Monday, 30 January 2017

Who saw the body get laid in the tomb?



Who followed Joseph of arimathea when he took the body of Jesus to the tomb (Mark 15 46)?. What makes you think the body could not have been switched with a stuffed linen clothing? Who even went inside the tomb and double checked the actual body none of the soldiers went inside and took a good look at the face and confirmed it was the actual person.

There is not evidence from the New Testament that the soldiers or scribes or Pharisees followed Joseph of arimathea all the way to the tomb?. There is no solid evidence the man on the cross known as Jesus actually gave up his ghost rather could have been put to sleep after drinking mixed fluid, or even unconscious (Mark 15:36).

Why did Nicodemus & Joseph of arimathea bring a large a amount of Aloes with them as Aloes is used to resuscitate and invigorate a person (John 19:39)

It's undeniable that the body of Jesus could have easily been switched by Joseph of arimathea on his way to this tomb since none of the enemies of Jesus followed him. This further explains why Jesus never showed himself to the Jews he challenged with the sign, he hid himself from them. Remember Jesus supposed to have said to the Jewish rabbis, scribe and Pharisee that no sign shall be given other then the sign of Jonah three days and three night? (Matthew 12:39-40). So why did he not show himself to the Jews, scribes and Pharisees and prove to them he resurrected.

Note in Matthew 26:65-66 the only version which says that the Jewish rabbis  were worried The body would be taken by his disciples, so they request Pilate to secure the tomb and so the Pilate sent guards to the tomb, but nowhere does Matthew say the guards actually went  inside the tomb and took a good look at the face and then sealed the tomb.

A new dilemma for Christians can you prove to us the body of Jesus was not switched by Joseph of arimathea on his way to the tomb! If there was no witness who saw the body of Jesus get laid in the tomb then the entire empty tomb can be easily explained..

There was no body in the tomb in the first place!!

Sunday, 29 January 2017

Are you Jesus's brother or mother ?



He replied (Jesus), "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice." (Luke 8:21)



But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. (Matthew 12:48-50)


---------------


Shall we conclude from the above saying if u hear gods words and put it into practice your either Jesus brother or mother?..... Is that literal brother and mother or metaphorical? Why not apply the similar saying to Mary Pbuh when she was called the sister of Aaron?  Isn't that double standards from from Christians!! We also read from genesis Abraham calling his nephew lot BROTHER!!


And when Abram heard that his brother lot was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan. (Genesis 14:14)


And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people. (Genesis 14:12)


So Abram said to Lot, "Please let there be no strife between you and me, nor between my herdsmen and your herdsmen, for we are brothers. (Genesis 13:8)

-----------------

Once again are the above passages metaphorical or literal you choose, let's be consistence and rational, we know they mean brothers and sisters mothers and fathers in faith and to finish off this absurd desperate attempt to attack Islam by Christians I would like to close this with a verse from the book of Luke 


In the time of Herod king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah, and whose wife Elizabeth was a daughter of Aaron.
(Luke 1:5)

Was she really the daughter of Aaron ? Or descendent now imagine if we start playing those pathetic games how will u react!!   


"I have become a brother to jackals And a companion of ostriches.
(Job 30:29)

Are the words Tawheed and Trinity found in scriptures (Argument busted)



Whenever Muslims have a dialogue with Christians regarding theology, and the topic of trinity comes up Christians normally find it very uneasy to discuss this very issues of trinity. Just for the records most Christians have no understanding of the trinity and generally dismiss it as a mystery!. 

Now coming back to the topic of Trinity. When Muslims ask Christians where in the bible is the word trinity mentioned?. Rather then responding to the question they normally divert and counter by asking where in the Quran dose it say Tawheed. Interestingly Christians have acknowledged the word trinity which is supposed to be a core  fundamental doctrine attributing to their God is not found any where in the bible? How absurd. In fact the closed to trinity which is doing in 1 John 5:7 is actually a later addition and wasn't originally mentioned. This further supports the claim that there is not absolute mention of trinity nor the concept of trinity is found anywhere in the bible so the question is why use the word TRINITY where is was unknown to Jesus and his disciples!. Now what does trinity mean where did it derive form? The etymology behind it would mean three which again fails to support what Jesus and his disciples believed in and that is ECHAD One True God.

The earliest record of trinity is mentioned by 2nd century theologian Tertullian,  R.E. Roberts writes :

"Tertullian was the first Christian writer to face a serious attack concerning the nature of God. In response, he outlined a formula summarising the Biblical teaching on this, and was the first to use the word trinitas in a technical way to describe the relation of God the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. The work is question is Adv. Praxean, but he also uses the term in De Pudicitia 2, and 21, and 25. He also was the first to use the word persona for the persons of the Trinity. However Tertullian's pioneering work in this area does not always avoid tending to make the Son subordinate to the Father, no doubt because the issue was not in his mind at the time. In Adv. Hermogenes 4 he makes a statement that there was a time when the Son did not exist, but the context again suggests that the statement is an inadvertence drawn forth by his argument about the appropriate titulature of the persons of the Trinity, rather than a doctrinal statement."
So from the above quotation we read that concept of trinity derived during the 2nd century by Tertullian, thus we can agree Jesus nor his disciples were aware of this triune god theory. An innovation introduced centuries later which is still being understood by Christian. 

