₦airaland Forum

ProphetUdeme: Waste of my precious MB reading this whole THRASH. I dont blame u... I blame the false prophet mohammed that great deceiver

READ MY POST ABOUT MUHAMMAD IN THE BIBLE
PROPHET MUHAMMAD (pbuh) IN THE BIBLE
by Dr. Zakir Naik
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the Old Testament:
The Qur’an mentions in Surah Al-Araf chapter 7 verse 157:
"Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet,
whom they
find mentioned in their own (scriptures) in the law and the
Gospel".
1. MUHAMMAD (PBUH) PROPHESISED IN THE BOOK OF
DEUTERONOMY:
Almighty God speaks to Moses in Book of Deuteronomy
chapter 18 verse 18:
"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren,
like
unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he
shall speak unto them all that I shall command him."
The Christians say that this prophecy refers to Jesus (pbuh)
because Jesus (pbuh) was like Moses (pbuh). Moses (pbuh)
was a Jew, as well as Jesus (pbuh) was a Jew. Moses
(pbuh)
was a Prophet and Jesus (pbuh) was also a Prophet.
If these two are the only criteria for this prophecy to be
fulfilled, then all the Prophets of the Bible who came after
Moses (pbuh) such as Solomon, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel,
Hosea, Joel, Malachi, John the Baptist, etc. (pbut) will
fulfill this prophecy since all were Jews as well as prophets.
However, it is Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who is like Moses
(pbuh):
i) Both had a father and a mother, while Jesus (pbuh) was
born miraculously without any male intervention.
[Mathew 1:18 and Luke 1:35 and also Al-Qur'an 3:42-47]
ii) Both were married and had children. Jesus (pbuh)
according to the Bible did not marry nor had children.
iii) Both died natural deaths. Jesus (pbuh) has been raised
up
alive. (4:157-158)
Muhammad (pbuh) is from among the brethren of Moses
(pbuh). Arabs are brethren of Jews. Abraham (pbuh) had two
sons: Ishmail and Isaac (pbut). The Arabs are the
descendants of Ishmail (pbuh) and the Jews are the
descendants of Isaac (pbuh).
Words in the mouth:
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was unlettered and whatever
revelations he received from Almighty God he repeated them
verbatim.
"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren,
like
unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall
speak unto them all that I shall command him."
[Deuteronomy 18:18]
iv) Both besides being Prophets were also kings i.e. they
could
inflict capital punishment. Jesus (pbuh) said, "My
kingdom is not of this world." (John 18:36).
v) Both were accepted as Prophets by their people in their
lifetime but Jesus (pbuh) was rejected by his
people. John chapter 1 verse 11 states, "He came unto his
own, but his own received him not."
iv) Both brought new laws and new regulations for their
people. Jesus (pbuh) according to the Bible did not bring
any new laws. (Mathew 5:17-18) .
2. It is Mentioned in the book of Deuteronomy chapter 18:19
"And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not harken
unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will
require it of him."
3. Muhammad (pbuh) is prophesised in the book of Isaiah:
It is mentioned in the book of Isaiah chapter 29 verse 12:
"And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying,
Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned."
When Archangel Gabrail commanded Muhammad (pbuh) by
saying Iqra - "Read", he replied, "I am not learned" .
4. prophet Muhammad (pbuh) mentioned by name in the old
testament:
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is mentioned by name in the
Song
of Solomon chapter 5 verse 16:
" Hikko Mamittakim we kullo Muhammadim Zehdoodeh wa
Zehraee Bayna Jerusalem ."
"His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is
my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters
of Jerusalem."
In the Hebrew language im is added for respect. Similarely im
is added after the name of Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh) to make it Muhammadim. In English translation they
have even translated the name of Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh) as "altogether lovely", but in the Old Testament in
Hebrew, the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is yet
present.
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the New Testament:
Al-Qur'an Chapter 61 Verse 6:
"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said, 'O Children of
Israel! I
am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law
(which
came) before me and giving glad tidings of a messenger to
come
after me, whose name shall be Ahmed.' But when he came to
them
with clear signs, they said, 'This is evident sorcery!' "
All the prophecies mentioned in the Old Testament regarding
Muhammad (pbuh) besides applying to the Jews also hold
good for
the Christians.
1. John chapter 14 verse 16:
"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another
Comforter, that he may abide with you forever."
2. Gospel of John chapter 15 verse 26:
"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you
from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which
proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me."
3. Gospel of John chapter 16 verse 7:
"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I
go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not
come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you".
"Ahmed" or "Muhammad" meaning "the one who praises" or
"the praised one" is almost the translation of the
Greek word Periclytos. In the Gospel of John 14:16, 15:26,
and
16:7. The word 'Comforter' is used in the English
translation for the Greek word Paracletos which means
advocate or a kind friend rather than a comforter.
Paracletos is the warped reading for Periclytos. Jesus (pbuh)
actually prophesised Ahmed by name. Even the
Greek word Paraclete refers to the Prophet (pbuh) who is a
mercy for all creatures.
Some Christians say that the Comforter mentioned in these
prophecies refers to the Holy Sprit. They fail to realise
that the prophecy clearly says that only if Jesus (pbuh)
departs will the Comforter come. The Bible states that the
Holy Spirit was already present on earth before and during
the
time of Jesus (pbuh), in the womb of Elizabeth, and again
when Jesus (pbuh) was being baptised, etc. Hence this
prophecy refers to none other than Prophet
Muhammad (pbuh).
4. Gospel of John chapter 16 verse 12-14:
"I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear
them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is
come, he will guide you unto all truth: for he shall not speak
of
himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak:
and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me".
The Sprit of Truth, spoken about in this prophecy referes to
none
other than Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)
NOTE : All quotations of the Bible are taken from the King
James
Version.
Reference: http://www.irf.net/irf/comparativereligion/
index.htm

Ali Sina (pseudonym) is an Iranian Ex-Muslim ( apostate )
and a strong critic of Islam . Founder of Faith Freedom
International, which he describes as a grassroots movement
of ex-Muslims. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]
Background
Born and raised in Iran, educated in Italy and Pakistan, and
now living in Canada, he began debating with people in the
1990s AND ALSO WHAT HE WROTE IS THAT WE ARE AGAINST HATE NOT FAITH

Ali Sina (pseudonym) is an Iranian Ex-Muslim ( apostate )
and a strong critic of Islam . Founder of Faith Freedom
International, which he describes as a grassroots movement
of ex-Muslims. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]
Background
Born and raised in Iran, educated in Italy and Pakistan, and
now living in Canada, he began debating with people in the
1990s

Emusan: I wanted to modify my post before by adding CHRISTIAN/FREETHINKER but network is bad.
Since you've quote my post I don't need to do that again.



And you said no Christian respond to Zakir's challenge.



Are you sure something is up there?
You claimed NO CHRISTIAN site! And I went ahead to give you where A CHRISTIAN site responded to the challenge and you're here falling another thing.



Your problem is that you didn't read all the reply of Ali Sina you probably read his reply through Zakir's respond to his post because had it been you read it you will understand what I'm saying by calling him Christian/Freethinker. He is a Christian but also believed is freethinker that's why if your open his SITE you'll see "WE DEAL WITH HATE, NOT FAITH"

I bet it you will go back and check because you didn't know before.

Though some Christians still welcome him but I'm not subscribe with him.

WHY MISQUOTING ME?.......U ARE FUNNY MAN WHAT I SAID IS THAT U CANT SEE THE REAL COMMENT OF THE ANTAGONIST OF ZAKRNAIK I MEAN THE CO DEBATER UNLESS U WATCH THE VIDEO AND U WENT AHEAD TO POST A LINK AND THE LINK U POSTED IS A LINK CONTAINING ZAKR NAIK CLAIM WHICH WAS ANSWERED BY UR CO CHRISTIAN SO U CAN SEE U'RE ACTUALLY CNFUSE IN THE REAL SENSE...............U ALSO SAID ALI SINA IS A CHRISTIAN/FREE THINKER SMH!............ATLEAST HE IS THE ONLY CHRISTIAN WHO TRY TO COUNTER ZAKR NAIK BY FORWARDING THE MSG TO HIM AND HE WAS ALSO BUSTED JUST LYK D ANTAGONIST ..........

Emusan: Now you said everyone knows that Campbell performed woefully. If Dr. Campbell performed woefully, does it mean that ALL the POINT raised by Dr. Zakir are valid?

The reason why I didn't subscribe to Ali Sina reply is because he's a FREETHINKER and ONLY try to reiterate with the point that ALL CHALLENGES raised by Dr. Zakir can also be used against Quran.....though he's right.....Remember my first statement in my first post.

But for you to say you can't find it on CHRISTIAN SITE is a pure lie, here is the rebuttal.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Naik/index.htm

I GUESS U DIDNT READ WHAT IS THERE I HAVE ALREADY VISITED THAT LINK EVEN BEFORE U POST IT FOR ME THE RESPONSE THERE IS NOT BY THE ANTAGONIST IT IS BY UR CHRISTIAN MATE PLS CHECK IT WELL AS I HAVE ALWAYS SAID CONFIRM BEFORE POSTING SMH!

