What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog
Responding to Jochen Katz negative remarks toward me and my web site:
This article is a response to Jochen Katz negative remarks toward me and my web site, which are located at: http://www../Responses/Osama/index.htm
Jochen Katz wrote:
Osama does not even represent orthodox Islam. That he is a heretic is recognized by many. For example, on his Noorullah Website Hesham Azmy makes this comment on Answering Christianity: An encyclopedic web site defending Islam against Christian missionaries by brother Osama 'Abdullah. It is the largest regarding quantity of materials, but, unfortunately, it includes some deviant beliefs. Shahid bin Waheed published many articles refuting O. Abdallah's propaganda from an Islamic perspective in the period January to September 2003 on his site Be Warned! However, in October Shahid b. Waheed removed those articles, joined Osama and is now publishing his material on Answering Christianity (perhaps in order to get a larger audience?).
Few points to notice here:
1- "he is a heretic is recognized by many." Simple question here: Who are those "many" people? Brother Azmy did not back down because he was afraid of anyone. Like you, he was misinformed by the 50-year old foul and trash-mouth (who is fond on using the f*** word a lot), shahid bin waheed. After I have pointed out the Truth to him, he immediately removed his misunderstanding from his site. But for you on the other hand, I have already informed you multiple times before, and you continued to post your nonsense and lies against me.
2- The fact that you utterly failed to provide any solid reference that proves me to be a heretic clearly proves that you are (perhaps?) liars(?) and desperate to prove anything negative about Osama Abdallah, which is not professional nor mature.
3- The use of the word "many" by you suggests that you are careless in your words. Your utter failure to refute www.answering-christianity.com, and to stop it from constantly converting Christians speak loud and clear about you. In fact, on my web site's voting poll, one can easily see that most of my readers love my site! You can check it out at: https://www.answering-christianity.com/cgi-bin/vote/vote.cgi. Allah Almighty is a Witness that I never played with the results of the votes. Everything you see is true! It was documented by real people. And I set up my voting poll to not accept double voting. Try it (double voting), it won't work.
Also, as of today, 8/21/2004, there are exactly 1136 registered members on my Free Muslims Marriage Connection Site. After doing a search on all members with "Just Muslim" entered for the "Religion" field, I found that there are 450 members. This means that about 40% of the registered members chose not to register as "Sunni" or "Shia" Muslims. They apparently believe in almost the same Islamic Principles that I believe in. So no, I am not a "heretic" and there aren't "many" recognizing me as such! The opposite is what is true! Even those Sunni and Shia brothers and sisters registered on my site would not have registered if they considered me as a heretic. Why would 686 (1136 - 450) people support a "heretic"???!!! This is not to mention the thousands out there who love and enjoy my site and benefited greatly from it by the Will and Grace of Allah Almighty.
4- This 50-year old trash-mouth that you used is also another proof about how desperate and silly you are. I don't care if you disagree with my site. But to use such a low-life loser as an "orthodox" Muslim does compromise your integrity, truthfulness and objectivity toward making any claim about Islam. It is also preposterous, because you know well that people with foul mouths do not represent Islam, let a lone, orthodox Islam.
For the irrefutable proof, please visit: Good Manners in Islam. Allah Almighty Commanded the Muslims to speak politely and to preach Islam with Wisdom and beautiful preaching. Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him also said that one of the sings of a hypocrite is the use of foul language.
I just find it odd that you knew about all of these facts (because I already told you about them), and still insisted on decieving your reader with false information.
5- As to the "summary" of my "deviant" beliefs, the post doesn't prove a thing. On the contrary, the brother had talked positively and said I am a "hidden treasure" toward the end of the post. So much for your lies and false proofs about me being "deviant" and "heretic" recognized by "many".
Anyway, here is my detailed answer to the post point-for-point:
RE:As always Al-Turkee, general foolish posts with no specific points.
bro osama you have many errors with regards to the Islamic Aqeedah [doctrine] and jurisprudence which you must take into consideration.Examples are:
-Your claim that hadith was first compiled 200 years after the Prophet, whereas in reality the compilation of ahadeeth started since the time of the prophet and his companions and in fact some of those early compilations are still existent. the likes of bukhari, muslim and abu dawud based their works on collecting such earlier compilation of ahadeeth.
