Show Posts

106

In the Bible / WOMEN & BIBLE:

« on: January 26, 2013, 06:33:53 AM »

In actual fact the unrestricted freedom experienced by women
in the western world has only served to lead that society into a state of
chaos and disruption. Indeed, the scenes now being enacted there are
in protest against the anarchic situation created by Christian doctrine
itself. Even the most fanatical of Christian missionaries would hardly
endorse the statement that the freedom enjoyed by them owes itself
to Christian doctrine. Christian intellectuals are now engaged in thinking
out ways and means to extricate western civilization from the confines
of immorality. They have now recognized the fact that salvation through
the death on the cross can hardly be employed to practically cleanse
people of their sins. This would then mean that they themselves have
admitted that the freedom of western women cannot be the product
of Christian dogma. In truth, therefore, the people of the west began
to move away from established values in protest, and as a response, to
the world renunciation of Christian ascetism.
The Christian religion had but followed the Jewish principles.
No new belief, no ritual or code of morality can be seen to have been
taught by Christ. Christ had only claimed that he was a prophet sent
unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel (Mathew 15:25). He had
said that he was sent only to fulfill the code of the Old Testament
(Mathew 5:17). This meant that he was a prophet appointed to guide
the Israelites along the path of God. He had advised the people to
follow the laws revealed to Moses. Indeed, in the first centuries (after
the departure of Christ) the church had no rites or rituals, whatsoever,
which differed from those of the Jews in any manner; nor was there
any such law either.
It is the Jewish belief that the woman is the cause of sin entering
amongst mankind. The woman was, after all, the one who ate of the
forbidden fruit herself and then persuaded her mate to eat it too
(Genesis 3:12). She was the sinner who not only disobeyed God herself
but caused another to disobey as well. With the Christian adaptation
of this idea, she became, through her opening the door for sin, doomed
to carry the burden of guilt for having become the immediate cause of
the gruesome ordeal of the son of God which led to his death on the
cross.
The Hebrew term Baal means owner. The Old Testament of
the Bible refers to man as Baal. We see that according to the
commandments of the Old Testament, man is portrayed as one who
has total authority over woman. Indeed, the Bible has given man the
permission to even sell of his women - even if they were to be his own
daughters (Genesis 21:7). Among the Jews there was even the tradition
of selling off their own daughters at the slave market in order to repay
their debts (Nehemiah 5:5). Even in the matter of religious practice,
the Jews never granted women the freedom to act freely. The Book
of Numbers ruled that man had the authority to nullify the vows taken
up by his daughter or wife (30:12). That the wife was mentioned
together with slaves and domestic animals in the Ten Commandments
(Exodus 20:17, Deuteronomy 5:21) is an indication of the position of
woman amongst the Jews.
The Jews had looked upon the birth of a female child with
contempt. It was the law that if the mother gave birth to a female
child, she would be in a state of impurity for a period of time that
would be twice as long as the case if the child born was male (Leviticus
12:15). The ruling of the Old Testament was that woman had only
half the value of man (Leviticus 27:3-7).
Polygamy was universally practiced during the age of the Old
Testament. The Law commanded no restriction, whatsoever, in its
practice. Indeed, Solomon is said to have had seven hundred wives
and three hundred concubines! (I King 11:3). Moreover, according to
the Old Testament, only man had the right to divorce. A man could
divorce his wife at the slightest pretext. Here, he had only to see to it
that he provided her with the written document of divorce. However,
there is no statement, whatsoever, anywhere in the Bible which would
enable woman to free herself from the clutches of even the most
cruel husband (Deuteronomy 24:1-4).
The position of woman in Jewish society at the time of the
advent of Jesus was, indeed, a pathetic one. Women, children and
slaves were not permitted to recite Shema, the morning prayer. In
fact, there was even a Jewish ritual daily prayer that said â€˜I praise
God in that He created me not as woman.â€™ Woman were not permitted
to study the Torah. The Jewish Rabbi, Eliyasar, who lived around 90
C.E. had even opined that it was better to throw women to flames
than to teach them the Torah.
It can be seen that Christ had sincerely striven to bring about a
change in this situation. He gave positions to women amongst his
disciples. Even though there are no women amongst the apostles, we
see that many women attended his sermons. Mary Magdalene,
Yohanna, Susanna ... so goes their list. He had preached the gospel to
all irrespective of the fact whether they were men or women (John
4:1-24). In a Jewish society where it was ordained that there was
nothing for the woman in matter of religion, these steps were all
revolutionary in themselves. Through these steps Christ sought to teach
that both woman as well as man were equal before God.
Even as the church went astray in matters of belief after Jesus,
so did lapses begin to occur in the matter of the position accorded to
woman. The Christians, too, began to follow the prevalent laws of the
Old Jewish Community on matter dealing with woman. With the
assumption of Church authority by Paul, things became even worse.
Furthermore, with the influx of people from among the Greeks into
Christianity, the Christian community now became saturated with the
decadent conceptions on woman prevalent both in the Jewish as well
as the Greek traditions. Sophocles, the Greek philosopher, had said
that â€œsilence is the token of greatness as regards to womanâ€ The
Greeks were never prepared to grant any right, whatsoever, to woman.
That woman was the very personification of the devil was the very
theme popular in those days. At home, woman was not even entitled
to a place at the dining table. She was to ever remain confined to the
living quarters that was specially laid out for her. She was exploited
wholesale in the name of religion. The Greeks too were used to the
habit of â€˜donatingâ€™ women to the temples. Those who were so â€˜donatedâ€™
would then be doomed to a life of prostitution and menial jobs that
were associated with the temples. There are records to show that,
like the Devadasis of India, there were around a thousand of such
â€˜maid-servants of the divineâ€™ in the service of the temple of the god,
Aphrodite, in Corinth. It was natural, therefore, that the Christian church,
which adopted religious laws from the Greeks and the Jews, sought to
enact laws that would violate the sanctity of womanhood.
It is, however, in the epistles of Paul that we see the Christian
seeds of all anti-woman policies often attributed to the Christianity.
This animosity towards woman that pervades the epistles of Paul was
but a natural outcome of his having accepted Greek philosophy as the
very foundation for all his own ideas as well. It is the influence of the
Greek thought that â€˜the woman is the very image of the Devilâ€™ that is
evident in the writings of Paul which state to the effect that â€˜it is good
for a man not to marry.â€™ (Corinthians 7:1). It is again the ideas of
Sophacles who said that â€˜silence is the token of greatness as regards
the women.â€™ that is reflected in the words of Paul who said that â€˜the
women must observe silence at the church.â€™ (I Corinthians 14:34-3)
Woman is, indeed, one who demands protection. She is, by her
very nature, so constituted. Womanhood reaches its greatest heights
with pregnancy and child-birth. It is through marriage that woman is
enabled to fulfill all her natural propensities. By teaching that â€˜it is
good for a man not to marryâ€™, Paul has propagated a notion that is
wholly antagonistic towards woman: â€œAre you married? Do not seek
a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife.â€ (I Corinthians
7:27)
â€œNow to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for
them to stay unmarried, as I am.â€ (I Corinthians 7:8)
â€œSo then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does
not marry does even better.â€ (I Corinthians 7:38)
If all men in the world where to obey Paul and perform the
â€˜goodâ€™ act of not having anything to do with woman, the entire human
race would cease to exist within the span of a single century. It is for
this reason that this Christian notion is said to be antagonistic towards
humanity itself.
It was on the basis of these statements of Paul that Christian
ascetism developed. We are unable, however, to see in the sayings of
Christ anything that would discourage marriage. Nevertheless, we see
that within the span of a few centuries after Christ, ascetism came to
be greatly encouraged and to be accepted as the very foundation of all
Christian virtue during the unfolding of the history of Christianity. The
Devadasi system that prevailed amongst the Greeks, too, must have
had its influence upon the development of Christian ascetism. Ascetism
would have a greater adverse effect on woman than on man. For,
after all, it was through wedlock that womanhood found its highest
fulfillment and perfection.
It is the reflection of the influence of the doctrines of Paul that
were antagonistic towards woman which we witness in the activities
of the medieval church. Indeed, The foremost subject of heated
discussions of the church in those times was whether woman had a
soul or not. The cruelty that was perpetrated in the name of ascetism
went beyond all limits. All this madness was supposedly committed in
order that one may approach the divine through the infliction of torture
upon oneâ€™s own self.
It may have been in response to this attitude of the church against
woman as well as against the fulfillment of the sexual instincts that set
the stage for the moral laxity of the western world. As for the Qur'an,
it presents the sexual impulse as a sign of God in itself. Its fulfillment
is but the natural yearning of the human species. Indeed, the Prophet
(e) had taught that the fulfillment of the sexual urge, through the legal
provisions of the divine commandments, was, in itself, an act of
righteousness. As far as man was concerned, woman was then a
partner in this righteous act. But according to the Christian notion that
sexuality is in itself a sin, it is only natural that the woman is seen as
the sinner. The Qur'an, on the other hand, introduces woman as mate
and support.

