, or without; in the street, as Jarchi. The
orders of Cyrus F8
<http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=isa&chapter=013&verse=015>
were, that those that were found without (in the streets) should be slain; and
to proclaim in the Syriac language, that those that
were within doors should continue there, but, if they were found without, they
should be put to death; which orders were executed, and well agrees with this
prophecy:
and everyone that is joined
[unto them] shall fall by the sword;
or "added" unto them; any of other
nations that joined them as auxiliaries, see (Revelation
18:4 <http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=re+18:4>) or
"that is gathered"; so the Septuagint, "they that are
gathered"; that are gathered together in a body to resist the enemy, and
defend themselves. Some render the word, "every one that is
consumed", with age; neither old nor young, as follows, should be spared.
The Targum is,
``everyone that
enters into the fortified cities,''
flees there for safety and protection.
Their
children also shall be dashed to pieces before their
eyes…
Upon the ground, or against the wall, as was foretold should be, (Psalms 137:8,9 <http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ps+137:8,9>)
and in way of retaliation for what they did to the Jews, (2 Chronicles 36:17
<http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=2ch+36:17>) and this
was to be done "before their eyes", in the sight of the inhabitants,
which must make it the more distressing and afflicting; and, as Kimchi observes, this phrase is to be applied to the
following clauses:
their houses shall be spoiled;
plundered of the substance, wealth,
and riches in them, by the Persian soldiers:
and their wives ravished;
by the same, and both before
their eyes, and after that slain, in like manner as they
had
ravished the women in
[Their]
bows also shall dash their young men to pieces,
&c.] That is, the bows of the
Medes should dash in pieces the young men of the Babylonians. The meaning is,
either that they should put them into their bows, instead of arrows, and shoot
them upon the ground, or against a wall, and so dash them to pieces; or that
they should first shoot them through with their arrows, and then dash them with
their bows; according to Xenophon F12
<http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=isa&chapter=013&verse=018>,
Cyrus came to Babylon with great numbers of archers and slingers:
and they shall have no pity on
the fruit of the womb;
even of those that were in the womb, but should rip
up women with child, and cut
them in pieces: their eyes shall not spare
children;
in the arms of their parents,
or running to them, shrieking and crying, and in the utmost fright; and yet
their tender and innocent age would meet with no mercy. The Medes were
notorious for their cruelty F13
<http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=isa&chapter=013&verse=018>,
and which issued at last in the ruin of their empire.
I would
like to see Quenn reply to this verse and this Christian
commentary which is a very popular and known commentary. Note the verses not
only order the killing of women and children, but the raping of women as well!
I shall wait in anticipation for Quennal Gale to
respond to this verse, and I shall wait in great anticipation for Quennal Gale to bring me something like this from the Quran, or the Hadiths, something Quenn knows he won’t be able to do.
Mr. Zaatari responded by saying:
My
Response
The reason this was done was because the tribe had BROKEN THE TREATY with
the Muslims. So THEY WERE RIGHTFULLY PUNISHED, also even this episode doesn’t
compare with the Bible. Unlike the Bible, the prophet Muhammad spared the women
and kids, whereas the Bible just killed the women and the children.
Also boys who had passed puberty back then were considered as men, so those
boys who had passed puberty WERE TECHNICALLY CONSIDERED ENEMY COMBATANTS since
their tribe had BROKEN THE TREATY with the Muslims. So hence Quenn has nothing again. The people who were killed were
not innocent, so hence there is no crime. -
<http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/rebuttal_to_quennal_gale_1.htm>
(Emphasis ours)
If you
break down Zaatari’s response he is clearly saying
that:
1. It is
okay for Muhammad to behead young boys because they broke the treaty with the
Muslims.
2. This was
rightful punishment to be beheaded because of the broken treaty with the
Muslims.
3. Any boy
who passed puberty was considered an enemy combatant because of the broken
treaty with the Muslims.
4. The
people killed were not innocent so there is no crime here.
I am
amused that Quenn has to lie against me, because he
very well knows that I made it clear that those men who were killed were NOT
BOYS, but since Quennal Gale is a liar by nature he
has to take me out of context.
Let me
break it down for Quennal Gale so he understands what
I did say:
1- The
execution of the men of the Banu Qurayza
tribe was legit and not a crime
2- It was
not a crime because Banu Qurayza
conspired to kill and wipe the Muslim ummah off the
map
3- The Banu Qurayza tribe were under a
treaty with the Muslims and it was agreed upon by BOTH parties that anyone who
broke the treaty would be punished by death. (Consult Ibn
Kathirs sirat, and Tabaris, and Ibn Ishaqs)
4- Only
the men of the Banu Qurayza
tribe were killed, not the women and children, they were spared
5- The
judgement passed on the Banu Qurayza
tribe was ordered by Sa'd a
former ally of the Qurayza tribe
6- The Banu Qurayza tribe had
specifically called for Sa'd
to order judgement on them agreeing to obey any judgement he passed on them
So
hopefully this will make things easy for Quenn.
