As someone who was born a Muslim and spent nearly half of my life in Muslim countries, I have experienced the full spectrum of Islamic practice-from the so-called tolerant Islam in Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria to the most extreme forms in places like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Now living in the West, I can confidently say that I agree with Ibn Warraq. I am one of millions who are afraid to speak out, but the truth is that there is no reforming Islam. It is a toxic ideology that is easily manipulated and twisted because it was created for extremely simple minds, tailored for Bedouins living in the dark ages of human existence. The claims about freedoms and rights within Islam are completely false. Reforming the religion is impossible. Unfortunately, the only way to confront Islam is by understanding it and responding accordingly. It must be treated with the same intensity that it imposes on the rest of the world. It's time for us to acknowledge this reality.
As an ex Muslim, what this man is saying is spot on! Islam should be publicly criticized, satirized and ridiculed without fear of repercussions. No ideology is above criticism
@@intheoceanofknowledgeWe don't really need to ask you anything. Enough questions are asked and discussed in depth daily already on a variety of ex-muslim channels. So if you want to ask any questions, you really do need to discuss with them. You sound like one of those clueless experts who turn up daily on the streams. If you don't know which one to go to just ask and I'll give you a recommendation. Anyway, good luck.
Leave in your heart and read about Jesus in the New Testament, 🙏! He's coming back sooner than later and it isn't worth to stay in that "religion". If you cannot get a Bible where you are read it online. Pray to the real God of the universe and it certainly isn't Allah 😊! Talk to Jesus every day to form a relationship with Him! Read MATHEW 11:28-30 as well as read Psalm 23, 91 and 121 daily especially Psalm 91 aa its a protective prayer, so is Isisah 54:17! Just because you cannot physically leave Islam, you can emotionally leave it! Eternity is a long time to be separated from the real God YHWH! God bless to you and yours and I hope it helps, 🙏! 🤍🤍🤍 Edit: Jesus Christ of Nazareth loves you very deeply and He's been seen by millions of people including myself! 👑👑👑
There is no such law or directives in Islam , the problem is He is victim of Man made laws and personal trauma and his all so called Islamic knowledge is second hand.
@Chris-ho2de - if over a billion people seriously believe God told his messenger what laws mankind should follow and those laws should trump any man-made laws of their host country, we have a problem as the host country A fairly obvious step in the right direction would be to stop importing people with that mindset
hmmm...so learned from Anni Cyrus about al taquiyyah, to lie in the name of Allah, but there are a couple other times and ways to lie to defend actions, correct?
@@cochetah4339Devout Muslim, faithfully follow Quaranic instructions on Weaponising Deceit to spread Islam. Takiyah : Tactical deceit Mu`darat : Strategic deceit Kitman: deceit by ommission Tawriya : deceit by deliberate ambiguity Daruna : deceit through necessity ( eg eat bacon to gain non muslim trust ) Taysir : deceit through facilitation (eg permit haram like alcohol, to gradually ease a non muslim into the faith) Maruna : temporary suspension of Sharia and appear moderate until the time is right to enforce Sharia. eg. wait for demographic change .
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@AtheistVeganThere are over 2000 references in Sunni & Shia texts that there were 17"000 verses in the original Quran as the Islamic scholar Adnan Rashid explained in one of his video talks, too, but today's Quran has only 6"000 verses. Where's the other 11"000 verses? This means the Quran is incomplete. There's a Raabi on TH-cam admitting & explaining why reincarnation was hidden in the Torah. I believe reincarnation was mentioned in the other 11"000 verses. Otherwise, how do you explain Muslims remembering their past lives in Islamic countries??? Allah sent Guru Nanak ji to complete the task & remind you people of him! Read Taajudins Diary, which you can download for free online. Just Google it. Taajudin Nakshabandi accompanied Guru Nanak ji to the Middle East for 2 years and saw the Kaaba move besides other miracles attributed to Guru Nanak ji. It was compiled by an X Muslim Nawab of Mirpur, then part of India! Why do you think X Muslim Sikhs say that Guru Granth Saheeb is an updated version of the Quran??? Sahih Muslim 146 It is narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar ('Abdullah b. 'Umar) that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) observed: Verily Islam started as something strange and it would again revert (to its old position) of being strange just as it started, and it would recede between the two mosques just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.
@@thereformer2023There are over 2000 references in Sunni & Shia texts that there were 17"000 verses in the original Quran as the Islamic scholar Adnan Rashid explained in one of his video talks, too, but today's Quran has only 6"000 verses. Where's the other 11"000 verses? This means the Quran is incomplete. There's a Raabi on TH-cam admitting & explaining why reincarnation was hidden in the Torah. I believe reincarnation was mentioned in the other 11"000 verses. Otherwise, how do you explain Muslims remembering their past lives in Islamic countries??? Allah sent Guru Nanak ji to complete the task & remind you people of him! Read Taajudins Diary, which you can download for free online. Just Google it. Taajudin Nakshabandi accompanied Guru Nanak ji to the Middle East for 2 years and saw the Kaaba move besides other miracles attributed to Guru Nanak ji. It was compiled by an X Muslim Nawab of Mirpur, then part of India! Why do you think X Muslim Sikhs say that Guru Granth Saheeb is an updated version of the Quran??? Sahih Muslim 146 It is narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar ('Abdullah b. 'Umar) that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) observed: Verily Islam started as something strange and it would again revert (to its old position) of being strange just as it started, and it would recede between the two mosques just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
There are over 2000 references in Sunni & Shia texts that there were 17"000 verses in the original Quran as the Islamic scholar Adnan Rashid explained in one of his video talks, too, but today's Quran has only 6"000 verses. Where's the other 11"000 verses? This means the Quran is incomplete. There's a Raabi on TH-cam admitting & explaining why reincarnation was hidden in the Torah. I believe reincarnation was mentioned in the other 11"000 verses. Otherwise, how do you explain Muslims remembering their past lives in Islamic countries??? Allah sent Guru Nanak ji to complete the task & remind you people of him! Read Taajudins Diary, which you can download for free online. Just Google it. Taajudin Nakshabandi accompanied Guru Nanak ji to the Middle East for 2 years and saw the Kaaba move besides other miracles attributed to Guru Nanak ji. It was compiled by an X Muslim Nawab of Mirpur, then part of India! Why do you think X Muslim Sikhs say that Guru Granth Saheeb is an updated version of the Quran??? Sahih Muslim 146 It is narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar ('Abdullah b. 'Umar) that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) observed: Verily Islam started as something strange and it would again revert (to its old position) of being strange just as it started, and it would recede between the two mosques just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.
Why would you choose to listen to this random guy.. Who is lying she taking shit.. Apostasy in ISLAM isn't punishable by death.. Stop listening to these 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡 And listen to some real Islamic scholars.! Crazy tho how in the west of you refuse to go to war.. They put you in a cage And your family to due out if poverty.. So ethical
Exactly like the Mafia, the original concept of “protection money” came from Islam as well, it’s called “Jizya”. Only difference is, you choose to be in the Mafia, in Islam, you’re given the life sentence the day you are born in a Muslim family.
Abraham, the biggest pimp the world has ever known. If you're going to pretend you're attached to this place in some way, can you have the decency to actually spell it out. When I shorten your homeland people look at me funny. Cheers, An Englishman.
@@mznxbcv12345bro you don't have to copy paste this much, three abrahmic religion are the same ,but in different cloakes...who are you kidding 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂. If one made 10 ,next 12, third one 15 ..
"Jesus" did not intend to establish a new religion. He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. In the opening chapters of Acts we find two addresses by Peter, one delivered to the disciples when an apostle to succeed Judas Iscariot was to be chosen, and the other to the Jews on the day of Pentecost. On neither occasion did the speaker mention a new religion, or a church open to Gentiles as well as to Jews, or an abandonment of the Mosaic law. If these ideas had been in his mind at that time, he could not have omitted some reference to them. That the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem continue for at least eighteen years to comply with the requirements of the Mosaic law is proved by the epistle of Paul and also by Acts. In the latter book we read that at time not specified, probably not earlier than 40 C.E Peter went to Joppa and there ate with Gentiles-^that i he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of one of the Mosaic ceremonial rules-and after his return to Jesus; then, he was called to account by his fellow disciple He justified his conduct, not on the ground that Jesus had abrogated the ceremonial law of Moses, or any part of it, but that in a dream he had received a divine communication telling him that all manner of beasts, fowls, an creeping things were clean, and that it was lawful for him to keep company with Gentiles, who were " unclean under the law of Moses. This announcement was accepted as authoritative, but with much surprise, " becaus that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."' This statement of the revelation to Peter, and of it acceptance by the disciples in Jerusalem, is doubtless a invention of the author of Acts. It cannot be brought into harmony with later passages of his own book, nor with the statements of Paul, who is our only trustworth; witness in these matters. According to Acts, about 51 C. E. a council was held in Jerusalem to put an end to the dissension which had arisen in the church on the questions of circumcision and unclean meats. This council decided in favor of Paul, who was in attendance and the decision as given in a letter addressed not to all Christians but only to " the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia"-where Paul had been making converts, informing them that they were not required to observe the Mosaic ceremonial law. It is quite clear that no such council would have been held if the matter had been decided ten years before, as Acts says it had been. But this account of the council of 51 C. E. is also a fiction. About eight years later Paul went to Jerusalem again, and his appearance there provoked a riot. The mob wanted to kill him because of his hostility to the Mosaic law, and this mob included Jewish Christians as well as Jews. All the Christians in Jerusalem were zealous adherents of the Mosaic law. Some of the leading brethren, presumably apostles, advised Paul to take a false oath that he did not teach his Jewish converts to neglect the law. And, if we can believe Acts, he took that oath. This, however, did not pacify the mob, which would have put him to death if the Roman soldiers had not protected him. They took him to prison and finally to Rome. This story in Acts implies that the apostolic church adopted one rule of discipline for the Gentile and another for the Jewish Christians; that the latter were, and that the former were not, required to comply with the Mosaic ceremonial law. This duplicity of discipline is not recorded elsewhere. It is not known to Paul ; and if it had existed, he could neither have been ignorant of it nor remained silent about it. He tells us that the twelve apostles in Jerusalem, or those of them known to him, favored strict adherence to Moses; and the only way in which he could get along harmoniously with them was by promising to do no missionary work in Judea. He was to labor among the Gentiles, Trinitarians are inoculated from rationality, facts and logic. It is no surprise that basic reasoning is entirely lost on those that believe that the creator became one of those he created in order to save the created from his own self. Not to mention the incoherence in the scripture, never minding the creed itself. Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted [James 1:13) God cannot be tempted (John 1:29) Jesus was seen (1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God (Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God (Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man (Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn (Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn (1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died (1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die (Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation (Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation (Mark 4:38) Jesus slept (Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep (John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful (Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful (Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing (Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3). 2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain. It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings. How can one beieve that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity: "And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church" -Homily 17 Section XIX On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said "For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.” -Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5 Soon after Jesus had selected his twelve apostles, according to Luke, he " gave them power and authority over all devils and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. And he said unto them: 'Take nothing for your journey, neither staves nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. And whatsoever house ye enter, there abide and thence depart. And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them." This is the entire charge of Jesus to his apostles when he sent them out to convert the world, as reported by Luke, who claims to give the address or a portion of it, and that presumably the most important portion, word for word. The language here attributed to Jesus conveys no idea that he had any purpose of founding a new church. Neither here nor anywhere else, in the language attributed to him in the New Testament, does he explain the phrase " the kingdom of God " to mean a new ecclesiastical organization. In several passages he does use it to signify the celestial dominion after the destruction of the world; and this is therefore presumably its meaning everywhere. The gospel of Matthew is much further than that of Luke in its report of the charge of Jesus to his apostles: "These twelve Jesus sent forth and commanded them, saying: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.", "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I am come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother... He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward." This charge, as reported by Matthew omitted nearly all the main ideas that would have been appropriate in an address instructing the twelve to preach the foundation of Christianity. It does not say whether Jesus wished to reform or to supersede Judaism; whether his principal purpose was ecclesiastical, moral, political, or sanitary. The remarks about healing the sick and casting out devils is the most explicit of all the instructions. Certainly no reader can learn from that charge that Jesus intended to establish a new religion; and much less can he learn any feature of the faith or discipline of a projected new church. And this address is that portion of the New Testament where such information should be given most clearly. He made no doctrinal definition and no ecclesiastical organization. He did not use the key words of the original doctrines necessary to Christianity or a new church, nor the keywords of ideas afterwards associated with Christianity, such as Incarnation, Trinity, Immaculate Conception, and Transubstantiation. The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission. Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws. There never was such another epidemic of ecclesiastical forgery. The church was flooded with books attributed falsely to apostolic times and authors. The names of many of these books, and the texts of some, are preserved. Distinguished saints and learned fathers of the faith openly commended the invention and acceptance of false- hoods designed to aid the conversion of the world to what they believed to be truth. None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
"Jesus" did not intend to establish a new religion. He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. In the opening chapters of Acts we find two addresses by Peter, one delivered to the disciples when an apostle to succeed Judas Iscariot was to be chosen, and the other to the Jews on the day of Pentecost. On neither occasion did the speaker mention a new religion, or a church open to Gentiles as well as to Jews, or an abandonment of the Mosaic law. If these ideas had been in his mind at that time, he could not have omitted some reference to them. That the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem continue for at least eighteen years to comply with the requirements of the Mosaic law is proved by the epistle of Paul and also by Acts. In the latter book we read that at time not specified, probably not earlier than 40 C.E Peter went to Joppa and there ate with Gentiles-^that i he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of one of the Mosaic ceremonial rules-and after his return to Jesus; then, he was called to account by his fellow disciple He justified his conduct, not on the ground that Jesus had abrogated the ceremonial law of Moses, or any part of it, but that in a dream he had received a divine communication telling him that all manner of beasts, fowls, an creeping things were clean, and that it was lawful for him to keep company with Gentiles, who were " unclean under the law of Moses. This announcement was accepted as authoritative, but with much surprise, " becaus that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."' This statement of the revelation to Peter, and of it acceptance by the disciples in Jerusalem, is doubtless a invention of the author of Acts. It cannot be brought into harmony with later passages of his own book, nor with the statements of Paul, who is our only trustworth; witness in these matters. According to Acts, about 51 C. E. a council was held in Jerusalem to put an end to the dissension which had arisen in the church on the questions of circumcision and unclean meats. This council decided in favor of Paul, who was in attendance and the decision as given in a letter addressed not to all Christians but only to " the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia"-where Paul had been making converts, informing them that they were not required to observe the Mosaic ceremonial law. It is quite clear that no such council would have been held if the matter had been decided ten years before, as Acts says it had been. But this account of the council of 51 C. E. is also a fiction. About eight years later Paul went to Jerusalem again, and his appearance there provoked a riot. The mob wanted to kill him because of his hostility to the Mosaic law, and this mob included Jewish Christians as well as Jews. All the Christians in Jerusalem were zealous adherents of the Mosaic law. Some of the leading brethren, presumably apostles, advised Paul to take a false oath that he did not teach his Jewish converts to neglect the law. And, if we can believe Acts, he took that oath. This, however, did not pacify the mob, which would have put him to death if the Roman soldiers had not protected him. They took him to prison and finally to Rome. This story in Acts implies that the apostolic church adopted one rule of discipline for the Gentile and another for the Jewish Christians; that the latter were, and that the former were not, required to comply with the Mosaic ceremonial law. This duplicity of discipline is not recorded elsewhere. It is not known to Paul ; and if it had existed, he could neither have been ignorant of it nor remained silent about it. He tells us that the twelve apostles in Jerusalem, or those of them known to him, favored strict adherence to Moses; and the only way in which he could get along harmoniously with them was by promising to do no missionary work in Judea. He was to labor among the Gentiles, Trinitarians are inoculated from rationality, facts and logic. It is no surprise that basic reasoning is entirely lost on those that believe that the creator became one of those he created in order to save the created from his own self. Not to mention the incoherence in the scripture, never minding the creed itself. Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted [James 1:13) God cannot be tempted (John 1:29) Jesus was seen (1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God (Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God (Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man (Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn (Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn (1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died (1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die (Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation (Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation (Mark 4:38) Jesus slept (Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep (John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful (Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful (Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing (Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3). 2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain. It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings. How can one beieve that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
This was very eye opening. I come from an East African country with very high rates of unemployment. As a result, young men and women often willl go to Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries to work as domestic workers etc. The torture they are put through with so many deaths reported; mental issues arising from maltreatment in those countries - forcefully taking custody of their passports and have no means to return home; being thrown off balconies when they start to demand to return home etc....Very horrific stories you almost wonder if these are human beings.