107

In Islam / QURA'N AND RIGHT OF WOMEN

« on: January 26, 2013, 06:20:34 AM »

The Qur'an teaches that in the preservation of the solid edifice
of the family, both the man and the woman are to play their respective
roles. It is from this foundational basis that the Qur'anic laws
concerning their rights, responsibilities and duties emanate. The
Qur'anic vision with regard to man and woman may be summarised
as follows:
One : Both man and woman originated from the same soul.
They are like the two sides of a coin. Although both are independent,
it is their mutuality which gives each its fullness.
Two : Neither can a woman be like a man nor a man be like a
woman. Each has its very own different, yet, potentially mutual,
existence.
Three : Both man and woman have then rights. However those
rights are to be attained not through violence. It must be through mutual
cooperation.
Four : Both have their respective duties. It is only by virtue of
fulfilling these duties that both the individual and the society can survive.
Five : It is against the very law of nature for a man to undertake
the responsibilities of a woman and for a woman to try to fulfill those
of a man. Each has to perform its own duty.
Six : It should not be at the expense of the otherâ€™s rights that
each seeks to fulfill oneâ€™s obligations and enjoy oneâ€™s own rights.
The rights accorded to woman by the Qur'an may be summarized
as follows :
1. The right to live. The Arabs were a people who, on knowing
that oneâ€™s wife had delivered a female child, contemplated killing it
(Qur'an 16:59). The moral level of contemporary society, which, through
modern technological devices, identifies the sex of the embryo and on
learning that the child to be born is a female, one resorts to killing it in
its embryonic stage itself, is hardly above that of the Arabs of primitive
times. The Qur'an criticizes that narrow- mindedness which would
not permit the girl child to live. (Qur'an 16:59, 81:9). It declares that
like man, she, too, has the right to birth and to life.
2. The right to own property : The Qur'an has given the woman,
like the man, the right to earn wealth. The view of the Qur'an is that all
her earnings, whether it be through her personal efforts or by way of
inheritance, belongs to her and to her alone. None, not even the husband,
has the right to take anything, whatsoever, of her earnings without her
explicit permission. â€œAnd in no wise covet those things in which Allah
hath bestowed His gifts more freely on some of you than on others: to
men is allotted what they earn; But ask Allah of His bounty. For Allah
hath full knowledge of all things.â€ (Qur'an 4:32)
3. The right to inheritance : It is the Qur'anic recommendation
that daughters, too, have a share in the wealth of their parents. In
reality, no other religious scripture has declared the right to inheritance
of the woman. Even in Europe, which boasts to be very civilized, the
right to inheritance for women was recognized and put into effect only
since the last couple of centuries. The Qur'an had, however, declared
and brought into effect the law fourteen centuries ago that women
had the right to inheritance. â€œFrom what is left by parents and those
nearest related there is a share for men and a share for women,
whether the property be small or large - a determinate share.â€ (Qur'an
4:7)
4. The right to choose a mate : Islam recommends that while
putting forth marriage proposals, the likes and dislikes of the woman
must be seriously considered. None, not even the father, has the right
to marry off his daughter to a person whom she dislikes. Prophet
Muhammad(e) had said, â€œThe widow is not to be given in marriage
without her consent. The virgin is not to be given in marriage without
consulting her for her acceptance. Her silence constitutes her
acceptanceâ€™â€™ (Bukhari, Muslim)
5. The right to education and free thought: The Qur'anâ€™s view is
that women have the right to education and free thought. This view is,
however, not restricted to mere advice. The Prophet had practically
demonstrated this. The great yearning for knowledge exhibited by the
woman who followed the Prophet is universally acknowledged. For it
can be seen from the history of the times that women used to always
approach the Prophet and his wives to acquire knowledge. Indeed it is
seen in the hadith reported by Imam Bukhari that the Prophet had set
aside one day for his discussions with them.
6. The right to criticize: Islam provides the woman with the
right to criticize and question. The incident wherein quoting from the
Qur'an a woman once criticizes the Caliph Umar when he prepared to
control the value of Mehr as men were finding it difficult to pay their
due to the constant increase in its value and wherein he corrected
himself saying: â€œEverybody - even an old woman - knows better than
Umar.â€™â€™ (Muslim), is quite well-known.
The first verses of Surah Mujadilah (Those who question) were
revealed in response to the questions put by a woman companion who
argued with the Prophet concerning the traditions of lihaar which
prevailed during the time of Jahiliyyah. This makes it quite clear that
even women were permitted to discuss matters freely with the Prophet
when it came to the issue of their rights. It is especially relevant that at
no point in these verses has the argument raised by the woman been
frowned upon.
7. The right to take part in social activities: Although it is only
natural that men take part in politics, Islam has granted the freedom to
participate in matters pertaining to the nation to the woman also. Islam,
however, does not compel women to take part directly in the campaigns
for freedom of belief. But Muslim women did take part in helping out
those who were fighting in the field of battle. History does give us
accounts of woman-companions of the Prophet who proceeded to the
battlefield accompanying the men, prepared food for them, distributed
water and nursed the wounded. There has been in Islamic history
even those precious few who, under dire circumstances, went with
the men to very thick of the action on the battle field. Indeed, it was
Ayesha, the Prophetâ€™s wife, who led her side in the Battle of the Camel
which transpired as a result of the contention , and the opposition to it,
that Ali was not to be elected as Caliph until the assassins of Caliph
Usman were apprehended and punished.
8. The right to dower: It is the right of the woman being married
to recieve Mehr. The woman has the right to demand the Mehr of her
choice through her guardian. It is the duty of the man to give this
dower. The dower which is given to her is then considered as the
wealth of the woman. None can take from it except with her permission.
â€œAnd give the women (on marriage) their dower as an obligation; but
if they, of their own good pleasure, remit any part of it to you, take it
and enjoy it with right good cheer.â€ (H.Q. 4:4) - this is the
commandment of the Qur'an.
9. The right to divorce: The woman has the right to get a divorce
under circumstances wherein she becomes unable to live with her
husband. The divorce from the womanâ€™s side is referred to by the two
terms Khulâ€™a and Fasq. The first is the divorce wherein the dower is
also to be returned while the second is the one in which it is not
returned. In any event, Islam does not force the woman to live with
a husband whom she does not like. Under compelling circumstances,
she can recieve a divorce.

108

Which "Book" is the People of the Book's that the Quran talks about? / Re: I've researched the entire Glorious Quran for this.....

« on: January 24, 2013, 03:54:45 AM »

What does the Qur'an say about the scriptures that preceded it?

The Qur'an recognizes all the scriptures that had been revealed
before its own time. However, the Qur'an does not, in an explicit
fashion, state the total number of all such revealed scriptures. There
is only the mention of the names of four other scriptures in the Qur'an.
These include the Taurat which was revealed to the Prophet Moosa
(a), the Zaboor which was revealed to the Prophet Dawood (a) the
Injeel which was revealed to the Prophet Isa (a) and the Qur'an itself
which was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (e). The Qur'an further
highlights the fact that besides these four scriptures, other edicts, too,
were revealed by the Lord Creator.
â€œSay : We believe in Allah and what is revealed to us and
what was revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob
and the tribes, and what was entrusted to Moses and Jesus and
the prophets from their Lord.â€ (3:136)
â€œAnd this is in the Books of the earliest (Revelations),
The Books of Abraham and Moses.â€ (87:18,19)
The Qur'an attests the truth of all the previous scriptures. â€œIt is
He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book,
confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Torah (of
Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus).â€ (3:3)
It is the compulsory duty of the Muslim to believe in all the
scriptures that were revealed by Allah. Indeed, the Qur'an views the
disbelief in the divine nature of any of the previous scriptures as a
gross perversion.
â€œO ye who believe! Believe in Allah and His Messenger, and
the scripture which He hath sent to His Messenger and the
Scripture which He sent to those before (him). Any who denieth
Allah, His angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Day of
Judgment, hath gone far, far astray.â€ (4:136)

Are the Tauraat, the Zaboor, and the Injeel the Torah (Pentateuch),
Psalms and the Gospels mentioned in the Bible?

Tauraat is the scripture that was given to Moosa (a). Similarly,
the Zaboor and the Injeel are the books that were given to Dawood (a)
and Isa (a). The Qur'an introduces the scriptures as those that were
revealed by the Lord Creator Himself. â€œIt was We who revealed
the Torah (to Moses): therein was guidance and light.â€ (5:44)
â€œAnd in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary,
confirming the Torah that had come before him: We sent him the
Gospel: therein was guidance and light.â€ (5:46)
From this it is abundantly clear that these scriptures were all in
fact, revealed by the Lord Creator Himself. But this is not the case
with the books of the Bible. They were all written centuries after the
messengers. Indeed, there is not even a single book in the Bible
which can reasonably be believed to have been revealed to the
messengers. It is the traditional belief of the Jews that Moses (a),
himself, had written the Pentateuch (Torah); not that it was revealed
by God. However, modern research indicates that even the traditional
belief that Moses had written the Pentateuch is, in itself, baseless. It
is the opinion of the scholars that since the death of Moses, and the
events that followed his death, have been described in the Pentateuch
(Deuteronomy 34:5-10), it can never be that Moses (a) had written
the book himself. Similar is the case of the Book of Psalms. In actual
fact, there is not in it, a single Psalm that can be authoritatively said to
have been written by David. In the Gospels, too, although there is
mention, therein, of the true Gospel of God which Jesus had actually
preached (Mark 1:14,15), there is no clear picture about this Gospel
in the four accounts in the Bible. As for the Gospels in the New
testament, it was written at least five decades after Jesus. The gospels
give but vastly differing and contradictory accounts of the life of Jesus.
It is now clear that none of these was the true scripture that was revealed
to Jesus. In short, therefore, even though the various books of the
Bible do quote certain ideas from the Tauraat, the Zaboor and the
Injeel, it cannot be said that they are present in the Bible in all their
fullness and purity.

109

Quran History, Text, Compilation, and alleged Contradictions / Re: Abrogated Verses.