-----------------------
Now let's bust this weak argument made by Christians regarding the word Tawheed. As mentioned above Christians who can't answer regarding the trinity and why it's not mentioned in the bible, tend to divert the question and ask Muslims here is Tawheed found in the Quran. Just for the records since we've proven that not only is the word trinity not in the entire bible even the concept of trinity is not found nor was this trinity even known or used by Jesus or his disciples. This goes to show that no such doctrine was even known or used till the 2nd century.

Coming to the word Tawheed one has to first establish where the word Tawheed derived from : 

Tawheed in Arabic means attributing Oneness to Allaah and describing Him as being One and Unique, with no partner or peer in His Essence and Attributes.  
The Arabs say waahid, ahad and waheed, all meaning one. Allaah is Waahid, meaning that He has no rivals or peers in any way. So Tawheed means knowing Allaah is One, with none like unto Him. Whoever does not acknowledge Allaah in these terms and does not describe Him as being One with no partner or associate does not believe in Tawheed. 
Tawheed means Monotheism that is believing in One True God who has No associates or parters. It's root word is Waahid, Ahad and Waheed 

This word (Tawheed) and its derivatives are used with this meaning in the Qur’aan and Sunnah. For example: 

“Say (O Muhammad): He is Allaah, (the) One [Ahad].Allaah‑us‑Samad [Allaah — the Self‑Sufficient Master, Whom all creatures need, (He neither eats nor drinks)].He begets not, nor was He begotten.And there is none co‑equal or comparable unto Him” (al-Ikhlaas 112:1-3)

“And your Ilaah (God) is One Ilaah [ilaahun waahidun] (God — Allaah), Laa Ilaaha illa Huwa (there is none who has the right to be worshipped but He), the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful” (al-Baqarah 2:163)

“Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allaah is the third of the three (in a Trinity).’ But there is no Ilaah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilaah [ilaahun waahidun] (God —Allaah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall on the disbelievers among them” (al-Maa'idah 5:73)

The above verses from the Quran we can read that the concept of Oneness is found in the Quran. And the word Tawheed has derived from It's root word Waahid, Ahad and Waheed. 

Did Prophet Muhammed  Pbuh and His Companions know about the word Tawheed and the Answer is Yes!. We have Sahih Hadiths where the word Taweed is Explicity Mentioned, which tells us  The Prophet Muhammed Pbuh and his Companions were well aware of the Word Taweed and this Word was used during the beginning of Islam. Let's cite a few hadiths to show Tawheed was a well known Word.

It was narrated from ‘Aishah and Abu Hurairah that when the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wanted to offer a sacrifice, he brought two large, fat, horned, black-and-white, castrated rams. He slaughtered one on behalf of his nation, for whoever testified to Allah with monotheism (بِالتَّوْحِيدِ )and that he had conveyed (the Message), and he slaughtered the other on behalf of Muhammad and the family of Muhammad (ﷺ). ( Sunan Ibn Majah Vol 4 Book 26 Hadith 3122)

The Word Tawheed is used in Arabic بِالتَّوْحِيدِ

“The Messenger of Allah came with two sheep both with big horns, then he reclined to one side and said: Bismillah wa Allahu Akbar, O Allah! Be with Muhammad and his family, then reclined to the other and said: Bismillah wa Allahu Akbar, O Allah! Be with Muhammad and his Ummah who testify/bear witness to you of/with TAWHEED and testify/bear witness to this statement/declaration. (Narrated by Jabir ibn Abdullah, collected by Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani, Matalib al-Aliya volume 3, page 32 (Hassan))

The Word Tawheed is used in Arabic ، بالتوحيد 

“Amr bin Shu`aib narrated from his father, who narrated from his grandfather that al-Aas bin Wa’il took an oath during the pre-Islamic times (Jahiliyyah) that he would slaughter one hundred goats and that Hisham bin al-`Aas slaughtered his share of 50 goats. Then `Amr bin al-`Aas asked the Prophet (P) about that, and he said, “As for your father, if he affirmed TAWHIDand you fast and give charity on his behalf, it would benefit him.”