Sad .. as an Easy African I feel grieved by the millions of my kinsmen who where captured, castrated, enslaved and killed by these barbarians....and still going on today. East Africa should seek reparations
I'm a Tunisian ex Muslim one of the reasons why I left Islam is the history of my country and what my berber ancestors in north Africa suffered because of arabs and muslims during history and the arabization of north Africa because of them until people neglected their real berber identity for the sake of Islam.
So true! As an eclectic pagan, I love that your ancestral faith has non human deities as well, believing as I do that non human and plants have souls and mysteries too. May you find the path back to the magical wisdom of the ancient Amazigh and other pagans of North Africa!❤😊❤
@@angeldust4224 Indeed, I've been following the Hindu historians on TH-cam and used to follow Hindu and Sikh pages when I was on Facebook. The genocide by Muslims in India seems to have been the worst in human history!
There is a group of ex-Muslims in the world, who are courageous enough to speak up publicly. It would be so interesting to have them all together on a show/book.
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@mznxbcv12345I was there. They purposely went to look for and singled out civilians. They hunted us down as we were running away. They shot teenage girls who were cowering down on their knees. F*ck off with your lies
The first time the phrase “human animal” was recorded in history was by Eichmann in WW2 he literally said “we have to be savages in a chapter that will never be written when treating human animals”, even their calculating of calories was also done On the 7th, it is crucial to understand that there were no direct attacks on civilians, only collateral damage. Out of the 1148 total names on haaret dataset, 473 military and 675 were civilians. Ratio of civilians to military personnel killed on the 7th was 1 . 4 : 1 - lower than any of the iTf "mowing" operations, which has a ratio of 7 : 1 According to UN OCHA data from 2008 to 2022; The collateral damage on the 7th was significantly lower than any of the ITf "mowing" operations, which had a ratio of 7:1 with 1,023 military personnel out of 6,541 total. On the 7th, with 473 military (418 were iTf military personnel, 55 belonged to the police) out of 1148 total, the ratio of civilians to military personnel was a mere 1.4:1 When including all casualties, not just deaths, the collateral damage ratio of the "mowing" operations is a staggering 162:1 From the 161,233 accumulated civilian casualties over only 14 years of "mowing" operations. A 162 :1 ratio means that for every 162 civillians, 1 military personnel is a casualty. The 7th had a ratio of 1.4:1, more than a hundred times lower. The 473 are - 55 soldiers, 13 privates, 59 corporals, 200 sergeants (45 of whom were sergeant majors), 48 commanders, 32 lieutenants, 5 lieutenant colonels, 6 colonels, 37 officers, 10 inspectors, 6 intendents, and 2 Lance Corp. This was a military defeat, and they are taking it out on the rest. The reported ages of the victims are as follows: 0-4: 2 civilians 5-12: 8 civilians 13-17: 14 civilians 18-25: 132 civilians 26-40: 119 civilians 41-60: 55 civilians 61+: 40 civilians Active duty military personnel: 18-25: 258 active duty military personnel 26-40: 60 active duty military personnel 41-60: 17 active duty military personnel 61+: 1 active duty military personnel e other side. An excess of ten thousands, all before the seventh UN Human Rights Office (UN OCHA) PA Civilians 2008-2023: 2008 - 2,325 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 1,440. 2012 - 3,992 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 255. 2014 - 17,533 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 1,492. 2018 - 31,259 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 300. 2019 - 15,491 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 138. 2020 - 2,581 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 30. 2021 - 19,183 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 349. 2022 - 10,345 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 191. 2023 up to September - 8,508 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 227. civilian deaths on the other side - 2008: 3 , 2012: 6 , 2014: 73 , 2018: 9 2019: 10 , 2020: 0 , 2021: 9 , 2022: 26 Total; 2008 up to September 2023 - 161,233 PA Civilian Casualties, 1,023 military personnel. Wounded includes: amputees from the deliberate targeting of knees by snipers, white phosphorous third degree body burns, etc The "Costs of War" study by brown in 2021 has these figures for the past 20 years of engagement of US policy: indirect deaths 4.5-4.7 million, direct 905-940,000 ; in other words 6 Million Deaths and 38 million displaced. This is relevant because of the Yinon Plan.
Islamization of the Americas is definitely a thing in Canada. Thank you for this insightful interview.
2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1
You’re an absolute idiot like the two morons in this video. Islam has done anything, it’s so easy for you. Idiots to just go up and lie on the Internet nowadays there’s really no point for youtube nowadays
"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.""Allah only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion - [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers." Quran 60 8-9
If Hussein, the “tolerant muslim” 1:06:39 , says the story of Muhammad marrying Aisha when she was 6 years old is unreliable because it was written 90 years after the fact, why should anyone believe what the quran says about Jesus because the stories about Him were written about 600 years after Him?
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
According to atheist religion, Why is it not evil when children are boned by grown up pdf file atheist men? Do you think it has to do with doctrines of atheist religion which says that this is _liberating_ for children? So what atheists are doing when mounting children is not pervert, it is an act of kindness?
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
They know exactly what they are doing. They know very well that Jesus is who he says he is. They're just working very hard and hoping everyone else doesn't. They chose the wrong side. In the end, God wins, and they know it.
Their strategy seems untenable. The best case scenario is a sizable portion of the population realizes that just because they don’t agree on everything, it doesn’t mean they think they’re wrong about everything either. Alliances are built off this common ground and aimed at those running the country. Worst case, they never find common ground and all they do is fight and fight and fight like other parts of the planet. It’s a lose, lose for the decision makers.
Leaving Islam many years ago and I choose to convert. I stay incognito about my new faith, never published it. I am abandoned by my family, however I flee safely and able to start building my new life abroad. It's a dangerous ideology, especially for women myself. I am wishing the safety for all my fellow ex muslims everywhere. Please, strategise your escape for your safety.
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
My daughter in law from Iran says that if the people of her country were free to choose 80%+ would not be Muslim. Her family has never been Muslim…they are followers of Zoroastrian religion. She says that when you are born in a Muslim country they automatically say you are Muslim whether you are or not.
I am an muslim-born atheist living in a christian-majority country (Romania) ,and they do the same as the muslims ,everyone knows their child will be Christian before it is even born.
@@Small_Clips_Apologetics If you don't believe me just ask romanian couples who do not have a kid yet or who are in the pregnancy stage, they will tell you that their child will be Christian.
I do not understand why western politicians of all stripes are so enthralled with Islam. Islam is not just a religion but a political ideology that is totally at odds with western liberal democracy. The refusal of our politicians to question Islamist extremism in the UK and to instead call members of the public racists should they question the growing influence of Islam is dangerous. Again why, what is the agenda. We in the west must understand the threat islamism poses. That is not attacking individual Muslims but acknowledging organised Islam as the threat it is to liberal democracy.
No western politician is enthralled or any of its allies. they hate islam. the entire west is waging war on islam and you think they like them? what threat in the west? what are you on about
Christian Prince, an Arab born men a Christian here on TH-cam. He speaks fluent Arabic and he Study Islam and Sharia law. All you need to know about the truth Islam. He dabates muslims I have listen to many conversations. He has never been disapproved by any Muslims
You talk about, Sam Shamoun? He have 3 channels he’s soo good! Here’s one of his videos but not his channel… th-cam.com/video/zTWeNdEQfKY/w-d-xo.htmlsi=EeVuYVD2hGt7SXam
This conversation is fascinating. Thanks for sharing Ibn Warraq thoughts on Islam. I've never heard of him before but can't wait to read his book "Why I'm not A Muslim."
Apostasy in ISLAM isn't punishable by death.. Stop listening to these 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡 And listen to some real Islamic scholars.! Crazy tho how in the west of you refuse to go to war.. They put you in a cage And your family to due out if poverty.. So ethical
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
The interviewer should know what happened to Salman Rushdie! Of course, Muslims do not tolerate a Muslim being critical of Islam. He and his family are always under threat.
Oh my Goodness! I'm so happy to see this person. He's the one who started teaching me about Islam from his book "The Historical Muhammad" about 20 years back, and then later I bought "Why I'm not a Muslim" book. Prof. Ibn Warraq is an absolute genius and a great historian. He's a prolific writer. God bless you, Sir. Thank you so much for educating us about Islam.
@SuspectUsual For a Christian also. However, "Render under Caeser the things that are Caeser's, and unto God the things that are God's" is Jesus's instruction recorded in three Gospels: Matthew, Mark and Luke. That is, insofar as we are able without compromising our faith, we should obey the authority we live under. That's good common sense.
Hope this interview opens the Westerners' eyes. My grandparents and parents suffered enormously in the hands of the radical Muslims, which took place cumulatively 170 years ago.
Remember UK had blasphemy laws not long ago . There are more than 4000 religions on earth but only children of Abraham are fighting non stop. They are antiscience , colonizing death to the colourful world.
Before i knew about Ibn Warraq i knew about Al Rawandi and his mentor Abu Isa Al Warraq(dissidents from Abbasid era islam), upon learning about Ibn Warraq i became an instant fan, he carries the old name to our modern day and age, truly timeless. My quest for the truth about islam led me to leave the religion about 6 years ago, people like Ibn Warraq inspired me to take the step and accept reality instead of lying and gaslighting myself into thinking islam was great.