« on: January 24, 2013, 03:07:07 AM »

@tanveer
In truth, the fact that some of the rulings in the Qur'an have
been abrogated actually represents one of the evidences to prove its
divinity. The Qur'an is the last book that has been revealed by God for
the guidance of humanity. It is a book that puts forward wholly
practicable methods in the moulding of an ideal society on the basis of
a moral code which it, in itself, dictates. It is, in addition, a book that
seeks to show how, in the process of creating an exemplary and ideal
society out of nothing but the most primitive human conditions, the
divine law had influenced the making of such a society in the various
stages of its evolution. The Qur'an does not contain certain numbered
injunctions like the Ten Commandments that were revealed by God. It
is, in fact, the compendium of laws that grew with the beat and rhythm
of an evolving society that would eventually result in the fruitful
transformation of an entire people. In that chain of legislation, it is but
natural that the rulings that came at a time of total decadence will
become irrelevant when the society has gone past that stage in its
evolution. It is this loss of relevance that is, in fact, implied in the term
â€˜abrogation.â€™
Consider, for instance, the verses related to the consumption of
intoxicants. It must be remembered that the Qur'an was revealed to a
society that virtually bathed in wine. It was not about wine, which
turned man into beast, that the Qur'an first talked to them about. The
Qur'an firstly impressed upon their minds the purest conception about
God and of the unflinching awareness of the Hereafter. Indeed, the
Qur'an had, as the first step, sought to create a readiness in submitting
oneâ€™s entire life before the Creator. It was after having created a
mind-set to which the acceptance of all legislations that were confirmed
to have been issued from God had become easy that the Qur'an
declared: â€œThey ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say:
â€˜In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is
greater than the profit.â€™â€ (Qur'an 2:219)
This was the first stage. The Qur'anâ€™s approach here has been
to first seek to show the benefits, or otherwise, of a thing and to make
it clear that the sin in it would be greater than any benefit that may
accrue thereof.
With this verse, the society, now trained in alienating itself from
sin and in moving along the path of virtue, soon begins to free itself
from the vice-like grip of intoxicants and gambling. It was then that
the second verse was revealed: â€œO ye who believe! Approach not
prayers in a state of intoxication, until ye can understand all
that say ...â€ (Qur'an 4:43)
The prayer constitutes a conservation with the Lord Creator.
However, many a man approached prayer in a state of intoxication.
Indeed, the degree of their slavery to intoxicants can be seen from this
single fact. The Qur'an had then made the second step towards
achieving the goal of a society that was free of intoxicants. Prayer
must be made only with the acute awareness of that which is being
said in the conservation with God; with the mind and heart solemnly
influenced by that which is being uttered therein. Briefly put, therefore,
prayer must never be in a state of intoxication.
With the arrival of the second ruling a good section of those
conscious of God were freed of their slavery to intoxicating drinks.
They resolved, thenceforth, that they would, at least, abstain from
intoxicants during the times of the five daily prayers. It was then that
the third ruling, which sought to fully abolish all intoxicants, was finally
revealed.
â€œO ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, sacrificing
to stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination - of
Satanâ€™s handiwork: Eschew such (abomination), that ye may
prosper. Satanâ€™s plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred
between you, with intoxicants and gambling, and hinder you
from the remembrance of Allah, and from prayer: will ye not
then abstain?â€ (Qur'an 5:90,91)
With the revelation of this verse, the other verses that were
revealed earlier had now become irrelevant. They were, in fact, verses
that had been revealed for the creation of an intoxicant-free society
which were revealed in the two stages of the societyâ€™s evolution. It
can, therefore, be said that with the coming of this verse, the other
two verses had, for all practical purposes, become abrogated.
It was mentioned earlier that even this abrogation serves only
to stress the divine nature of the Qur'an. Prophet Muhammad (e)
was, himself, never one to take intoxicating drinks even before his
attainment of prophethood. Even if he were to put forward a law
against intoxicants which was of his own making, it would have been
in a fashion that straightaway prohibited all intoxicants forthwith.
However, it is the Creator who is best aware of the intricacies as well
as of the methodology of variation of the human mind. It is for that
same reason that He brought a law into effect stage by stage. When
such is the implementative process, therefore, it is only natural that the
laws issued in the earlier stage tend to be abrogated at a later stage.
This is why it has been said that the Qur'an makes it clear that these
abrogations are, indeed, from Allah, the Omniscient.

110

Is Trinity found in the Bible? Is it Polytheism or True Monotheism? / Who did Christ himself claim to be ?

« on: January 23, 2013, 04:35:26 AM »

Who was Jesus Christ ?

The Jews claim that Christ was the offspring of an adulterous relationship.

The Christians believe that Jesus was one person in the God of the Trinity.

The sources of Islam makes it abundantly clear that Isa, the Messiah, was, in fact, a messenger who was sent to the Israelites.

Who did Christ himself claim to be ?

Has Christ ever claimed that he was one person amongst the triple God-head of the Trinity? Is there any evidence in the Bible to the effect that he did make such a claim? Let us examine the matter.

Father, Son and Holy sprit

The following verses from the Gospel according to Matthew have been produced as evidence in support of the Trinity: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I will be with you always, to the very end of the age." (Matthew 28:19,20)

These verses are, however, not the proofs for Trinity. Indeed, these verses are better suited as criticism against the Trinity. The only thing that is evident from these verses is that there are three entities namely the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. However, it is not given to understand here that these three are one. If these three were indeed the three personages of the One God then it should have been made clear in the verses themselves or Christ should have declared it himself. Why did Christ, who taught concerning the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, not say himself that these three were the personages of the One God? Is it that Christ had covered up the 'fact' that these three were one from the masses? No. That can never be. The Messiah, who had come as the very messenger of truth would never have covered up anything which he himself knew and which would have served as the means of salvation for his people. He, who had shown the truth and the way, had never abstained from conveying to the masses any belief that would have provided life eternal itself. Yet he had never given out - not even once - the slightest hint of the doctrine of Trinity. It is evident from this itself that the idea of the Trinity does not fall into that group of fundamental beliefs which would serve to provide for eternal life.

'I and the Father are One'

Some have asked the question as to whether Christ had not himself said that "I and the Father are one." (John 10:30) and whether this does not then imply that he and God were, indeed, two parts of the same and single entity. Let us examine this verse in all its completeness. "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are one." (John 10:27-30)

There is not even a single indication anywhere in these verses which serve to convincingly present the claim that both Jesus and the Father belong to the triple parts of the same Divine essence. If that is so, then why has it been said here that "I and the Father are one" ?

Observe another of the statements from the Gospel of John: "... that all of them may be one, Father, just as You are in me and I am in You. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that You have sent me. I have given them the glory that You gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and You in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that You sent me and: have loved them even as You have loved me." (John 17:21-23)

In these verses it has been said that not only is God one in Christ alone, but the followers too constitute this oneness with God. If it is claimed that Christ is one in a triple God-head based on the aforementioned statement, "I and the Father are one", it must then be conceded, again on the basis of the above mentioned statement, that the followers of Christ, too, will find an existence within the Divine essence. It is then not the oneness in essence which is mentioned in these verses, but the oneness in ideal and belief. Here, it is the Greek word hen which has been translated as 'one'. This word is never the oneness in essence; it is the oneness in the attitude of co-operation that is implied here.

The saying of Christ that "I and the Father are one" is merely similar in intent to the saying used in the Malayalam language to the effect that "We both are bound to each other (in purpose)." Both Christ and the Father, who are involved in conveying the Divine message are, indeed, one. The followers of Christ, who accept it and attain to life eternal are also members in that communion. It is the communion of the Father, the prophet and of the apostles.

'He who has seen me has seen the father'

Some have asked based on the saying of Jesus, "he who has seen me has seen whether he could not, indeed, be God. Can man ever see God? The fact is that this can never be. Both the Old and the New Testaments have thrown light on this reality. Look at what the book of Exodus quotes Jehovah as having told Moses: "But , he said, 'you cannot see My Face, for no-one may see Me and live.'" (Exodus 33:20) If Christ was, indeed, God, then it would not have been possible for the masses to have seen him. As for Christ, he had lived as one seen by the people and as one seeing them in turn.

What then is the implication of the statement that "he who has seen me has seen father"? Examine this statement in full. "Philip said, 'Lord show us the Father and that will be enough for us.'

Jesus answered: 'Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? " (John 14:8,9). Here Christ has made it clear that none can at any time ever see God and that it is through Jesus that one must come to know God Himself.

Look at what John himself has to say, "No-one has ever seen God, but God, through His only Son, who is at the Father's side, has made him known." (John 1:18). Look at this verse in particular. The phrase used has been that 'No one has ever seen God.' There is no two opinion concerning the fact that this was written after Christ. This has been stated by John who only knew that the people had seen Christ. This means that John had never believed that Jesus Christ was God. Indeed, in the usage of 'God' Christ was never included. Of that we may be certain. It is, therefore, clear that John was a person who knew nothing of the God of the Trinity.

Divine truth was made manifest through Jesus. For he is the messenger of God. Indeed it is simply because of that anyone who knew Jesus came to know of God as well. This means that the son has made him (God) manifest. (John 1:18). This is the essence of the saying of Christ that ' he who has seen me has seen the father. Even when Christ said that "the words that ye hear are not mine, but of the Father who hath sent me" (John 14:24), it was the same message that is being conveyed.

Son of God

Another of the claims has been that as Christ has declared himself to be the son of God and that as his followers never discouraged the practice of calling him as such, it must follow that he did, indeed, possess such divinity. Whenever the Bible does make use of the term 'Son of God' it is necessary, firstly, to examine the meaning that has been intended there. The only Biblical meaning that can be conferred upon the term 'Son of God' is a man, particularly appointed by God Himself. Paul had written that "As many as are led by the spirit of God, they are the sons of God." (Romans 8:14)

The term 'Son of God' has been, therefore, reserved only for the elect of God. This has been the usage both in the Old and the New Testaments. Christ himself has made this clear. "If he called them 'gods' to whom the word of God came - and the Scripture cannot be broken - what about the one whom the Father set apart as His very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'?" (John 10:35,36). This would then mean that even as the God of the Israelites had referred to those to whom the Book was revealed as being gods, so was Christ, the messenger, who was sent into the world for the purpose of the guidance called the 'Son of God'.

It can be seen that the term 'Son of God' has been employed as a way of addressing right from the Old Testament itself. In fact, Jacob, Solomon, Ephraim and David: all are the sons of God in the language of the Old Testament.

"Then say to Pharaoh, 'This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son, ..." (Exodus 4:22)

"I will be his father, and he shall be My son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with the rod of men, with floggings inflicted by men." (Samuel 7:14)

"They will come with weeping; they will pray as I bring them back. I will lead them beside streams of water on a level path where they will not stumble, because I am Israel's father, and Ephraim is my firstborn son." (Jeremiah 31:9)

"I will proclaim the decree of the LORD: He said to me, 'You are My son; today I have become your Father.'" (Psalm 2:7)

If it is contended that Christ is one in the three personages of the Divine Trinity for the reason that he has been addressed as the son of God, then it must also be conceded that all the prophets in the Old Testament, who were referred to as the sons of God, must all be the personages of the Divine essence as well. But that is not all. The New Testament refers to all those who believe in Christ as the sons of God. Writes John, "Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God" (John 1:12). If Christ is, indeed, one person in the essence of the God of the Trinity because he is the Son of God, then it must follow that the apostles, too, who were conferred the right to be the sons of God, must find their membership in the same essence as well.