Then he goes on to quote some Muslim from medieval
ages. He puts some pictures from some old books. He
quotes this person, that person.
Give me a break Ali Sina !!
Are we talking about Muslims of medieval age or are we
talking about the Quran??
So why is Ali Sina desperately bringing irrelevant points??
I believe his blood pressure is getting high. He is too
desperate to write against Islam.
Poisonous Plants
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) The fact that some plants and seeds are
poisonous is not a new knowledge. This was known by very
ancient people. Any reasonable person can understand
that when the Bible says “I give you every seed-bearing
plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that
has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food”, it
does not mean that you should eat even the poisonous
ones.
My Response:
Lets read the verse properly
"30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of
the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—
everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every
green plant for food." And it was so." (Genesis 1:30)
The bible says "EVERY GREEN PLANT FOR FOOD." Do
words have any meaning in the language of Ali Sina?? Well
I cannot help if he cannot even understand plain English.
Such irresponsible statements can be made only by human
beings and not by God.
Ali Sina Writes:
The poisonous plants can have medicinal benefits. The
Bible makes it clear that as far as Jehovah is concerned no
seed or plant is a forbidden food. It is up to humans to
discover the benefits of each plant and use it in a way that
would improve their lives.
My Response:
Medicinal benefits, NOT for eating purposes. God has told
us what to eat and what not to eat. The things which he
commanded to be unlawful are unlawful where has things
which he has permitted to have are lawful.
Ali Sina Writes:
Prohibited foods in the Quran are specified, human flesh is
not among them. Does that mean that Muslims are
licensed to consume that? The god of the Christians and
the Jews has given to his followers some commonsense too.
My Response:
Ali Sina is getting more and more desperate. No where
does the Quran say that human flesh if permitted and no
where does the Quran even say irresponsible statements
like "All food are permitted".
Is Human flesh permitted??
Ali Sina is so pathetic, I really feel ashamed to even reply
to such points. Nevertheless, I'll reply as briefly as I can to
this absurd point of Ali Sina.
The only way in which we will be allowed to have human
flesh is if we slay the human being the way we slay the
animal. If the human being dies, we cannot eat because
dead flesh is prohibited (Quran 2:173,6:145,5:3 and
16:115). We are forbidden to slay any other human being.
The Quran says :
"...if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for
spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew
the whole people: " (Quran 5:32)
I have NEVER come across Ali Sina quoting this verse of
the Quran. Maybe he has quoted somewhere I don’t know.
Until now I have NOT come across any article on his site
which has quoted this verse.
The Quran besides forbidding us from unlawful meats. It
also tells us which meats are permitted.
"O ye who believe! fulfil (all) obligations. Lawful unto you
(for food) are all four-footed animals, with the exceptions
named:" (Quran 5:1)
We are only allowed to have four-footed cattles except the
ones which are prohibited and we get the know the
prohibited foods from the Quran as well as from the
authentic sayings of our beloved Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh).
Human flesh is not permitted to have. It is so absurd even
when someone says that Islam allows people to have
human flesh.
The Test of the Bible
Regarding the verses of the Bible Mark 16:17-18
Ali Sina considers these verses to be figurative.
We may first ask. Why is Ali Sina defending the Bible
here?? .This test was for Dr.William Campbell not for Ali
Sina. Ali Sina then talks about some amazing feats
performed by people which sound impossible. What is Ali
Sina trying to prove by this? Is he justifying the bible by
putting forth lame arguments? Lets read those verses
from Mark 16.
"[16] He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but
he that believeth not shall be damned.
[17] And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my
name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new
tongues;
[18] They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any
deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands
on the sick, and they shall recover ."
Does one need any explanation for these verses? They are
in pure simple English of King James Version. Christians
today to claim that they cast out demons in the name of
Jesus and they heal people in the name of Jesus (In reality
its fraud.) They try to deceive people in public but they
will NEVER do such a thing in hospital). So this is obviously
not figurative speech.
Authenticity of these verses :
These verses are considered to be fabrication by revisers
of RSV (Revised Standard version). They threw them out
of the bible in 1952 but were put back again in 1971.
Ali Sina then brings verses of the Qur'an like 2:65,5:60 and
7:166 which say that the Jews (A group of them) were
turned into apes.
We Muslims consider this to be a miracle. It may sound
ridiculous to critics. This is attributed to Allah (SWT). He is
the creator of the heavens and the earth. It is not difficult
for him to do such a thing. Now the question may arise
that why do Muslims point absurdities in the bible??
The reason is that the things mentioned in the bible that
are absurd, most of them are attributed to common
people. They are not attributed to God. If one attributes
such things to God, we do not take exception to that.
Miracles are attributed to Allah. The Quran tells its reader
in the beginning only.
"1. A.L.M.
2. This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to
those who fear Allah.
3. Who believe in the UNSEEN , are steadfast in prayer,
and spend out of what We have provided for them;
" (Quran 2:1-3)
The Quran doesn't say that a believer can do these things
in the name of Allah. Allah himself did it as a punishment
from him.
This explanation is replies all so-called “ridiculous” claims.
Speaking Tongues
I believe I responded to this above. When the bible tells us
that they will do it in the name of Jesus it means they will
do it miraculously as Christians claim of performing many
other miracles in his name. Ali Sina is so desperate to
attack the Quran, he does not even mind saying something
to defend the bible. Anyone who has to a foreign land
needs to know the language to communicate with people.
It doesn't make him a True Christian believer. THe test
above is to check whether the person is a true believer or
not.
Unscientific Statements in Bible and Quran
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Yes the Bible is full of unscientific statements.
But is the Quran without them? Dr. Naik is engaging in the
favorite Islamic fallacy of tu quoque and instead of refuting
the charges brought against the Quran, he is trying to find
faults in the Bible. Tu quoque, or the “you too” argument is
a logical fallacy. If the Bible is proven unscientific, it does
not mean that the Quran is scientific.
My Response:
It was Dr.William Campbell who initiated the debate and
not Dr.Zakir Naik. Dr.Naik doesn't go around asking
people to debate him. In all these years he has had very
few public debates. It was Dr.Campbell who wrote a book
against Islam. Dr.Naik refuted the points on the Quran and
turned the tables against him.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) In the field of medicine, the Bible says in the
book of Leviticus, Ch. No.14, Verse No.49 to 53 - it gives a
novel way for disinfecting a house from plague of
leprosy… disinfecting a house from plague of leprosy. It
says that… ‘Take two birds, kill one bird, take wood, scale
it - and the other living bird, dip it in water… and under
running water - later on sprinkle the house 7 times with
it.
Sprinkle the house with blood to disinfect against plague
of leprosy? You know blood is a good media of germs,
bacteria, as well as toxin - I hope Dr. William Campbell
does not use this method of disinfecting the OT, the
operation theatre.
(Ali Sina) Yes this is quite silly.
My Response:
See how Ali Sina is reminding people over and over that
bible silly and unscientific with errors. Answeringislam
team still puts him on their site. They too are pathetic and
desperate to attack Islam like Ali Sina.
Ali Sina Writes:
4:43 “… If ye are ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh
from offices of nature, or ye have been in contact with
women, and ye find no water, then take for yourselves
clean sand or earth, and rub therewith your faces and
hands. For Allah doth blot out sins and forgive again and
again.”
How scientific is this? I’d like to ask Dr. Naik, if by accident
he falls into a cesspool and does not find water to clean
himself, will he become clean if he rubs his hand and face
with clean dirt? There is nothing scientific in this ritual. If
the instruction was to rub the soiled part with clean dirt
this would have made some sense, but how can one
become clean by rubbing his hands and face with dirt
when another part of his body is soiled?
My Response:
Ali Sina again lacks basic knowledge of Islam. If someone
falls in a cesspool he has to wash himself from head to toe
before he can offer his Prayers. The Quran in above verse
is talking about Tayummum . Suppose if I go to answer the
call of nature and after few minutes I have to offer my
Prayers. Its obligatory to do Wudu (Ablutions) before
Prayers (Quran 5:6). Suppose if I find no water for that, I
can take clean sand and rub my face and hands with it
instead.
Wudu (ablutions) are not for merely physical cleanliness
but for purification. If Ali Sina does not know basic things
of Islam that does not mean Quran is wrong. Lets read the
full verse here.
"O ye who believe! Approach not prayers with a mind
befogged, until ye can understand all that ye say,- nor in a
state of ceremonial impurity (Except when travelling on
the road), until after washing your whole body. If ye are
ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh from offices of
nature, or ye have been in contact with women, and ye
find no water, then take for yourselves clean sand or
earth, and rub therewith your faces and hands. For Allah
doth blot out sins and forgive again and again." (Quran
4:43)
Ali Sina does not mind misquoting the verses of the Quran.
If this was by mistake then its inexcusable and if its
deliberate then its devilish.
The Quran tells us real clear that if one is in a state of
ceremonial impurity he has to wash his whole body.
Ali Sina Writes:
A claim of Muhammad about Jesus that is utterly
ridiculous and not even in the Bible is the verse 5:110
where Allah say to Jesus “behold! thou makest out of clay,
as it were, the figure of a bird, by My leave, and thou
breathest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave.” Is
this scientific? Why Muhammad could not perform
miracles like that?
My Response:
Ali Sina here is comparing miracles with science. He is
comparing apples and oranges. Why Muhammad (pbuH)
couldn't perform those miracles?? Hilarious indeed. This
is a typical question which was even asked by the pagan
Arabs. Such questions by Ali Sina suggest that he is a fake
apostate along with that it also shows his pagan mentality.
Such questions were even asked by pagan Arabs. The
Quran says
"They say: "Why is not a sign sent down to him from his
Lord?" Say: "The Unseen is only for Allah (to know), then
wait ye: I too will wait with you." (Quran 10:20)
"And We refrain from sending the signs, only because the
men of former generations treated them as false:" (Quran
17:59)
"They swear their strongest oaths by Allah, that if a
(special) sign came to them, by it they would believe. Say:
"Certainly (all) signs are in the power of Allah. but what
will make you (Muslims) realise that (even) if (special)
signs came, they will not believe.?" (Quran 6:109)
Ali Sina Writes:
Bukhari 4:54:537
The Prophet said "If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone
of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings
has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease."
Does Dr. Naik practice this kind of medicine for himself
and his loved ones? God knows how many people must
have become sick and died during these centuries by
foolishly following the prescriptions of Dr. Muhammad bin
Abdullah.
Response :
note: The debate was not about the Hadith. It was only on
the Quran and the Bible. But anyways I’ll reply on that
even.
Ali Sina Writes:
Bukhari 7:71:590 says that Muhammad prescribed the
urine of camel as medicine. Is there any scientific proof
that drinking the urine of camel is beneficial? Urine is the
concentrated toxin and refuses of the body. How can this
utterly unhygienic thing be medicinal? Does Dr. Naik
follow his beloved prophet’s instruction for his own health
and longevity? Beer is prohibited in Islam, why not bottled
camel urine served chilled for Muslims? The world’s
dependency on oil is going to end within a few decades.
Bottled camel urine exported to all Muslim countries could
be a good source of income for Saudi Arabia. .
Response :
Ali Sina is here going crazy. This simply reveals how sick
and demented person Ali Sina is. The detailed reply on
camel urine used as medicine.
Ali Sina Writes:
According to the Islamic law, the a'yan najisah are nine in
number. They are as follows:
1. urine;
2. stool;
3. semen;
4. blood;
5. corpses;
6. dogs;
7. pigs;
8. kafir;
9. Alcoholic liquids.
Source: http://www.imamreza.net/eng/imamreza.php?
print=4759
9:28 says "Verily, the Mushrikûn (unbeleivers) are Najasun
(unclean). Is this scientific? How can one become unclean
by just discovering some errors in Islam and deciding not
to believe in it? And how can a kafir who is unclean
become clean simply by saying his shahada ? This is not
scientific. It is hocus-pocus.
My Response:
This is metaphorical as well as literal. Muslims are obliged
to be in the state of ablution. Non-Muslims are not in that
state therefore they are called as unclean.
Ali Sina Writes:
Does Dr. Naik believe that alcohol is unclean? Alcohol is
used to disinfect things that are unclean. Did he use camel
urine to disinfect his instruments instead of alcohol, when
he was practicing medicine? How can alcohol be
considered unclean? You can say drinking it is unhealthy,
but certainly it is not unclean. This is as absurd as using
bird blood as disinfectant.
My Response:
Point to be noted, nowhere does the Quran or any Sahih
Hadith call alcohol "najis." Since Islam bans consumption
of intoxications in Toto. Therefore some scholars consider
it to be najis. The Quran tells us very clearly.
"They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In
them is great sin, and SOME PROFIT , for men; but the sin
is greater than the profit." (Quran 2:219)
It is unclean only in metaphorical sense. No Quranic verse
or Hadith calls it najis
In Response to Numbers 5:11-31.
Ali Sina Writes:
He completely ignored that the Quran contains far more
ridiculous statements. Take for example the verse 3.61
“If any one disputes in this matter with thee, now after
(full) knowledge Hath come to thee, say: "Come! let us
gather together,- our sons and your sons, our women and
your women, ourselves and yourselves: Then let us
earnestly pray, and invoke the curse of Allah on those who
lie!"
Here Muhammad is challenging his opponents to engage
in a “cursing contest" to see who is telling the truth. This is
really funny. How can truth be revealed through cursing
and invoking Allah’s wrath on each other? This shows the
prophet of Islam was superstitious and a fool. He was
indeed a very stupid man. Does cursing work? If it does
why Muhammad asked his followers to wage war for him
and kill innocent people? All they had to do was sit at
home and curse their enemies and wait for calamity to
strike them.
My Response:
The Jews considered themselves to be the righteous
servants of God and were rejecting Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh). No True Believer will invoke the curse of Allah
upon him. Its not a "contest" as Ali Sina describes. No one
was getting a prize for cursing more. Invoking the curse of
Allah does reveal the truth in many cases. I have
witnessed many such cases. In most of the cases, the Truth
gets revealed. Anyone who is even little God fearing will
not invoke the curse of God upon him.
Muhammad (pbuh) never asked to kill any innocent
human beings. This is the same lie which critics use
against him.
For refutations on false charges against Muhammad
(pbuh) refer to :
http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac4.htm#links