Islam as a religion or cult is not meant for the civilized world or society. It is intended to be preached among or unite the brutes, violent, ruthless and intolerant. It believes in subjugation or submission of other faiths and ideology without questioning or criticism. Love, kindness and compassion are alien for them and one don't find these basic human qualities in their scriptures
The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
I'm an ex-muslim, a BIG FAN of Ibn Warraq. Great and honest scholar from Muslim background. Muhammad of Islam is a MYTH, a creation of the Abbasids. The historical guy is Qutham, a wannabe prophet and warlord/mercenary. He was NOT from Mekkah (of Arabia). He was born and raised in Iraq. The only non-Muslim historical records about him is in the Byzantines Chronical of Arabia. They refer to him as alghawi (deceiver). The mention of Mekkah appeared in 742 A.D. and it was in Iraq. The Abbasids biggest scheme and deception, they changed dates and locations. They destroyed all records (including Quran) and re-invented a FICTIONAL history. Islam polemist, Dr. Jay Smith, is a leading scholar in exposing how the Abbasids did it.
@@SA_SovereigntyForPatriots @MAT-244 That has already been done for Christianity. Full critical analysis, although many people are not aware of that. Unlike Islam, Christianity matches the historical records. @MAT-244 is correct about Islam as we know it today having been created long after the date given for the death of Mohammed (if he existed). The Ummayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik changed the coinage in what is now Syria from its Byzantine form with Christian symbology to the Nabatean script that became Arabic around 691-692 AD, possibly to justify his reign against the rebellion of Ibn al-Zubayr who likely was in Petra (as all the qiblas from the Arabian temples to their chief god Al Lah, that the Nabateans called Dushara and whose family is mentioned in the Koran in Sura 53:19-21) and fled to what we now call Mecca. There is also evidence of Iraqi involvement in the creation of Islam. One thing we do know for sure, is that Islam's story about it's origins cannot be true as they don't match the archeological record (and much of the Koran predates the alleged lifespan of Mohammed, as we know have the earlier Christian manuscripts of stories such as the Sleepers of Ephesus that the Koran later copied and modified).
@@staubsauger2305 Christianity matches the historical records?....Why is it that you don't acknowledge that it is Paul who created Christianity and not Jesus. Jesus was born a Jew and died a Jew. Please show or tell where that is reflected in Christianity.
@@intheoceanofknowledge You pose a good question. The answer actually lies with the individual who is at such a cross road. While I am not aware of your religious beliefs most people who stray away from Islamic ideology find themselves disenchanted with it's oppressive nature. Personally I believe that there is one Supreme Entity that resides within every human being and if everyone practices Good Thought, Good Words and Good Deeds daily you are that much closer to that Supreme Entity. The problem today is that we are disengaged from spiritual reality. We are not humans seeking a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings seeking a human experience. Once you embrace this concept you will think more clearly. Irrespective of your beliefs Good Thoughts, Good Words and Good Deeds are part of your spiritual makeup and no ideology can replace this fact. 🙏🕉🙏
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
@@intheoceanofknowledgemy question why anyone follow such a stpd religion which is everything except spiritualism Wha kind of god male religion ? Force people to fight for it ??
@@stormraider6834 You are not the only one who thinks that way. To understand this you have to go back quite a few centuries when in the Middle Eastern regions there were only Arabs who were nomads. It is these people who were preached this ideology and that was the birth of Islam. Originally this concept met with little support/success so fear and oppression were introduced and and it has remained that way ever since. Today, people in Iran call themselves Muslims but in fact they are Zoroastrians by ancestry who were forcefully converted to Islam. Today we are one of the smallest minorities in the world. I am proud to be a Zoroastrian. If you are interested you can Google it. Unlike other religions Zoroastrianism does not encourage or permit conversion and according to prophet Zoroaster every person is by birth destined into his/her faith and it is a sin to do conversion. Finally, it might interest you to note that it was our prophet Zoroaster who predicted the birth of Jesus Christ a few centuries before Christ was born. Although I am Zoroastrian, I have read a lot about Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity and Islam. I always encourage people to do this. It only when the mind is open does the light shine in. May God Bless you always.
What a wonderful gentleman, a man of principle, great courage and integrity. I have Why the West is Best. I trust his views are more sound after this interview and have a l9t of respect for him. I thought you interviewed him very well Winston returning to points, not missing anything out, allowing him to speak and being considerate and respectful. Really enjoyed meeting him.
Q: *What are some lessons that Muslims need to learn?* A1: *Wrong book leads to wrong results!* A2: *Actions have consequences!* A3: *Losing a war you started is called Defeat, not Genocide!*
What an intelligent lovely and courageously honest man. You are English to me. Your love of our landscape, literature and history make you English. Thank you.
A bit strange that he felt upset when his friend said that Yes you would notice that, being a foreigner. Why in the world would he feel upset! His understanding or views would be shaped by his lived experience! And he was born in India, lived in Pakistan, had been a Muslim! So what his friend said was extremely insightful. Nothing racist or demeaning there. Indeed, that was an insightful comment by his friend.
Ibn Warraq was the first ex-Muslim I ever read, because of Why I Am Not A Muslim. This is the book that absolutely shifted my opinion on Islam as a leftist. Fortunately there have been books have been written on the subject since (because any Islamist can say one book is false), but I highly recommend this classic work.
If you’re an anti-religionist, that’s one thing, but to completely disregard 14 centuries of history is preposterous. Over 1M people were killed in Iraq during the West’s successive invasions of Iraq. Is that not a holocaust? We’re literally live-streaming the Israelis eviscerating Gazans like fish in a barrel. Is this Christianity? Judaism? Secular neo-liberal enlightened western values? The Europeans literally genocided population after population and institutionalized slavery and colonialism in the most barbarous way. The demonization of 2 billion Muslims is vile. Hedonist, individualistic, consumerists will hate and hate until they’re all debt slaves and literal prostitutes all while the rich laugh all the way to the bank. “If you’re note careful, the newspapers will have you hating people who are oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing” - Malcolm X
I remember when TV used to show high quality shows with very relevant and interesting guests like this. It’s interesting how things change over time. Makes me a little sad for nostalgic reasons, but at the same time I’m happy to have programs like this in such abundance and so easily accessible, which was never the case for TV during its heyday because of obvious technological limitations. This is one of the best interviews I’ve seen in a while. Very informative, entertaining, and no wasted breath. Excellent work.
The worst genocide of people was that of Hindus by Islamic rulers which has never been acknowledged by the west,almost deliberately.in 1990, genocide of Kashmiri Hindus was never acknowledged even by India. Kashmiri Hindus became refugees in their own country ,as they moved out of Kashmir into majority hindu Jammu next door and rebuilt their lives with no compensation or help from their own government.The 1920 genocide of Hindus in the so called riot { it was not a riot,but Hindus were targeted by Muslims ) was under British rule of India . Again no acknowledgment from British rulers of Hindus being targeted. I believe everybody is afraid of being killed by Muslims, if they tell the truth
@@tempelhoferfeld7727 Armenians rebelled against the state and sided with the British so they became a danger and expelled from the Ottoman land. There is no genocide what so ever they are all lies. They were attacked by the thugs on the way when they were expelled. Armenian government admitted recently that genocide did not take place. Balkans were under Ottoman rule just like a lot of nations were under British rule or Romans' rule. That's what empire means.
Heard of Ahmadiyya? They are moderate Muslims who are routinely massacred by mainstream Sunni and Shia Muslims for being “apostate”. Meaning, not violent enough for their liking.
@@YoniBaruch-y3m notice how zero leftist every bring up the plight of ahmadiya's in muslim majority countries. They spend all their time on 'islamophia' in the west, India instead to weaken these places
What a man he is. My salute to him from India. Authentic, humble, articulate and brave. His work shows why it is important to be a critical thinker. In India the age old philosophy says God is truth and the truth shall prevail. If you imbibe it , then you don’t need any religion
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
@@GODOURSALVATION. This is the problem. People try to see things as they experience it and feel that their truth is the ultimate truth. They feel they have arrived at their destination and hence feel it is their right to preach and sometimes violently impose their opinion and beliefs thinking it is right. One doesn't carefully explore their experience with their God from different lenses. Sorry my vocabulary is limited and hence I cannot fully explain what I'm trying to convey here. So my point is this, most of our beliefs are acquired and imposed. We grow up surrounded by all different beliefs and absorb those systems otherwise we yearn for a godly companion and pick the definition of the devine from among the Manny teachings written in books authored by men. Most people fail to question their beliefs and remain in their cages.
so the demolition of the statue in Bristol was not to destroy a icon for slavery, but to destroy a proponent for the abolition of slavery. What a revelation. How the uk press missed to point.
@@Anubis2976 Tell me what is your sect !!!! You believe in monkeys how became you !!! Or man can have babies this time around tell me … or Anubis Egyptian: is a god in Egyptian mythology … is that your sect come on now!!! Jesus is true in his testimony the son of man … Read brother of humanity!!! When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’ “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
Some claim the liberal element were a tiny privileged minority, but actually have we any sense of what proportion of women achieved such self volition?
There is a big group called ex-Muslims who have left Islam for good and who are active on social media. They are doing a good job of bringing real Islam to light. Check out names like Sahil, Adam, etc.
plus Mossab, the Green Prince, and Anni Cyrus tell much ...the west must learn this as all the EU was planned no borders as in UNAgenda21-30 to become the NorthAmericanUnion signed byBush/Clinton to let destruction by evil run amuck...
The brave Hindus of India had suffered the most-imagine 700 years of oppressive Islamic rule in their own country ! But they are still here standing tall!
And most Indian Hindus are converting to Christians & Hinduism is not good religion either with casteism old outdated rules.India won't flourish like West even after 100 years because of that
Altruism! Are you insane. You think the Elites care for anyone or anything. This is the same old idea of pitting populations against each other so they never gain strength or focus on what is occurring at the top. Then they will be there to offer protection and rest after the conflict they created.
41:01 when Thomas Jefferson in 1785 confronted Ambassador Abd Al-Rahman in London, about why the islamic barbary states were taking captured American crews as slaves, the ambassador replied: "Because the Quran tells us to"
@@yasararif8292 I was paraphrasing, what Jefferson paraphrased, which was: “it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.” That's the actual quote from Thomas Jefferson.
@@yasararif8292 why should I? I didn't claim it says so in the qoran - that was Ambassador And Al-Rahman according to Thomas Jefferson. And the US initially started paying jizya to tripoli to protect their merchants. But in 1801 they came back with guns. A lot of them. Say, are you trying to downplay the violent supremacism baked into islam? Can you tell me, who is meant with "those who earned god's wrath" that you reference everytime you pray? Did you celebrate, mourn or not give a f about Ismail Haniyya' death?
shesshh...we're gonna go back all the way to 1785 🤣..while you're at it, might as well dig up church support for KKK and opposition against slavery & black civil rights in deep south
Was so happy to hear Ibn dismisses Ed Hussain as a double-talker. It has infuriated me in the past that people cannot see though this fraud. So refreshing to hear someone speak so boldly and directly about Islam and its general awfulness.
27 วันที่ผ่านมา +4
"I began to re-evaluate my belief in God and I began to believe in God again, and then thereafter I became religious and started to seek knowledge, familiarise myself with the faith. I listened to scholars that would talk about the life of the prophet. Id read books, attend lectures, go to the mosque, have discussions with people about the Islamic religion... I believed it was obligatory upon me to eventually commit an act of terror." - Ibrahim Abbas, who plotted to massacre "as many people as possible" at churches and public transit stations over Christmas 2016 (Australia)
Of course it is unimaginable to Christians. We don't persecute nor seek the lives of those who leave the faith. We love them and pray for them to return to The Lord.
All Britons, regardless of race or creed, have had enough. We are fed up with the divisive race-baiting, the unchecked rise of grooming gangs, and the growing threat posed by extremist ideologies intent on undermining our way of life. We are fed up with the two tier policing. We demand secure borders and the immediate deportation of those unwilling to contribute to or defend our country and its values. It is time for our leaders-politicians, police, civil servants, and His Majesty the King-to listen and take action. We call for a referendum on the following critical questions: 1. Should Britain continue its membership in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)? 2. Should the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, established by the United Nations, be reconsidered and revised? 3. Should any future British government be legally obligated to pursue these revisions until they are implemented globally? It’s important to acknowledge that these challenges are not unique to Britain; many Western nations face similar, if not more severe, issues. The British media must actively promote this initiative, and a parliamentary petition should be launched to support it. ❤🇬🇧
@squibbelsmcjohnson The idea of using force is unthinkable to most British people, as it would result in massive loss of life, economic collapse, and severe geopolitical consequences. The only sensible solution is to hold a legal and democratic referendum on our membership of the ECHR and the 1951 Refugee Convention, including its 1967 Protocol, as established by the United Nations. It’s crucial to recognise that Western nations are facing similar challenges. The situations in Germany, France, Sweden, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Canada, and the United States illustrate that Britain is not alone in its struggles. Violence is a recourse only taken by despotic regimes; democratic solutions are the way forward. 👍🏽❤️🇬🇧
As a naturalized Ozzie, i am against global Islamization. They owe their allegiance only to their foul creed and not to the country that gave them shelter and bread. Thus, it is said they may be friendly to you but they are not your friend.