أما أبوك فلو كان أقر بالتوحيد، فصمت وتصدقت عنه نفعه ذلك “. (Imam Ahmad narrated this, See silsilah saheeha (484))

(Just for the records Nabeel quraishi a Christian apologist said during his debate with Dr shabir Ally that nowhere in the Hadiths is the word Tawheed found?. Wonder if he would apologise to Dr Shabir Allay and his congregation for lying!
--------------------------

And there's many more Hadiths which Explicitly uses the word Tawheed for this paper these are sufficient. So let's us summarise this whole study: 

The Word Trinity nor the Concept  of Trinity is nowhere to be found in the Entire bible. The root word of Trinity is Three, even that's nowhere to be found in the Entire bible. Had the word Trinity have any sort of link to its root word which was often used then this could of have been used as evidence, but even that is lost. In short forget Trinity its root word Three is not even found which holds the Concept of a Triune God. The Earliest record of the usage of Trinity is by the 2nd century theologian Tertullian. There is no absolute evidence form them New Testament where Jesus or his disciples ever spoke about trinity let alone use the word. The word Trinity was coined up much later. So we can conclude Trinity nor the Concept of Trinity is found anywhere in the entire bible not even during the time of Jesus and his followers. 

On the other hand the Word Tawheed which is derived from the root  word Waahid, Ahad and Waheed is found in the Quran. The Original Word Ahad meaning One is found in the Quran in many places, which completely destroys the argument made by Christians. Put it this way if you were to ask Christians what does Tawheed mean they'll hesitate to answer as they know Tawheed means Monotheism, Oneness. If the Original Word is found in the Quran why are Christians chasing a word which comes from the Original?. Even if the word Tawheed is not found in the Quran it does not mean that the word Taweed was unknown to Prophet Muhammed Pbuh and His Companions. The Hadiths explicitly use the Arabic word Tawheed. This tells us the word Tawheed was known and used by Prophet Muhammed Pbuh and His Companions. So the original word is found in the Quran and the derived word Tawheed is found in Hadiths.

Once again Trinity  nor its concept is found anywhere in the bible. Whereas Tawheed and its root Original Word is found in the Quran and Hadiths.

So next time Christians use this baseless Argument show us where Tawheed is found in the Quran correct them!






Saturday, 28 January 2017

Yahweh commands Aaron to make an offering to Satan.!!!!!!



We read from the  bible that Yahweh commanded  Aaron to give Satan an offering!. Now This may sound really absurd to Christian readers, but little did they know their very bible tells us Aaron made an offering to Satan by the command of Yahweh. First let's  Let's read this devilish act :

“And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the LORD and the other lot for Azazel.” (Leviticus 16:8)

To the average bible reader he/she may see no problem with the above verse. Before we dwell into this problematic verse we need to understand what the context to this verse is. So in a nutshell Aaron was not allowed to enter the holy place of Yahweh until he brought a sin offering and presented it before the Lord. The verses go,on saying what type of offer he needs to bring and how to make it.

“This is how Aaron is to enter the Most Holy Place: He must first bring a young bull for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering. He is to put on the sacred linen tunic, with linen undergarments next to his body; he is to tie the linen sash around him and put on the linen turban. These are sacred garments; so he must bathe himself with water before he puts them on.From the Israelite community he is to take two male goats for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering.“Aaron is to offer the bull for his own sin offering to make atonement for himself and his household. Then he is to take the two goats and present them before the Lord at the entrance to the tent of meeting.(Leviticus 16:3-7)

The Interesting part and the main topic of this paper is found in verse 8 (“And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the LORD and the other lot for Azazel.”) we know from context Yahweh has commanded Aaron to offer two goats one to himself and the other to Azazel. You may wonder who's Azazel? Well if you read the KJV bible you'll notice it reads scapegoat?. The Hebrew text reads Azazel (עֲזָאזֵל) which has been translated in english as the scapegoat. 

The question is what does Azazel (עֲזָאזֵל) mean? Let's find our before we hit the nail: 

John Eadie who was Professor of Biblical Literature and Exegesis to the United Presbyterian Church writes:
“The language in the original is precise and peculiar. It reads “And Aaron shall cast lots on the two goats – ONE FOR JEHOVAH, ONE FOR AZAZEL.” What we are to understand by Azazel has been much disputed. The language appears to us to imply the personality of Azazel – “One for Jehovah, One of Azazel.” By Azazel we are inclined to understand Satan, as do almost all ancient versions, which leave the word, as they do the names of other persons, untranslated.” 

Professor Craig A. Evans writes:
“It was believed that in the last days Satan would be bound: “the Lord said to Raphael, ‘Bind Azazel hand and foot” (1 Enoch 10:4). Raphael is an archangel and Azazel is an archdemon, possibly Satan himself (cf. 1 Enoch 21:4, 6)”

Bishop of Natal Reverend John William Colenso writes:
“The acceptance of Azazel, v.8,10,26, as the name of a personal being placed in opposition to Jehovah, seems to be the only mode of justifying the relation in which the two lots stood to each other … The greater number of critics are inclined to take Azazel as the name of an evil spirit to whom the goat was sent…. Several Jewish traditions point to the same conclusion. The name Azalzel, easily corrupted from Azazel, is applied to a fallen angel in the book of Enoch, which was most likely written by a Jew about 40 A.C. … Origen expressly says that Azazel denoted the Devil…. ”

Barnes’ Notes of the Bible states that “the two goats formed a single sin-offering... Azazel is the pre-Mosaic name of an evil personal being placed in opposition to Yahweh. 