Brother "ABCD" provided no proofs what so ever for his claim. There are close to 2 million hadiths (narrations about the Prophet peace be upon him) out there. I have shown the clear evidence that Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari were documented, the most two authentic hadith collections, were documented in "Bukhara", which is located in the former Soviet Union. This means that the hadiths were really documented on a large scale after the collapse of the Persian and Roman Empires by the Muslims and the expansion of Islam to reach the lands of the Far East. This took 10s and 100s of years to be accomplished.
Please visit: What parts of the Bible and Hadiths do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth? and Why? for more details and proofs.
-Lack of understanding Usool al Hadith and Fiqh.
This is a matter of an opinion. Humbly speaking, however, I have successfully converted many Christians to Islam by the Will, Grace and Mercy of Allah Almighty. To say the very least, I am obviously not a jack ass when it comes to Islam :-).
-Restricting authentic ahadeeth only to sahih bukhari , muslim and to some extent to abu dawud, and rejecting other sources. It should be known that these three sources dont present all the authentic ahadeeth, as there are thousands of other authentic ahadeeth that are not found in bukhari,abu dawud & muslim and are present in other sources like Sahih Ibnu Khuzaimah, Jami at Thirmidhi, Sunan ad Dirami, Muwatta of Imam Malik, Musnad of Imam Ahmad etc. These sources listed are the geninue sources of ahadeeth along side the likes of bukhari and muslim.
First of all, I never rejected any other source. The internet only offers Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim and Partial hadiths from Sunan Abu Dawood. I used every source available. If you have other sources in English that I can use, then please send it to me. I will gladly add it promptly and write all of the necessary program(s) for data retrieval and searching, insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing).
-Your claim that apostates in Islam can go free.
Tell me brother ABCD, why did Allah Almighty speak about apostates 4 times in the Noble Quran, and not in a single Noble Verse did He Command for killing them?
Also tell me, why should an American, for instance, who might embrace Islam, and later fall victim to the over-whelming false propaganda against Islam and end up deserting Islam because of his misunderstanding be killed?
-Your posting of pictures of nude/immoral Christian women in the following link:
I was showing an example of how evil the western women are. They claim to be "Christians" and yet, they have no problem in wearing bikinis and committing fornication and even adultery. But at any rate, this doesn't take away from me representing Islam.
-Your claim on the lawfulness of music which totally contradicts the Quran, Sunnah, Ijma [the usools from which fiqh is derived].
Again, a shallow statement without any proofs by brother ABCD. At www.answering-christianity.com/music_in_islam.htm, I have created two sections: one allowing music and other prohibiting music. Both sections presented hadiths and other Islamic quotes to back up their claims. I left it to the reader to decide. But you disagreeing with music doesn't make me lesser Muslim. There are millions upon millions of Muslims and Muslim scholars out there that agree with music.
-Lack of interpreting the quran and explaining its verses from the way the Sahaba and Tabioun understood and implemented them. For example your claim that the beast mentioned in the Quran is jesus, whereas in reality the beast mentioned in the verse according to the authentic prophetic traditions and as understood by the companions is another creature that is to appear after the death of Jesus[ once he descends back on earth]. the beast according to the prophetic traditions is to appear at around the same time when the sun rises from the west, and will tell the people that day of judgement is very close.
You are wrong and I advise you to go and read again about the topic. The "beast" in the Noble Quran is not a dragon, nor does the Noble Quran nor the hadiths claim that he will come when the sun rises from the west. The coming of the beast is one of the Signs of the Day of Judgement. The word for beast in the Noble Quran was the same exact word used for humans. When Allah Almighty said that He will bring the beast to teach mankind the Truth again, I believe He, the Almighty, was referring to a human religious figure or leader. I said that it is possible that this person be Jesus. It is my interpretation (through thorough studying) that the "beast" will be "Jesus". The beast's name will not necessarily be called "Jesus" or "Isa", because the returning "Isa" will be vicious and merciless against the army of satan. It is possible that Allah Almighty will change the person's name from "Isa" to "the Beast".