@EdwardThatch-ee7yx You hit the nail on the head. You say violence is a recourse taken by despotic regimes. Do you not think the current regime in G. Britain has the potential to be totalitarian or despotic? I do. They've shown their hand already, just as the democrat party in the US has. I know that the democrat party here in the US definitelt has that potential. The right hates everything the left stands for. The left simply hates the people on the right. That's anyone who identifies as right or conservative. They'll support anything put in front of them, regardless of the degree of stupidity or absurdity, as long as it has been given the ok seal of approval & acceptance by those designated as gatekeepers for their particular causes.
@@EdwardThatch-ee7yx I agree, but when those in power choose to be willfully ignorant (or even active facilitators), I question what it will take for sense to prevail and just how long might that take?
Thanks Winston. I do not comment because I am learning from the variety of guests you have. There is an enormous amount to learn and understand. It (your podcasts) has made me look beyond mainstream media more than I have done before. And more people should.
J. Edger Hoover Who was over the FBI may have had a better program that was supported by many White Evangelical organizations. I think he wanted a certain type of christian world and every body would live happily ever after.
Another way to look at it would be, let's not lose sight of just how far humanity progressed under the West. We need to stop throwing it under the bus.
Excelente interview, the travel from Islam to follower of the truth is very inspiring. I believe that the Transcendental Truth will find you if you follow Him.
Winston, please invite Raymond Ibrahim to talk us through the Christian persecution in the Muslim world. He will shed a lot of light on Islam’s view of non Muslims, in this case Christians. British people and the Western world in general should have clear understanding of the Muslim world’s point of view.
warum bauen christen ,das christentum auf unwahrheiten auf,,,kirchenkult İst auf feindschaft des İSLAM's aufgebaut.Also hat keine gerinste chaunz gegen İSLAM...
All religion is hi-jacked by the dark side. If ur believe is from outside of you, ur are going down the wrong path. All u need is to " listen" to uself.
The British and American Commi governments (leaders) know the reality of what the West is facing. They welcome it! Most of them are a part of it! They love the European Union and World Health Organization and want the world to be globalized: ONE WORLD ORDER WITH THEM AS THE LEADERS OF IT! This can only happen if the West is demolished!
Well, my comment was erased, but I’m going to write it again. The Wests’ leaders understand the reality of what Europe and America are facing. Most of them actually support the demise of the West and here is why. Many of the Wests’ leaders are Globalists. They support the WHO, NATO, China, etc. In order for Globalism to proceed, the West must be toppled.
“I’d not want to live in a society where people are stoned for adultery, but rather in one where someone first gets stoned and then commits adultery” was a line which Warraq once delivered at the end of a fantastic debate.
These people think child brides are less morally abhorrent that a woman engaging in consensual premarital sex. Get real. I'm not even pro casual sex but that's just absurd
you do know when you say that muslims know you didnt read the quran. that might change views of the ignorant non muslims but anyone who is curious and actually reads it will know your statement is a lie
Ex muslim here..he is right. Im married with 3 kids in the UK. I realised in my late 30's that Islam is not true. For me to proclaim, i do not believe it is instant divorce. I will be cut off from my parents, siblings, my friends. I will have a battle to keep my children with me. So i keep quite and forced to participate in this cult.
@@user21870look at Archeological findings on his crucifiction and the DNA tests of the blood from the crucifiction site, IF YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH.
Are you a man or woman? I presume as a man you could risk at least teaching your kids what you have learnt and finding for them a way out that your father couldn't ? As a woman, I can imagine it would be more difficult.
As someone who was born a Muslim and spent nearly half of my life in Muslim countries, I have experienced the full spectrum of Islamic practice-from the so-called tolerant Islam in Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria to the most extreme forms in places like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Now living in the West, I can confidently say that I agree with Ibn Warraq. I am one of millions who are afraid to speak out, but the truth is that there is no reforming Islam. It is a toxic ideology that is easily manipulated and twisted because it was created for extremely simple minds, tailored for Bedouins living in the dark ages of human existence. The claims about freedoms and rights within Islam are completely false.
Reforming the religion is impossible. Unfortunately, the only way to confront Islam is by understanding it and responding accordingly. It must be treated with the same intensity that it imposes on the rest of the world. It's time for us to acknowledge this reality.
Agreed!
Thank you for speaking the truth .
Islam will not bend. God will bend the earth for his Religion! The prophet was given the keys to the east and the west.
I think muslims are very much victims of their own ideology.
@@Ufb10 Really? Ludicrous as ever.
As an ex Muslim, what this man is saying is spot on!
Islam should be publicly criticized, satirized and ridiculed without fear of repercussions. No ideology is above criticism
tell me the thing you want to criticise?
@@intheoceanofknowledge sure, having intercourse with married women in accordance with the Quran and Islamic law
@@intheoceanofknowledgeEverything in Islam is criticizable.
@@intheoceanofknowledgeWe don't really need to ask you anything. Enough questions are asked and discussed in depth daily already on a variety of ex-muslim channels. So if you want to ask any questions, you really do need to discuss with them. You sound like one of those clueless experts who turn up daily on the streams. If you don't know which one to go to just ask and I'll give you a recommendation. Anyway, good luck.
@@intheoceanofknowledge --- WHAT !?
Radical Islam is a snake in the grass. Moderate Islam is the grass.
And there are 100,000,000 + of them in the world.
...that hides the snake.
And the non Islamics who support the snake and the grass are worse than the snake and the grass
@@graphguy More than that...... much more.
@@ozzie444 Those are the numbers I hear, that 10% is radical. What source do you have?
"We can' t leave Islam without being punished". That summarizes it. There is no tolerance, peace and love in Islam.
Leave in your heart and read about Jesus in the New Testament, 🙏! He's coming back sooner than later and it isn't worth to stay in that "religion". If you cannot get a Bible where you are read it online. Pray to the real God of the universe and it certainly isn't Allah 😊!
Talk to Jesus every day to form a relationship with Him! Read MATHEW 11:28-30 as well as read Psalm 23, 91 and 121 daily especially Psalm 91 aa its a protective prayer, so is Isisah 54:17!
Just because you cannot physically leave Islam, you can emotionally leave it! Eternity is a long time to be separated from the real God YHWH! God bless to you and yours and I hope it helps, 🙏! 🤍🤍🤍
Edit:
Jesus Christ of Nazareth loves you very deeply and He's been seen by millions of people including myself! 👑👑👑
it is a cult. no exit point.
There is no such law or directives in Islam , the problem is He is victim of Man made laws and personal trauma and his all so called Islamic knowledge is second hand.
@Chris-ho2de - if over a billion people seriously believe God told his messenger what laws mankind should follow and those laws should trump any man-made laws of their host country, we have a problem as the host country
A fairly obvious step in the right direction would be to stop importing people with that mindset
If possible leave❤
Proud to be an Ex Muslim Me And My 4 Friends And their Family Left islam 2 years ago... ❤
❤
Congrats, now you are human
Ex Muslim here Yorkshire uk
Because your humanity didn't allow to be muslim.
Woooowww 😮 praise GOD😍😎
As an ex-Muslim, believe this man when he says Muslims like Ed Hussain double speak.
I agree he’s a fraud
Islam reveals itself in the Quran the west needs to wake up quickly
hmmm...so learned from Anni Cyrus about al taquiyyah, to lie in the name of Allah, but there are a couple other times and ways to lie to defend actions, correct?
@@cochetah4339Devout Muslim, faithfully follow Quaranic instructions on
Weaponising Deceit to spread Islam.
Takiyah : Tactical deceit
Mu`darat : Strategic deceit
Kitman: deceit by ommission
Tawriya : deceit by deliberate ambiguity
Daruna : deceit through necessity
( eg eat bacon to gain non muslim trust )
Taysir : deceit through facilitation
(eg permit haram like alcohol, to gradually ease a non muslim into the faith)
Maruna : temporary suspension of Sharia and appear moderate until the time is right to enforce Sharia. eg. wait for demographic change .
@@cochetah4339 Touché'
@@Unity108c
I left Islam 46 years ago by reading Quran and history.I was open about it but unfortunately my sister cut her relationship with me.
Did you join another religion?
So very sorry that your sister shunned you 😢.
@@forensicdar no
@@laikanbarth thank for your support and empathy.
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer
Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as::
“seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed:
"Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Ex-muslim from Bangladesh here.
Me too. Exmuslim 🇧🇩 Zindabad 💪
@@thereformer2023 where are you from? I'm from dhaka.
Ex-Muslims are expected to give up all horrid thoughts and beliefs of islam. Only then will they be considered to be good humans.
@@AtheistVeganThere are over 2000 references in Sunni & Shia texts that there were 17"000 verses in the original Quran as the Islamic scholar Adnan Rashid explained in one of his video talks, too, but today's Quran has only 6"000 verses. Where's the other 11"000 verses? This means the Quran is incomplete.
There's a Raabi on TH-cam admitting & explaining why reincarnation was hidden in the Torah. I believe reincarnation was mentioned in the other 11"000 verses. Otherwise, how do you explain Muslims remembering their past lives in Islamic countries???
Allah sent Guru Nanak ji to complete the task & remind you people of him!
Read Taajudins Diary, which you can download for free online. Just Google it.
Taajudin Nakshabandi accompanied Guru Nanak ji to the Middle East for 2 years and saw the Kaaba move besides other miracles attributed to Guru Nanak ji. It was compiled by an X Muslim Nawab of Mirpur, then part of India!
Why do you think X Muslim Sikhs say that Guru Granth Saheeb is an updated version of the Quran???
Sahih Muslim 146
It is narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar ('Abdullah b. 'Umar) that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) observed:
Verily Islam started as something strange and it would again revert (to its old position) of being strange just as it started, and it would recede between the two mosques just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.
@@thereformer2023There are over 2000 references in Sunni & Shia texts that there were 17"000 verses in the original Quran as the Islamic scholar Adnan Rashid explained in one of his video talks, too, but today's Quran has only 6"000 verses. Where's the other 11"000 verses? This means the Quran is incomplete.
There's a Raabi on TH-cam admitting & explaining why reincarnation was hidden in the Torah. I believe reincarnation was mentioned in the other 11"000 verses. Otherwise, how do you explain Muslims remembering their past lives in Islamic countries???
Allah sent Guru Nanak ji to complete the task & remind you people of him!
Read Taajudins Diary, which you can download for free online. Just Google it.
Taajudin Nakshabandi accompanied Guru Nanak ji to the Middle East for 2 years and saw the Kaaba move besides other miracles attributed to Guru Nanak ji. It was compiled by an X Muslim Nawab of Mirpur, then part of India!
Why do you think X Muslim Sikhs say that Guru Granth Saheeb is an updated version of the Quran???
Sahih Muslim 146
It is narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar ('Abdullah b. 'Umar) that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) observed:
Verily Islam started as something strange and it would again revert (to its old position) of being strange just as it started, and it would recede between the two mosques just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.
Ex Muslim Iraqi American woman and proud ❤
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
Congrats to u ! U shud reach out to yasmine mohamad of free hearts free minds
Thank you for coming to America and make us a better people.
There are over 2000 references in Sunni & Shia texts that there were 17"000 verses in the original Quran as the Islamic scholar Adnan Rashid explained in one of his video talks, too, but today's Quran has only 6"000 verses. Where's the other 11"000 verses? This means the Quran is incomplete.
There's a Raabi on TH-cam admitting & explaining why reincarnation was hidden in the Torah. I believe reincarnation was mentioned in the other 11"000 verses. Otherwise, how do you explain Muslims remembering their past lives in Islamic countries???
Allah sent Guru Nanak ji to complete the task & remind you people of him!
Read Taajudins Diary, which you can download for free online. Just Google it.
Taajudin Nakshabandi accompanied Guru Nanak ji to the Middle East for 2 years and saw the Kaaba move besides other miracles attributed to Guru Nanak ji. It was compiled by an X Muslim Nawab of Mirpur, then part of India!
Why do you think X Muslim Sikhs say that Guru Granth Saheeb is an updated version of the Quran???
Sahih Muslim 146
It is narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar ('Abdullah b. 'Umar) that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) observed:
Verily Islam started as something strange and it would again revert (to its old position) of being strange just as it started, and it would recede between the two mosques just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.
You are one of a few lucky Iraq women who was able to escape that "Cancer". I hope there will be more lucky women like you, especially in middle east
When he says " you can't leave your religion , it's a one way ticket " I can't help think .. just like the mafia ... this is exactly what Islam is ...
Exactly. It's Exactly what Islam is.
You can check out anytime but you cant leave....as the song goes
Why would you choose to listen to this random guy.. Who is lying she taking shit..
Apostasy in ISLAM isn't punishable by death..
Stop listening to these 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
And listen to some real Islamic scholars.!
Crazy tho how in the west of you refuse to go to war.. They put you in a cage And your family to due out if poverty.. So ethical
And most thuggish gangs
Exactly like the Mafia, the original concept of “protection money” came from Islam as well, it’s called “Jizya”.
Only difference is, you choose to be in the Mafia, in Islam, you’re given the life sentence the day you are born in a Muslim family.