Jewish understanding 
The traditional Orthodox Jewish understanding of the word עזאזל, it's my personal belief that the Hebrew word עזאזל, which occurs four times in the Tanakh (Lev. 16:8 x1; Lev. 16:10 x2; Lev. 16:26 x1), is the proper name of a fallen angel, i.e. an evil spirit/ demon. This Hebrew name is very similar to one found in 1 Enoch.
For example  it is written in the book of Enoch 
And the whole earth has been corrupted hrough the works that were taught by Aza(z)el: to him ascribe all sin. (1 Enoch 10:8-9)

Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman (רמב"ן)

In his commentary on Lev. 16:8, Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman makes a similar assertion to Rabbi Ibn Ezra concerning the meaning of the word עזאזל. He writes :

Now the Torah has absolutely forbidden the acceptance of gods and all worship to them. However, the Holy One, blessed be He, commands us on Yom ha-Kippurim (the Day of Atonement) that we should release a goat in the wilderness, to the "prince" who rules over wastelands, and this (goat) is fitting for it because he is its master, and destruction and waste emanate from his power, which in turn is the cause of the stars of the sword, wars quarrels, wounds, plagues, division and destruction... Also in his portion are the devils called "destroyers" in the language of our rabbis, and in the language of our scriptures, "se'irim" (demons).

According to Pirḳe R. El. xlvi. (comp. Tos. Meg. 31a), the goat is offered to Azazel as a bribe that he who is identical with Samael or Satan should not by his accusations prevent the atonement of the sins on that day.
The fact that Azazel occupied a place in Mandæan, Sabean, and Arabian mythology (see Brandt, "Mandäische Theologie," pp. 197, 198; Norberg's "Onomasticon," p. 31; Reland's "De Religione Mohammedanarum," p. 89; Kamus, s.v. "Azazel" [demon identical with Satan]; Delitzsch, "Zeitsch. f. Kirchl. Wissensch. u. Leben," 1880, p. 182), renders it probable that Azazel was a degraded Babylonian deity. Origen ("Contra Celsum," vi. 43) identifies Azazel with Satan; Pirḳe R. El. (l.c.) with Samael; and the Zohar Aḥare Mot, following Naḥmanides, with the spirit of Esau or heathenism; still, while one of the chief demons in the Cabala, he never attained in the doctrinal system of Judaism a position similar to that of Satan

There you have it Yahweh commanded Aaron to make an offering of two goats one to  himself and Satan, imagine that! On top of that Christians fall into another dilemma because to them Jesus was also a scapegoat a sacrificial lamb. 
Now the ultimate question is if Jesus was a ransom as stated in Mark 10:45 to whom was the Ransom paid?. Was the ransom paid to Yahweh or Satan ? Could his so called alleged father be responsible for such a murder to set people free?, or does the the Ransom go  to Satan who eventually wins his way by killing the so called alleged son of God and walks away scoot free?.  We can conclude one thing and that is if Jesus of the bible was this scapegoat then his sacrifice was given to Satan.




Friday, 27 January 2017

Rebecca the jar and Camels.! busted!



The fact that Rebecca was Isaac's child bride is so embarrassing for Christians they are finding it difficult not accept it. Even though we have proven from the Hebrew bible the language and academic biblical scholars that Rebecca was a child bride,Christians still play the blind game. What's worse they try to refute this fact by saying Rebecca could not have been a child bride because of a certain information found in the bible regarding Rebecca?. Let's find out what this information is which Christians are latching on thinking they can debunk the proven fact that Rebecca was a child bride.


-----------------------


Before he had finished praying, Rebekah came out with her jar on her shoulder. She was the daughter of Bethuel son of Milkah, who was the wife of Abraham’s brother Nahor. The woman was very beautiful, a virgin; no man had ever slept with her. She went down to the spring, filled her jar and came up again.


Then the servant ran to meet her, and said, "Please let me drink a little water from your jar." She said, "Drink, my lord"; and she quickly lowered her jar to her hand, and gavehim a drink. After she had given him a drink, she said, "I'll draw water for your camels too, until they have had enough to drink." So she quickly emptied her jar into the trough, ran back to the well to draw more water, and drew enough for all his camels. (Genesis 24:16-20)


The above passage is a typical refutation made by Christians regarding Rebecca's age when she got married. Their claim is how can Rebecca be a Child/Infant (NAAR in Hebrew) when she was able to to carry jar/jug on her shoulder? 