treaty is defined as:
TREATY
1 : the action of treating
<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treating> and especially of
negotiating
2 a : an agreement or
arrangement made by negotiation: (1) :
PRIVATE TREATY <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/private+treaty>
(2) : a contract in writing between
two or more political authorities (as states or sovereigns) formally signed by
representatives duly authorized and usually ratified by the lawmaking authority
of the state b : a document in which such a contract is set down (Merriam-Webster
Online Dictionary)
A treaty is
defined as the negotiation or result of a negation between two parties with
agreements to hold to certain terms and conditions. In the case of Muhammad, it
was a treaty among various tribes. To break a treaty basically means to annul
the previous agreements among the binding parties. Hence, Mr. Zaatari has clearly stated that Muslims can attack others
just for breaking the treaty and that the punishment they incur is therefore
justified.
In the case
of the Banu Qurayzah:
1. All
young boys would be beheaded
2. Some
women who fought would also be beheaded
3. Because
the treaty was broken all who passed puberty were considered enemy combatants.
With Zaatari’s criteria being laid out, we can conclude that:
It is okay
to kill enemy combatants who break a treaty, since violating such an agreement
results in their just and fair punishment. (Source
<http://www.answer-islam.org/violent_bible.html>)
Quenn again
has to lie and distort the information he has, the treaty the Muslims made with
the Jews in Madinah was that ANYONE WHO BROKE IT
including Muslims would be punished, and punished by death, all parties agreed
to it, so by Banu Qurayza
breaking this treaty they had open themselves up for attack.
Secondly
no boys were killed, they were young men, under God's eyes boys who go through
puberty or are going through puberty are considered as young men and not boys,
something many Christians and Jews also agree
on.
However
so, Muslims are not allowed to kill women and children, innocent women that is,
unlike the Bible were everyone is killed including innocent pregnant women, and
innocent helpless babies, they are all put to the sword.
Mr. Zaatari obviously has a dilemma because in trying to defend
the beheading of the “young boys” of the Banu Qurayzah he claimed that if they passed puberty “they were
considered enemy combatants” and deserved to be beheaded! Notice that Zaatari hasn’t presented corroborating data from Islamic
history to show that the entire tribe fought against the Muslims and has
therefore not proven that “all of these enemy combatants” actually fought
Muhammad. Hence, we can conclude that boys who were considered “enemy
combatants” who necessarily didn’t fight in a war WERE BEHEADED just because
they fit in this group.
The
punishment executed against the tribe was passed by Sa'd
a man who the tribe placed as the judge to pass judgement on them, if Quenn feels this is bad or wrong, then he should go
complain against the Banu Qurayza
for appointing Sa'd as the judge for them. Secondly, Quenn should also go complain to Qurayza
for breaking the treaty in the first place which put them in all this trouble.
And no Quenn, I am not in a dilemma, it is you who is in a dilemma,
and you are in a very bad dilemma, your Bible allows the slaughtering of women
and children, which we all know is heinous and disgusting, however so you are
obliged to follow it hence you are in a dilemma, do you follow such sick
sadistic barbarity, or do you throw this book away. It is your choice, but
maybe this shall help you make that choice:
Ezekiel 9:5-7
"Then I heard
the LORD say to the other men, "Follow
him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no
mercy; have no pity! Kill them all - old and young, girls and women and little
children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right
here at the
Matthew Henry commentary:
I. A command given to
the destroyers to do execution according to their commission. They stood by the brazen altar, waiting
for orders; and orders are here given them to cut off and destroy all that were
either guilty of, or accessory to, the abominations of
1. They are ordered
to destroy all, (1.) Without exception. They must go through the city, and smite; they
must slay utterly, slay to
destruction, give them their death's wound. They must
make no distinction of age or sex, but cut off old and young; neither the beauty of the virgins, nor the innocency of the babes, shall secure them. This was
fulfilled in the death of multitudes by famine and pestilence, especially by
the sword of the Chaldeans, as far as the military
execution went. Sometimes even such bloody work as this has been God's work.
But what an evil thing is sin, then, which provokes the God of infinite mercy
to such severity! (2.) Without compassion: "Let not your eye spare, neither have you pity (Ezekiel 9:5
<http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=eze+9:5&t=kjv>);
you must not save any whom God has doomed to destruction, as Saul did Agag and the Amalekites, for that
is doing the work of God deceitfully,
Jeremiah 48:10
<http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=jer+48:10&t=kjv>.