Please visit: Jesus is the "Beast" in the Noble Quran who will come and fight the devil.
-Claiming that Hell will be empty eventually such that the unbelievers will enter paradise at a specific time once they receive their punishment. This claim goes totally against the teachings of the authentic sunnah and the way the Sahaba/Ahlal Bayt and Tabioun understood the quranic verses and the sunna.
These are not my claims. These are Allah Almighty's claims:
"To those who reject Our signs and treat them with arrogance, no opening will there be of the gates of heaven, nor will they enter the garden, until the camel can pass through the eye of the needle: Such is Our reward for those in sin. (The Noble Quran, 7:40)"
In this Noble Verse we clearly see a promise from Allah Almighty to let all of the disbelievers enter Paradise if the miracle of the Camel going through the needle's eye happens. Jesus peace be upon him did talk about the same miracle and said that it is humanly impossible, but definitely possible with GOD Almighty. See Matthew 19:23-26 for more details.
Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said:
Narrated Abu Huraira: "I heard Allah's Apostle saying, Allah divided Mercy into one-hundred parts and He kept its ninety-nine parts with Him and sent down its one part on the earth, and because of that, its one single part, His creations are Merciful to each other, so that even the mare lifts up its hoofs away from its baby animal, lest it should trample on it." (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Good Manners and Form (Al-Adab), Volume 8, Book 73, Number 29)"
"Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Allah created one hundred (parts of mercy) and He distributed one amongst His creation and kept this one hundred excepting one with Himself (for the Day of Resurrection). (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book Pertaining to Repentance and Exhortation to Repentance (Kitab Al-Tauba), Book 037, Number 6630)"
"Salman Farisi reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Verily, there are one hundred (parts of) mercy for Allah, and it is one part of this mercy by virtue of which there is mutual love between the people and ninety-nine reserved for the Day of Resurrection. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book Pertaining to Repentance and Exhortation to Repentance (Kitab Al-Tauba), Book 037, Number 6632)"
"Salman reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Verily, Allah created, on the same very day when He created the heavens and the earth, one hundred parts of mercy. Every part of mercy is coextensive with the space between the heavens. and the earth and He out of this mercy endowed one part to the earth and it is because of this that the mother shows affection to her child and even the beasts and birds show kindness to one another and when there would be the Day of Resurrection, Allah would make full (use of Mercy). (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book Pertaining to Repentance and Exhortation to Repentance (Kitab Al-Tauba), Book 037, Number 6634)"
As we clearly see from Prophet Muhammad's Sayings above, Allah Almighty only shared one level of Mercy with us. How can any one including Adolph Hitler, who used to bake the innocent Jews in ovens, over power Allah Almighty's 100 levels of Mercy?! It is impossible! I even highly doubt that Hitler over powered the one level that Allah Almighty shared with us here on earth.
So if a mad man like Hitler couldn't over power Allah Almighty's Mercy, then how is it possible for normal humans like you and me who only mind their own business and work hard to feed their family and raise their children and please Allah Almighty to over power Allah Almighty's one hundred levels of Mercy?
This should be another crystal clear proof that Allah Almighty will empty Hell from His creations and will fill it up with His Holy Foot after everyone gets purified from their sins.
Please visit: Hell will eventually be empty according to Islam.
-Criticizing unjustly the first 4 caliphs, whereas in reality the prophet[saws] appointed Abu Bakr as his immediate successor and Umar to succeed him afterwards. Uthman and Ali became caliphs based upon a majority vote. All four were promised paradise and the Prophet spoke greatly of them and asked the muslims to follow their footsteps according to authentic traditions reported from him[saw]. The charges labelled against the caliphs as seen in your article are all false and comes from forged reports found in the likes of Tareekh at Tabari, Al-Imamah Was Siyasah, Ibnu Atheer etc.
In my article "None of the four caliphs was really perfect", I have clearly stated that I have nothing but admiration and love toward all of the four caliphs. Me proving that none of them was perfect doesn't mean a thing. It most certainly wouldn't prove the gibberish nonsense that the answering Islam team are claiming about me for being "heretic" and "deviant".