A very weak and desperate attempt to challenge an irrefutable proof which destroys the notion that child marriage never took place in the bible. The problem is majority of Christians do not study their own bible nor do they want to learn from people who are experts in that field. Rather majority of Christians make up their own interpretations so it fits the way they find it convenient without having a proper understanding of the texts.


------------------------


Let's now show our Christian friends how carrying a jar of water and emptying it in a trough  so the camels can drink from could be problematic when it comes to new findings!




  • Archaeologists from the University of Tel Aviv, Israel, found that camels were not domesticated in Israel until the 9th century BC

  • They claim this shows that Biblical text was compiled long after the events described in it and challenges the Bible as a historical document

  • Researchers analysed the oldest known domesticated camel bones, found in the Aravah Valley in the southern Levant, to inform their research


  • Camels were not domesticated in Israel until centuries after the Age of the Patriarchs – when Abraham, Jacob and Issac are said to have lived - between 2,000 and 1,500 BC.
    Dr Erez Ben-Yosef and Dr Lidar Sapir-Hen of Tel Aviv University's Department of Archaeology and Near Eastern Cultures used radiocarbon dating to pinpoint the moment when domesticated camels arrived in the southern Levant. They found camels came in the 9th century BC, not the 12th as previously thought. 


    "This is a very good example that the stories were written at a much later time than they supposedly took place. The editor of these stories knew the camel was a draft animal used in his time for traveling across the desert, so of course Abraham, Jacob and David used camels. We call it an anachronism; he projected the reality that he knew at his own time," says Ben-Yosef.


    Carol Meyers, a professor of religious studies at Duke University, about what such anachronisms tell us about the genesis of religious texts says :

    "Pretty much so. In other words, stories about Abraham having a lot of camels, figuring in the story of Rebecca at the well - those stories are purported to take place hundreds of years before the camel was around, was on the scene as a domesticated animal. The storyteller who's shaping those legends is using what information he knows, which is after the camels are domesticated. And if he wants to show that Abraham is a very important, wealthy figure, what better way than to say that he's got the most expensive vehicle available? It'd be like saying he has a fleet of Jaguars or something like that today. We know that Jaguars didn't exist 200 years ago. We have an idea of our history of technology, but somebody formulating the story in, say, the 7th or 6th century BCE, they wouldn't have known that camel"

    In short there was no camels in the same region as Abraham,Isaac, Jacob which means Rebecca could not have given water to the CAMELS?. If the scribes can make up such a lie just to improve the story it's obvious Rebecca would not have had carried the jar in the first place. Our Christian friend may say doesn't this also mean that Rebecca may not have been a child or even got married if the scribes can make up the Camels just to improve the story?.  That may not be the case since child marriage was very common those days and Rebecca was no exception to that. The fact that Rebecca married Isaac would not be doubtful to any historian, archeologist, but digging up the past as archeologist do could indeed change history as we know it. By finding out Camels were not present at a certain area does not dismiss two people  getting married.


  • So if any Christians bring up Rebecca carrying her jar to give the camels water inform him/her Camel did not exist at that region during the time of Rebecca!.


    Wednesday, 25 January 2017

    According to the bible Breast feeding is allowed by men's How absurd is that!!



    "Have I conceived all this people? have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers?" (Numbers 11:12)

    Obviously, a nursing father is a sight that must have been at least occasionally seen during those times or else there would have been no point to the metaphor Moses was trying to construct.

    "And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me." (Isaiah 49:23)

    Here's one more verse: "One dieth in his full strength, being wholly at ease and quiet. His breasts are full of milk, and his bones are moistened with marrow"

    In this verse, breasts full of milk signify good health and full strength. Men, how is YOUR strength? (Job 21:24)


    ----------------------------------------------------------------



    Christians are ignorant of the New Testament’s portrayal of Jesus; and they are ignorant of the documents hidden by the Church, namely the Gospel of Philip which records the love affair between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. The book of Revelation is probably the most degrading book; it contains a passage that describes Jesus having woman breasts!

    And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps (mastos) with a golden girdle. (Revelations 1:13)

    Let us analyze the passage closely; Jesus is described as having “paps” with a golden girdle. But what are paps? According to the Oxford Dictionary, it basically means the “breasts”.  There is evidence to show that “paps” exclusively refers to woman breasts.
    Here is the lexicon for “paps”

    Strong’s Number: 3149

    Transliterated Word:

    Mastos

     Phonetic

    mas-tos' 

    Definition:
    the breasts
    the breasts (nipples) of a man
    breasts of a women

    The word “paps” could refer to both male and female breasts, but the New Testament applies the Greek word “mastos” to woman only!