Matthew has made it clear as to who it is that are entitled to be known as the sons of God. "Blessed are the peace-makers, for they will be called sons of God." (Matthew 5:9). However, none among the peace-makers have raised the claim of being a part of the Divine Essence.

The Miraculous Birth

We have understood that Christ had never claimed to be God or that he was one personage in the God of the Trinity or even that he was the begotten son of God. It is also claimed that he was the son of God as he was born without a father. If that is so, then it must be Adam, who was born without a father and a mother, who is more entitled, than Jesus, to be the son of God! In fact, the Bible does introduce Adam as being the son of God (Luke 3:38). Is it possible to accept Adam as a personage in the essence of God on the premise that he has been recognized as the son of God?

The Bible introduces Melchizedec, the high priest, as one who has neither beginning nor end. Look at what Paul has to write about Melchizedec, the King of Salem, the high priest of God: "Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever." (Hebrews 7:3) If it is claimed that Christ was the son of God simply because he was born without a father, it must then be conceded that Melchizedec, who has neither father nor mother, no beginning or end, was even more deserving than Christ in being the son of God. At this rate the number of personages within the divine essence can only but increase. Indeed, the doctrine of Trinity will very well change into a multiplicity of the divine unity!

The Holy Prophet

Who was Christ? This question still remains to be answered. He had himself never claimed to be God or even to be the begotten son of God. Then what was it that he actually did claim?

Read through the statements concerning Christ which have come up in the New Testament. He has been referred to as the 'Son of God' in a very limited number of occasions within the Gospels. This epithette has been, however, used more frequently in the writings of Paul. The Gospels have, on the other hand, referred to Jesus as the 'Son of Man' 63 times.

Yes .... Christ was, indeed, the Son of Man. A man who was subject, like every one of us, to the feelings of hunger, thirst and other emotions. A man great in the sense that he had laboured to sacrifice all his desires for the sake of God's pleasure. A messenger who had striven to his utmost to lead the Children of Israel along that path of Truth and virtue. That which he uttered was but the revelation of God. He said, "He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me." (John 14:24) He had performed many a miracle. These were, however, shown by God. Christ had made clear the fact that he could do nothing of himself except that which God had taught him." .... 'I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does." (John 5:19)

Christ was, indeed, a very human messenger. A messenger like Abraham, Ishmael, Jacob, Moses and Joseph. He was the guide of the Children of Israel. He was innocent of sin; a great individual who had persevered to guide society along the path of righteousness by his own example. He was not God; nor even the son of God. Nor yet one in the three personages of the Trinity. He was but a messenger; a very human messenger.

The Complete Man

Examine the New Testament. We see, therein, Christ, the man. If we study the accounts from his birth onwards. We cannot arrive at a picture that is different from that of a human being.

- Jesus is born as the descendent of Abraham and David (Luke 2:21).

- Jesus is circumcised (Luke 2:21).

- Jesus is breast-fed (Luke 11:27).

- Jesus travels on back of the ass (Matthew 21:5).

- Jesus takes food and drink (Matthew 11:19).

- A homeless Jesus (Matthew 8:20).

- Jesus uses clothing (John 19:23).

- Jesus has brothers and sisters (Matthew 13:35).

- The knowledge of Jesus increases with his age (Luke 21:40).

- Jesus, of his own self, can do nothing (John 5:30).

- Jesus is unaware of the time of fruition of the Fig tree (Mark 11:12).

- Jesus exercises obedience through his patience (Ebriar 5:8).

- Jesus experiences hunger (Mark 11:12).

- Jesus experiences thirst (John 19:28).

- Jesus sleeps (Matthew 8:24).

- Jesus is fatigued in a journey (John 4:6).

- Jesus sighs in anxiety (John 11:33).

- Jesus weeps (John 11:35).

- Jesus grieves (Matthew 26:37).

- Jesus exerts his strength (John 2:13).

- Jesus exhorts unto the taking up of the sword (Luke 22:36).

- Jesus fears the Jews (John 18:12,13).

- Jesus is betrayed (John 18:2).

- Jesus is captured (John 18:12,13)

- Jesus is humiliated (Matthew 26:67)

- Jesus is beaten (John 18:22)

- Jesus fears death (Mark 14:36).

- Jesus prays to God (Matthew 26:42).

- A messenger from heaven appears so that Jesus may be strengthened (Luke 22:43).

Let us now think. Is Jesus God or was he human?

Common sense answers that he is, indeed, human. A great messenger!

The Holy Quran had been right all along: "O people of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and his Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not 'Three': desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is One God: glory be to Him: (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs." (Quran 4:171)

The Gospel of God

Jesus Christ was the messenger of God who was appointed amongst the Israelites. He had himself said: "leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift." (Matthew 5:24). His mission was to bring back the Israelites, who had deviated from the Divine path, to the religion of truth.

The Gospel (Injeel) was the scripture that was revealed to Jesus. He had invited the Israelites towards the path of Truth by preaching the Gospel.

Jesus had taught : " 'The time has come,' he said, 'The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!'" (Mark 1:15). "Firstly, the good news must be preached to all people." (Mark 14:9)

Where is the Gospel, which God had revealed to Jesus Christ, to be found today? Will we ever get a complete picture of the Gospel which Jesus had preached if we are to search the whole of the Bible thoroughly? No. The New testament contain the gospels of Matthew, Mark and John. Where then is the 'Gospel of God' that was preached by Jesus to be found today?

The 'Gospel of God' preached by Jesus Christ is not extant today. Like all the previous divine scriptures which were revealed before it, it, too, has become long forgotten now.

There is but one single religious scripture that has maintained the original purity with which it was revealed. That is the Holy Quran. The Quran is, furthermore, the only book which, on its own, professes to be divine. The Quran is the book which has remained unconquered for fourteen centuries in the face of all the scientific and technological revolutions witnessed by the world.

The Quran was revealed to the world through Muhammad (e) who was prophesied by Jesus as the one who was to come as his successor (John 16:7-14).

Those who desire to obey Jesus and attain to life eternal must, necessarily, follow the Quran as well as the life of Muhammad (e) which was based on it. That is the path of eternal salvation.

111

Bible Prophecies / Uncompleted bible prophecy:

« on: January 23, 2013, 04:21:11 AM »

Uncompleted bible prophecy:

All prophets said the verses in the name of god. If it never happened or it Dishonest, you throw out the verses, god never said like that, that prophet was a liar. You never follow and fear him. (Deuteronomion 18:18)

1) Adam dead:
â€œYou eat the fruits you will die that dayâ€ (Genesis 2:17)

Adam ate the fruits he never dies that day (Genesis 3:5 to 7, 22)

2) Fourth generations of Abraham are refugees. (Genesis 15:13 to 17)

Abraham>Issaquah> Yakobe> Levi> kahath> amram> mosses

But it happened 7th generation during the periods of mosses. We canâ€™t found from the bible period of Issaquah, Yakobe, Levi, kahath and amram are refugees.

3) God says to yakube â€œI give this land for you and your successorâ€ (Genesis 28:13)

We know from the bible it never happened yakube life.

4) God says to yakube â€œI bring back you from Egyptâ€ (Genesis 46:4)

It never been happened his life. He lived and died at Egypt.

Yakube lived Egypt 147 years and he died there (Genesis 47:28, 29)

5) God says to mosses â€œI give you land for you and your successorâ€ I send an angel and throw the â€˜kananiansâ€™ and â€˜yebusariansâ€™ (Exodos 33:1, 2)
It never happened during the period of mosses â€˜kananiansâ€™ and â€˜yebusariansâ€™ are never throw from Israel.

6) Who had written the verses?

God say to mosses â€œI am writing verses on the slabâ€ (Exodos 34:1)
Mosses written verses on the slab (Exodos 34:27)

7) God says to Israel â€œI bless you, you give loan many people, but you never got loan from others, you ruled several people, anyone never ruled youâ€ ( Deuteronomion 15:6)

Itâ€™s never happened we know that many countries ruled by Israel, they take loan from different countries.

8) That period Five city from Egypt spoken by canon language. (Yeshua 19:18)

This prophecy happened?

We know that from the history people of Egypt never spoken the canon language.

9) God say to Sedikya (king of yehudha) your dead came pecfully, you never died by sword. (Yeramiave 34:4, 5)

Itâ€™s happened? â€˜You died peacefullyâ€™.
How can sedikya died?
King of Babylonia killed sedikya two sons in front of him, they killed people of yehudha, and they caught sediky make him blind, he died at jail. (Yeramiave 52:10, 11, kings 25:7)

10) Oh! Jerusalem, you wear the beautiful dress, only the people who fore skin sectioned and cleaned are enter into youâ€(yeshave 52:1)

It never happened because many people enter Jerusalem without fore skin sectioned and cleaned, till it continue.

11) â€œ...People never been lived Babylonia, anyone canâ€™t enter to Babylonia, only wild animal live there in futureâ€ (Yeramiave50:40, 41, yeshave 13:19-22)

It never happened, many people lived there, till it continue

12) â€œGod says â€œcity of tire never been a livable place, no one live there (yesakail26:20, 21, 21:36)
It never happened, Jesus travel through Tire and he saw the people, he enters one of the homes (Mathew 15:21 mark 7:3, apostle21:3)

13) Return of the Jesus:
God says â€œsome people present here they saw the return of Jesus and make the world divineâ€ (Mathew16:28, mark14:62, Luke 9:27)

Why bible saysâ€™ someone present here, they saw the return of Jesusâ€™?
It never happened during the periods of apostle. Jesus dead and 2000 years passed away. Jesus never returns.

14)â€this generation never passed away without they saw â€˜end of dayâ€™ â€ (mark13:29, 30, Luke 21:32)

After Jesus many generations passed away, it never happened during the periods of apostle. Jesus dead and 2000 years passed away. It never been happened.