While your attempts and zeal of refuting and exposing the Christian missionaries is applaudable and appraisable, yet these are some of the errors seen in your website with regards to the Islamic sciences.
Please be more open-minded, especially when it comes to religions. But thanks for the kind remarks. As to my "errors", I don't think I made any, because all of my claims are backed by the Noble Quran.
As a brother who wants all the best for you, I sincerely suggest you akhi to take some time to study more on the Usools of Aqeedah, Fiqh, Hadeeth and classical Tafseers as well as the Islamic history and seerah. You have a lot of good potential in you, and I see in you a hidden treasure, if unearthed then you will establish yourself as a true knight of the authentic teachings of Islam. May Allah bless you, and guide us all to the right guidance and straight path.
I hope bro that you were not offended by my post, Please forgive me if my words comments etc. appeared harsh or hurtful to you, that was not my intent, Barakallaho feikom
Thank you again for the kind remarks my dear brother. I promise you that I will try my honest best to always thrive on serving Islam and my Muslim brothers and sisters, insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing). Like I mentioned above, there are close to 2 million hadiths out there, most of them are corrupt. I personally believe in only the ones that are directly linked with the Noble Quran, such as the ones that elaborate on how to Pray, how to Fast, etc..., because Praying and Fasting are mentioned in the Noble Quran.
As to me being offended, insha'Allah, I will never get offended by you my brother :).
The liars have changed their position and message. Hilarious indeed!
On 5/1/2004, the deceivers of the answering Islam team have changed their message due to my refutation to it. Here is what their new message says:
" Note: Osama Abdallah does not represent orthodox Islam. Many of his articles propagate heretical ideas. Although Muslims usually try to present a united front against the Christians, in this case, there exist Muslim websites that caution against him, or even outright denounce his site. For example, on his Noorullah Website Hesham Azmy used to make this comment on Answering Christianity: "An encyclopedic web site defending Islam against Christian missionaries by brother Osama 'Abdullah. It is the largest regarding quantity of materials, but, unfortunately, it includes some deviant beliefs." (he later removed the last part of the statement, probably upon Abdallah's personal request). On Abdallah's message board one can find this summary of his deviant beliefs by one reader. Shahid bin Waheed publishes many articles seeking to rebut O. Abdallah's propaganda on his site Be Warned! (Note: Murtad is Arabic and means apostate.) Important: Our links to pages by Muslims who criticize O. Abdallah publicly do not constitute an endorsement of these sites as being reliable Islamic sources themselves. In particular, since the beginning of 2004, there has developed a rather disgusting shouting match between Shahid b. Waheed and Osama Abdallah with each side trying to find an even greater insult for the other. "
Few points to notice here:
1- They removed the lie that they themselves have made up about "many" Muslims consider me as
"heretic" and "deviant".
2- They resorted to another lie by saying without being specific "Many of his articles propagate heretical ideas." What are those articles? And what are those "heretic" ideas? Care to give us one or two?
Have the liars had proofs, they would've been more specific.
The decieving team are trying to cover their utter failure to refute www.answering-christianity.com by trying to propagate their new lie about Osama Abdallah being a heretic and a deviant person, and therefore, there is no need to refute him since he does not really represent Islam.
Who else beside the 50-year old foul-mouth (he is fond on using the f*** word a lot) do they have to support their lie? And even this 50-year old piece of trash had called me "dear brother Osama" before. The foul-mouth started off as a supporter to my site, then he changed to calling me apostate, then changed to be my supporter again, and then changed to calling me apostate again. It's all because I don't belong to his cult. Even Jochen Katz, the web master of "answering Islam", sent both of us an email saying to him something like this (I lost the email but the contents are the same): "I have not seen any VISIBLE CHANGE on Osama's site to cause you to change your position from being his supporter to declaring him as a disbeliever". These were the words (similar words) of Jochen Katz himself!
I have kept three links written by the trash-mouth where he called me "brother Osama" in two of them, and "dear brother Osama" on one of them. There were many more but I didn't keep them. Anyway, the following three are sufficient enough:   . So even their foul and trash-mouth is inconsistent, moody, selective in mixing real Islam with his personal feelings, and a hypocrite. He even declared my 2-year old son as an infidel, contradicting Prophet Muhammad when he said that a new-born is Muslim by default until he changes his belief in the Absolute One True GOD Almighty and associates partners with Him.