Ali Sina Writes:
This will bring the downfall of Islam. Because Islam is
unchangeable it is bound to break and fall apart. Precisely
because of this reason, other religions have a future, but
Islam has none. Other religions will survive this century
and many more, but Islam will not. Islam will meet its
death, thanks to its own rigidity.
My Response:
Much to his wishful thinking. Yes, Islam is unchangeable; it
will remain as it is till the day of Judgement. Its an eternal
religion unlike others which change with the passage of
time and are no more practicable today. According to Ali
Sina Islam will not survive this century. I believe he is
watching cartoonnetwork more and more everyday. Islam
is Alhumdulillah growing more and more everyday and it
will prevail over the full world. Thats the promise of Allah
(SWT) in the Qur'an.
"It is He Who hath sent His Apostle with guidance and the
Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even
though the Pagans may detest (it)." (Quran 9:33)
Ali Sina Writes:
The Christians and the Jews can overlook those errors and
attribute them to the fallibility of the scribes. The Biblical
prophets were humans and they could have erred
My Response:
Oh Really?? I want to hear from answeringislam team if
they really believe that bible contains errors. I also want
to hear on that from other Christian sites. Christians are
the ones who shout on the top of their voices that BIBLE IS
INFALLIBLE WORD OF GOD.
Note : Ali Sina is telling everyone that Bible has errors,
unscientific points and absurdities. But still
answeringislam team have put him on their site.
They too are pathetic people like Ali Sina. They don’t mind
anyone saying anything against their religion. They are
happy as long as Islam is attacked.
Ali Sina Writes:
They must either accept the Quran as one package or
reject it in its entirety. This claim of authenticity that
Muslims think is the strength of the Quran, is actually the
cause of its fall.
Jesus said: "I have much more to say to you, more than you
can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he
will guide you into all truth". John 16:12 -13
My Response:
Yes, We believe the Quran to be 100% authentic and
correct. Ali Sina here quoted Jesus (pbuh). He din't realize
that the joke is on him. This "Spirit of Truth" is none other
than Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
http://www.answering-christianity.com/prediction.htm
Ali Sina Writes:
The spirit of the truth has come. It is the new age of
enlightenment. The gates of knowledge and understanding
are flung open and new truths are being revealed every
day. Christians know that knowledge of God is not limited
to what is in the Bible. They know that truth is infinite.
They are open to learn new things. Muslims don't know
that. Muslims foolishly think God’s knowledge is limited.
That everything He wanted to say He has already said it in
the Quran and there is nothing more to learn. They think
the hands of God are tied and his wisdom is dried out. That
is why Christianity, and all other religions that allow
change are alive and Islam is dead.
My Response:
New Truths are being revealed everyday and every aspect
of Islam is being proven to be the Truth. More and More
people are embracing Islam everyday. Other religions are
not true; they cannot stand the test of times. But Islam is
the Truth, it will stand till the eternity.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) purpose of my presentation on ‘Bible and
science’ is not to hurt any Christian’s feeling. If while
presenting, if I hurt your feelings, I do apologize in
advance.
(Ali Sina) Dr. Naik is gauging Christians with Islamic
yardstick. It’s Muslims who get offended, make riots, burn
churches and embassies and kill innocent people if their
religion is criticized. Christians have been taking criticisms
for a long time and if those criticisms were correct, they
have changed their ways and beliefs. That is why I call
Christianity a living faith and Islam a dead and fossilized
faith.
My Response:
Yes,Muslims do get offended. We love Islam more than our
own family. What if I enter your house and abuse your
mother?? Will anyone let me go Scott free? NO !!. We love
Islam more than our own family, we feel proud to be
Muslims and we do get offended if someone insults it (not
criticize). Most of the human beings get offended if their
religion is being attacked including Christians.
Ali Sina here calls Christianity a “Living faith” and he also
quoted Jesus (pbuh). It makes more and more difficult to
believe that he is a Former Iranian Muslim. Since no-one
knows him in person. There is no proof whatsoever that he
is a Former Iranian Muslim.
I believe he too is a Pathetic Christian who attacks
Islam.
Creation of the Universe in the Quran
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) First we deal with Astronomy. The Bible speaks
about the creation of the universe. In the beginning, 1st
Book, Book of Genesis, 1 st Ch. , it is mentioned - It says…
‘Almighty God created the Heavens and the Earth, in six
days and talks about a evening and a morning, referring to
a 24 - hour day. Today scientists tell us, that the universe
cannot be created in a 24 hour period of six days. Qur’an
too speaks about six ‘ayyams’ . The Arabic word singular is
‘yaum’ plural is ‘ayyam’ . It can either mean a day of 24
hours, or it is a very long period, a ‘yaum’ , an epoch.
Scientists say we have no objection in agreeing that the
universe - it could have been created in 6 very long
periods.
(Ali Sina) Here Dr. Naik is vividly revealing the hypocrisy
and the double standard that characterizes the Muslim
mind. The story of the creation stated in the Quran is
borrowed from the Bible. So, logically, what is true about
the original version is also true about its copy. What is
good for the goose is also good for the gander. However
Dr. Naik says that the days stated in the Bible should be
interpreted as 24-hours days while the days stated in the
Quran should be interpreted as unspecified periods of
time - eons. Why this double standard?
My Response:
Ali Sina again proves himself stupid. Dr.Zakir Naik made it
very clear that why it is referring to 24-hour day because
it speaks of a MORNING & EVENING . Morning and
Evening refer to a 24 hour day. I'll quote the verses here
from Genesis 1:3-5
"3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4
God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light
from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the
darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and
there was morning —the first day."
The Quran does not speak of evening and morning when
describing the days. Therefore, the Biblical verses refer to
six 24-hour days whereas the Quranic verses refer to 6
eon
Ali Sina Writes:
It is because the Muslim mind is a sick mind, bereft of
fairness and commonsense.
My Response:
More insults from Ali Sina on Muslims. I request Brother
Umar to add these as well.
Ali Sina Writes:
This story, whether in its original version stated in the
Bible or in its plagiarized version rehashed in the Quran is
fairytale. No scientist has ever said that the universe has
been created in six phases. Geologists have divided the
history of the Earth in several epochs, which have nothing
to do with the Biblical and the Quranic version of creation,
but the history of the universe is not demarked by phases.
This is clearly an error.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik never said universe is created in six phases.
Note the words of Dr.Naik " Scientists say we have no
objection in agreeing that the universe - it could have
been created in 6 very long periods ." Ali Sina lies once
again. Regarding Quran copied from the bible. I put the
answer from Dr.Zakir Naik above. I'll put it again
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t18/t18a/pg1.htm
Ali Sina Writes:
Six or eight days of creation?
Sura 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 say that God created "the
heavens and the earth" in six days. But this is contradicted
in Sura 41:9-12
My Response:
This is another so called contradiction brought by Ali Sina.
I think he is too desperate to write something against
Islam. Dr.Zakir Naik himself replies to this.
Refer to question no.14 here.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t15/t15b/pg1.htm
Read the response and see how clearly Ali Sina is deceiving
the reader.
Ali Sina Writes:
Furthermore, verse 7.54 says “Your Guardian-Lord is
Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days,
and is firmly established on the throne (of authority): He
draweth the night as a veil over , each seeking the other
in rapid succession."
This statement can be accepted as poetry but it is not
scientific: Darkness is the absence of light, therefore the
cannot be compared to a "veil" drawn over the day.
My Response:
This is the way human beings speak. If Ali Sina is not a
human that does not mean the Quran is wrong. This is how
everyone speaks in day-to-day life. If I say "there is too
much silence here." Can anyone stand up and object that I
am unscientific?? Silence is absence of sound. But no one
will ever stand and point that I am unscientific. Suppose if
I says "There is too much darkness in the cave" can
anybody say I am unscientific?? Darkness is absence of
light. But no will still say that I am unscientific. This is how
human beings speak INCLUDING scientists. Allah (SWT)
has given the Quran for the human beings so that we can
understand.
The above answer by Dr.Zakir Naik answers all the other
points which Ali Sina has raised on the order of the
creation heavens. Heavens and the Earth were created
together. But there is one more point which he raised that
I'll be touching.
Regarding Seven heavens.
Ali Sina fails to realize that the Quran is originally in
Arabic. In Arabic and other Semitic languages "Seven" is
used often to describe indefinite form of Plural. Many
commentators like Muhammad Asad etc. have explained.
"Seven" is used in several other places in the Quran as an
indefinite form of Plural.
"To it are seven gates: for each of those gates is a (special)
class (of sinners) assigned" (Quran 15:44)
"And if all the trees on earth were pens and the ocean
(were ink), with seven oceans behind it to add to its
(supply), yet would not the words of Allah be exhausted
(in the writing): for Allah is Exalted in Power, full of
Wisdom." (Quran 31:27)
Again in the above 2 verses "seven" is used as indefinite
form of plural. It was even used in the texts at the time of
the Quran and even in several Hadith
Contradictions in the Bible and the Quran
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Yes indeed, there are many contradictions in the
Bible. But there are even more contradictions in the
Quran. I will list a few of them at the end of this paper. Let
us mention one of them here.
My Response:
See how Ali Sina tells everyone that Bible has got
contradictions. But yet Answeringislam team puts this
response in their rebuttal section to Dr.Zakir Naik. They
are like drowning men catching at straws. They do not
care if someone calls the bible wrong. They are simply too
desperate like Ali Sina to write something against the
Quran and Muslims.
Ali Sina Writes:
22:47 and 32:5 say that Allah's day equal to 1,000 human
years. But 70:4 says that it equal to 50,000 years.
My Response:
Regarding the above contradiction. I can again do no
better than post let Dr.Zakir Naik himself reply to this.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t15/t15b/pg1.htm
For more refutations to so-called "contradictions" in the
Quran. Refer to:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/
quranerr.htm
Is Sky a Dome?
Ali Sina comes up with another pathetic response. He on
his site gives some stupid diagrams of his to show that
earth is flat. No where does the Quran say that earth is
flat. There are certain verses, which critics may assume.
The most common one is
"And Allah has made the earth for you as a carpet (spread
out)."
[Al-Qur’an 71:19]"
Ali Sina hasn't quoted this verse here. But I came across
many other articles on his site which have used this verse
to "prove" earth is flat.
Dr.Zakir Naik also responds to this.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t15/t15b/pg1.htm
(See question 8 in the above link)
Ali Sina Writes:
022:065
Seest thou not that God has made subject to you (men) all
that is on the earth, and the ships that sail through the sea
by His Command? He withholds the sky from falling on the
earth except by His leave: for God is Most Kind and Most
Merciful to man.
Yusuf Ali realizing the absurdity of this verse deceptively
has added (rain) in parenthesis after the word sky. No
other translator has done that and there is no mention of
rain in the Arabic version .
My Response:
To know what Yusuf Ali really meant. Read footnote 2874
of his commentary.
Ali Sina again I believe is too desperate. He uses the word
"version" for the Quran. In reality there is no such thing as
"version" of the Quran. Quran is only one throughout the
history and is maintained in its original Arabic text.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Yusuf Ali's translation of the Quran is the most deceptive
and the least trustworthy. If you have to read the Quran in
English I suggest read several translations simultaneously
and trust the most damaging translation because it is the
most truthful
My Response:
Hilarious indeed!! Anyone broad-minded person who
reads this will realize that Ali Sina is not only unscholarly
in his approach but he is also mentally unstable at the
same time. He considers the most "damaging" translation
to be most truthful irrespective whatever it is !! Hilarious
Indeed !!
Ali Sina then quotes the commentary of Ibn-Kathir and
writes
Ali Sina Writes:
So scholars debated whether the dome of the sky is
sustained by invisible pillars or it is hovering over earth
without pillars miraculously thanks to Allah's power. But
everyone agreed that the sky is a dome. "
My Response:
Irrespective whether you take that sky has pilars or not.
The negative side of the picture is that sky has pillars. Any
unbiased reader who reads will realize that Quran is only
speaking metaphorically. It is in no way speaking in literal
sense. The sky is a dome. I agree with that. I gave a link.
I'll put it again.
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_21.html
What the Quran is speaking that sky is a dome. If Allah
(SWT) does not hold it back. It will fall on the earth. This
holding back of sky by Allah, The Quran describes as
"Without any pillars that ye can see." It still doesn't prove
Quran to be unscientific even if I agree with the
interpretation of Ali Sina.