15) Revival of Jesus:
Like yona three days and three nights Jesus being under the earth. (Mathew 12:39, 40)

We know from the verses after the Jesus dead, his body still there three day and night.
But from the bible we know that Jesus cruised Friday evening and his Revival Sunday yearly morning (Sunday yearly morning Mariyam never saw the Jesus body).
How many day and night?
Friday night, Saturday morning, satuday night =2 night and 1 day.

How can it happening 3 day and 3 nights?

16) Life after death:

â€œMy twelve apostles ruled twelve tribes of Israel during their Reincarnationâ€ (Mathew 19:28)
This verse indicate that Respectful of twelve apostles after their dead.
Twelve apostles from pathrose to yuda eskiriath (Mathew 10:1-5)
What about yuda eskiriath?
He Betrayed Jesus.
Christian believes that he was a Curser.
How can he rule tribe of Israel during his Reincarnation?

All prophets said the verses in the name of god. If it never happened or it Dishonest, you throw out the verses, god never said like that, that prophet was a liar. You never follow him and fear him. (Deuteronomion 18:18)

From the 16 the prophecy, we know that someone include some verses after the prophet dead.

Oh! People of books why are you mixed truth and false in to the verses? Why are hide the truth? (Qurâ€™an 3:71)

They written their hand and say to people â€˜it is from the godâ€™ for a small profit (Qurâ€™an)

Are they never thinking about the Qurâ€™an? If it is not from the god they can find many contradictions from it (Qurâ€™an 4:82)

112

Hadiths & Sunna, and Prophet Muhammad's Person / Re: Women are the twin halves of men

« on: January 23, 2013, 04:00:28 AM »

In truth, the only religious text that grants the right of inheritance
to woman is the Qur'an. Indeed, many of the nations, termed
today as progressive, have conferred upon women the right to inheritance
only in the twentieth century. As for the Qur'an itself, it had
declared unequivocally in the seventh century itself that,

113

Quran Scientific Miracles & Islam's Prophecies (in Hadiths and Quran) / Re: Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) in Hindu scriptures

« on: January 23, 2013, 03:41:04 AM »

Symptoms of kalki shown in Muhammed(s)

1) According to Hindu believe kalki is the final incarnation

Muhammed(s) was the last prophet.

2) Year of kalki was b.c 3102

Mohammed(s) had born middle of that year.

3) Kalki born sandal island simfal.

Mohammed(s) born mekha.we knows that it is desert.

4) Name of mother of kalki was the sumathi (meaning trustful)

Mohammed(s) mother name â€˜aminaâ€™.the Arabic word mean that trustful.

5) Kalki got Sleight from mountain.

Mohammed(s) got Sleight first at mountain (hira)

6) Kalki and his four followers destroy the immoral things.

Mohammed(s) and his four followers (abobacker, ummer, usman, Ali
) fought against the immoral things.

7) Kalki flight through the sky.

Muhammed flight through the sky (miaraj).

8) Father of kalki died before his born and mother few period after his born.

Muhammed(s) father died before his birth and his mother died few periods after his birth.

Mohammed(s) in Hindu Veda:

â€œAthesminanthare mlech acharyana samanitha mahamada ethikyatha shisyasaga samanithamâ€

Vyasan says â€œAt that time a foreign prophet names mahammed and his followers appearâ€. (Bavishwal puranam 3:3:3:5)

Vyasan says â€œHe was a prophet from the desert, he five times clean his body part by water and pray to god. He destroy the all the evil power and make people to ideal path (path of god).he is one of the slave of godâ€. (Bavishwal puranam 3:3:3:68)

Vyasan saysâ€ His follower cut their fore skin, they breed chin, they never breed hair, and they are Revolutionaries. They are making hallo for the people come to prayer, they eaten all the meat without pork, they fight against the people, who deviated from the truth and morality, they known as musilivan. They are walking the path of ideal peopleâ€. (Bavishwal puranam 3:3:3:25-28)
(A.H. VIDYARTHI & U. ALI: Muhammed in Parsi, Hindu and Buddhist Scriptures, Page36).

â€œEdam jana upasrutha naramshamsa stha vishythe shshtim sahsra navitham cha cowmara arush meshta dadmehea ushta yasya pravahino vadu mantho dir dasha varshme radhasya ni jihidathe diva eshamano upasprysha asha hrishayea mamehe shatam nishkan dhasha sraja threni shathanyvartham sahsadhasha gonamâ€

â€œHey people! You listen here carefully â€œa good man praised, I welcome him from between sixty thousands ninety enemy and he traveled by male and female camel. His Majesty fall beyond the haven. He had given to god 10 rectangle, 100 gold coins, 300 Arabic horses, 10,000 cows.â€ (Adarva Veda, vimshakandam suktham 27 slogam 1 to 3)

From the above verses we understand that:

1)   â€œEdam jana upasruthaâ€ its means that this message is the important message.
That means this verse must know all the believers. It includes an important message for all the believers.
2)   â€œNaramshamsaâ€ means good and praised. Muhammad the Arabic word has two meaning good and praised.
3)   â€œStha vishytheâ€ means he praised. From the history there is only one man praise more than anyone (Muhammed(s)).a Muslim praise Muhammed(s) 30 times per day(prayer).when they here his name they say â€œsalalahu alyva salamâ€ .god praise to him. We Muslim use his name with(s), (pbuh), and (e) means god praise to him.
4)   â€œSixty thousand enemyâ€. When he lived Mecca, population of Mecca between sixty thousands to seventy thousand.
5)   â€œCowmaraâ€ this word has two meaning 1) ideal ruler (Mohammed(s) an ideal ruler.2) he spread the peace to the society (prophet).both meaning apt to Muhammed(s).he spread Islam (means peace) to society.
6)   â€œVadu mantho dirdashaâ€ its means that he travel camel with his wifeâ€™s. There is not a possible he is an Indian, because Indians never travel by camel .it indicate someone from Arabia. Here Veda says â€˜wifeâ€™s not wife, Mohammed(s) had more than two wifeâ€™s.
7)   â€œHe had given to god 10 rectangle, 100 gold coins, 300 Arabic horses, 10,000 cowsâ€. Here 10 rectangles indicate his 10 good followers (during his life period there is 10 people his good follower and god says from Qurâ€™an they are going to haven).100 gold means 100 good follower of Muhammed(s) they are called â€˜muhajirâ€™,they travel from Mecca to madina with Muhammed(s) during â€˜hijaraâ€™.
â€œ300 Arabic horsesâ€ indicate his first war â€˜badrâ€™, total number of people in Islamic side was 313(8 person canâ€™t involve the war, one person die before the war and 4 of them are children.remaing 300 Veda mention here).10,000 cows indicate victory of Mecca at that time number of Muslims are 10,000.

From the above verses we can understand that.

1)   Hindu expected kalki born 14,000 years ago at Arabia.
2)   There is no way to chance of incarnation. Truth is they are prophet not an incarnation of god.
3)   Vyasan explain the coming prophet. He may be one of the prophets.

114

Bible History, Canons, alleged Lost Scriptures, alleged Contradictions & Errors, and general Text QA / WOMEN IN BIBLE

« on: January 23, 2013, 03:32:20 AM »