None need to be more merciful than God is; and he had said (Ezekiel
2. They are warned
not to do the least hurt to those that were marked for salvation: "Come not near any man upon whom is the mark;
do not so much as threaten or frighten any of them; it is promised them that
there shall no evil come nigh them, and therefore you must keep at a distance
from them." The king of
3. They are directed
to begin at the sanctuary (Ezekiel 9:6
<http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=eze+9:6&t=kjv>),
that sanctuary which, in the chapter before, he had seen the horrid profanation
of; they must begin there because there the wickedness began which provoked God
to send these judgments. The debaucheries of the priests were the poisoning of
the springs, to which all the corruption of the streams was
owing. The wickedness of the sanctuary was of all wickedness the most
offensive to God, and therefore there the slaughter must begin: "Begin there, to try if the people will
take warning by the judgments of God upon their priests, and will repent and
reform; begin there, that all the
world may see and know that the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God,
and hates sin most in those that are nearest to him." Note, When judgments
are abroad they commonly begin at the
house of God, 1 Peter
II. Here is execution
done accordingly. They observed their orders, and, 1. They began at the elders, the
ancient men that were before the house, and slew them first, either those
seventy ancients who worshipped idols in their chambers (Ezekiel 8:12
<http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=eze+8:12&t=kjv>) or
those twenty-five who worshipped the sun
between the porch and the altar, who might more properly be said to be before the house. Note, Ringleaders in
sin may expect to be first met with by the judgments of God; and the sins of
those who are in the most eminent and public stations call for the most
exemplary punishments. 2. They proceeded to the common people: They went forth and slew in the city;
for, when the decree has gone forth, there shall be no delay; if God begin, he
will make an end.
Jeremiah 51:20-26
"You are my
battle-ax and sword," says the LORD. "With
you I will shatter nations and destroy many kingdoms. With you I will shatter
armies, destroying the horse and rider, the chariot and charioteer. With you I
will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens.
With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, captains and
rulers. "As you watch, I will repay
Adam Clarke commentary:
Verse 20. Thou art my battle axe
I believe Nebuchadnezzar is meant,
who is called, Jeremiah 50:23
<http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=jer+50:23>, the hammer of the whole earth. Others think
the words are spoken of Cyrus. All
the verbs are in the past tense: "With thee have I broken in pieces,"
Verse 24. And I will render
The vau
should be translated but, of which it
has here the full power: "But I
will render unto
Verse 25. O destroying mountain
An epithet which he applies to the Babylonish
government; it is like a burning
mountain, which, by vomiting continual streams of burning lava, inundates and destroys all towns, villages fields,
And
roll thee down from the rocks
I will tumble thee from the rocky base on which thou restest.
The combustible matter in thy bowels being exhausted, thou shalt
appear as an extinguished crater; and
the stony matter which thou castest out shall not be of sufficient substance to make a foundation stone for solidity, or a corner stone for beauty, Jeremiah 51:26
<http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=jer+51:26>. Under this
beautiful and most expressive metaphor, the prophet shows the nature of the Babylonish government; setting the nations on fire,
deluging and destroying them by its troops, till at last, exhausted, it tumbles
down, is extinguished, and leaves nothing as a basis to erect a new form of
government on; but is altogether useless,
like the cooled lava, which is, properly speaking, fit for no human purpose.
What more
can I say to such barbarity?
To show you
how this is further substantiated we turn to Zaatari’s
very own comments further down in this article in reference to Surah 17:
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
Hmmm is
it just me or what? WHERE IN THOSE VERSES DOES IT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WOMEN AND
KIDS BEING KILLED.
Notice that
according to Zaatari’s very own words:
It must be
mentioned that women and children are killed and that if it isn’t mention Zaatari assumes that it didn’t happen.
So using
this logic we must ask Zaatari this:
1. Where
exactly did the Hadith’s or Islamic history OR THE
QURAN (since you only believe things found in it) mention that the “young boys”
fought against Muhammad and that “they were considered enemy combatants”?
Thank you Quenn, thank you
very much for your challenge to me asking me where the Quran
or hadith state that all the young men fought against
the prophet. I do not need to show it, because
I just showed that the Jews had asked Sa'd to pass
judgement on them, so therefore they were punished accordingly, so as I said
and will say again, go complain to the Qurayza tribe
about why they asked Sa'd to pass judgement on them
since we will never know what the prophet would have done to them.
Secondly,
Quenn again has to quote out of context and give a
false image against me, let us quote in context to establish what was said:
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”!
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,
To which
I replied:
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
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.
So notice
this coward was trying to equate the Quranic story
with that of his own Bible! Yet the Quranic story
says nothing about slaying women and children, the Quran
says the land was given to Moses, and that he should assault the inhabitants,
but from WHERE DOES QUENN CONCLUDE THAT THIS MEANS THAT HE WAS COMMANDED TO
KILL THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN.
Notice Quennal Gale's stupid logic, a general gives his soldier an
order to fight the people of
But to
refute Quennal Gales assertion that I need a clear
explicit reference to believe in something is FALSE, the reason I asked Quenn to show me WHERE WOMEN AND CHILDREN ARE killed in
those passages it because it does not even suggest it! Here is what it says:
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
From
where does anyone conclude that these passages say go kill women and children
as said in the Bible? What Quenn did is READ INTO THE
TEXT, HE HAS CLAIMED SOMETHING THAT IS NOT THERE NOR SUGGESTED.
In fact
let us also consult the tafsir since the tafsir refutes Quennal Gale even
further:
The Speeches of Yuwsha` (Joshua) and Kalib
(Caleb)
Allah said,
[????? ????????? ???? ????????? ?????????? ?