What a brave man! As a female Christian Pakistani-Brit, I salute you, Sir! God bless you both! ❤
Abraham, the biggest pimp the world has ever known.
If you're going to pretend you're attached to this place in some way, can you have the decency to actually spell it out. When I shorten your homeland people look at me funny.
Cheers,
An Englishman.
What are you doing in England, stand up against yours
@@mznxbcv12345bro you don't have to copy paste this much, three abrahmic religion are the same ,but in different cloakes...who are you kidding 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂. If one made 10 ,next 12, third one 15 ..
@@mznxbcv12345 can't get you , why not
"Jesus" did not intend to establish a new religion. He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either.
In the opening chapters of Acts we find two addresses by Peter, one delivered to the disciples when an apostle to succeed Judas Iscariot was to be chosen, and the other to the Jews on the day of Pentecost. On neither occasion did the speaker mention a new religion, or a church open to Gentiles as well as to Jews, or an abandonment of the Mosaic law.
If these ideas had been in his mind at that time, he could not have omitted some reference to them. That the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem continue for at least eighteen years to comply with the requirements of the Mosaic law is proved by the epistle of Paul and also by Acts.
In the latter book we read that at time not specified, probably not earlier than 40 C.E Peter went to Joppa and there ate with Gentiles-^that i he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of one of the Mosaic ceremonial rules-and after his return to Jesus; then, he was called to account by his fellow disciple He justified his conduct, not on the ground that Jesus had abrogated the ceremonial law of Moses, or any part of it, but that in a dream he had received a divine communication telling him that all manner of beasts, fowls, an creeping things were clean, and that it was lawful for him to keep company with Gentiles, who were " unclean under the law of Moses. This announcement was accepted as authoritative, but with much surprise, " becaus that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."'
This statement of the revelation to Peter, and of it acceptance by the disciples in Jerusalem, is doubtless a invention of the author of Acts. It cannot be brought into harmony with later passages of his own book, nor with the statements of Paul, who is our only trustworth; witness in these matters.
According to Acts, about 51 C. E. a council was held in Jerusalem to put an end to the dissension which had arisen in the church on the questions of circumcision and unclean meats. This council decided in favor of Paul, who was in attendance and the decision as given in a letter addressed not to all Christians but only to " the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia"-where Paul had been making converts, informing them that they were not required to observe the Mosaic ceremonial law. It is quite clear that no such council would have been held if the matter had been decided ten years before, as Acts says it had been.
But this account of the council of 51 C. E. is also a fiction.
About eight years later Paul went to Jerusalem again, and his appearance there provoked a riot. The mob wanted to kill him because of his hostility to the Mosaic law, and this mob included Jewish Christians as well as Jews. All the Christians in Jerusalem were zealous adherents of the Mosaic law. Some of the leading brethren, presumably apostles, advised Paul to take a false oath that he did not teach his Jewish converts to neglect the law. And, if we can believe Acts, he took that oath. This, however, did not pacify the mob, which would have put him to death if the Roman soldiers had not protected him. They took him to prison and finally to Rome. This story in Acts implies that the apostolic church adopted one rule of discipline for the Gentile and another for the Jewish Christians; that the latter were, and that the former were not, required to comply with the Mosaic ceremonial law. This duplicity of discipline is not recorded elsewhere. It is not known to Paul ; and if it had existed, he could neither have been ignorant of it nor remained silent about it. He tells us that the twelve apostles in Jerusalem, or those of them known to him, favored strict adherence to Moses; and the only way in which he could get along harmoniously with them was by promising to do no missionary work in Judea. He was to labor among the Gentiles,
Trinitarians are inoculated from rationality, facts and logic. It is no surprise that basic reasoning is entirely lost on those that believe that the creator became one of those he created in order to save the created from his own self. Not to mention the incoherence in the scripture, never minding the creed itself.
Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted
[James 1:13) God cannot be tempted
(John 1:29) Jesus was seen
(1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God
(Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God
(Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man
(Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn
(Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn
(1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died
(1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die
(Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation
(Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation
(Mark 4:38) Jesus slept
(Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep
(John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful
(Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful
(Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing
(Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing
Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3).
2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain.
It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings.
How can one beieve that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He.
Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Ex muslim woman from turkey since when i was 14 and proud to be in American
Glad you are a proud American!! That makes me happy!! 🇺🇸
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer
Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as::
“seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed:
"Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar?
Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization.
The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua.
infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name."
jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah )
Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language:
"From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen.
He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown.
"protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22)
𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي
A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת
Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic:
ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain
س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining
ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining
ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining
ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining
ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining
The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word.
As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate,
Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE).
And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical.
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either.
Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity:
"And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church"
-Homily 17 Section XIX
On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said
"For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.”
-Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5
Soon after Jesus had selected his twelve apostles, according to Luke, he
" gave them power and authority over all devils and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. And he said unto them: 'Take nothing for your journey, neither staves nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. And whatsoever house ye enter, there abide and thence depart. And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them."
This is the entire charge of Jesus to his apostles when he sent them out to convert the world, as reported by Luke, who claims to give the address or a portion of it, and that presumably the most important portion, word for word. The language here attributed to Jesus conveys no idea that he had any purpose of founding a new church. Neither here nor anywhere else, in the language attributed to him in the New Testament, does he explain the phrase " the kingdom of God " to mean a new ecclesiastical organization. In several passages he does use it to signify the celestial dominion after the destruction of the world; and this is therefore presumably its meaning everywhere.
The gospel of Matthew is much further than that of Luke in its report of the charge of Jesus to his apostles: "These twelve Jesus sent forth and commanded them, saying: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.", "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I am come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother... He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward."
This charge, as reported by Matthew omitted nearly all the main ideas that would have been appropriate in an address instructing the twelve to preach the foundation of Christianity. It does not say whether Jesus wished to reform or to supersede Judaism; whether his principal purpose was ecclesiastical, moral, political, or sanitary. The remarks about healing the sick and casting out devils is the most explicit of all the instructions.
Certainly no reader can learn from that charge that Jesus intended to establish a new religion; and much less can he learn any feature of the faith or discipline of a projected new church. And this address is that portion of the New Testament where such information should be given most clearly. He made no doctrinal definition and no ecclesiastical organization. He did not use the key words of the original doctrines necessary to Christianity or a new church, nor the keywords of ideas afterwards associated with Christianity, such as Incarnation, Trinity, Immaculate Conception, and Transubstantiation.
The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission.
Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws.
There never was such another epidemic of ecclesiastical forgery. The church was flooded with books attributed falsely to apostolic times and authors. The names of many of these books, and the texts of some, are preserved. Distinguished saints and learned fathers of the faith openly commended the invention and acceptance of false- hoods designed to aid the conversion of the world to what they believed to be truth.
None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity.
Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
"Jesus" did not intend to establish a new religion. He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either.
In the opening chapters of Acts we find two addresses by Peter, one delivered to the disciples when an apostle to succeed Judas Iscariot was to be chosen, and the other to the Jews on the day of Pentecost. On neither occasion did the speaker mention a new religion, or a church open to Gentiles as well as to Jews, or an abandonment of the Mosaic law.
If these ideas had been in his mind at that time, he could not have omitted some reference to them. That the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem continue for at least eighteen years to comply with the requirements of the Mosaic law is proved by the epistle of Paul and also by Acts.
In the latter book we read that at time not specified, probably not earlier than 40 C.E Peter went to Joppa and there ate with Gentiles-^that i he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of one of the Mosaic ceremonial rules-and after his return to Jesus; then, he was called to account by his fellow disciple He justified his conduct, not on the ground that Jesus had abrogated the ceremonial law of Moses, or any part of it, but that in a dream he had received a divine communication telling him that all manner of beasts, fowls, an creeping things were clean, and that it was lawful for him to keep company with Gentiles, who were " unclean under the law of Moses. This announcement was accepted as authoritative, but with much surprise, " becaus that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."'
This statement of the revelation to Peter, and of it acceptance by the disciples in Jerusalem, is doubtless a invention of the author of Acts. It cannot be brought into harmony with later passages of his own book, nor with the statements of Paul, who is our only trustworth; witness in these matters.
According to Acts, about 51 C. E. a council was held in Jerusalem to put an end to the dissension which had arisen in the church on the questions of circumcision and unclean meats. This council decided in favor of Paul, who was in attendance and the decision as given in a letter addressed not to all Christians but only to " the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia"-where Paul had been making converts, informing them that they were not required to observe the Mosaic ceremonial law. It is quite clear that no such council would have been held if the matter had been decided ten years before, as Acts says it had been.
But this account of the council of 51 C. E. is also a fiction.
About eight years later Paul went to Jerusalem again, and his appearance there provoked a riot. The mob wanted to kill him because of his hostility to the Mosaic law, and this mob included Jewish Christians as well as Jews. All the Christians in Jerusalem were zealous adherents of the Mosaic law. Some of the leading brethren, presumably apostles, advised Paul to take a false oath that he did not teach his Jewish converts to neglect the law. And, if we can believe Acts, he took that oath. This, however, did not pacify the mob, which would have put him to death if the Roman soldiers had not protected him. They took him to prison and finally to Rome. This story in Acts implies that the apostolic church adopted one rule of discipline for the Gentile and another for the Jewish Christians; that the latter were, and that the former were not, required to comply with the Mosaic ceremonial law. This duplicity of discipline is not recorded elsewhere. It is not known to Paul ; and if it had existed, he could neither have been ignorant of it nor remained silent about it. He tells us that the twelve apostles in Jerusalem, or those of them known to him, favored strict adherence to Moses; and the only way in which he could get along harmoniously with them was by promising to do no missionary work in Judea. He was to labor among the Gentiles,
Trinitarians are inoculated from rationality, facts and logic. It is no surprise that basic reasoning is entirely lost on those that believe that the creator became one of those he created in order to save the created from his own self. Not to mention the incoherence in the scripture, never minding the creed itself.
Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted
[James 1:13) God cannot be tempted
(John 1:29) Jesus was seen
(1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God
(Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God
(Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man
(Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn
(Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn
(1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died
(1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die
(Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation
(Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation
(Mark 4:38) Jesus slept
(Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep
(John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful
(Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful
(Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing
(Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing
Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3).
2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain.
It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings.
How can one beieve that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He.
Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
This was very eye opening. I come from an East African country with very high rates of unemployment. As a result, young men and women often willl go to Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries to work as domestic workers etc. The torture they are put through with so many deaths reported; mental issues arising from maltreatment in those countries - forcefully taking custody of their passports and have no means to return home; being thrown off balconies when they start to demand to return home etc....Very horrific stories you almost wonder if these are human beings.
Sad .. as an Easy African I feel grieved by the millions of my kinsmen who where captured, castrated, enslaved and killed by these barbarians....and still going on today. East Africa should seek reparations
yep
Dont forget the mass deaths of south asian labourers during qatar world cup preps
As I’m an ex Muslim from East Africa as well especially Somalia, Islam is a cancer to humanity.
Islam never abolished slavery. Most modern slaves are in fact Islamist marriages..
I am also an Ex-Muslim, from Lahore, Pakistan 🌹🇵🇰
Salute
Do you listen to Harris Sultan? I’m from Bangladesh and I’m also ex-Muslim.
Keep yourself safe guys or get enough money to GTFO 😂
Esa bhi hota h kya kya blasphemy ka charge nahi lagta ??? from India
@@studyclasses5537 thankfully Asian countries are not as advanced at spying on their citizens
RIP
I'm a Tunisian ex Muslim one of the reasons why I left Islam is the history of my country and what my berber ancestors in north Africa suffered because of arabs and muslims during history and the arabization of north Africa because of them until people neglected their real berber identity for the sake of Islam.
So true! As an eclectic pagan, I love that your ancestral faith has non human deities as well, believing as I do that non human and plants have souls and mysteries too. May you find the path back to the magical wisdom of the ancient Amazigh and other pagans of North Africa!❤😊❤
Same situation in Indian subcontinent. Rape, murder, looting, human trafficking selling women and children
@@angeldust4224 Indeed, I've been following the Hindu historians on TH-cam and used to follow Hindu and Sikh pages when I was on Facebook. The genocide by Muslims in India seems to have been the worst in human history!
not only the history of your country, the brave Amazighi people, but also the history of Assyrians and Kurds...
I hope ex-Muslims are encouraged by this interview.
There is a group of ex-Muslims in the world, who are courageous enough to speak up publicly. It would be so interesting to have them all together on a show/book.
Yes indeed
Leaving Islam book exists
❤❤❤ yes!!!!!!!
@@Tragic.Kingdom whats it called ??
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer
Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as::
“seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed:
"Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
He's now another truth-telling hero. Good for him (and the rest of the world).
The west is too busy playing videogames and watchin reality shows to do anything about it. We chose our own demons and we're paying the price for it.
who now has a fatwa on his head. I hope both of these gents will be safe.
@@mznxbcv12345
@@mznxbcv12345I was there. They purposely went to look for and singled out civilians. They hunted us down as we were running away. They shot teenage girls who were cowering down on their knees. F*ck off with your lies
what is the truth?