In actual fact the unrestricted freedom experienced by women
in the western world has only served to lead that society into a state of
chaos and disruption. Indeed, the scenes now being enacted there are
in protest against the anarchic situation created by Christian doctrine
itself. Even the most fanatical of Christian missionaries would hardly
endorse the statement that the freedom enjoyed by them owes itself
to Christian doctrine. Christian intellectuals are now engaged in thinking
out ways and means to extricate western civilization from the confines
of immorality. They have now recognized the fact that salvation through
the death on the cross can hardly be employed to practically cleanse
people of their sins. This would then mean that they themselves have
admitted that the freedom of western women cannot be the product
of Christian dogma. In truth, therefore, the people of the west began
to move away from established values in protest, and as a response, to
the world renunciation of Christian ascetism.
The Christian religion had but followed the Jewish principles.
No new belief, no ritual or code of morality can be seen to have been
taught by Christ. Christ had only claimed that he was a prophet sent
unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel (Mathew 15:25). He had
said that he was sent only to fulfill the code of the Old Testament
(Mathew 5:17). This meant that he was a prophet appointed to guide
the Israelites along the path of God. He had advised the people to
follow the laws revealed to Moses. Indeed, in the first centuries (after
the departure of Christ) the church had no rites or rituals, whatsoever,
which differed from those of the Jews in any manner; nor was there
any such law either.
It is the Jewish belief that the woman is the cause of sin entering
amongst mankind. The woman was, after all, the one who ate of the
forbidden fruit herself and then persuaded her mate to eat it too
(Genesis 3:12). She was the sinner who not only disobeyed God herself
but caused another to disobey as well. With the Christian adaptation
of this idea, she became, through her opening the door for sin, doomed
to carry the burden of guilt for having become the immediate cause of
the gruesome ordeal of the son of God which led to his death on the
cross.
The Hebrew term Baal means owner. The Old Testament of
the Bible refers to man as Baal. We see that according to the
commandments of the Old Testament, man is portrayed as one who
has total authority over woman. Indeed, the Bible has given man the
permission to even sell of his women - even if they were to be his own
daughters (Genesis 21:7). Among the Jews there was even the tradition
of selling off their own daughters at the slave market in order to repay
their debts (Nehemiah 5:5). Even in the matter of religious practice,
the Jews never granted women the freedom to act freely. The Book
of Numbers ruled that man had the authority to nullify the vows taken
up by his daughter or wife (30:12). That the wife was mentioned
together with slaves and domestic animals in the Ten Commandments
(Exodus 20:17, Deuteronomy 5:21) is an indication of the position of
woman amongst the Jews.
The Jews had looked upon the birth of a female child with
contempt. It was the law that if the mother gave birth to a female
child, she would be in a state of impurity for a period of time that
would be twice as long as the case if the child born was male (Leviticus
12:15). The ruling of the Old Testament was that woman had only
half the value of man (Leviticus 27:3-7).
Polygamy was universally practiced during the age of the Old
Testament. The Law commanded no restriction, whatsoever, in its
practice. Indeed, Solomon is said to have had seven hundred wives
and three hundred concubines! (I King 11:3). Moreover, according to
the Old Testament, only man had the right to divorce. A man could
divorce his wife at the slightest pretext. Here, he had only to see to it
that he provided her with the written document of divorce. However,
there is no statement, whatsoever, anywhere in the Bible which would
enable woman to free herself from the clutches of even the most
cruel husband (Deuteronomy 24:1-4).
The position of woman in Jewish society at the time of the
advent of Jesus was, indeed, a pathetic one. Women, children and
slaves were not permitted to recite Shema, the morning prayer. In
fact, there was even a Jewish ritual daily prayer that said â€˜I praise
God in that He created me not as woman.â€™ Woman were not permitted
to study the Torah. The Jewish Rabbi, Eliyasar, who lived around 90
C.E. had even opined that it was better to throw women to flames
than to teach them the Torah.
It can be seen that Christ had sincerely striven to bring about a
change in this situation. He gave positions to women amongst his
disciples. Even though there are no women amongst the apostles, we
see that many women attended his sermons. Mary Magdalene,
Yohanna, Susanna ... so goes their list. He had preached the gospel to
all irrespective of the fact whether they were men or women (John
4:1-24). In a Jewish society where it was ordained that there was
nothing for the woman in matter of religion, these steps were all
revolutionary in themselves. Through these steps Christ sought to teach
that both woman as well as man were equal before God.
Even as the church went astray in matters of belief after Jesus,
so did lapses begin to occur in the matter of the position accorded to
woman. The Christians, too, began to follow the prevalent laws of the
Old Jewish Community on matter dealing with woman. With the
assumption of Church authority by Paul, things became even worse.
Furthermore, with the influx of people from among the Greeks into
Christianity, the Christian community now became saturated with the
decadent conceptions on woman prevalent both in the Jewish as well
as the Greek traditions. Sophocles, the Greek philosopher, had said
that â€œsilence is the token of greatness as regards to womanâ€ The
Greeks were never prepared to grant any right, whatsoever, to woman.
That woman was the very personification of the devil was the very
theme popular in those days. At home, woman was not even entitled
to a place at the dining table. She was to ever remain confined to the
living quarters that was specially laid out for her. She was exploited
wholesale in the name of religion. The Greeks too were used to the
habit of â€˜donatingâ€™ women to the temples. Those who were so â€˜donatedâ€™
would then be doomed to a life of prostitution and menial jobs that
were associated with the temples. There are records to show that,
like the Devadasis of India, there were around a thousand of such
â€˜maid-servants of the divineâ€™ in the service of the temple of the god,
Aphrodite, in Corinth. It was natural, therefore, that the Christian church,
which adopted religious laws from the Greeks and the Jews, sought to
enact laws that would violate the sanctity of womanhood.
It is, however, in the epistles of Paul that we see the Christian
seeds of all anti-woman policies often attributed to the Christianity.
This animosity towards woman that pervades the epistles of Paul was
but a natural outcome of his having accepted Greek philosophy as the
very foundation for all his own ideas as well. It is the influence of the
Greek thought that â€˜the woman is the very image of the Devilâ€™ that is
evident in the writings of Paul which state to the effect that â€˜it is good
for a man not to marry.â€™ (Corinthians 7:1). It is again the ideas of
Sophacles who said that â€˜silence is the token of greatness as regards
the women.â€™ that is reflected in the words of Paul who said that â€˜the
women must observe silence at the church.â€™ (I Corinthians 14:34-3)
Woman is, indeed, one who demands protection. She is, by her
very nature, so constituted. Womanhood reaches its greatest heights
with pregnancy and child-birth. It is through marriage that woman is
enabled to fulfill all her natural propensities. By teaching that â€˜it is
good for a man not to marryâ€™, Paul has propagated a notion that is
wholly antagonistic towards woman: â€œAre you married? Do not seek
a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife.â€ (I Corinthians
7:27)
â€œNow to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for
them to stay unmarried, as I am.â€ (I Corinthians 7:8)
â€œSo then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does
not marry does even better.â€ (I Corinthians 7:38)
If all men in the world where to obey Paul and perform the
â€˜goodâ€™ act of not having anything to do with woman, the entire human
race would cease to exist within the span of a single century. It is for
this reason that this Christian notion is said to be antagonistic towards
humanity itself.
It was on the basis of these statements of Paul that Christian
ascetism developed. We are unable, however, to see in the sayings of
Christ anything that would discourage marriage. Nevertheless, we see
that within the span of a few centuries after Christ, ascetism came to
be greatly encouraged and to be accepted as the very foundation of all
Christian virtue during the unfolding of the history of Christianity. The
Devadasi system that prevailed amongst the Greeks, too, must have
had its influence upon the development of Christian ascetism. Ascetism
would have a greater adverse effect on woman than on man. For,
after all, it was through wedlock that womanhood found its highest
fulfillment and perfection.
It is the reflection of the influence of the doctrines of Paul that
were antagonistic towards woman which we witness in the activities
of the medieval church. Indeed, The foremost subject of heated
discussions of the church in those times was whether woman had a
soul or not. The cruelty that was perpetrated in the name of ascetism
went beyond all limits. All this madness was supposedly committed in
order that one may approach the divine through the infliction of torture
upon oneâ€™s own self.
It may have been in response to this attitude of the church against
woman as well as against the fulfillment of the sexual instincts that set
the stage for the moral laxity of the western world. As for the Qur'an,
it presents the sexual impulse as a sign of God in itself. Its fulfillment
is but the natural yearning of the human species. Indeed, the Prophet
(e) had taught that the fulfillment of the sexual urge, through the legal
provisions of the divine commandments, was, in itself, an act of
righteousness. As far as man was concerned, woman was then a
partner in this righteous act. But according to the Christian notion that
sexuality is in itself a sin, it is only natural that the woman is seen as
the sinner. The Qur'an, on the other hand, introduces woman as mate
and support.

115

Bible History, Canons, alleged Lost Scriptures, alleged Contradictions & Errors, and general Text QA / Re: WHO REALITY HERDED THE VERSES FROM SATAN?

« on: January 23, 2013, 03:21:09 AM »

Jesus said: â€œDo not think that I have come to abolish the
Law or the prophetsâ€ (Mathew 5:17)
The Qur'an says, â€œIt was We who revealed the Torah (to
Moses): therein was guidance and light.â€ (5:44)
â€œAnd remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: â€˜O Children
of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (Sent) to you, confirming
the Taurat (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of
messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad.â€™â€ (61:6)
Paul had written, â€œChrist redeemed us from the curse of the
Law.â€ (Galatians 3:13)
â€œBy abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments
and regulations.â€ (Ephesians 2:15)
Jesus said that he came not to destroy the law; the Qur'an, too,
says the same. As for Paul, he contends that Jesus had come to save
the world from the law. Who indeed, is the one who recieved the
revelation of Satan ?
Jesus Christ had never taught that he was God. (Mark 12:29,
Mathew 4:10). The Qur'an, too, reiterates this beyond the shadow of
a doubt. (3:51). But Paul had stated thus, â€œWho, being in very nature
God, did not consider equality with, God something to be grasped.â€
(Philippians 2:6) and â€œHe is the image of the invisible God, the
first born over all creation.â€ (Colossians 1:15). Jesus had never
received any revelation that stated that he himself was God. Even if
he did receive such a revelation, he would certainly have made it
known. But Paul seems to have received a â€˜revelationâ€™ declaring Jesus
to be God. Whence, indeed, must that â€˜revelationâ€™ have proceeded ?
The Bible described the circumcision as a covenant which God
had made with Abraham. The Lord had instructed Abraham about the
circumcision as follows: â€œAs for you, you must keep my covenant,
you and your descendants after you for the generation to come.â€™â€
(Genesis 17:9-14). The Bible quotes God as having told Moses, â€œâ€˜On
the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised.â€™â€ (Leviticus 12:3).
Jesus, too, had observed this divine commandment: â€œOn the eighth
day, when it was time to circumcise him .....â€ (Luke 2:21) Jesus
had never instructed anyone against the circumcision. This had been
for the simple reason that he had never received such a revelation in
the first place. But observe what Paul says: â€œ.... if you let yourselves
be circumcised Christ will be of no value to you at all.â€ (Galatians
5:2). Whence did Paul receive this â€˜revelationâ€™ ? Of a certainty, not
from God,if not, then where from indeed?
The major reason behind the allegation that Muhammad (e)
had his revelations from the Devil has been that the Qur'an refuted
the crucifixion and salvation of humanity through the sacrifice of a
single individual. There are numerous verses in the Qur'an wherein
Jesus and his mother have been praised and have found the most
reverential mention. It may also be remembered that Maryam has been
the only woman to be referred by name in the Qur'an. The Qur'an
further describes even the miracle wrought through Jesus which has
not been recorded in the Bible like his having breathed life into birds
of clay (3:49). The incident wherein the baby Jesus had spoken from
his cradle which the Qur'an describes (19:30) is not mentioned
anywhere in the Bible. There is nothing in the Qur'an that serve to
tarnish the lofty character of Jesus. Here it is especially relevant that
according to the Gospel of John, the first miracle of Christ had been
that he had produced wine at a marriage function in Canaan (John
2:1-11). There is, however, no such reference in the Qur'an.
The Biblical concept has been that â€œ... anyone who is hung
on a tree is under Godâ€™s curse.â€ (Deuteronomy 21:23). The Jews
had thought that they had had Jesus accursed by way of impaling him
onto the cross. Paul, too, says the same thing. â€œChrist redeemed us
from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is
written: â€˜Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.â€™â€ (Galatians
3:13). It follows from this that the crucifixion has only served to make
of Jesus an accursed person. But the Qur'an does not accept the idea
that Jesus had become so accursed for the sins of the whole world.
How can anyone believe that God never heard the prayer of Jesus
which he made in order that he be saved from the accursed wooden
cross (Mathew 29:39) without believing in the very rejection of divine
mercy to Jesus? The Qur'an, however, teaches that God had, by way
of saving Jesus from the accursed wooden cross, undermined the
conspiracy of the Jews. (4:157,158)
The Jews contend that Jesus had become accursed by way of
his being impaled upon the cross.
Paul contends that Jesus had become accursed by way of his
dying upon the cross.
The Qur'an contends that God saved Prophet Jesus from the
cross.
Which among these is the revelation of the Satan? Is it the one
which glorifies Jesus or is it the one which makes of him an accursed
person?
In short, therefore, the stark reality is that those who strive to
produce proofs to the effect that the Qur'anâ€™s has been a satanic
revelation, have kept falling into the pitfalls of their own making.