    And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps (mastos) which thou hast sucked. (Luke 11:27)

    For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps (mastos) which never gave suck. (Luke 23:29)

    Since the New Testament never applies the word “paps” to males, the verse Revelation 1:13 does speak of Jesus having female breasts! Now if the author of Revelation wanted to say Jesus has MALE breasts, he should’ve used the Greek word “stethos”, which simply means “breast”.

    And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast (stethos), saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. (Luke 18:13)

    Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake. He then lying on Jesus' breast (stethos) saith unto him, Lord, who is it? (John 13:25)

    Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast (stethos) at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? (John 21:20)

    The difference is that “stethos” defines any breast, but “mastos” only refers to female breasts. The perverted author of Revelations decided to use the word “mastos” and not “stethos”.

    The scholar Tom Harper comments on Revelations 1:13

    Revelation 1:13, in the King James Version, says, “And I saw in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle”. “Paps” is the archaic word for a woman’s breasts. In the Greek, the word used is the plural mastos, which the lexicon defines as “the breast, esp., of the swelling breast of a woman”. Rarely, the plural was used to refer to a man’s breasts, but the prevailing sense is female. The fact that the figure in this passage from Revelation wore a “girdle”, or cincture, about the breasts—the modern equivalent would be a brassiere—confirms that the breasts in question are female. Indeed, the New English Bible translates the plural as though it were a singular—“with a golden girdle round his breast”. The New Revised Standard Version tried to avoid any embarrassment by wrongly translating it as “chest”. (The Pagan Christ, p. 211)

    It is interesting to note that Revelations also contains a passage that speaks of angels having breasts!

    And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts (stethos) girded with golden girdles. (Revelations 15:6)

    Do angels have breasts? The passage doesn’t use the Greek word “mastos”, so the author is simply describing the breasts (non-female) of angels. Yet the verse Revelation 1:13 blatantly describes Jesus as a woman.


    Monday, 23 January 2017

    According to the bible Moses had horns coming out of his head?


    Here's another example on when I ask Christians how well versed are you with the Hebrew bible, and how do you interpret the Hebrews texts?. The problems that we find it most Christians don't have a clue of their own bible. They don't know Hebrew nor have they been taught to read from the original language so what happens they get stuck on certain verses and passages which create a bigger problem when they start to interpret it their own way which is not the correct method the way the Jews interpret.

    Take for instance this passage from the Torah :


    And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him. And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him. (Exodus 34:29-30 KJV)

    The above passage is a very bad English Translation, either the translators did not know Hebrew or they deliberately hid the actual Hebrew text to save themselves from embarrassment. You may wonder what's so extraordinary about the above passage? It seems pretty straight forward Moses got the tablets from mount Sinai and his face was shining?.  Let's show how Christians fail to understand the actual text since they are u aware of the Hebrew language. 

    According to Exodus 34:29-30 Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets and his FACE WAS SHINING!. Was his face really shining? according to the Hebrew text it wasn't rather he had HORNS coming out of his Face the Hebrew text used in Exodus 34:29-30 is קָרַ֖ן ka·ran HORNS. 

    Here's a literal translation of the texts :

    And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face had HORNS; and they were afraid to come nigh him. (Exodus 34:30)

    --------------------

    Blue letter bible : קָרַן qâran, kaw-ran'; a primitive root; to push or gore; used only as denominative from H7161, to shoot out horns; figuratively, rays:—have horns, shine

    Even the Latin vulgate Torah translates the texts as horns 


    And when Moses came down from the Mount Sinai, he held the two tables of the testimony, and he knew not that his face was horned from the conversation of the Lord. And Aaron and the children of Israel seeing the face of Moses horned, were afraid to come near. (Exodus 34:29-30 Latin vulgate)

    How about the same word being used in other books found in the bible:


    And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine HORN with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.
    (1 Samuel 16:1)


    And his brightness was as the light; he had HORNS coming out of his hand: and there was the hiding of his power. (Habakkuk 3:4) 


    And it shall come to pass, that when they make a long blast with the ram's HORNand when ye hear the sound of the trumpet, all the people shall shout with a great shout; and the wall of the city shall fall down flat, and the people shall ascend up every man straight before him. (Joshua 6:5)


    And Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him HORNS of iron: and he said, Thus saith the LORD, With these shalt thou push the Syrians, until thou have consumed them.
    (1 kings 22:11)


    And thou shalt make the horns of it upon the four corners thereof: his HORNS shall be of the same: and thou shalt overlay it with brass. (Exodus 27:2)


    The list goes on! This only shows that the actual english translation was hidden by the copyist. The golden question is why did he have HORNS coming out? No wonder it says Aaron and the children of Israel were afraid to come close to him? 

    Again why did the copyist hide this?




     

    Sunday, 22 January 2017

    According to Matthew, Jesus accused the Jewish leaders of murdering Zechariah son of Barachiah:


    "...Zechariah son of Barachiah whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar." (Matthew23:35).