Very timely conversation. Thank you for clarifying these important aspects of Islam for both Muslims and non Muslims. Knowledge is strength.
or DEADLY!!
The first time the phrase “human animal” was recorded in history was by Eichmann in WW2 he literally said “we have to be savages in a chapter that will never be written when treating human animals”, even their calculating of calories was also done
On the 7th, it is crucial to understand that there were no direct attacks on civilians, only collateral damage. Out of the 1148 total names on haaret dataset, 473 military and 675 were civilians.
Ratio of civilians to military personnel killed on the 7th was 1 . 4 : 1 - lower than any of the iTf "mowing" operations, which has a ratio of 7 : 1
According to UN OCHA data from 2008 to 2022; The collateral damage on the 7th was significantly lower than any of the ITf "mowing" operations, which had a ratio of 7:1 with 1,023 military personnel out of 6,541 total.
On the 7th, with 473 military (418 were iTf military personnel, 55 belonged to the police) out of 1148 total, the ratio of civilians to military personnel was a mere 1.4:1
When including all casualties, not just deaths, the collateral damage ratio of the "mowing" operations is a staggering 162:1
From the 161,233 accumulated civilian casualties over only 14 years of "mowing" operations.
A 162 :1 ratio means that for every 162 civillians, 1 military personnel is a casualty. The 7th had a ratio of 1.4:1, more than a hundred times lower.
The 473 are - 55 soldiers, 13 privates, 59 corporals, 200 sergeants (45 of whom were sergeant majors), 48 commanders, 32 lieutenants, 5 lieutenant colonels, 6 colonels, 37 officers, 10 inspectors, 6 intendents, and 2 Lance Corp. This was a military defeat, and they are taking it out on the rest.
The reported ages of the victims are as follows:
0-4: 2 civilians
5-12: 8 civilians
13-17: 14 civilians
18-25: 132 civilians
26-40: 119 civilians
41-60: 55 civilians
61+: 40 civilians
Active duty military personnel:
18-25: 258 active duty military personnel
26-40: 60 active duty military personnel
41-60: 17 active duty military personnel
61+: 1 active duty military personnel
e other side. An excess of ten thousands, all before the seventh
UN Human Rights Office (UN OCHA) PA Civilians 2008-2023:
2008 - 2,325 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 1,440.
2012 - 3,992 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 255.
2014 - 17,533 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 1,492.
2018 - 31,259 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 300.
2019 - 15,491 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 138.
2020 - 2,581 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 30.
2021 - 19,183 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 349.
2022 - 10,345 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 191.
2023 up to September - 8,508 Wounded Civilians, Deaths 227.
civilian deaths on the other side -
2008: 3 , 2012: 6 , 2014: 73 , 2018: 9
2019: 10 , 2020: 0 , 2021: 9 , 2022: 26
Total; 2008 up to September 2023 - 161,233 PA Civilian Casualties, 1,023 military personnel.
Wounded includes: amputees from the deliberate targeting of knees by snipers, white phosphorous third degree body burns, etc
The "Costs of War" study by brown in 2021 has these figures for the past 20 years of engagement of US policy: indirect deaths 4.5-4.7 million, direct 905-940,000 ; in other words 6 Million Deaths and 38 million displaced. This is relevant because of the Yinon Plan.
@@mznxbcv12345palestinians worked with nazis in ww2 lol taqqiya
Islam is the truth. If it wasn't, TH-cam would censorit the video .
Western nations are stupid they keep statistics that make them look bad, Islam is the best if you don't write it down it never happened 😂❤
Im an ex Muslim from Pakistan. Here in Karachi, educated and rich Pakistani are not religious anymore.
but still those rich pakistani's mentality towards other religions would be same as radical ones.
the rich use religion to control the poor... it's not a new thing
I suppose all the ones arriving in europe illegally are the other kind 😞
They should campaign to get the Pakistani government revoke the infamous blasphemy laws.
@@AnoNymous-qx4tf good to hear.
Islamization of the Americas is definitely a thing in Canada. Thank you for this insightful interview.
You’re an absolute idiot like the two morons in this video. Islam has done anything, it’s so easy for you. Idiots to just go up and lie on the Internet nowadays there’s really no point for youtube nowadays
Two wonderfully humble and honest men . It gives hope for the world.
"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.""Allah only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion - [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers."
Quran 60 8-9
If Hussein, the “tolerant muslim” 1:06:39 , says the story of Muhammad marrying Aisha when she was 6 years old is unreliable because it was written 90 years after the fact, why should anyone believe what the quran says about Jesus because the stories about Him were written about 600 years after Him?
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
According to atheist religion, Why is it not evil when children are boned by grown up pdf file atheist men?
Do you think it has to do with doctrines of atheist religion which says that this is _liberating_ for children? So what atheists are doing when mounting children is not pervert, it is an act of kindness?
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer
Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as::
“seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed:
"Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Our elites suffer from pathological stupidity and ignorance...
They aren't elite. They are the useful idiots of the global cabal.
No not stupidity or ignorance. They know what’s coming. They are a part of the demise of the West!
They know exactly what they are doing. They know very well that Jesus is who he says he is. They're just working very hard and hoping everyone else doesn't. They chose the wrong side. In the end, God wins, and they know it.
Their strategy seems untenable. The best case scenario is a sizable portion of the population realizes that just because they don’t agree on everything, it doesn’t mean they think they’re wrong about everything either. Alliances are built off this common ground and aimed at those running the country.
Worst case, they never find common ground and all they do is fight and fight and fight like other parts of the planet. It’s a lose, lose for the decision makers.
Vanity
*"If you recite the Quran, you are Muslim!*
*If you understand the Quran, you are Ex-Muslim!"*
Keep yapping a lot💋
I read the Quran and understood the Quran and i am still Muslim
@@Iamnotokay18I'm Christian, but can't put the Qu'ran down. I love it
@@Shilajit33 god bless U in respect your book respect your relegion and am not going to take about Jesus read about him. In the Quran
@@Iamnotokay18say what you want, that's on you, and your decision nobody else does.
@@dr.peanutsheesh6176 what are U saying?
Leaving Islam many years ago and I choose to convert. I stay incognito about my new faith, never published it. I am abandoned by my family, however I flee safely and able to start building my new life abroad.
It's a dangerous ideology, especially for women myself. I am wishing the safety for all my fellow ex muslims everywhere. Please, strategise your escape for your safety.
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer
Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as::
“seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed:
"Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@ranro7371 Muham had slaves himself and approved of raping them even if they were married slaves.
My daughter in law from Iran says that if the people of her country were free to choose 80%+ would not be Muslim. Her family has never been Muslim…they are followers of Zoroastrian religion. She says that when you are born in a Muslim country they automatically say you are Muslim whether you are or not.
They must study how Spain got rid off islam
Then all Muslim countries would be 100% Muslim lol. They don't claim that...
I am an muslim-born atheist living in a christian-majority country (Romania) ,and they do the same as the muslims ,everyone knows their child will be Christian before it is even born.
That is not true. You have to be born again.
@@cristristam9054
@@Small_Clips_Apologetics If you don't believe me just ask romanian couples who do not have a kid yet or who are in the pregnancy stage, they will tell you that their child will be Christian.
I do not understand why western politicians of all stripes are so enthralled with Islam. Islam is not just a religion but a political ideology that is totally at odds with western liberal democracy.
The refusal of our politicians to question Islamist extremism in the UK and to instead call members of the public racists should they question the growing influence of Islam is dangerous. Again why, what is the agenda.
We in the west must understand the threat islamism poses. That is not attacking individual Muslims but acknowledging organised Islam as the threat it is to liberal democracy.
The west needs oil from middle eastern countries which is part of the reason for the reluctance to criticize.
the west created al Qaeda daesh which are violent crazy groups, the us want you to believe these are muslims but its their (cia) creation
No western politician is enthralled or any of its allies. they hate islam. the entire west is waging war on islam and you think they like them?
what threat in the west? what are you on about
Yes, keep paying taxes to fight those who want to impose JIZYA, and just keep voting and wait for change. Good luck lol
Oil.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is also a voice that needs to be heard on this subject, she's a heroine of our times.
That she is
100 percent
At least she gets to the real issues, this is boring in contrast.
In The Netherlands she was treated with disdain...and she eventually went to America...het spijt me Ayaan dat we je niet geloofde...✝️✝️✝️
Lmao. No, she’s just another fraud.
The guy who made me leave Islam. I respect him.
Ibn Warraq, was the kind of voice I yearned to hear.
Come back before it’s too late
Come back for what?@@nayeemimani2451
@@nayeemimani2451Nope😂
Lol
@@nayeemimani2451 Come out before it is late.
Christian Prince, an Arab born men a Christian here on TH-cam. He speaks fluent Arabic and he Study Islam and Sharia law. All you need to know about the truth Islam. He dabates muslims I have listen to many conversations. He has never been disapproved by any Muslims
Yes
If he was a former christian who converted to islam and is facing persecution, he would be the poster child of the islamoleftist west
A person cannot claim to pursuing truth without looking carefully at Jesus Christ. He said " I am...the truth.."
You talk about, Sam Shamoun?
He have 3 channels he’s soo good!
You talk about, Sam Shamoun?
He have 3 channels he’s soo good!
Here’s one of his videos but not his channel…
th-cam.com/video/zTWeNdEQfKY/w-d-xo.htmlsi=EeVuYVD2hGt7SXam
Nice to see that Ibn Warraq is still around.
This conversation is fascinating. Thanks for sharing Ibn Warraq thoughts on Islam. I've never heard of him before but can't wait to read his book "Why I'm not A Muslim."
I was always a huge fan of Winston Marshall as a musician , but I'm an even bigger fan now that I've discovered his podcast
I was always a big fan of Winston Marshall the Olympian break dancer, now I love his podcast.
You're thinking of Winston Marsalis maybe?
Ibn Warraq, a brave, brave man dismantling the Islamic apologists with logic and pure facts. God bless you Sir! 🙏
Yes, God Bless you, athiiest or not, you release truths
Apostasy in ISLAM isn't punishable by death..
Stop listening to these 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
And listen to some real Islamic scholars.!
Crazy tho how in the west of you refuse to go to war.. They put you in a cage And your family to due out if poverty.. So ethical
I read his book many years ago.... very enlightening..... I shared with many people
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
Thank you so much for having this man on. I read his book in 1995. He is an unbelievable scholarly voice that the world needs now more than ever.
Well said.
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer
Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as::
“seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed:
"Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@mznxbcv12345
You need to STOP lying.
Moslems never read the quran as they don't know Arabic!
This historian is a TRUTH TELLER!
@@mznxbcv12345momo was a slave trader and pdf.file he was 53 when he slept with 9yesr old aisha ❤
@@mznxbcv12345The 👹
The interviewer should know what happened to Salman Rushdie! Of course, Muslims do not tolerate a Muslim being critical of Islam. He and his family are always under threat.
Obviously the religion of peace....
Fun fact: Rushdie hid out on Cape Cod when that happened. I saw him.
No. Muslims are critical of people lying against Islam. Truth doesn't tolerate BS.
This is why I don’t trust the likes of Ed Husain or Majid Nawaz
@@malvolio01 Who are Ed and Majid?
Oh my Goodness! I'm so happy to see this person. He's the one who started teaching me about Islam from his book "The Historical Muhammad" about 20 years back, and then later I bought "Why I'm not a Muslim" book. Prof. Ibn Warraq is an absolute genius and a great historian. He's a prolific writer. God bless you, Sir. Thank you so much for educating us about Islam.
Listen to Christian Apologetics also.
Like -- GodLogic Apologetics,
Christian Prince,
The Prophet's Republic
Cross and the Crescent Discussion Group
Any chance you can pass on those books to Starmer please?
Light's on on the attic?
Is anyone home?
God this is boring 😢
@@Small_Clips_Apologetics Pfander Films, Robert Spencer, Ayaan Hirsi Ali…
@@sabinadonofrio8863don't watch then.
Winston’s selection of guests and topics is superb.
I support his freedom of speech and salute his courage!
*"For a Muslim, loyalty to faith trumps his loyalty to the country!!"*
-- BR Ambedkar
Even Ambedkar knows this
I believe it also trumps his loyalty to family. There appears to be no love or joy in Islam. .
Alahamdulla I am not MUSCLIM ❤
He was of the of most intelligent and respectful politician in Indian history
@SuspectUsual For a Christian also. However, "Render under Caeser the things that are Caeser's, and unto God the things that are God's" is Jesus's instruction recorded in three Gospels: Matthew, Mark and Luke. That is, insofar as we are able without compromising our faith, we should obey the authority we live under. That's good common sense.
What a brave, intelligent and honest man ... what he is doing is SO dangerous! (but so necessary)
Hope this interview opens the Westerners' eyes. My grandparents and parents suffered enormously in the hands of the radical Muslims, which took place cumulatively 170 years ago.
It’s the western “ politicians “ the corrupt Marxist left politicians vote the bums out
Which country did this happen in
@@randomhuman2595 Virtually ALL Muslim dominated countries . Please remove your historical blinders .