116

Bible History, Canons, alleged Lost Scriptures, alleged Contradictions & Errors, and general Text QA / WHO REALITY HERDED THE VERSES FROM SATAN?

« on: January 23, 2013, 03:04:04 AM »

Many Christian critics have alleged that the revelation received
by Muhammad (e) were, in fact, from the Satan himself. It has been
the endeavour of the Christian writers like C.D. Fander, Claire Tisdal,
Joshmach Dowell, John Gilchrist and G. Nehless to portray the
revelations received by Muhammad (e) as being the insinuations of
the Devil. They advocate the idea that it had been the attempt of the
Devil to confine man within the pitfalls of sin by way of denying the
cruicifixion of Jesus Christ and the atonement of sin through it, that
stands behind the verses of the Qur'an. Can the Devil infest the human
body? Can a person be afflicted with disease owing to his possession
by the Devil? Will a person possessed by the Devil have the experience
of revelation? Such discussions are irrelevant here. By the dictum of
the Bible, then, let us consider the disorders that manifest themselves
in the person possessed by the Devil :
1. Screaming aloud owing to the affliction of the brain (Mark 1:24,
Luke 9:39, John 10:20)
2. Suicidal tendency (Mathew 9,18:17, 15:32, Mark 5:13, Luke 8:33)
3. Tendency to walk naked (Luke 8:2, 8:35)
4. To be pushed aside by the Devil (Mathew 17:15, Mark 1:26, 9:18,
9:20, 9:26)
5. Dumbness (Mark 9:25, 9:32, 12:22, Luke 11:14)
6. Deafness (Mark 9:25)
7. Blindness (Mathew 12:22)
8. To see that which others do not and to know that which others
donâ€™t (Mark 1:24, Luke 4:3, Mathew 8:29)
None of the symptoms of the one possessed by the Devil, which
are described in the Bible, is seen in the person of Muhammad (e).
One of the evidences cited by those who allege that Muhammad (pbuh)
was possessed by the Devil has been his own statement that the divine
revelation sometimes came to him in the form of the ringing of a bell
and that this form of revelation was the hardest for him. Another
evidence cited has been the saying of Aysha (r), the wife of the Prophet,
that she saw beads of perspiration on the forehead of the Prophet
when the revelation came upon him on a very cold day. Here, there is
an important question that is to be considered. Does the Bible say, in
any place, that the one possessed by the Devil feels the ringing of a
bell in his ears or that his forehead is dampened with the wetness of
perspiration even in extreme cold? If it does not, then what, indeed, is
the basis on which the followers of the Bible allege satanic possession
against the Prophet?
Those who say that the divine message received by the Prophet
was the production of a Devilish possession, are, in fact, actually
forced to say that their own holy men are themselves possessed by
the Devil.
â€˜St. Paulâ€™ had been the one who had actively laboured to destroy
Jesus as well as the ideals that he propagated (Acts of the Apostles
9:1, 26:10, 8:1) as long as he remained on the earth, after which it was
that he came forward with the claim that Christ had appeared to him
in a vision. Observe the description in the Bible of the way in which he
had received this vision of Christ: â€œAs he neared Damascus on his
journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. He
fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, â€˜Saul, Saul, why
do you persecute me?â€™
â€˜Who are you, Lord ?â€™ Saul asked. â€˜I am Jesus, whom you
are persecuting.â€™ He replied. â€˜Now get up and go into the city,
and you will be told what you must do.â€™
The men travelling with Saul stood there speechless, they
heard the sound but did not see anyone. Saul got up from the
ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So
they led him by the hand into Damascus. For three days he was
blind, and did not eat or drink anything.â€ (Acts of the Apostles
9:3-9)
We have seen that the Bible indicates the falling down to the
ground, seeing that which others do not see and hearing that which
others do not hear as being the symptoms of a devilish possession. In
the incident wherein Paul claimed that he saw Christ, he had
experienced all these symptoms too. But will the Christian world
accept it if it was now claimed that Paul himself had been possessed
of the Devil? The Christian critics will never be able to produce even
a single shred of evidence from the Bible to conclusively assert that
Muhammad (e) was possesed by the Devil. On the other hand,
however, it can be shown, using the Bible, that Paul, the real founder
of the present-day Christian faith, had been subjected to the
insinuations of the Satan. Then who is it, now, who was actually
possessed of by the Devil ?
Now, examine the very corner-stone of the Christian allegation
that the Qur'an had come to be written because of the Satanic influences
that moved Muhammad (e). After all, it has been only because of the
Qur'anic denunciation of the concept of salvation through the
crucifixion of Jesus Christ that the Qur'an has been alleged to be a
satanic creation. What, then, is the reality? Both Christians and
Muslims believe that Jesus was of a pure and unblemished character.
Both groups are agreed upon the fact that he had been appointed by
God Almighty Himself. Further still, both affirm that he was not
possessed by the Devil. If such is the case, then why should we not
compare the teachings of Jesus Christ with those of Paul and
Muhammad (e) in order to analyze as to who it was - Paul or
Muhammad (e) - who was afflicted by the insinuations of the Satan.
For any person in receipt of a revelation from the Devil must, of a
necessity, be an enemy of Jesus; going by the consideration that the
antagonist of a messenger from God will naturally be the antagonist of the message that he conveys.

117

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: What Islam Say ABout prostitution .?

« on: January 23, 2013, 02:14:04 AM »

What is wrong if two individuals desire to get involved in a sexual
relationship with each other ?

Sex is a divine gift. Its foremost function amongst living creature
is reproduction. It is also true that in the case of man, besides
reproduction, his mental health, shappiness of family life , peacefull
social life : all are linked to sexuality. In availing of a sexual behaviour
that is not in keeping with the divine guidelines, the mental health of
the individual, solidarity of the family and social structure will be
adversely affected. Moreover, such extra-marital relations will lead
to the affliction by sexually transmitted diseases which will eventually
end in the degeneration of society. Indeed, those who have learned of
this through experience have been the very people who claim for
themselves the status of being the spokespersons of modern civilisation.
Islam teaches that if two individuals are to have sexual relations
with each other they are to do so only through the contract of marriage.
Apart from that all other relations are bound to create problems and
damage. It will also destroy the very fabric of all values in society. It
will cast the seeds of suspicion within oneâ€™s marital life. Such suspicion
will then create cracks within the rapport between hearts. It disrupts
family relations - it will even gravely affect the mental health of future
generations.
The statistics related to this subject in Kerala, which is currently
moving ahead with the acceptance of western values, will frighten
any with a sense of moral consciousness. For instance, at least three
hundred people report atthe Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology in
Trivandrum every month to verify through DNA whether they
themselves are indeed the fathers of the infants borne by their wives.
(Mathrubhumi Weekly, 31.01.99) What does this reveal? The number
of spouses who distruct each other is on the increase. What is the
reason for this? The answer is given by Mathrubhumi itself: â€œ30
percent of the men and 18 percent of the women who participated in
the survey confessed that they indulge in extra-marital affairs.â€
This is the state of Keralite society which boasts of great and
lasting moral traditions. As for the state of western societies, it is even
worse. The greatest social problem there continues to be the girls who
become pregnant at a very tender age. Another important issue with
which the government continues to grapple is the problem of illegitimate
children. However the situation there is such that these issues are not
considered as problematic at all. Social scientists, however, warn that
such violations of behavioural norms lead to the collapse of the institution
of the family and consequently create social problems of a grave nature
which will, in the long run, end in the total chaos and destruction of the
western world.
Islam has never envisioned such a society. Islam has striven for
the creation of a society wherein a peaceful family environment and
marital relationship prevails.
To that end, Islam considers that all sexual relations outside of
wedlock are to be prohibited. For that reason the Qur'an recommends
strict penal laws which serve to eliminate such sexual relations.
Conceding the fact that the sexual impulse is, indeed, one of the most
powerful of instincts, it is necessary, nevertheless, to check man, in
the exercise of that impulse, with equally compelling measures. Indeed,
herein lies the great relevance of the punishments in the Qur'an.

Will it be possible to eliminate extra-marital relationships through
the punishments prescribed in the Qruan ?