If his wife divorces him, then she too will be called "murtadd" (apostate) by him. That's how stupid and low this filthy-mouth is.
But nonetheless, the more stupid than him are the ones that use him as an "orthodox" Muslim. Hilarious indeed!
3- As to the "summary of his deviant beliefs", I have responded to the link in great details above. The brother does not call me "deviant". On the contrary, he called me "hidden treasure". Again, this only proves that you are liars.
4- As to brother Hesham Azmy, like I said above, he did not back down because he was afraid of anyone. Like you, he was misinformed by the 50-year old foul and trash-mouth (who is fond on using the f*** word a lot), shahid bin waheed. After I have pointed out the Truth to him, he immediately removed his misunderstanding from his site. But for you on the other hand, I have already informed you multiple times before, and you continued to post your nonsense and lies against me.
5- The deceivers have exposed themselves by saying "Important: Our links to pages by Muslims who criticize O. Abdallah publicly do not constitute an endorsement of these sites as being reliable Islamic sources themselves." So now you admit that the trash-mouth is not an orthodox Muslim, contrary to your original message that I have listed above. Hilarious indeed!
6- "In particular, since the beginning of 2004, there has developed a rather disgusting shouting match between Shahid b. Waheed and Osama Abdallah with each side trying to find an even greater insult for the other." Let me correct this lie of yours:
(a) It was the trash and foul-mouth that got into the match. I did not get much into it. I only documented his trash to further prove to the reader that he is the dumpster I claim he is. Big difference! Since he claims to be an "orthodox" Muslim, and for a while you supported that because he served your purpose well, then my mission was to expose him and to prove him to be a hypocrite along with making you look like total fools.
(b) The so-called "disgusting shouting" was mostly if not all done by him, not by me. He was the one using the f*** word left and right in his language. I happily documented it. Me responding to him by calling him "dumpster" is not really "disgusting". It's simply the plain Truth. He is a loser and he is a trash-mouth. Nobody can refute that.
Once again, you have tried to deceive your reader and to cover up your miserable failures to stop www.answering-christianity.com from constantly converting Christians to Islam, by propagating lies against Osama Abdallah, his beliefs and characters to desperately show the reader that Osama is not worth responding to, and you shouldn't listen to him. But as Allah Almighty said in the Noble Quran: "Truth stands out clear from error" (2:256). The Truth I told in this article and throughout my site speak clearly about how much of a true Muslim Osama Abdallah really is.
In conclusion, I think it is obvious and clear that the clowns (sorry to say that) of the answering Islam team are desperate and miserable in their attempts to disprove me. They rely on a filthy foul and trash-mouth (he is fond on using the f*** word a lot) dumpster to disprove me, and they appointed him as an "orthodox" Muslim, which is to say the least, hilarious, dumb and very unethical. Not to mention coward and decieving to the reader.
Please visit: Good Manners in Islam. Allah Almighty Commanded the Muslims to speak politely and to preach Islam through Wisdom and beautiful preaching.
Jochen Katz wrote:
Osama Abdallah has recently started compiling an alleged list of rebuttals to all of the articles of individual authors on Answering Islam, such as Sam Shamoun and Silas. However, as can be seen as one looks over the list, most of the "responses" are not direct responses and many of the ones that are indirect do not properly address, if they address at all, the articles which Osama claims are being refuted. Osama is apparently wanting his readers to think that he has addressed all of these authors' work when it clearly is not the case. Of the 56 articles in Sam Shamoun's file, only a mere 14 find a direct response, many of which are the work of other polemicists besides Abdallah. Of Silas' 53 articles, only 18 find a direct response, many again which are not Osama's work, but links to other sites. Below is a list of many of Osama's articles and links to which his material should be compared. We feel that some of the articles Osama gave which were supposed to be rebuttals of our material work better the other way around. So, the reader will notice some articles in this chart to which Osama has allegedly refuted in the material contained in the links which he gave for comparison. The reader should consider both sides critically.