Ali Sina:
(Ali Sina) This description is wrong no matter how many
times it is repeated. I quote again what Dr. Campbell said
in the conclusion of his talk on embryo: “ There is no time
when calcified bones have been formed, and then the muscles
are placed around them. The muscles are there, several
weeks before there are calcified bones, rather than being
added around previously formed bones, as the Qur’an states .”
This statement is scientific. The Quran is not.
My Response:
Wrong according to who? Scientific discoveries done by Ali
Sina? Dr.Zakir Naik responded very convincingly to
Dr.Campbell and Dr.Campbell did not say anything against
it.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As Professor Keith Moore said that… ‘The stages
- that how it is described in modern embryology… stage
1,2,3,4,5, is so confusing, The Qur’an ic stage on
embryology describing on the base of appearance, and the
shape, is far more superior.’ Alhamdulillah.
(Ali Sina) This is ludicrous. How can the Quran be superior
when it is all wrong? Josef Goebbel, Hitler's minister for
propaganda said: "If you tell a big enough lie, frequently
enough, it becomes the truth. " This is what Dr. Naik wants
to achieve. He wants to repeat a lie frequently enough,
until it becomes true. I am sorry. It does not work in this
case. The description of the embryo in the Quran is all
wrong. It won’t become true even if it is repeated a billion
times. Bones are not created first to be covered with flesh
later. Period!
My Response:
The Qur'an may be all wrong according to the scientific
knowledge and discoveries done by Ali Sina. Let me
remind you he has NOT given any source from where he
got his information. Now shall we agree with Dr.Keith
Moore who is a reputed scientist or Islamophobists like Ali
Sina?? He goes on to quote minister of Hitler. Dr.Zakir
Naik didn’t lie frequently. He quoted all from great
scientists like Dr.Keith Moore etc.
Note:
Up till now, Ali Sina has not
quoted a single medical book
to back any of his claims!
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Therefore he said… therefore he said that… ‘I
have no objection in accepting that Prophet Muhammed is
the messenger of God and that this Glorious Qur’an has to
be a Divine Revelation, from Almighty God.’
(Ali Sina) If Dr. Naik is speaking of Dr. Moore, it should be
noted that he did not convert to Islam. This tells us that his
interests were this-worldly. He did not see any miracles in
the Quran. He simply fooled the Muslims and laughed his
way to the bank.
My Response:
What bank? What Money?? Ali Sina has not provided any
proof whatsoever. The Quran says
"Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof
if ye are truthful ." (Quran 2:111)
Dr.Moore did not accept Islam because of other reasons. If
he had accepted Islam then Ali Sina would have called him
a liar. Ali Sina considers Muslims to be liars by nature
Source
If he didn’t accept then he fooled the Muslims. In either
way, he'll be spoken against. Why?? Because he wrote
something good about the Qur'an.
Did Ali Sina forget about other scientists and learned men
who have embraced Islam?? Like Professor Thagada
Shaun , Jeffery Lang and others.
Ali Sina further goes on to call Allah (SWT) a saddist. He
comes up with a ludicruous example of a cat. He is
comparing cats with human beings. He says that he
wouldn't do such a merciless thing to a cat. But he wants
worse to be done to Muslims. He says "As long as Muslims
are Muslims they do not deserve to be treated in
accordance to the Universal Declaration of Human
Right." ( Source
He further says “They must be colonized and ruled with
iron fist” ( Source
According to Ali Sina "Muslims are not humans"
( Source
For more insults, refer to
Ali Sina’s foul mouth exposed
He forgot that we human beings are not allowed to do such
a thing to any other human being.. Human beings are
responsible for their own actions. The Qur'an says
"...it is not God that hath wronged them, but they wrong
themselves." (Quran 3:117)
If Allah (SWT) starts punishing us for good deeds, he will
not leave a single of us on earth. On the day of judgement
no human being can claim that he is treated against the
mercy of Allah. Allah (SWT) besides being merciful is also
just. He will treat everyone in a just way. Suppose that
today someone catches Hitler. What punishment can one
give him for the incineration of 6 million Jews?? and
indirectly his life caused death of 30-60 million human
beings. Maximum we can do is kill him and burn him
once. But who will compensate for 5,999,999 other lives??
That is why we must also conclude that this life is not
complete. A person may be punished and may not get
punished. Allah will even forgive blasphemous people like
Ali Sina, Sam Shamoun etc. if they repent. The Qur'an
says :
"Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their
souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives
all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (Qur'an
39:53)
Our good deeds are multiplied by Allah (SWT) by 10 and
our bad deeds are not multiplied even twice. The Qur'an
says
"He that doeth good shall have ten times as much to his
credit: He that doeth evil shall only be recompensed
according to his evil: no wrong shall be done unto (any of)
them" (Quran 6:160)
The Holy Quran says :
".... but if any does evil, the doers of evil are only punished
(to the extent) of their deeds ." (Quran 28:84)
This had nothing to do with the debate between Dr.Zakir
Naik and Dr.William Campbell. Therefore, I won’t go into
the detail of it. Lets continue with the main point of it.
Ali Sina Writes:
If it was not so depressing, it would have been funny that
Dr. Naik should choose such a macabre statement of the
Quran to prove its alleged miracle. What part of this
stupid verse is miraculous? All it reveals is a sick mind of a
fool. Dr. Naik speaks from the position of utter ignorance.
In the old days no one knew that brain had anything to do
with sensing pain or even thinking. Aristotle thought that
brain acts like a radiator to cool the body. Thinking was
done with heart, they believed. We still say memorizing
things by heart. People feel pain right where it hurts.
Pinch or slap yourself and see where do you feel it? Do you
feel it in your brain? You feel the pain right where you are
hurting yourself. So what part of this simplistic statement
is miraculous? Muhammad is stating the obvious. There is
no miracle in these harebrained verses. They do not
reveal any science.
My Response:
People may have known that skin is responsible for pain.
But people did not know that if you burn a skin
continuously it will lose the tendency of burning anymore.
That is what doctors do today when a patient of burn
injury comes. They take a pin and prick in that area. If the
patient feels pain the doctor is happy because its a
superficial burn. If the patient does not feel pain then its
deep burn. That is the miraculous point about it. And we
may well ask. If this was known since ages. Then why is the
discovery of pain receptors considered a recent discovery.
Why isn't it considered a discovery that was done eons
ago?
Ali Sina on Professor Tegatat Tagashaun.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Professor Thagada Shaun must be a fool.
Heaven knows if such an idiot actually exists or he is a
fabrication of Muslim wishful thinking. These verses are
stupid. Not only they reveal that Muhammad was a sadist,
they also contain no scientific information whatsoever.
Muslims have based their entire faith on logical fallacies.
"Doctor so and so has confirmed the Quran so Islam must
be true" is an asinine argument. There are many more
authentic doctors and professors born and raised in Islam
who reject this cult and have left it. They find Islam and
the Quran utterly stupid. Why not listen to them?
My Response:
Ali Sina forget that the joke is on him. He is not a
fabrication of Muslim wishful thinking. He is/was a
professor at Chang Mai University in Thailand. Ali Sina,a
coward who hides behind the internet and thinks he is a
genius. Which doctors proved the Quran to be
unscientific?? 'Dr' Ali Sina or some doctor from his
clowns?
Ad Hominem in the Quran
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Qur’an calls such people, as in Surah Baqarah
Ch. 2, Verse 18…(Arabic)… ‘The deaf, the dumb, the blind,
they will not return to the true path. ’ The Bible says the
same thing in Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 13, Verse No. 13…
‘Seeing they see not, hearing they hear not, neither will
they understand.’
(Ali Sina) This is called poisoning the well or the famous ad
hominem fallacy. The Quran fails to give one solid
argument that cannot be successfully refuted. Instead of
proof, Muhammad tried to undermine the intelligence and
sincerity of those who did not agree with his irrational
claims. He did not stop there. He then went on ordering
his demented followers to fight, and wage war against the
unbelievers, to crucify them, to cut their fingertips and to
slay them wherever they find them.
My Response:
The Quran has given many points. This whole site is
dedicated to it.
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html
Yes, Muhammad (pbuh) did ask his followers to fight and
slay the idolaters in battlefields in self defence and against
oppression and tyranny.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Both the Bible and the Quran contain absurdities,
obscenities and innumerable scientific errors. However
since the thinking Christians and Jews know that the Bible
is not the verbatim word of God, but stories written by
men who allegedly were inspired but nonetheless fallible,
they take their scriptures with a grain of salt. This allows
them to adapt to the changing time and let their
intelligence be their guide.
My Response:
Quran contains no absurdities. No unscientific points. No
contradictions. Musims have kept refuting the so-called
unscientific pionts, absurdities and contradictions.
Dr.Zakir Naik refuted all of them in the debate to which Ali
Sina responded and I am writing a counter-rebuttal to it.
The Jews and Christians change their religion because it
has problems and is not practicing anymore. The Muslims
do not do that because we do not have any problem with
our religion and we keep practicing it till today and
thousands of non-Muslims are accepting Islam everyday
throughout the world.
Ali Sina Writes:
Because Muslims think the Quran is the verbatim words of
God, they can’t change it. They are stuck in the 7 th
century and can’t go forward. Other religions are living.
They are growing and changing. Islam is fossilized.
My Response:
Hilarious indeed !! Those who change their scripture are
good according to Ali Sina. I want to know, Do Christians
agree that changing scripture is alright? Do they have
authority to change their religion however they like?? Do
they agree that any Christian can write his own bible?
Definitely not!! This is again falsehood from Ali Sina.
He considers other religions to be growing. He doesn't
really realize that he is making a fool of himself once
again. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.
Non-Muslim sources also agree with that. e.g Guiness
World Records, CNN etc.