@@bobbya51 I meant to ask where this persons grandparents are from
@@randomhuman2595anywhere
I accept him as an Englishman. Ok, he isnt ethnically English but he has clearly integrated and likes our way of life, overall
He did all this to get this acceptance yet there is a ‘not ethnically “ clause.Poor soul….
@@budding4708 Many others havent even tried to be British
Remember UK had blasphemy laws not long ago . There are more than 4000 religions on earth but only children of Abraham are fighting non stop. They are antiscience , colonizing death to the colourful world.
The list of ex Muslims speaking out is growing longer
Man has great courage to speak up in the kind of world we live in.❤❤❤
Amazing interview, simply brilliant. Ibn Warraq's words should be on a global curriculum educating all.
Before i knew about Ibn Warraq i knew about Al Rawandi and his mentor Abu Isa Al Warraq(dissidents from Abbasid era islam), upon learning about Ibn Warraq i became an instant fan, he carries the old name to our modern day and age, truly timeless.
My quest for the truth about islam led me to leave the religion about 6 years ago, people like Ibn Warraq inspired me to take the step and accept reality instead of lying and gaslighting myself into thinking islam was great.
Islam as a religion or cult is not meant for the civilized world or society. It is intended to be preached among or unite the brutes, violent, ruthless and intolerant. It believes in subjugation or submission of other faiths and ideology without questioning or criticism. Love, kindness and compassion are alien for them and one don't find these basic human qualities in their scriptures
The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar?
Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization.
The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua.
infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name."
jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah )
Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language:
"From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen.
He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown.
"protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22)
𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي
A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת
Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic:
ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain
س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining
ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining
ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining
ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining
ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining
The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word.
As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate,
Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE).
And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical.
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
No one can have a positive opinion of Muhammad, including scholars, unless they are lying about him.
Cognitive dissonance
Dr. Wafa Sultan, Ex-Muslima and psychiatrist: It is not possible to know Q'ran and Sunna AND to believe in it AND to be a mentally healthy person.
@@heikejohannajahns3257Very interesting!
I have heard that muslim scholars don't trust the majority of the hadith.
All I know is he was a nonse
I'm an ex-muslim, a BIG FAN of Ibn Warraq. Great and honest scholar from Muslim background. Muhammad of Islam is a MYTH, a creation of the Abbasids. The historical guy is Qutham, a wannabe prophet and warlord/mercenary. He was NOT from Mekkah (of Arabia). He was born and raised in Iraq. The only non-Muslim historical records about him is in the Byzantines Chronical of Arabia. They refer to him as alghawi (deceiver). The mention of Mekkah appeared in 742 A.D. and it was in Iraq. The Abbasids biggest scheme and deception, they changed dates and locations. They destroyed all records (including Quran) and re-invented a FICTIONAL history. Islam polemist, Dr. Jay Smith, is a leading scholar in exposing how the Abbasids did it.
I wish Dr Jay Smith would do the same research and investigation about Christianity with the same passion and obsession.
@@SA_SovereigntyForPatriots @MAT-244 That has already been done for Christianity. Full critical analysis, although many people are not aware of that. Unlike Islam, Christianity matches the historical records. @MAT-244 is correct about Islam as we know it today having been created long after the date given for the death of Mohammed (if he existed). The Ummayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik changed the coinage in what is now Syria from its Byzantine form with Christian symbology to the Nabatean script that became Arabic around 691-692 AD, possibly to justify his reign against the rebellion of Ibn al-Zubayr who likely was in Petra (as all the qiblas from the Arabian temples to their chief god Al Lah, that the Nabateans called Dushara and whose family is mentioned in the Koran in Sura 53:19-21) and fled to what we now call Mecca. There is also evidence of Iraqi involvement in the creation of Islam. One thing we do know for sure, is that Islam's story about it's origins cannot be true as they don't match the archeological record (and much of the Koran predates the alleged lifespan of Mohammed, as we know have the earlier Christian manuscripts of stories such as the Sleepers of Ephesus that the Koran later copied and modified).
@@SA_SovereigntyForPatriots why? Christianity does not kill those who leave it like you Muslims do. It's far better than Islam.
@@staubsauger2305 Christianity matches the historical records?....Why is it that you don't acknowledge that it is Paul who created Christianity and not Jesus. Jesus was born a Jew and died a Jew. Please show or tell where that is reflected in Christianity.
Another good book is Norbert G. Pressburg What the Modern Martyr Should Know: Seventy-Two Grapes and Not a Single Virgin: The New Picture of Islam
Thank you for featuring Ibn Warraq - who isn't afraid to tell it like it is.
Very brave and generouse gentleman for coming out and warning the world about this ☪️ancer !
@@Nobody-p3i first that’s offensive second off how is this cancerous?
Thank you for speaking the truth , Ibn Warraq.
Great discussion. As an ex-muslim from a sunni background I support this gentleman.
What makes you leave Islam?
@@intheoceanofknowledge
You pose a good question. The answer actually lies with the individual who is at such a cross road. While I am not aware of your religious beliefs most people who stray away from Islamic ideology find themselves disenchanted with it's oppressive nature. Personally I believe that there is one Supreme Entity that resides within every human being and if everyone practices Good Thought, Good Words and Good Deeds daily you are that much closer to that Supreme Entity. The problem today is that we are disengaged from spiritual reality. We are not humans seeking a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings seeking a human experience. Once you embrace this concept you will think more clearly. Irrespective of your beliefs Good Thoughts, Good Words and Good Deeds are part of your spiritual makeup and no ideology can replace this fact. 🙏🕉🙏
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
@@intheoceanofknowledgemy question why anyone follow such a stpd religion which is everything except spiritualism
Wha kind of god male religion ? Force people to fight for it ??
@@stormraider6834
You are not the only one who thinks that way. To understand this you have to go back quite a few centuries when in the Middle Eastern regions there were only Arabs who were nomads. It is these people who were preached this ideology and that was the birth of Islam. Originally this concept met with little support/success so fear and oppression were introduced and and it has remained that way ever since. Today, people in Iran call themselves Muslims but in fact they are Zoroastrians by ancestry who were forcefully converted to Islam. Today we are one of the smallest minorities in the world. I am proud to be a Zoroastrian. If you are interested you can Google it. Unlike other religions Zoroastrianism does not encourage or permit conversion and according to prophet Zoroaster every person is by birth destined into his/her faith and it is a sin to do conversion. Finally, it might interest you to note that it was our prophet Zoroaster who predicted the birth of Jesus Christ a few centuries before Christ was born. Although I am Zoroastrian, I have read a lot about Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity and Islam. I always encourage people to do this. It only when the mind is open does the light shine in. May God Bless you always.
The man is a hero - I read all his work years ago. Always been a hero of mine.
I read that book 20 years ago and it changed my life.
What a wonderful gentleman, a man of principle, great courage and integrity. I have Why the West is Best. I trust his views are more sound after this interview and have a l9t of respect for him.
I thought you interviewed him very well Winston returning to points, not missing anything out, allowing him to speak and being considerate and respectful. Really enjoyed meeting him.
Q: *What are some lessons that Muslims need to learn?*
A1: *Wrong book leads to wrong results!*
A2: *Actions have consequences!*
A3: *Losing a war you started is called Defeat, not Genocide!*
👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
So, you think the Zionist genocide of Palestinians started on 7th October?
Proud Ex-Muslim, his book helped me! :)
Thank you for sharing. People around the world need to hear it. Not only Islamic slavery is far worst than what happened in Europe, but it is ongoing.
Winston, you are doing wonderful and essential work. Keep it up and I hope you are enjoying it 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
Thank you! I am
Islam dies without lies
@@Huntingdonn what lies the whole gosh dang Bible is a lie
What an intelligent lovely and courageously honest man. You are English to me. Your love of our landscape, literature and history make you English. Thank you.
A bit strange that he felt upset when his friend said that Yes you would notice that, being a foreigner.
Why in the world would he feel upset! His understanding or views would be shaped by his lived experience! And he was born in India, lived in Pakistan, had been a Muslim! So what his friend said was extremely insightful. Nothing racist or demeaning there. Indeed, that was an insightful comment by his friend.
Ibn Warraq was the first ex-Muslim I ever read, because of Why I Am Not A Muslim. This is the book that absolutely shifted my opinion on Islam as a leftist. Fortunately there have been books have been written on the subject since (because any Islamist can say one book is false), but I highly recommend this classic work.
Have you read Quran
If you’re an anti-religionist, that’s one thing, but to completely disregard 14 centuries of history is preposterous. Over 1M people were killed in Iraq during the West’s successive invasions of Iraq. Is that not a holocaust? We’re literally live-streaming the Israelis eviscerating Gazans like fish in a barrel. Is this Christianity? Judaism? Secular neo-liberal enlightened western values?
The Europeans literally genocided population after population and institutionalized slavery and colonialism in the most barbarous way. The demonization of 2 billion Muslims is vile. Hedonist, individualistic, consumerists will hate and hate until they’re all debt slaves and literal prostitutes all while the rich laugh all the way to the bank.
“If you’re note careful, the newspapers will have you hating people who are oppressed and loving the people doing the oppressing” - Malcolm X
try reading a Muslims book too don’t be so quick to judge.
@@kamer54 I’ve read the Quran, the Hadiths, the Sunnah and introduction to Islam books. I’m good thanks.
@@randomhuman2595 This professor understands Islam as it should be understood as he has the intelligence and insight to see it for what it is.
I remember when TV used to show high quality shows with very relevant and interesting guests like this. It’s interesting how things change over time. Makes me a little sad for nostalgic reasons, but at the same time I’m happy to have programs like this in such abundance and so easily accessible, which was never the case for TV during its heyday because of obvious technological limitations. This is one of the best interviews I’ve seen in a while. Very informative, entertaining, and no wasted breath. Excellent work.
The worst genocide of people was that of Hindus by Islamic rulers which has never been acknowledged by the west,almost deliberately.in 1990, genocide of Kashmiri Hindus was never acknowledged even by India. Kashmiri Hindus became refugees in their own country ,as they moved out of Kashmir into majority hindu Jammu next door and rebuilt their lives with no compensation or help from their own government.The 1920 genocide of Hindus in the so called riot { it was not a riot,but Hindus were targeted by Muslims ) was under British rule of India . Again no acknowledgment from British rulers of Hindus being targeted. I believe everybody is afraid of being killed by Muslims, if they tell the truth
And now Hindus are being targeted in Bangladesh and the west is hush as not displease a certain community
Dont forget the armenians and the balkans!!!
@@tempelhoferfeld7727 Armenians rebelled against the state and sided with the British so they became a danger and expelled from the Ottoman land. There is no genocide what so ever they are all lies. They were attacked by the thugs on the way when they were expelled. Armenian government admitted recently that genocide did not take place. Balkans were under Ottoman rule just like a lot of nations were under British rule or Romans' rule. That's what empire means.
Exactly
@@Lucy-my1clit was a genocide.
No such thing as a Moderate Muslim when the extremism is in the same room
you guys have all the lines moved back
Heard of Ahmadiyya? They are moderate Muslims who are routinely massacred by mainstream Sunni and Shia Muslims for being “apostate”. Meaning, not violent enough for their liking.
@@YoniBaruch-y3m well there you go. Either way Islam isn’t a good look
@@YoniBaruch-y3m notice how zero leftist every bring up the plight of ahmadiya's in muslim majority countries. They spend all their time on 'islamophia' in the west, India instead to weaken these places
What a man he is. My salute to him from India. Authentic, humble, articulate and brave. His work shows why it is important to be a critical thinker. In India the age old philosophy says God is truth and the truth shall prevail. If you imbibe it , then you don’t need any religion
Allahu was Muhammad's creation for all his personal needs and Desires,, if he want anything,, he was delivering message in the name of Allah,,, infact both are one. But after indoctrination of Islam ideology into brain the analytical and reasoning skill will be wiped outout
Jesus says, i am the way,the truth and the life .
Christ is king
@@GODOURSALVATION. Mind you he also proposed to stone the child as per OT and condemned Jewish priests for not doing it.
@@GODOURSALVATION. This is the problem. People try to see things as they experience it and feel that their truth is the ultimate truth. They feel they have arrived at their destination and hence feel it is their right to preach and sometimes violently impose their opinion and beliefs thinking it is right. One doesn't carefully explore their experience with their God from different lenses. Sorry my vocabulary is limited and hence I cannot fully explain what I'm trying to convey here.
So my point is this, most of our beliefs are acquired and imposed. We grow up surrounded by all different beliefs and absorb those systems otherwise we yearn for a godly companion and pick the definition of the devine from among the Manny teachings written in books authored by men. Most people fail to question their beliefs and remain in their cages.
Yes. New statistics show, that while 100% of atheists are flaming homosexuals, actually only 100 out of 100 atheists are also pdf files.
so the demolition of the statue in Bristol was not to destroy a icon for slavery, but to destroy a proponent for the abolition of slavery. What a revelation. How the uk press missed to point.
Massive, carefully nurtured ignorance is at the root of our problems.