Here is an interesting observation: On 2 November 2003, Osama Abdallah's claim about the number of his «Rebuttals to "Answering Islam" and other anti-Islam articles» suddenly jumped from the number 250 to 355 in one day. How did that happpen? That is a lot of new articles for one day, one may think. Well, he actually added only ONE article, answering (?) 60+45 questions found in ONE article on a Christian website and counted this as 105 rebuttals. Is he really so desperate that he is in need of this kind of statistics? Anyway, on to the comparison list.
As to me not providing rebuttals, can you please provide at least one example that shows where I failed to provide a rebuttal so we can at least discuss it here?
Jochen said: "Osama is apparently wanting his readers to think that he has addressed all of these authors' work when it clearly is not the case." Well, Osama is really not worried about proving anything to anyone. Osama's main concern is to spread Islam and it's Truth to mankind. Whether or not people accept or reject Islam, this is something Osama had left to Allah Almighty to decide on.
Jochen said: "Of the 56 articles in Sam Shamoun's file, only a mere 14 find a direct response, many of which are the work of other polemicists besides Abdallah. Of Silas' 53 articles, only 18 find a direct response, many again which are not Osama's work, but links to other sites." Oh really? Show us the proof. When one reads my rebuttals at:
He will immediately see that Osama had maintained his standards in regarding to providing responses/rebuttals that clearly answer the points that your team had raised. Yes, some of my rebuttals are not direct ones, and that's because I have already covered the topic before in great details, and I therefore, after examining the article, I saw no need to give a direct one, because I had all of the points already addressed in an existing article.
Jochen said: "We feel that some of the articles Osama gave which were supposed to be rebuttals of our material work better the other way around." Again, care to provide an example? These kind of dumb statements do you no service and no good. Everyone knows who Osama Abdallah is, and how strong his web site, www.answering-christianity.com, really is. My reader (Muslim or non-Muslim) fully appreciates my quality of hard work, and fully knows that I don't write junk and call them articles. I always back my points with quotes. So again, please provide us an example to show the reader where I did poorly? Otherwise, please provide us your silence.
Jochen said: "Here is an interesting observation: On 2 November 2003, Osama Abdallah's claim about the number of his «Rebuttals to "Answering Islam" and other anti-Islam articles» suddenly jumped from the number 250 to 355 in one day. How did that happpen? That is a lot of new articles for one day, one may think. Well, he actually added only ONE article, answering (?) 60+45 questions found in ONE article on a Christian website and counted this as 105 rebuttals. Is he really so desperate that he is in need of this kind of statistics?" I did clearly mention:
"Andrew and Robert Morey at www.bible.ca. Andrew's 60 questions, and Robert's 45 questions. Total of 105 questions."
So, where exactly did I go wrong here? Where did I show that I was desperate? I did debunk Robert's and Andrew's mantras and exposed Andrew's ridiculous and outrageous lies of deliberate misquotations!
Is that why you are so angry? Osama Abdallah is not desperate and not unprofessional. Believe me, my list of rebuttals will grow a whole a lot larger in the near future insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing).
It seems to me that Mr. Katz is jealous of my site, because since he and his team couldn't really provide much answers to my articles, they try to bury their utter failure through attacking me personally in a hope to prove to the reader that Osama is not even worth responding to.
Well Mr. Katz, think as you wish, but I have tons of readers who appreciate my work, and many had already embraced Islam through this humble servant of Allah Almighty; Osama Abdallah.
Jochen Katz had showed that he is jealous from my site's rapidly growing popularity. He feels that the only way he can undermine Osama Abdallah and www.answering-christianity.com is to attack the personality of Osama Abdallah. This is a cheap tactic that only further proves that Jochen is a total joke. I have lost respect for you Mr. Katz. Right now, you have proven to us that you are desperate and foolish enough to personalize your attacks on my site, while I have done absolutely no harm to you, nor ever showed you any disrespect toward you.
Back to My Rebuttals, and exposing the lies of the Answering Islam team section.
Rebuttals to Jochen Katz' articles.
Send your comments.
Back to Main Page.