Ali Sina Writes:
(Ali Sina) Are we supposed to believe that Dr. Keith
Moore, who was the chairman and the head of the
department of Anatomy, of a major university did not
know how human embryo looks? The truth is that Dr.
Moore and Dr. Bucaille fooled Muslims by telling them
what they wanted to hear and in this way they ingratiated
the Saudi King who in turn lavished them with a lot of
petrodollars
My Response :
Now this is turning out to be funny. In Brief, I will tell you
the sick mentality of Ali Sina.
If a Muslim scientist writes something about Science that
matches the Quran then he is a liar and a deceiver. If a
non-Muslim scientist does it then he is doing it for the sake
of petrodollars. This is turning out to be more and more
stupid from Ali Sina.
Ali Sina believes Dr.William Campbell spoke the Truth.
Why? Because he opposed the Quran. The reason is
obvious.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) What Dr. William Campbell showed you is the
other perspective of it. If I show this book - it looks like a
rectangle - If I show you like that, it is a different
perspective. That diagram is given in the book - The
diagram which you saw on the slide is even there - And I’ll
deal with it InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Here again the gullible audience became
euphoric and clapped without realizing that Dr. Naik is
engaging in the fallacy of suppressing the evidence. Dr.
Campbell showed the picture of the embryo from the front
and from the side. Dr. Naik wants to convince his audience
that they should look at it from one angle only – the angle
that it most resembles a leech. Of course one who is
determined to be fooled would be willing to look at things
by standing on his head, if that helps him to see them
from the exact angle that would reconfirm his unreasoned
faith. That is why Muslims are unable to see the truth.
Their tunnel vision does not allow them to see things from
all angles. If only they changed their perspective a little,
they would see that Islam is nothing but a big lie.
My Response:
I told you people its turning out to be more and more
funny. This is the photograph, which Dr.Zakir Naik
showed.
http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a.htm
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore, after about 80 questions
were asked to him, he said… ‘If you would have asked me
these 80 questions, 30 years ago, I would not have been
able to answer more than 50 percent - Because
embryology has developed recently in the past 30 years.’
He said this in the eighties.
Now, do we believe Dr. Keith Moore whose statement is
available outside in the foyer - his videocassette is
available… ‘This is the truth’...’Anna-ul-Haq’... recorded
statement. So will you believe Dr. William Campbell’s
personal conversation with Professor Keith Moore, or the
one mentioned in this book, with Islamic edition as well as
the photograph that I had shown to you? And in the
videocassette available outside you can see it - He makes
those statements. So you have to choose which is more
logical - Personal discussion with Dr. William Campbell or
his statement on Video. Like how Dr. William Campbell
showed my video - 100 percent proof what I said…
(Ali Sina) This is again a false reasoning. What Dr. Moore
said to Dr. Campbell and what he said in the videos
intended to be sold to Muslims could be two different
things.
My Response:
If Dr.Keith Moore had done such a thing. If someone had
caught him then it will completely ruin his reputation and
no more "petrodollars.” Furthermore, his book is used
more by non-Muslims than Muslims. More non-Muslim
medical colleges use this book than Muslim medical
colleges. Dr.Keith Moore wasn’t an Arab Muslim.
Therefore, we have no reason to doubt him. Since more
Non-Muslims refer to his book, he would NEVER write in
favor of the Quran if he was really greedy of
“petrodollars.”
Ali Sina Writes:
. He would have made a fool of himself telling Dr.
Campbell what he says for Muslim consumption. We are
not here to probe whether Dr. Moore is a liar or Dr.
Campbell is reporting him erroneously. We must look at
the medical science. We don't need the opinions of the
experts when we can easily find the facts on our own.
Appealing to authority is called argumentum ad
verecundiam and this is another logical fallacy. We must
see whether what the Quran says is supported by science
or not. We must not accept the words of anyone just
because they are authorities. They could have some
ulterior motives. They might have lied and
misrepresented the truth for some personal gain. The
ultimate authority is science, not Dr. Moore, Dr. Bucaille
or Dr. Campbell. Dr. Campbell has proved his case
backing his argument with pictures. Unless someone can
produce pictures that tell a different story, the claims of
this doctor or that doctor are irrelevant. Once things are
demonstrated to us, we can dispense with the opinions of
authorities.
My Response :
We actually do not need experts to tell us about science
but we need Scientists like Ali Sina to tell us that.
Dr.William Campbell showed the slides and Dr.Zakir Naik
convincingly answered to them. He did it from the medical
book written by a well-reputed scientist Dr.Keith Moore.
Ali Sina tells us that scientific data is available and we do
not need experts to tell us.
Wait a minute, which scientific data? The scientific
discoveries done by the world’s greatest scientist Ali
Sina?? Which science is he talking about? Who writes the
books of science if not the great scientists?? Are they
written in heavens and thrown down to us from there? As I
proved above. Dr.Moore was not a Muslim either and he
has no ulterior motives. If he lies then it can simply ruin
his reputation. Moreover, he will have no more
"petrodollars.”
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) ‘Moon is reflected light’ - I’ll come to it later on.
And whatever additional information he got from Qur’an
and Hadith, it was incorporated later into this book…‘The
Developing Human’ - the 3 rd edition and this book got an
award for the best medical book written by a single author
in that year.
(Ali Sina) Is Dr. Naik telling us that Dr. Moore got an
award for the book he wrote claiming the ridiculous Quran
is scientific? Who gave that award? Al Azhar University or
the Grand Mosque in Medina? What is the name of that
award?
My Response:
This is turning to be more and more funny every time. Al-
Azhar University and Grand Mosque don't go around
giving awards. It definitely got the award from medical
authorities. He considers the Qur'an ridiculous. Thats what
ALL islamophobists do.
Dr. Keith Moore had earlier authored the book, 'The
Developing Human'.After acquiring new knowledge from
the QUR'AN, he wrote, in 1982, the 3rd edition of the same
book, 'The Developing Human'. The book was the recipient
of an award for the best medical book written by a single
author. This book has been translated into several major
languages of the world and is used as a textbook of
embryology in the first year of medical studies. In 1981,
during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam, Saudi
Arabia, Dr. Moore said, "It has been a great pleasure for
me to help clarify statements in the QUR'AN about human
development. It is clear to me that these statements must
have come to MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam---
from GOD or ALLAH, because almost all of this knowledge
was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves
to me that MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam---
must have been a messenger of GOD or ALLAH{The
reference for this statement is the video tape titled 'This is
the Truth'.For a copy of this video tape contact the Islamic
Research Foundation}
Ali Sina then goes on to tell us about the scientific
discoveries done by him. He keeps making a joke and a
fool of himself. He did not give any source of all his crap.
Ali Sina always says "this is not true" and "that is not true"
without giving us any source from any medical book.
After explaining all the embryological stages, When
Dr.Zakir Naik mentioned that the Quranic stages on
embryology are based on appearance.
Ali Sina writes:
(Ali Sina) Here our good doctor is making a major shift of
strategy. Now, he is no longer insisting that the Quranic
description of the embryo is scientific. He says that the
Quran talks about the “appearance” that exist between a
clot, a leech and the embryo in its different stages of
growth. If so, why claim that the Quran is scientific and
miraculous? In the past, women had miscarriage way
more than today. The fetus was aborted and they could
see that it remotely resembled, first to a clot of blood and
then to a leech. In the absence of a microscope this is all
they could see. So, where is the miracle? Why make so
much ado about it saying “how could Muhammad have
known this 1400 years ago?” when such a prosaic
knowledge was available to anyone for eons? In fact as Dr.
Campbell noted, Hippocrates described the embryonic
growth much more accurately.
My Response:
When did Dr.Zakir Naik ever insist that all the stages are
based on function? He always insisted that stages are
based on appearance. The appearance of the embryo in all
the stages was not known at that time. How did Prophet
Muhammad (pbuh) know that embryo looks like a leech?
(Which I proved above with a photograph which was
shown by Dr.Zakir Naik from the book of Dr.Keith Moore)
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore took plastic seal, and bit
between his teeth to make it look like a ‘ Mutga ’- The teeth
marks resembled the ‘somites.’ Dr. William Campbell
said… ‘When the ‘Alaqa ’ becomes a ‘Mutga ’ the clinging is
yet there - It is there till 8 and a half months- So… the
Qur’an is wrong.’ I told you in the beginning, the Qur’an is
describing the appearance. ‘The leech like’ appearance
and the ‘clot like’ appearance, is changed to the ‘chewed’
like appearance. It yet continues to cling till the end -
There is no problem. But the stages are divided on
appearance - Not on the function.
(Ali Sina) Alaqa either means something that clings or clot
of blood. One word in one sentence cannot have two
different meanings. If alaqa is something that clings, then
the fetus should be called alaqa during all its gestation.
Why then the Quran says it becomes mutga ? If it’s only the
appearance to the clot, then we should discard Dr.
Bucaille’s suggestion who says this word should be
translated as “something that clings”. If the Quran is clear,
then why this much confusion?
My Response:
The Quran is speaking about the embryological stages
based on appearance. When it describes Alaqa , Also the
function befits here. But even if you ignore the function
here. Still the embryo looks like a clot as well like the leech
as Dr.Zakir Naik proved in his talk and Ali Sina agrees that
embryo does look like a clot. The Qur'an is not confusing.
The Islamophobists will find it confusing irrespective how
clear it is. The translation may be confusing. But the
Arabic text is very clear.
Dr.Zakir Naik then spoke about Mudga and formation of
muscles and bones. To that Ali Sina writes :

More insults in the next paragraph
Ali Sina Writes:
Believe me, absurd thinking is the trait of Muslims.
Sometime ago I read an essay about a Muslim child asking
his religious teacher that the Quran says Jinns will be sent
to hell to be punished but the the Quran also says that
Jinns are made of fire, so how fire can be hurt by fire? The
teacher slapped the child and asked him if it hurts? The
poor lad responded yes, with tears in his eyes. "Like that!",
responded the teacher. "My hand is flesh and your face is
flesh but it still hurts". Foolish Muslims think this is such a
great reasoning. This is the fallacy of wrong analogy . But
the Muslim brain is not equipped with enough rationality
to think deep. He WANTS to believe and any nonsense will
do. There are several sites that have written against me. I
receive numerous emails from Muslims who have neither
read my articles nor those written by Muslims trying to
refute me. And yet these people tell me that I have
already been refuted and give me links to the same silly
sites. They WANT to believe that I am refuted. They will
believe anyone who claims he has refuted me without
searching the truth of that claim. The Muslim mind works
in bizarre ways .
My Response:
More foul-mouth from Ali Sina.
I put the link above of brother Umar's article which
exposes his insults and foul-mouth. I request brother
Umer to add these as well.
Oceanology of the Quran,
Ali Sina writes (In response to Dr.Naik)
(Ali Sina) If the separation of sweet and salt waters is an
observable phenomenon, as it seems that everyone agrees,
then how could no one know about it until "the
advancement of oceanology" made its knowledge possible?
What Muhammad is referring to is precisely that and
nothing more. There is no “invisible barrier” between two
waters, which is “forbidden to be trespassed”. There is no
barrier of any kind - no barzakh at all between waters.
Waters don’t mix immediately because of different
temperature and density but they eventually do, just like
when you pour cream in a cup of coffee. It takes time to
mix; that is why you stir it. Those who saw this
phenomenon must have relayed their observation to
others using figurative speech saying waters don’t mix AS
IF there is an invisible barrier between them. Our
ignorant Muhammad took this literally and claimed there
is an “invisible barrier” between them, which is “forbidden
to be trespassed”. Nothing can be further from the truth.
All waters mix and there is no barrier, invisible or
otherwise between them. When two rivers, carrying
sediments of different colors meet, or when sweet water
coming from rivers flows into the blue salty water of the
sea, one can see the line of demarcation sometimes
stretching for miles until they gradually blend. Where the
waters merge, i.e. what Dr. Naik refers to as the “slanting
homogenizing area”, is not a “barrier”. It is the opposite of
it. There the waters are not forbidden to trespass but
actually merge.
It is amazing that Muslims emphasize on the flagrant
errors of the Quran as its miracles. Who would buy this
nonsense except a totally ignorant person?
My Response:
Wait a minute, Where is the source of all this?? Dr.Zakir
Naik atleast quoted one scientist Dr.Hay.
The same site which Ali Sina accused Dr.Naik of copying
from explains this as well. It also gives the reference to the
book on oceanology written by Non-Muslim scientists.
http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1-b.htm
Is Islam for All Mankind?
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As far as this statement of his is concerned,
regarding the Bible , I do agree with it totally - Because the
Bible was only meant for the children of Israel , for that
time. It is mentioned in the Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 10,
Verse No. 5 and 6, Jesus Christ peace be upon him tells his
disciples… ‘Go ye not in the way of the Gentiles.’ Who are
the Gentiles? The Non-Jews, the Hindus, the Muslims. ‘But
rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel .’ Jesus
Christ peace be upon him said in the Gospel of Mathew,
Ch. No. 15, Verse No. 24… ‘I am not sent, but to the lost
sheep of the house of Israel .’ So Jesus Christ and the Bible
were only meant for the children of Isreal. Since it was
meant for them, to analyze the Bible , you have to use the
meaning of the word, which was utilized at that time. But
the Qur’an was not meant only for the Arabs of that time.
Qur’an is not meant only for the Muslims. The Qur’an is
meant for the whole of humanity, and it is meant to be for
eternity.
(Ali Sina) Here again the Muslim audience broke in
applause and the sign of joy was visible from their
countenance. To them it was victory after victory.
However, had Dr. Naik told them that the Quran says that
Muhammad has come only for the Meccans alone and the
people around it they would not have rejoiced that much.
006.092 And this is a Book which We have sent down,
bringing blessings, and confirming (the revelations) which
came before it: that thou mayest warn the mother of cities
and all around her.
The mother of cities, Umul Qura, is Mecca. The same thing
is confirmed in verse:
042.007 Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an
Arabic Qur’an: that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities
and all around her.
In other places Allah says to Muhammad that he has come
for the people who did not receive guidance yet.
032.003 “Nay, it is the Truth from thy Lord, that thou
mayest admonish a people to whom no warner has come
before thee: in order that they may receive guidance.”
036.006 In order that thou mayest admonish a people,
whose fathers had received no admonition, and who
therefore remain heedless (of the Signs of Allah).
My Response:
Ali Sina here again quotes the verses and mispresents
them. Both the verses 6:92 and 42:7 say "Mother of cities
and All Around her "
ALL around her means the full world. Mecca is the centre
of the world and ALL around it is the full world. The
verses of the Quran do not prove that Islam is only for
Arabs Alone.
And in other two verses Allah is saying that he has sent
Muhammad (pbuh) to admonish the people to whom no
guidance has come before. Does it say that "admonish only
those people to whom no Warner had been sent"??
Definitely not !!! Allah (SWT) sends his final messenger
which is for the whole of humanity from those people to
whom a messenger had not been sent before.
Ali Sina Writes:
The people of the Book, i.e. the Jews, the Christians and
perhaps the Zoroastrians had their own messengers and
their guidance. The only people who had not received
guidance were the Arabs, specifically the Arabs of Mecca
and its surrounding. So, it is clear that Muhammad
claimed that he had come only for the Quraish and not for
the people of the Book and the rest of mankind. Of course,
as he became powerful, his ambitions grew and he
changed his mind later. Few Muslims know about these
verses. What do they say about them? If they truly
believe that the Quran is the word of God, they should stop
their da'wa and Jihad. The people of Mecca and its
surrounding have already converted to Islam. If Muslims
believe that the Quran is the word of God, how do they
dare to disobey Him and make da'wa elsewhere. Even if
Muhammad said they should attack other countries and
convert others into Islam, they should not listen to him but
do what the Quran says. Whose word is more important?
That of Allah or that of Muhammad? These verses should
also convince the non-Arab Muslims, including the
Egyptians, the Syrians, the Iraqis and all others now known
as Arabs that Islam is not for them. Islam is only for the
Meccans and its surrounding. They must leave Islam, if
they truly believe that the Quran is the word of God.
(Dr. Naik) Qur’an says in Surah Ibrahim, Ch. 14, Verse. 52,
in Surah Baqarah Ch. No. 2, Verse 185, and Surah Zumar
Ch. 39, Verses. 41, that the Qur’an is meant for the whole
of human kind. And Prophet Mohammed, may peace be
upon him, was not sent only for the Muslims or the Arabs.
Allah says in the Qur’an in Surah Ambiya Ch. No. 21, Verse
No. 107------(Arabic)---- That We have send thee as a
mercy, as a guidance, to the whole of humankind.’
(Ali Sina) Verse 14:52 says “ Hatha balaghun lilnnasi”. Nas is
people – any number of people. It could be people
gathered in a room. It could refer to the inhabitants of a
village, a town, a country and not necessarily ALL
Mankind. For example nas is used in verse 7.116 when
talking about the magic performed by the magicians of
Pharaoh who bewitched the eyes of the people ‘nas’. Are
we supposed to understand that all mankind were
bewitched? The same word is used in 2:185, 39:4 and
21:107. In all these verses Nas means "people" and not all
mankind. If we assume that the word 'nas' used in these
verses means all mankind then we have to admit that
there is flagrant contradiction in the Quran for the verses
6:92, 42:7, 32:3 and 36:6 clearly state that the Quran is for
the people of Mecca and its surrounding.
My Response :
Most of the Translations translate the word 'nas' as
'mankind' in the verses which Dr.Zakir Naik quoted. But
even if Ali Sina doesn't agree. Still other verses prove that
Quran is for entire humanity. Nowhere does the Quran say
that it is only for the Arabs. He deliberately mispresented
the verses he quoted to prove that.
More verses confirming Quran to be for entire humanity
"Blessed be He Who sent down the criterion (of right and
wrong, i.e. this Quran) to His slave (Muhammad SAW) that
he may be a warner to the Alameen (mankind and
jinns)." (Quran 25:1)
"But it is nothing less than a Message to all the
worlds ." (Quran 68:52)
"Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the
Worlds :" (Quran 81:27)
"And no reward you (O Muhammad SAW) ask of them
(those who deny your Prophethood) for it, it(the Quran) is
no less than a Reminder and an advice unto the Alameen
(men and jinns)." (Quran 12:104)
The word used in the above 4 verses is "Alameen" meaning
"worlds".
Ali Sina Writes:
However, Muhammad also claimed to have been sent to
"creatures of both worlds". lilAAalameen. means
everything in both worlds. (That includes dogs and pigs.)
That is because he was a megalomaniac narcissist and
narcissists talk big. He even claimed to have come as
guidance for Jinns, which are mythical beings.
My Response:
He considers Jinns to be mythical beings. They are
mythical for him not for us. Its the matter of belief.
Science has not proven Jinns mythical. They may assume
them to be but there are no proves at all. He again insults
our beloved Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and calls him
narcissists (someone who is fascinated with himself).
Brother Umar has responded to this false charge. I too will
deal with it in the next para.
Ali Sina Writes:
"Narcissists have grandiose ideas about themselves. In a
Hadith Muhammad makes his Allah say to him: “Were it
not for you, I would not have created the universe.” [3]
Muhammad ibn Ali has narrated that Muhammad said:
"Among all the people of the world God chose the Arabs;
from among the Arabs he chose the Kinana; from Kinana
he chose the Quraish; from the Quraish he chose Bani
Hashim; from Bani Hashim he chose Me. [Tabaqat V. 1 p.
2] This man was full of himself - a true narcissist. So much
for the alleged equality in Islam. Arabs are the chosen
race. Arabs have known that always and they treat non
Arab Muslims with disdain. If you are a non-Arab Muslim,
you are accepting to be inferior. "
The source of it is given in the footnote
As-Saghaanee (d.650) said, this hadith is "maudu
(fabricated)" ['al-Ahaadeeth al-Mawdoo'aat' of as-
Saghaanee (pg. 7)] and likewise al-Albaanee ['Silsilah ad-
Da'eefah' (1/450 no.282)] ash-Shaykh Mulla Alee Qaaree
(d.1014) said, "maudu, but it's meaning is correct."
My Response:
All Ali Sina can do is quote fabricated hadith. This hadith
is a fabricated one according to scholars. But even if we
assume it is correct. Still it doesn't prove that he is
narcissist. Reasons :
1. Muhammad (pbuh) was considered an honest and
Truthful man even by the pagan Arabs before his
prophethood.
He spoke whatever God Almighty commanded him.
2. It is not only mentioned in the Hadith but it is also said
by God Almighty to Adam (pbuh) in the Gospel of
Barnabas. Chapter 39. It reads
"'Adam, having sprung up upon his feet, saw in the air a
writing that shone like the sun, which said: "There is only
one God, and Mohammed is the messenger of God."
Whereupon Adam opened his mouth and said: "I thank
thee, O Lord my God, that thou hast deigned to create me;
but tell me. I pray thee, what meaneth the message of
these words: "Mohammed is messenger of God. Have there
been other men before me?"
'Then said God: "Be thou welcome, O my servant
Adam. I tell thee that thou art the first man whom I have
created And he whom thou hast seen [mentioned] is thy
son, who shall come into the world many years hence, and
shall be my messenger, for whom I have created all
things; who shall give light to the world when he shall
come;"
http://www.barnabas.net/barnabasP39.html
Christians deny the Gospel of Barnabas. The Historians do
not deny it. For the authenticity of Gospel of Barnabas
refer to :
http://www.natheal.com/NaturalHealingMethodologies/
WorldReligions/history_of_the_gospel_of_bar.htm
http://www.barnabas.net/
Paul said about Barnabas.
"If he comes unto you, receive him. (Colossians 4:10)"
Muhammad (pbuh) is not narcissist. But its again
allegations and lies by Ali Sina. Refer to Brother Umar
article for responses to all the charges against Muhammad
(pbuh) by Ali Sina
http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/
true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm
Embryology continuation
Ali Sina again claims that Dr.Zakir Naik fooled the
audience. According to him Dr.Keith Moore and
Dr.Bucaille fooled the Muslims.

Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Dr. William Campbell who knows Arabic, may
say…‘Why did not Allah Subhanawa Taala specifically
mention….(Arabic) …. Meaning… ‘The capacity of the
heavens to return back rain.’ Why did not Allah mention
specifically? Now we have came to know why did not Allah
do that, in His Divine wisdom. Because today we have
came to know that besides - the Ozonosphere… the layer
above the earth - Besides returning back rain, it even
returns back other beneficial matter and energy of the
Earth, which is required by the human beings. It does not
only return back rain - Today we have come to know, it
even returns back waves of Telecommunication, of
Television, of Radio, by which we can see TV, we can
communicate, we can hear the radio. And besides that, it
even returns back the harmful rays of the outer space,
back on the other side, and absorbs. For example the sun
light… the ultraviolet rays of the Sun light is absorbed by
the Ionosphere. If this was not done, life on the Earth
would have ceased to exist. So Allah Subhanawataala is far
superior and for more accurate, when He says…. (Arabic)
…. By the capacity of the Heaven to return.’ And the
remaining things as he mentioned is there in the Qur’an -
You can refer to my Videocassette. The Qur’an describes
the ‘Water cycle’ in great detail.
(Ali Sina) Wow! What a great logic. Why the Quran does
not talk about the stage of evaporation? …Because
Ozonosphere returns other beneficial matters such as
radio waves too. That is why!
Instead of answering the question, Dr. Naik tries to
distract his audience by talking about red herring and by
introducing non sequitor arguments.
But wait a minute! Didn't Dr. Naik say that "the Firmament
which returns " is about the capacity of heavens to return
back rain? Obviously Dr. Naik could not even convince
himself. After assuring us that "almost all the
commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of
Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning
‘Evaporation’", he goes on to give us the reason why Allah
did not mention this stage in the Quran. Come on Doctor!
Don't make this too easy for me.
My Response:
Quran mentions the stage of evaporation in this verse. But
since Quran is superior to science. It goes beyond that. If
the Quran mentioned specifically then it would only mean
returning of rain. Rain is not the only thing which the
ozonosphere returns. Quran is more scientific!! For more
on the returning sky
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_22.html
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Regarding what he said about the Bible , he
showed stage 1 and stage 3 in the first slide, and in the
second stage 1, 3, and then 2. ‘That the rain water is taken
up’… he says… ‘and then the rain water comes down on
the Earth.’ This is the philosophy of Phasofmillitas, in 7th
century BC. He thought that the spray of the ocean was
picked up by the wind, and send to the interior as rain.
There is no cloud mentioned there. In the second
quotation Dr. William Campbell gave - First is, according to
him, ‘evaporation’ which we agree. We don’t mind having
the concordance approach with the Bible . ‘…Then rain falls
down, and then are the clouds formed.’ - That is not the
complete water cycle. Alhamdulillah, the Qur’an describes
the water cycle in great detail, in several places. How does
the water rise, evaporates, forms into clouds - the clouds
join together, they stalk up, there is thunder and lightning,
water comes down, the clouds move into the interior, they
fall down as rain, and the evaporation of the water table
and Alhamdulillah in great detail. The Qur’an speaks about
the water cycle in great detail, in several places. In Surah
Nur, Ch. No. 24, Verse No. 43, in Surah Rum, Ch. No. 30,
Verse 48, in Surah Al-Zumar, Ch. 39, Verse 21, in Surah
Muminun, Ch. 23, Verse 18, in Surah Rum Ch. No. 30,
Verse No. 24, in Surah Al-Hijr, Ch. 15, Verse No. 22, in
Surah Araf Ch. No. 7, Verse No. 57, in Surah Rad, Ch. No.
13, Verse No. 17, in Surah Furqan, Ch. 25, Verse No. 48 and
49, in Surah Fatir, Ch. No. 35, Verse No. 9, in Surah Yasin,
Ch. 36, Verse No. 34, in Surah Jathiya, Ch. 45, Verse No. 5,
in Surah Qaf, Ch. No. 50, Verse No. 9, in Surah Al-Waqiah,
Ch. No. 56, Verse No. 68 and 70, in several places, Surah
Al-Mulk,Ch. 67, Verse No. 30, the Glorious Qur’an speaks
about the ‘Water cycle’, in great detail.
(Ali Sina) Here is where Dr. Naik outperformed himself.
His Muslim audience became ecstatic and started
applauding and cheering as if he was a pop singer
performing their favorite number. He said all those verses
from memory, like pulling one rabbit after another out his
had. Impressive indeed. Let us quote these verses and see
if there is anything miraculous in them. While you are
reading, note how often Muhammad forgets that the
Quran is supposed to be the word of Allah and Allah
should not refer to himself in third person.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik did not have enough time to explain them.
Therefore, to cut short he only gave references. Muslim
audience had every right to be ecstatic because Dr.Zakir
Naik was convincingly refuting the falsehood promoted by
Dr.William Campbell. The answer to the shift from first to
third person etc. is here
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/
robinson.html
Ali Sina then goes on to quote all the verses and says that it
is only observable phenomenon. He doesn't realize that
Quran is 1400 years old. Today it seems to be observable
phenomenon to us because all the data on the subject is
with us. Water Cycle seems to be an observable
phenomenon.
In the words of Ali Sina "What the Quran describes has
been observable by any primitive man since eons."
If Water Cycle is an observable phenomenon then why is it
considered only a recent discovery of about 500-600 years
old? Why isn't it considered simply to be an observable
phenomenon? Why is taught to children in school??
Dr.Maurice Bucaille knew that there would be people like
Ali Sina who will think that water cycle is merely an
observable phenomenon. Moreover, what the Quran
mentions is not simply an observable phenomenon. I'll just
provide one example here.
" And He sends down from the sky mountain masses (of
clouds) wherein is hail:" (Quran 24:43)
Now if you are traveling by an aeroplane and when the
aeroplane goes above the clouds. One can see that clouds
appear like mountain masses. I myself have witnessed it.
On which aeroplane did Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) go to
check this??
How come Ali Sina missed out this verse?
“And We send the fecundating winds, then cause the rain
to descend from the sky, therewith providing you with
water (in abundance), though ye are not the guardians of
its stores.” (15:22)
Dr.Maurice Bucaille writes:
"When the verses of Quran concerning the role of water in
man's existence are read in succession today, they all
appear to us to express ideas that are quite obvious. The
reason for this is simple: in our day and age, we all, to a
lesser or greater extent, know about the water cycle in
nature.
If However , we consider the various concepts the ancients
had on this subject, it becomes clear that the data in the
Quran do not embody the mythical concepts current at the
time of the Revelation which had been developed more
according to philosophical speculation than observed
phenomenon. Although it was empirically possible to
acquire on a modest scale, the useful practical knowledge
necessary for the improvement of the irrigation, the
concepts held on the water cycle in general would hardly
be acceptable today."
Note: Ali Sina also accuses Dr.Maurice Bucaille and
Professor Keith Moore of fooling the people. I'll come to
that later.
Do Mountains Stabilize the Earth
Dr.Zakir Naik in his talk provided the source. He said that
Dr.Frank Press said that mountains give stability to the
earth and he asked Dr.William Campbell to prove on the
contrary. Get any documented proof which says on the
contrary.
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) I have not come across a single Geological book,
and I challenge Dr. William Campbell to produce a single
Geological book - Not his personal correspondence with
the Geologist. That does not carry weight. His personal
correspondence with Dr. Keith Moore …. Documented
proof. And if you read the book ‘The Earth’ which is
referred by almost all the universities, in the field of
Geology, one of its authors by the name of Dr Frank Press,
who was the advisor to the former president of USA,
Jimmy Carter, and was the president of the Academy of
Science of USA. He writes in his book that…‘The mountains
are wedge shaped - It has deep roots within. And he says
that…‘The function of the mountain is to stabilize the
earth.’ And the Qur’an says in Surah Ambiya, Ch. No 21,
Verse No. 31, in Surah Luqman, Ch. No. 31 Verse No.10, as
well as in Surah Nahl, Ch. No. 16, Verse No. 15, that…‘We
have made the mountains standing firm on the Earth, lest
it would shake with them and with you.’
(Ali Sina) I tried to contact Dr. Frank Press and wrote to
two sites that had written about him asking to please put
me in touch with him. Neither of them responded. I am
not willing to buy his book Earth that costs $95.95 dollars
just to verify this claim. However I doubt Dr. Press could
have said such an absurd thing. Muslims are good in
twisting things to make them look something else. I believe
Dr. Naik has got this false information form Another
Islamic site islam-guide.com that says: "A book entitled
Earth is a basic reference textbook in many universities
around the world. One of its two authors is Professor
Emeritus Frank Press. He was the Science Advisor to
former US President Jimmy Carter, and for 12 years was
the President of the National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, DC. His book says that mountains have
underlying roots. [ Earth, Press and Siever, p. 435. Also
see Earth Science , Tarbuck and Lutgens, p. 157.] These
roots are deeply embedded in the ground, thus, mountains
have a shape like a peg
My Response:
Does Dr.Frank Press really have time to contact every
Tom,Dick and Harry?? Does he have time to contact people
like Ali Sina who hide behind the internet like cowards? Ali
Sina hides behind the internet, writes, and thinks that he
is a genius.
How can Ali Sina simply accuse someone with mere
assumptions?? He is firstly not willing to buy the book.
Then he is accusing Dr.Naik of copying from this site.
Dr.Naik said the same thing much earlier than this debate.
He said so also in his talk "Quran and Modern Science -
Conflict or conciliation” in 1996 and he had delivered talks
on the same subjects before also. It reads on the site
"A book entitled Earth is a basic reference textbook in
many universities around the world. One of its two
authors is Professor Emeritus Frank Press. He was the
Science Advisor to former US President Jimmy Carter, and
for 12 years was the President of the National Academy of
Sciences, Washington, DC. His book says that mountains
have underlying roots.1 These roots are deeply
embedded in the ground, thus, mountains have a shape
like a peg (see figures 7, 8, and 9)."
When Ali Sina quotes this site. He removed the reference
to the footnotes. The site further provides us with 3
pictures and Ali Sina on it writes:
“These pictures have nothing to do with science. They are
just more Islamic lies. These are taken from The Geological
Concept of Mountains in the Quran a book written by a
Muslims El-Naggar and falsely attributed to Dr.
Press.” Source:
May I know where these people attributed the photos
taken to Dr.Frank Press?? They even provide the source of
it. Here are the 3 sources mentioned on the same site of
pictures 1,2 and 3 respectively.
"Figure 7: Mountains have deep roots under the surface of
the ground. (Earth, Press and Siever, p. 413.)"
"Figure 8: Schematic section. The mountains, like pegs,
have deep roots embedded in the ground. (Anatomy of the
Earth, Cailleux, p. 220.) "
"Figure 9: Another illustration shows how the mountains
are peg-like in shape, due to their deep roots. (Earth
Science, Tarbuck and Lutgens, p. 158.)"
See how Ali Sina lies. He thinks that people will simply
believe him without verifying.
Further, Ali Sina doesn't agree with the verses of the
Quran 16:15,21:31. And he starts giving his scientific
explanation. Wait a minute, Where is the source of all his
wishful explanations?? Dr.Zakir Naik atleast gave the
source. He quoted a non-Muslim scientist Dr.Frank Press,
who has no reason to favour the Quran. Nor did he write
the book to bring a compability between the Quran and
Science.
Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) And in reply to the statement…‘That if
mountains prevent earthquakes, how come you find
earthquakes in mountainous regions?’ The reply is, that -
If I say that medical doctors, they prevent the sickness and
disease in a human being, and if someone argues…‘If
doctors prevent the sickness and diseases in a human
being, how come you find more sick people in the
hospitals, where there are more doctors than at home -
where there are no doctors.’
(Ali Sina) What a ridiculous analogy! Patients go to
hospitals AFTER they get sick because they are living and
thinking beings and that is where they can get medical
attention and get better. They do not become sick in
hospitals (unless the hospital is in an Islamic country with
Islamic hygiene). Is Dr. Naik trying to compare
earthquake, a natural phenomenon, to humans? Do the
earthquakes happen first elsewhere and then decide to
conglomerate in mountains? This analogy is utterly
ridiculous; yet Dr. Naik’s Muslim audience became so
elated that they spontaneously cheered and applauded.
One black guy was almost falling off his chair of excessive
laughing. What these people were laughing at? At their
own stupidity? Now the world can see them and laugh at
them. It’s as if the more stupid is a statement, the more
Muslims enjoy it. This reveals the deplorable intellectual
bankruptcy of the wretched Umma.
My Response:
Dr.Zakir Naik clearly explained the verses of the Quran.
He said this just as a joke and to expose the poor reasoning
of Dr.William Campbell. Dr.Zakir Naik explained it very
well. Muslim audience cheered because Islam was being
defended and lies of Dr.William Campbell were being
exposed. They have every right to be. Islam is criticized a
lot in Western countries. If someone defends it then
Muslims have all rights to cheer and applaud. See How Ali
Sina in the ends throws insult at the entire ummah
(community) of the Muslims. His foul-mouth never ends