Conspiracy theory BS. Most people who were there toppled a slaver into the river.
The press just say what they are told to say
@@glynreed1 so very true...the London mayor knows what he's doing...but the prime minister thinks he's got him in his pocket.
The point seems to be purposely missed.
I’m proud ex Muslim and without lies Islam dies!!! Jesus is lord 🙏❤️🔥👑🕊️☦️
From one sect to another
Anubis, Christianity is the truth and is far better than Islam when taken seriously.
@@Anubis2976 Tell me what is your sect !!!! You believe in monkeys how became you !!! Or man can have babies this time around tell me … or Anubis Egyptian: is a god in Egyptian mythology … is that your sect come on now!!! Jesus is true in his testimony the son of man … Read brother of humanity!!! When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’ “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
Islam is not a religion of peace
@@Anubis2976 Anubis I did not summon you go back to hell
What a lovely gentle man. This talk has been a real eye opener into an Education in Islam very interesting indeed.
Instead of just taking someone else's word, I urge you to go do your own research.
This man is a hero and I will pray for his safety and his family’s safety to keep his voice alive.
The Persians, women in society were quite liberal before the 70's and Islamic Republic.
Absolutely correct. Every time I see the pictures of this period in time, I cry.
Yes, you are correct.
evil replaces evil, and so the world turns
Lebanon same
Some claim the liberal element were a tiny privileged minority, but actually have we any sense of what proportion of women achieved such self volition?
There is a big group called ex-Muslims who have left Islam for good and who are active on social media. They are doing a good job of bringing real Islam to light. Check out names like Sahil, Adam, etc.
plus Mossab, the Green Prince, and Anni Cyrus tell much ...the west must learn this as all the EU was planned no borders as in UNAgenda21-30 to become the NorthAmericanUnion signed byBush/Clinton to let destruction by evil run amuck...
Any links? or more info?please
thx
There's also Christian Prince and Llyod de Jongh. They are very good at showing how stupid and filthy, the religion of peace really is.
YT channel name Ex Muslim Sahil (Hindi), Adam Seeker, Apostate Prophet and so more
The brave Hindus of India had suffered the most-imagine 700 years of oppressive Islamic rule in their own country ! But they are still here standing tall!
But, sadly Hindus lost Pakistan, Bangladesh and kashmir to islam
Kashmir is not lost...
And most Indian Hindus are converting to Christians & Hinduism is not good religion either with casteism old outdated rules.India won't flourish like West even after 100 years because of that
Alhamdulilla 😊@@vikas1520
@@gauravchauhan7834Thanks to Modi 🥰
I'm proud of this man as he hails from my country,, India
He's a great man.
Our elites are suffering from Pathological Altruism.
Hope you’re being sarcastic
It's far worse than that.
Altruism! Are you insane.
You think the Elites care for anyone or anything.
This is the same old idea of pitting populations against each other so they never gain strength or focus on what is occurring at the top.
Then they will be there to offer protection and rest after the conflict they created.
It’s actually covert narcissism disguised as altruism
It’s actually covert narcissism disguised as altruism
41:01 when Thomas Jefferson in 1785 confronted Ambassador Abd Al-Rahman in London, about why the islamic barbary states were taking captured American crews as slaves, the ambassador replied: "Because the Quran tells us to"
@@yasararif8292 I was paraphrasing, what Jefferson paraphrased, which was:
“it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
That's the actual quote from Thomas Jefferson.
@@yasararif8292quran 5:51, quran 9:29 and many many more
@@yasararif8292 why should I? I didn't claim it says so in the qoran - that was Ambassador And Al-Rahman according to Thomas Jefferson.
And the US initially started paying jizya to tripoli to protect their merchants. But in 1801 they came back with guns. A lot of them.
Say, are you trying to downplay the violent supremacism baked into islam?
Can you tell me, who is meant with "those who earned god's wrath" that you reference everytime you pray?
Did you celebrate, mourn or not give a f about Ismail Haniyya' death?
@@yasararif8292what difference would that make I don’t get it
shesshh...we're gonna go back all the way to 1785 🤣..while you're at it, might as well dig up church support for KKK and opposition against slavery & black civil rights in deep south
Was so happy to hear Ibn dismisses Ed Hussain as a double-talker. It has infuriated me in the past that people cannot see though this fraud. So refreshing to hear someone speak so boldly and directly about Islam and its general awfulness.
"I began to re-evaluate my belief in God and I began to believe in God again, and then thereafter I became religious and started to seek knowledge, familiarise myself with the faith. I listened to scholars that would talk about the life of the prophet. Id read books, attend lectures, go to the mosque, have discussions with people about the Islamic religion... I believed it was obligatory upon me to eventually commit an act of terror."
- Ibrahim Abbas, who plotted to massacre "as many people as possible" at churches and public transit stations over Christmas 2016 (Australia)
He's a good man, I remember when he and others launched the St Petersburg declaration, at the Secular Islam Summit. 17 years go, how time flies.
Please spread, fantastic interview! God bless you both always!
Know Islam, no peace. No Islam, know peace.
🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯
Right
You are as ignorant as he is , enjoy your ignorance
Loved this❤. Love and respect from an Indian humanist
*"Terrorism has no religion, but one Evil Cult has monopoly over Terrorism!"*
@@SuspectUsual bark bark ktwa lundutva 🕉️💩💩🐖🖕🖕🖕
Lives in danger for trying to leave Islam! Christians today can hardly imagine it!
Christians are the most persecuted religion on the planet.
Of course it is unimaginable to Christians. We don't persecute nor seek the lives of those who leave the faith. We love them and pray for them to return to The Lord.
@@irataylor5083most Christians don't know what christianity is😂😂😂
I'm an ex-muslim and I know your pain. Keep safe bro
You too bro, we pray to our safety in name of God. @@abdullahhussein3775
All Britons, regardless of race or creed, have had enough.
We are fed up with the divisive race-baiting, the unchecked rise of grooming gangs, and the growing threat posed by extremist ideologies intent on undermining our way of life. We are fed up with the two tier policing.
We demand secure borders and the immediate deportation of those unwilling to contribute to or defend our country and its values.
It is time for our leaders-politicians, police, civil servants, and His Majesty the King-to listen and take action.
We call for a referendum on the following critical questions:
1. Should Britain continue its membership in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)?
2. Should the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, established by the United Nations, be reconsidered and revised?
3. Should any future British government be legally obligated to pursue these revisions until they are implemented globally?
It’s important to acknowledge that these challenges are not unique to Britain; many Western nations face similar, if not more severe, issues.
The British media must actively promote this initiative, and a parliamentary petition should be launched to support it. ❤🇬🇧
@squibbelsmcjohnson The idea of using force is unthinkable to most British people, as it would result in massive loss of life, economic collapse, and severe geopolitical consequences. The only sensible solution is to hold a legal and democratic referendum on our membership of the ECHR and the 1951 Refugee Convention, including its 1967 Protocol, as established by the United Nations. It’s crucial to recognise that Western nations are facing similar challenges. The situations in Germany, France, Sweden, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Canada, and the United States illustrate that Britain is not alone in its struggles. Violence is a recourse only taken by despotic regimes; democratic solutions are the way forward. 👍🏽❤️🇬🇧
As a naturalized Ozzie, i am against global Islamization. They owe their allegiance only to their foul creed and not to the country that gave them shelter and bread. Thus, it is said they may be friendly to you but they are not your friend.
@EdwardThatch-ee7yx You hit the nail on the head. You say violence is a recourse taken by despotic regimes. Do you not think the current regime in G. Britain has the potential to be totalitarian or despotic? I do. They've shown their hand already, just as the democrat party in the US has. I know that the democrat party here in the US definitelt has that potential. The right hates everything the left stands for. The left simply hates the people on the right. That's anyone who identifies as right or conservative. They'll support anything put in front of them, regardless of the degree of stupidity or absurdity, as long as it has been given the ok seal of approval & acceptance by those designated as gatekeepers for their particular causes.
@@EdwardThatch-ee7yx I agree, but when those in power choose to be willfully ignorant (or even active facilitators), I question what it will take for sense to prevail and just how long might that take?
Unfortunately I know many bigots who refuse to hear any criticism of Islam.
"In the absence of god, truth is the only yardstick". The video was great but the ending was special. Great speaker, great host.
Thanks Winston. I do not comment because I am learning from the variety of guests you have. There is an enormous amount to learn and understand. It (your podcasts) has made me look beyond mainstream media more than I have done before. And more people should.
If only the world were full of Ibn Warraq's, what a wonderful world it would be. What a lovely; intelligent; insightful man.
J. Edger Hoover Who was over the FBI may have had a better program that was supported by many White Evangelical organizations. I think he wanted a certain type of christian world and every body would live happily ever after.
Another way to look at it would be, let's not lose sight of just how far humanity progressed under the West. We need to stop throwing it under the bus.
Excelente interview, the travel from Islam to follower of the truth is very inspiring. I believe that the Transcendental Truth will find you if you follow Him.
Winston, please invite Raymond Ibrahim to talk us through the Christian persecution in the Muslim world. He will shed a lot of light on Islam’s view of non Muslims, in this case Christians. British people and the Western world in general should have clear understanding of the Muslim world’s point of view.
Oh yes! I agree!
Leftism is also part of the problem.
warum bauen christen ,das christentum auf unwahrheiten auf,,,kirchenkult İst auf feindschaft des İSLAM's aufgebaut.Also hat keine gerinste chaunz gegen İSLAM...
I'm just reading his book at the moment, sword and scimitar, should be compulsory reading.
All religion is hi-jacked by the dark side.
If ur believe is from outside of you, ur are going down the wrong path.
All u need is to " listen" to uself.
The internet is such a wonderful thing. It broadcasts truth and is unstoppable.
Yes! I'm glad you said that. That how I found out about how the saints come out of the grave. I saw them before I got their email.(Matthew 27:52-53)
@@donluna2000 u know Christianity is built of lies right
Our prime minister wants to outlaw criticism of izzzlam
This is the kind of person who should be advising the government on the reality of what we are facing?
He'd be in jail, quick as you like.
I don't appreciate having to sit through 3 adverts at a time.
The British and American Commi governments (leaders) know the reality of what the West is facing. They welcome it! Most of them are a part of it! They love the European Union and World Health Organization and want the world to be globalized: ONE WORLD ORDER WITH THEM AS THE LEADERS OF IT! This can only happen if the West is demolished!
Well, my comment was erased, but I’m going to write it again. The Wests’ leaders understand the reality of what Europe and America are facing. Most of them actually support the demise of the West and here is why. Many of the Wests’ leaders are Globalists. They support the WHO, NATO, China, etc. In order for Globalism to proceed, the West must be toppled.
God bless him although he doesn’t believe in god
We need more knowledgeable people like him .🙏
Winston Marshall what's a great interviewer. It comes across that you know what you are talking about so your guest enjoys the conversation
“I’d not want to live in a society where people are stoned for adultery, but rather in one where someone first gets stoned and then commits adultery” was a line which Warraq once delivered at the end of a fantastic debate.
The irony is that in the Muslim society I live in, the most sex crazed, adulterous people I’ve met on the dating scene are Muslims. Go figure.
That's a great quote.
These people think child brides are less morally abhorrent that a woman engaging in consensual premarital sex. Get real. I'm not even pro casual sex but that's just absurd
@@Amanda-j3y well said.
@Amanda-j3y or that drinking 🍸 is unacceptable but child marriage is 🤔🤫🫣
An absolute genius man. I learned so much from this beautiful soul.
You need to interview Robert Spencer. "Moderate" Muslims can easily become radicalized by reading the quran.
He was cited by the man from 🇳🇴 who did something
Fyi,...Interesting that Yusuf Islam(Cat Stevens read the Quran and converted to Islam)
you do know when you say that muslims know you didnt read the quran. that might change views of the ignorant non muslims but anyone who is curious and actually reads it will know your statement is a lie
@@SA_SovereigntyForPatriotsbecause he is like muslims when even he was not muslims
I read the Goraun/Koran. Its good, its true. I love Allauh.
Winston, that was an interesting conversation. Good questions were asked.
Ex muslim here..he is right. Im married with 3 kids in the UK. I realised in my late 30's that Islam is not true. For me to proclaim, i do not believe it is instant divorce. I will be cut off from my parents, siblings, my friends. I will have a battle to keep my children with me. So i keep quite and forced to participate in this cult.
😢… maybe ask why Jesus is coming back in your book too and judges… only god Can judge… that is my best argument to make people 2 guess
@@christianandersen1582 All religions are fake.
@@christianandersen1582 there is no Jesus
@@user21870look at Archeological findings on his crucifiction and the DNA tests of the blood from the crucifiction site, IF YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH.
Are you a man or woman? I presume as a man you could risk at least teaching your kids what you have learnt and finding for them a way out that your father couldn't ? As a woman, I can imagine it would be more difficult.
All the Ex-Muslims must get together and protest in the streets!!!
😂😂
Why do you laugh 🧐 @@susangemmell9401
Better don't because it is what Muslim always do 😅
absolute right
Yes, and soon