It is not just penal laws that find mention in the Qur'an. In fact,
Islam views the recourse to penal law only as a last resort. The Qur'an
teaches that all circumstances which can lead to extra-marital sexual
affairs must first be removed. All laws and regulations for that purpose
are provided by the Qur'an. They can be summarized as follows:
One : Men and women are to dress decently. As sight constitutes
the prime motivation of the sexual impulse in man, women are not to
dress in such a fashion as to display their beauty.
Two : There should be nothing in society which is of a sexually
provocative nature. Indeed, in an Islamic society caberrets, dances,
beauty contests, ballets and the like are never permitted.
Three : The unrestricted mingling of the sexes, which ultimately
leads to adultery, must be prevented.
Four : The use of sex as a profession must be completely
banned. For in an Islamic society, prostitutes, call-girls, sex-bombs,
nude models and the like are an impossibility.
Five: Men and women (excepting for the husband or any relative
with whom marriage has been prohibited ) are not to travel together.
Six :Men and women are not to converse freely except in the
presence of another person.
Seven: Unless they have become mates through the institution
of marriage, men and women are not to gaze at each other with lewed
passion.
Eight : They are not to speak, or flirt, in a manner that evokes lust.
Nine : If a man comes with the offer of marriage, the guardians
of the woman must come forward to offer her in marriage to him if he
is seen to be of a suitable person.
Ten : In the case of the men who cannot find contentment in a
single woman, there is also the provisions - albeit, a conditional one -
to marry more than one woman.
Firstly, the Qur'an seeks to remove all situations which serve to
inflame sexual passions and to promote crime of adultery. Secondly, it
provides for an open permission for the fulfillment of desires through
recourse to a lawful procedure. Even after this, those who opt for
illegal means for the fulfillment of their desires actually destroy the
moral fabric of society as well as the family. Islamâ€™s prescription here
is to award severe punishments in such cases.
Circumstances play not an insignificant role in tempting man to
commit sin. In actual terms, therefore, due to the transformation of
the media and the market into the promoters of sexual provocation
and the current stand of the society in seeing in extra-marital
relationships nothing of a sinful nature, the attacks against women
have only risen to alarming heights. Take the case of Kerala itself. If
the number of reported cases of rape in Kerala in 1997 was 193, 266
in 1995 and 399 in 1996, it rose to 588 in 1997. A 121.05 percent
increase in just two years! By the month of Octoberâ€™98, 461 cases of
rape were reported. (Courtesy: Mathrubhumi Weekly, 24.05.1999).
What could be the reason for this ? The shift in the position of the
society as regards to extra-marital affairs and the exploitation of
feminine charms by the media and the market have played out not a
small part of their own in dontributing to the riseof atrocities against
wemen. If such a state of affairs is to continue, even women who lead
decent lives will not be allowed to go about in peace in Kerala.
This situation cannot exist in an Islamic society. For there can
be no instance wherein women cannot live free of the fear of losing
their chastity. Indeed, in the time of the Prophet very few people,
whose number could be virtually counted by the fingers of oneâ€™s hands,
were punished for adultery. So was it during the reign of the Caliphs.
Although thesway of the media and the influence of western culture
have all served to create much decadence, the low rate of crime even
today in countries where the Qur'anic penal laws are implemented
highlights its practicability through all ages.

118

Quran Morality and Moral Code, Laws & QA / what r the situation Islam allow beating:

« on: January 23, 2013, 02:08:05 AM »

Man and woman are the two halves of the institution of the
family. However the control of this institution is vested in the hands of
man. It is his responsibility to see to it that the institution is not laid to
waste. To this end, the Qur'an has exhorted man to exert to the utmost
of his ability. Observe the verse that explains the course of action that
is to be taken for this purpose: â€œMen are the protectors and maintainers
of women, because God has given the one more (strength) than the
other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore
the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husbandâ€™s)
absence what God would have them guard. As to those women
on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first),
(next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly); But if
they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance):
For God is Most High, Great (above you all).â€(4:34)
Breach of discipline has been mentioned in the verse only after
it has explained the nature of the good woman. In the vision that emanates
from the Qur'an, the good woman is the one who â€œare devoutly
obedient, and guard in (the husbandâ€™s) absence what God would have
them guard.â€ For the preservation of the family and the moral fabric
of society, such a nature is indispensable in women. Alongside this she
must also be one who guards, in secret, that which Allah would have
her guard.
How many men can tolerate life with a spouse who always
quarrels with her husband and is bent upon disobeying all that he asks
her to do? What will be the condition of the children who grow up in a
family atmosphere that is rife with mutual distrust and quarrels? The
Qur'an commands against such a state of affairs. There is much that
is due from a wife that is the right of the husband alone. It is not the
characteristic of a good woman that she gives them to him in his presence
and to others in his absence. She can, in no wise, give anything -
whether it be a gaze or a word uttered - that is due to the husband
alone to any other person. When that happens it becomes the reason
for the disruption of the family. Such disruptions can never be allowed
to happen. The Qur'anic prescriptions on the matter proceed in the
context of this all-important objective.
The Qur'anic recommendation is that all indiscipline that leads
to the disruption of the family must be taken out by the root itself. To
wait till such tendencies develop and blossom into full-fledged arrogance
is to actually create the very cause of disruption of the family
unit. At that advanced stage, there will not be much use in treating the
problem. For all such treatment will prove ineffective. The condition
of the children living in a family that, devoid of all peace and tranquility,
is heading towards utter chaos is, indeed, quite pitiable. It becomes
imperative, therefore, that, if such tendencies for indiscipline become
apparent at a distance, certain remedial action, albeit in a step by step
manner, needs to be taken to save the family from disruption. It is in
such circumstances that, in order to ward off indiscipline, the Qurâ€™an
has permitted the man to take recourse to certain measures. These
measures are, however, not in the least meant to harm, avenge or
punish. On the contrary, they are meant to correct and unify through
the elimination of any tendency for exhibiting indiscipline.
The measures recommended by the Qurâ€™an are as follows:
â€œAs to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and illconduct,
admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and
last) beat them (lightly); But if they return to obedience, seek not against
them means (of annoyance): For God is Most High, Great (above you
all).â€
An ill-disciplined woman must first be advised. She should be
made aware of the consequences of her actions in this world and the
next. Sound advice will, indeed, suffice as an effective remedy if the
lapses have occurred owing to the natural dispositions of the woman.
There might be cases where stern instructions and advice do
not work. In many such cases the main reason behind the failure of
the husbandâ€™s loving pleas and emotional advices will turn out to be
arrogance, pure and simple. Arrogance is usually born out of beauty
consciousness, of being wealthy and of the high status of the womanâ€™s
family. It is here that the second measure must come into play. She
must be separated from oneâ€™s bed. The bedroom is the place in which
attraction and temptation reign supreme. Therein lies the very power
base of the arrogant woman. That she is separated from there would
mean that her arrogance has been looked down upon with contempt.
It is, indeed, a stern measure against the sharpest weapon in the armoury
of the ill-disciplined woman. It goes without saying, however,
that the man who rises to employ this measure must of necessity be
equipped with the greatest self-control and determination. Those will,
indeed, be nights which will cause even the most arrogant of women
to think deeply. The knowledge that her mate is in no need of that
because of which she tended to become arrogant will definitely serve
to change the mind of the woman.
The Qurâ€™an instructs that even in cases where separation from
oneâ€™s bed fails, the family must not be allowed to disintegrate. Cases
where, after verbal appeals prove ineffective, separation from oneâ€™s
bed also fails to deliver are rare indeed. When such situations do arise,
the level of indiscipline will have reached its highest extent. There can
then be no other solutions.
It is only as the next step that the Qurâ€™an prescribes â€˜beatingâ€™
as a possible solution. It is only after all other peaceful means have
been exhausted that the Qurâ€™an recommends beating her as a preventive
measure. At other times, however, Prophet Muhammad has
been one person who spoke out vehemently against the beating of
women. â€œThose who beat their wives are devoid of all decency.â€ (Abu
Dawood, Ibn Majah): this was his own opinion. Indeed, he had asked
on one occasion: â€œHave you no sense of shame? To beat oneâ€™s own
wife even as one would his slave; and then to have intercourse with
her!â€ (Muslim, Ahmed). It is certain, therefore, that the Qurâ€™an, which
was revealed through the Prophet who said that â€œthe best of you is the
one who is kindest to his wife.â€ (Tirmidhi) would never, without sufficient
reason, command that the woman be beaten. It is only as a
means to check a bigger evil â€“ as a last resort when all other options
fail - that the Qurâ€™an has recommended beating. And that, too, the
Prophet had particularly exhorted that she must not be beaten in such
manner as to lessen her self-respect as is the case when she is struck
on the face or likewise. She is never meant to be harmed or humiliated.
On the contrary, it is only to correct her that the Qurâ€™an recommended
beating as a last resort. Indeed, much like the father who
beats his child; like the teacher who beats the student, it is very much
a stern instruction emanating from the emotional depths of a caring
instructor. The highest objective of this instruction being the safe recovery
of the institution of the family from certain collapse.

119

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Proof Jesus was not divine/God

« on: January 23, 2013, 01:59:06 AM »

Examine the New Testament. We see, therein, Christ, the man. If we study the accounts from his birth onwards. We cannot arrive at a picture that is different from that of a human being.

- Jesus is born as the descendent of Abraham and David (Luke 2:21).

- Jesus is circumcised (Luke 2:21).

- Jesus is breast-fed (Luke 11:27).

- Jesus travels on back of the ass (Matthew 21:5).

- Jesus takes food and drink (Matthew 11:19).

- A homeless Jesus (Matthew 8:20).

- Jesus uses clothing (John 19:23).

- Jesus has brothers and sisters (Matthew 13:35).

- The knowledge of Jesus increases with his age (Luke 21:40).

- Jesus, of his own self, can do nothing (John 5:30).

- Jesus is unaware of the time of fruition of the Fig tree (Mark 11:12).

- Jesus exercises obedience through his patience (Ebriar 5:8).

- Jesus experiences hunger (Mark 11:12).

- Jesus experiences thirst (John 19:28).

- Jesus sleeps (Matthew 8:24).

- Jesus is fatigued in a journey (John 4:6).

- Jesus sighs in anxiety (John 11:33).

- Jesus weeps (John 11:35).

- Jesus grieves (Matthew 26:37).

- Jesus exerts his strength (John 2:13).

- Jesus exhorts unto the taking up of the sword (Luke 22:36).

- Jesus fears the Jews (John 18:12,13).

- Jesus is betrayed (John 18:2).

- Jesus is captured (John 18:12,13)

- Jesus is humiliated (Matthew 26:67)

- Jesus is beaten (John 18:22)

- Jesus fears death (Mark 14:36).

- Jesus prays to God (Matthew 26:42).

- A messenger from heaven appears so that Jesus may be strengthened (Luke 22:43).

Let us now think. Is Jesus God or was he human?

Common sense answers that he is, indeed, human. A great messenger!

The Holy Quran had been right all along: "O people of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and his Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not 'Three': desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is One God: glory be to Him: (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs." (Quran 4:171)

120

GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS / Re: Very Important - Authorship of the Quran

« on: January 23, 2013, 01:53:12 AM »

www.nicheoftruth.org/pages/responses_home.htm

Answering Christianity Research Center

Messages - shabeer_hassan