Ali Sina Writes:
Of course both are false. The earth is inside the sky and
part of it. They can neither come together nor
separate. Here we have two version that contradict each
other and both are scientifically wrong.
My Response :
As I explained above none of the two is wrong. Dr.Zakir
Naik explains
“The creation of the universe is explained by
astrophysicists in a widely accepted phenomenon,
popularly known as the 'Big Bang'. It is supported by
observational and experimental data gathered by
astronomers and astrophysicists for decades. According to
the 'Big Bang', the whole universe was initially one big
mass (Primary Nebula). Then there was a 'Big
Bang' (Secondary Separation) which resulted in the
formation of Galaxies. These then divided to form stars,
planets, the sun, the moon, etc. The origin of the universe
was unique and the probability of it occurring by 'chance'
is zero."
Does the Quran say the Sun and the Moon Revolve Around
Their Own Axis?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) When I was in school, I had learned that the
Sun in respect to the Earth - it was stationary - the Earth
and the Moon, they rotated about in axis, but the sun was
stationary. But when I read a Verse of the Qur’an saying, in
Surah Al–Ambiya, Ch. . 21 Verse No. 33, it says…. (Arabic).
… ‘It is Allah who has created the night and the day.’….
(Arabic)…. The sun and the moon…. (Arabic)…. Each one
traveling in an orbit with its own motion. Now
Alhamdulillah, modern science has confirmed the Qur’an ic
statement. The Arabic word used in the Qur’an is
‘Yasbahoon’ , which describes the motion of a moving body.
When it refers to a celestial body, it means it is rotating
about its own axis. So Qur’an says the sun and the Moon,
they revolve as well as rotate about their own axis. Today
we have come to know that the Sun takes approximately
25 days to complete one rotation.
(Ali Sina) Dr. Naikr claims that the verse 21:33 which says
the sun and the moon follow their orbits means they
rotate around their axis because the word íóÓúÈóÍõæäó
ysbahun means rotating around its own axis. This is simply
not true. Dr. Naik is fabricating evidence and twisting the
meaning of the words. The word here implies that the Sun
and the Moon rotate in circle, i.e. around the Earth and
not around their own axis. This is what Muhammad
observed and this is what he said. He stated what was
obvious to him and to everyone else. See how this word is
translated.
Pickthall They float, each in an orbit.
Yusuf
Ali
swim along, each in its rounded course.
Hilali-
Khan
each in an orbit floating.
Shakir all (orbs) travel along swiftly in their
celestial spheres.
Sher Ali each gliding along smoothly in its orbit.
Khalifa each floating in its own orbit.
Arberry each swimming in a sky.
Palmer each floating in a sky.
Rodwell each moving swiftly in its sphere.
Sale [the celestial bodies] move swiftly, [each] in
[its respective] orb.
As one can see, Dr. Naik is in error. By bundling the Moon
and the Sun together, it is clear that Muhammad thought
they are alike with one being brighter than the other.
Attempts such as this, to twist the apparent meaning of the
words reveal the desperation of Muslims to find miracles
and science in the absurdities of the Quran and hide its
errors. Why none of these so called miracles attributed to
Muhammad are in clear language? Why Allah did not say
the Earth is round and it is rotating around the Sun and
the Moon is rotating around the Earth? Simple and clear!
In none of the so called Quranic miracles you find clarity.
Then again, if the Quran is full of science why the Islamic
countries are most wretched? Muslim's response to this is
that Muslims do not practice Islam, that is why. But how is
it that the Kafir countries that do not practice Islam at all
are better than Muslim countries that practice it a little?
Why virtually all the kafir countries are more advanced
than virtually all the Islamic countries? The more Islamic
a country gets the more backward, barbaric and poor it
becomes. Is there in this a lesson for us all?
My Response:
As I explained in the beginning that translations are
human handy-work and they are done by people who may
not be having great knowledge of science. And even you if
you read the last translation by Sale it says the same thing
what Dr.Zakir Naik explained. It reads " [the celestial
bodies] move swiftly, [each] in [its respective] orb.
" see the different meanings of the word "orb"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/orb
Muslims today have gotten backward because we have
deviated away from the teachings of Islam. When we
Muslims were close to the Quran we were on the top of the
world. Did Ali Sina forget the discoveries done by Muslim
scientists The discoveries done by Western Scientists
are only in last few centuries. Western scientists rehashed
many of the discoveries of Muslim Scientists. Did he forget
the Muslims scientists who did brilliant discoveries about
800-1000 years ago?? Did he forget great scientists like
Jabbir Ibn Hayyan, Ali Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Muhammad
Zakaria Razi etc. For more detail, refer to this.
http://www.ummah.net/history/scholars/index.html
Ali Sina Writes:
A quick calculation reveals that the likelihood that a Jew
wins the Noble Prize is 2088 times higher than a Muslim
winning it. If all the science is in the Quran why all the
Muslims are so miserable?
My Response:
As I explained above. It is because we have deviated away
from the word of Allah (SWT). Ali Sina also considers Bible
unscientific. But we have many Christian scientists.
Therefore, Religion has nothing to do with discoveries of
science. The followers of many other religions like
Hinduism, Buddhism etc. live in third world countries.
They have not done many discoveries either. But Ali Sina
doesn't highlight them. He is only concerned about
targeting the Muslims.
Does the Quran say the Universe is Expanding?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) It was Edvin Hubbel who discovered that the
universe is expanding. The Qur’an says in Surah Dhariyat,
Ch. 51, Verse No. 47, that…‘We have created the
expanding universe’ - The vastness of space. The Arabic
word ‘Mohsiana ’ refers to ‘vastness’ – ‘the expanding
universe.’
Regarding the topics on Astronomy, which Dr. William
Campbell touched, I will deal in the rebuttal, InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Dr. Naik claims that the verse 51:47 talks about
the expanding universe. This is not so. Muhammad is
simply saying that the universe is vast and not that it is
expanding. This verse reads:
Arabic…
See how this is translated:
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the
Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is
Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and
most surely We are the makers of things ample.
The fact that the universe is vast is prosaic and obvious.
There is no mention of expanding universe in this verse.
Any illiterate man can look at the sky and see it is vast. To
the ancient people even the Earth looked vast. To us it
looks very small.
My Response:
Ali Sina previously quoted atleast 7-8 translations for
Quran 21:33. Now he only quoted three. Why?? The
reason is because if he had quoted more he would have
been proved to be a liar. Let’s read other translations of
the verse of the Quran 51:47
Dr. Munir Munshey : " With Our power and prowess, We
brought into being the universe. And indeed, We expand it
(steadily)!"
Muhammad Al-Hilali & Muhsin Khan: "With power did We
construct the heaven. Verily, we are Able to extend the
vastness of space thereof."
Arberry: " And heaven -- We built it with might, and We
extend it wide."
Khalifa : "We constructed the sky with our hands, and we
will continue to expand it."
And if you read the translation by Muhammad Asad, it
uses the same words which Dr.Zakir Naik used "Expanding
Universe". The verse reads
Muhammad Asad : "It is we who have built the universe
with [our creative] power; and, verily, it is we who are
steadily expanding it."
"we are expanding it" is the translation of the plural
present participle musi'una and of the verb ausa'a
meaning "to make wider, more spacious, to extend, to
expand"
Water Cycle in the Quran?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) In the field of ‘Water cycle’ that Dr. William
Campbell pointed out, certain things. The Qur’an describes
the water cycle in great detail. And Dr. William Campbell
mentioned 4 stages. In his book he mentions 4 (a) and (b)
- the last one he did not mention in the slide - I don’t know
why? It says... ‘The Driplinition’…‘The Water table.’ He
missed out here - Maybe because it was not mentioned in
the Bible . He said there is not a single Verse in the Qur’an ,
which speaks about ‘evaporation.’ Qur’an says in Surah Al-
Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, that….(Arabic)…. ‘By the
capacity of the heavens to return.’ And almost all the
commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse of
Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning
‘Evaporation.’
(Ali Sina) I don’t know which commentator said such a
thing but if anyone has, he is mistaken. Let us read the
first part of this Sura:
My Response :
He is insinuating that only he (Ali Sina) knows the Quran
whereas any commentator who says so is mistaken.
Ali Sina continues :
Let us read the first part of this Sura:
086.001 By the Sky and the Night-Visitant (therein);-
086.002 And what will explain to thee what the Night-
Visitant is?-
086.003 (It is) the Star of piercing brightness;-
086.004 There is no soul but has a protector over it.
086.005 Now let man but think from what he is created!
086.006 He is created from a drop emitted-
086.007 Proceeding from between the backbone and the
ribs:
086.008 Surely (Allah) is able to bring him back (to life)!
086.004 There is no soul but has a protector over it.
086.005 Now let man but think from what he is created!
086.006 He is created from a drop emitted-
086.007 Proceeding from between the backbone and the
ribs:
086.008 Surely (Allah) is able to bring him back (to life)!
086.009 The Day that (all) things secret will be tested,
086.010 (Man) will have no power, and no helper.
086.011 By the Firmament which returns (in its round),
The entire Sura is gibberish. It just makes so sense. You
can hardly find any text as obtuse as this.
My Response :
Ali Sina considers the Surah to be gibberish. To infidels
the whole Quran may sound gibberish. And Ali Sina is one
of them. Therefore, it does not really matter to us if this
sounds gibberish to him. I won’t be touching to all six of
his so called "errors" in the Quran. I'll just deal with the
first and the last one.
"1) It appears that Muhammad is saying that each person
has a star that protects him. This is fairytale fit for
children.
Where is the verse saying that star protects the man?? !!
The first 3 verses of the Surah are speaking of something
different whereas the verse 4 is speaking about something
different. If Ali Sina is dumb and cannot even understand
plain English that does not mean Quran is wrong. Lets now
come to the main topic of it which Dr.Naik touched.
"By the Firmament which returns (in its round)" (Quran
86:11)"
Ali Sina then goes on to say there are six “errors” in this
Surah. I’ll just be dealing with the last one here which is
relevant to the topic.
Ali Sina Writes:
6) Then he swears “by the Firmament which returns (in its
round)”. Firmament is the stars, the sun and the moon, not
vapor and rain. Muhammad saw that every night the stars
are coming back and every day the Sun is returning. These
heavenly objects were known as the firmament. This verse
has nothing to do with evaporation and rain. Please pay
attention how often Dr. Naik twists the meanings of the
words to make his point prevail. The word used is ' sama'.
It means sky/heaven and it can also be interpreted as
firmament but it can't be translated as rain.
My Response:
As Ali Sina here rightly says that "sama" means heaven/
sky. I want to know where did Dr.Zakir naik translate it as
"rain"? He never did so. Here are the words of Dr.Naik
"By the capacity of the heavens to return.’ And almost all
the commentaries of the Qur’an - they said, that this Verse
of Surah Tariq, Ch. No. 86, Verse No. 11, refers to the
capacity of the heavens to return back rain - meaning
‘Evaporation.’ "
Can anyone here see Dr.Naik translating "sama" as
"rain" This is another terrible lie by Ali Sina. See how
he is trying to deceive his reader. Dr.Naik simply
explained what it is referring to