    -----------------

    Unfortunately, the Zachariah mentioned was slain in Jerusalem, 69 CE; so that Matthew makes Jesus refer to an event that occurred 39 years after his death in the past tense.

    Referring to this passage, the Catholic scholar Dr. Hug says: "There cannot be a doubt, if we attend to the name, the fact and its circumstances, and the object of Jesus in citing it, that it was the same Zacharias Barouchos, who, according to Josephus, a short time before the destruction of Jerusalem, was unjustly slain in the temple."

    Commenting on this passage, Prof. Newman says: "There is no other man known in history to whom the verse can allude. If so, it shows how late, how ignorant, how rash is the composer of a text passed off on us as sacred truth" (Religion not History, p. 46).

    Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Commentary 

    35. from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias] If the reading “son of Barachias” be retained (it is omitted in the Sinaitic MS.) a difficulty arises; for the Zacharias, whose death “in the court of the house of the Lord” is recorded 2 Chronicles 24:20-22, was the son of Jehoiada. The words, however, do not occur in Luke 11:51, and are possibly interpolated. Zechariah the prophet

    Shockingly biblical scholars admit there is an INTERPOLATION !!!!!!!!!!

    What a Shame!!!

    Saturday, 21 January 2017

    Missionary lie exposed!

    It's been a few times now I've come across on Facebook this new missionary lie which totally takes the biscuit. It's about a small child one version says boy another says girl who apparently asked an Imam a question with baffled him and he was unable to answer!. So what was this question posed by a child which the imam was shocked and unable to answer?

    Believe it or not  the child asked the Imam after his Islamic lecture, where does the Quran say Allah love the sinner like her? Which apparently made the imam speechless?

    Ask yourself this question have you ever heard of a small child going up to an imam and asking such a question!!! Seriously? And what's worse it had to be a Christian making mention of such an apparent situation. It seems to me that Christians have become to desperate they'll go to any means to make Islam look bad even if it's the road to lying!. 

    Let's say for arguments sake this child even asked the Imam was the imam able to answer this child's  question? And the answer is YES let's clear this lie made by Christians and close this case for good.


    Now unlike Christians who only accept and rely upon the bible (sets of books from the old and new testament making it into one), us Muslims on the other hand follow the Quran and Sunna (Teaching and sayings of Prophet Muhammed Pbuh found in books of Hadiths). Even the Jews have an oral tradition which they call inspired(Mishna/Talmud) but the Christians only solely follow the bible without any additional oral traditions. Let's use both Quran and sunnah I.e Hadith to clear up the lies the missionaries have created.

    ------------------

    Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah. for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
    ( Surah 39:53)

    We read from the above verse that Allah Swt is speaking to his servants who have transgressed and sinned against their souls, sinned to the extreme beyond a limit who have done wrong Despair not the Mercy of Allah Swt as Allah Swt forgives All Sins.

    Now imagine a disbeliever wether Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Atheist anyone who has constantly sinned and sinned Allah the Merciful will Forgive him providing he Repents why? Because Allah Swt Loves this person as the next verses will show


    "But ask forgiveness of your Lord, and turn unto Him (in repentance): For my Lord is indeed full of mercy and loving-kindness." (Surah 11:90)

    And He is the Oft-Forgiving, Full of Loving-Kindness,(Surah 85:14)

    The above verses clearly reads Allah Swt is the Loving, We read in Surah 39:53 that No Matter how much you have sinned against your own soul despair not the Mercy of Allah Swt as he will forgive you why because he is the loving the kind as found in Surah  11:90 and Surah  85:14


    There we have it Allah Swt loves everyone wether your a sinner or not a Jew, Christian, buddist, Hindu, atheist it does not matter as he's giving you a chance to free yourself from all the bad deeds you have committed no matter how much they may be it could reach the sky do not worry  by the Mercy of Allah Swt he will forgive you providing you repent as Allah Swt is the Loving and he Loves to Forgive Us.

    Now let's read from Hadith 


    In Saheeh Muslim it is narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Allah has one hundred parts of mercy, of which He sent down one between the jinn, mankind, the animals and the insects, by means of which they are compassionate and merciful to one another, and by means of which wild animals are kind to their offspring. And Allah has kept back ninety-nine parts of mercy with which to be merciful to His slaves of the Day of Resurrection.” (Muslim, al-Tawbah, 6908) 
    It was narrated that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Some prisoners were brought to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and there was a woman among the prisoners who was searching (for her child). When she found her child she embraced him and put him to her breast. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said to us, ‘Do you think that this woman would throw her child in the fire?’ We said, ‘No, by Allah, not if she is able not to.’ The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, ‘Allah is more merciful to His slaves than this woman is to her child.’”  (Agreed upon)



    Narrated by Abu Huraira

    Allah's Apostle said, "If Allah loves a person, He calls Gabriel, saying, 'Allah loves so and so, O Gabriel love him' So Gabriel would love him and then would make an announcement in the Heavens: 'Allah has loved so and-so therefore you should love him also.' So all the dwellers of the Heavens would love him, and then he is granted the pleasure of the people on the earth." (See Hadith No. 66, Vol. 8) 


    We can conclude that Allah Swt is the most Loving and Kind and Allah Swt Loves his creations and is The  Most Mercy Merciful to his Creation. Wether your a Jew, Christian, Hindu, buddist, Atheist Despair Not you will be forgiven providing you repent as Allah Swt is the most Merciful and Loving.


    Thursday, 19 January 2017

    Wives of solomon had more power then yahweh (biblical God)



    At Gibeon the LORD appeared to Solomon during the night in a dream, and God said, "Ask for whatever you want me to give you." (1 kings 3:5)


    Give me an understanding heart so that I can govern your people well and know the difference between right and wrong. For who by himself is able to govern this great people of yours?" (1 kings 3:9)


    I will do what you have asked. I will give you a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be. (1 king 3 :12)


    And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the sea shore. (1 kings 4:29)


    King Solomon was greater in riches and wisdom than all the other kings of the earth. (1 Kings 10:23)

    --------------------------------


    From the Above verses it seems like solomon is a great king and yahweh has blessed him with all Wisdom, riches, discerning Heart, one who knows RIGHT FROM WRONG!!.. The Prefect man as the King on earth, imagine people of the world came to get his wisdom?. Surely if YAHWEH has blessed him from himself then this blessing will always remain in him.  After all Yahweh came to his dreams and asked him what he wants, It's not often yahweh comes in dreams.?

    However Yahweh didn't even know what was coming to him. It's seems  like ya he got tricked by the wives of solomon!. They say the older you get the wiser you become, not in this case solomon was supposed to have been given wisdom at a very young age.    

    -------------------------------



    As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father had been.
    (1 kings 11:4)


    So solomon became a pagan? His wives  turned his HEART AWAY FROM GOD?.. How is that even possible when Yahweh himself granted solomon with such qualities of wisdom? A man who was blessed by God went against it? Can you imagine a Prophet of God became a pagan How could this be? Which begs the question why jews and Christians will have books written by a pagan I.e songs of Solomon and proverbs?






    Wednesday, 18 January 2017

    Yahweh commands stones as part of gifts


    The Sacred Tent

    1 The Lord said to Moses:
    2 Tell everyone in Israel who wants to give gifts that they must bring them to you. 
    3 Here is a list of what you are to collect: Gold, silver, and bronze; 
    4 blue, purple, and red wool; fine linen; goat hair; 
    5 tanned ram skins; fine leather; acacia wood; 
    6 olive oil for the lamp; sweet-smelling spices to mix with the oil for dedicating the tent and ordaining the priests; 
    7 and onyx stones for the sacred vest and the breastpiece. 
    8 I also want them to build a special place where I can live among my people. 
    9 Make it and its furnishings exactly like the pattern I will show you.
    (Exodus 25:1-9)

    -------------------

    Take notice on verse 7 (and onyx stones for the sacred vest and the breastpiece.)
    ONXY STONES!!!!




    One wonders why Christians say Muslims worship black stone where in reality Muslims do not worship the black Stone. For us Muslims it's a Sacred Stone sent from heaven. And here we read from the very bible Christians cherish the ONXY stone must be used for the Sacred vest and breastpiece. Below we read Jacob using a rock to worship Yahweh?......

    When Jacob got up early the next morning, he took the rock that he had used for a pillow and stood it up for a place of worship. Then he poured olive oil on the rock to dedicate it to God,
    (Genesis 28:18 )

    Sacrifice?

    How can Jesus have sacrificed himself when God raised him back to life again? Let's examine this claim, Sacrificing something or someone only happens when you want something back in return? If God sacrificed himself what did he get in return when he already owns EVERYTHING? What could god possibly gain from sacrificing  himself when he Owns everything and do what he likes whenever he wants? What good will that do to him?

    ----------------

    What does sacrifice mean?

    sacrifice
    ˈsakrɪfʌɪs/
    noun
    1. 1
      an act of slaughtering an animal or person or surrendering a possession as an offering to a deity.
      "they offer sacrifices to the spirits"
      synonyms:ritual slaughter, hecatomb, immolation, offeringoblation

      ----------------

      So God sacrificed himself to himself in order to forgive mankind from a sin which he created himself? And how can you say God sacrificed himself or his son whichever way you see it, when he bought himself or his son back to life again which means there was no sacrifice and nothing was lost ? It's like giving away your old car knowing you have a new one?

      Thus Jesus could not have Sacrificed himself when he was bought back to life.. In reality Nothing was lost? So where's the sacrifice   

      Serpant or Satan?

      And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the...