Emusan: Despite that is more than 2hrs YET could get your OWN perverted master out of it BUT to get the rebuttal of Dr. Campbell is long
I TRIED TOGET THE PDF BUT IT IS NT AVAILABLE.............U CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO TOLISTEN TO IT UR SELF

Despite that is more than 2hrs YET could get your OWN perverted master out of it BUT to get the rebuttal of Dr. Campbell is long >

I TRIED TOGET THE PDF BUT IT IS NT AVAILABLE.............U CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO TOLISTEN TO IT UR SELF

Don't worry I challenge you but you couldn't meet up with my challenge so it's left for you to judge yourself.

This is called a DEBATE Dr. Zakir provided his own challenge WHAT IS THE RESPOND of Dr. Campbell? simple.

Or if I tell you that "Teacher is better than Doctor" and I presented my point(s) supporting Teacher and someone copied ONLY my point(s)/presentation, CAN YOU AS A PERSON HOLD TO MY POINT ONLY AND AGREE THAT TRULY TEACHER IS BETTER THAN DOCTOR?

So I'm waiting for Campbell's RESPOND to this DEBATE from you.

THE MAIN REASON WHY CAMPBELL STATEMENT IS HARD TO FIND ON NET IS BECAUSE PEOPLE KNOW THAT CAMPBELL PERFORM WOEFULLY EVEN ON CHRISTIAMNS SITE ITS NT THERE BUT ALI SINA LATER COMMENTED ON THE VIDEO THAT DR ZAKR NAIK IS A MAGICIAN AND ALI TRIED TO DEFEND THE CHRISTIAN
BUT EVERY TYN HAS BEEN RESPONDED TO

Does Dr.Zakir Naik Really Fool the
audience?
On the very front page of Ali Sina’s site. Ali Sina has
written a response to Dr.Zakir Naik's presentation in his
debate with Dr.William Campbell. He says that Dr.Zakir
Naik is a magician and he fools his audience with words.
He calls him a Showman. You can find his response here
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/
NaikCampbellintro.htm#content
The Reason arises why does he call him a Showman and a
magician? The reason is obvious. Dr.Zakir Naik
Alhumdulillah with the grace of Allah (SWT) winning over
people's hearts.. He has delivered more than a thousand
public talks worldwide. He has Alhumdulillah started his
new 24 hour Satellite channel "Peace TV". This Channel
Promotes the True Picture of Islam. Ali Sina does not like
that.
Here I will be exposing Ali Sina. He not only is unscholarly
in his approach but he even lacks ethical values. Any
unbiased person who sees this picture of Dr.Zakir Naik
modified by Ali Sina and his clowns will realize that Ali
Sina is a loony.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/debates/
NaikCampbellintro.htm
Before I respond to the points raised by him. I would like
to make few points clear.
1. If Ali Sina Writes a response to Dr.Zakir Naik that
doesn't mean that Dr.Naik is fooling his audience. If I use
this logic than it also means that Dr.William Campbell was
also fooling his audience when he said falsehood about
Islam. It also means that Ali Sina is also fooling his readers
because many Muslims including Brother Umar on this site
has responded to false charges of Ali Sina.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/
true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm
2. It is Dr.William Campbell who actually initiated the
debate. Dr.Zakir Naik doesn't go around asking people to
have a public debate with him. Dr.Campbell wrote a book
against the Quran. Dr.Naik refuted all the points of
Dr.Campbell and pointed out scientific errors and
contradictions in the bible. Ali Sina accuses Dr.Zakir of
attacking the bible but doesn't say anything about
Dr.Campbell who actually initiated the debate.
3. The Translations are human handi-work and are bound
to contain errors. No Translation per se is error free. The
Translator may not have in-depth knowledge of Science
therefore it is highly possible that he makes an error in
translating the scientific statements mentioned in the
Quran.
Dr.Maurice Bucaille writes:
"Why do errors in translation exist? They may be
explained by the fact that modern translators often take
up, rather uncritically , the interpretations given by older
commentators. In their day, the latter had an excuse for
having given an inappropriate definition to an Arabic
word containing several possible meanings; they could not
possibly have understood the real sense the word or
phrase which has only become clear in the present day
thanks to scientific knowledge. In Other words, the
problem is raised of the necessary revision of translations
and commentaries. It was possible to do this at a certain
period in the past, but nowadays we have knowledge
that enables us to render their true sense "
(The Bible, The Quran, And The Science pg 118-119)
I'll mainly be touching the points which he raised on the
Quran. I wont be dealing with each and every small point
which is irrelevant. It was actually Dr.William Campbell
who was supposed to reply to these points. Therefore, He
should even thank me for even taking out my time.
Big Bang in the Quran?
Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) As far as Qur’an and modern Science is
concerned, in the field of ‘Astronomy’, the Scientists, the
Astronomers, a few decades earlier, they described, how
the universe came into existence - They call it the ‘Big
Bang’. And they said… ‘Initially there was one primary
nebula, which later on it separated with a Big Bang, which
gave rise to Galaxies, Stars, Sun and the Earth, we live in.’
This information is given in a nutshell in the Glorious
Qur’an , in Surah Ambiya, Ch. 21, Verse No. 30, which
says…. (Arabic).... Do not the unbelievers see…? ….
(Arabic)…. ‘That the heavens and the earth were joined
together, and we clove them asunder?’ Imagine this
information which we came to know recently, the Qur’an
mentions 14 hundred years ago.
(Ali Sina) In his fervor to make the Quran look scientific
Dr. Naik overlooks the fact that the theory of Big Bang
precludes the concept of creation. If Big Bang is true then
the story of the creation and Adam and Eve must be false
and vice versa. This is elemental.
21:30 , ‘The heavens and the earth were joined together,
and we clove them asunder’
This is not an allusion to the Big Bang. It is the rehashing
of the Genesis:
6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the
waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the
expanse and separated the water under the expanse from
the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse
"sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the
second day. Gen 1: 6-9
So if this is a miracle, the credit should go to the Bible and
not to the Quran. This fable, like many others, is borrowed
from the Bible.
My Response:
Ali Sina here claims that the Quran is copied from the
Bible. The same nonsense, which Christians keep
repeating. Since he has accused Dr.Zakir Naik. I can do no
better than let Dr.Zakir Naik reply to it.
http://www.irf.net/irf/dtp/dawah_tech/t18/t18a/pg1.htm .
Ali Sina Writes:
21:30 presents also another problem. It contradicts with
the verse 41.11
"Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it
had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come
ye together, willingly or unwillingly." They said: "We do
come (together), in willing obedience."
So which story is the right tale of the creation? Were the
heaven and the earth joined together and Allah clove them
asunder or were they apart and Allah told them to come
together?
My Response.
In the verse 41.11 Allah (SWT) is not talking about the
physical calling of heavens and earth together. He is
talking about coming into existence. Quran is in complete
compability with modern science. These verses have other
scientific points in it as well. But since I am only
responding to his points I wont go into details right now.

CLICK ON THIS LINK AND SEE THE RESPONE WITH ALI SUNNA ALLEGATION AND ISLAMIC SCHOLAR RESPONSE I CANT POST IT DIRECTLY COZ THE DOCUMENT IS HUGE www.answering-christianity.com/yahya_ahmed/dr_zakir_naik_rebuttal.htm

CLICK ON THIS LINK TO DOWNLOAD AUDIOS
www.dawahusa.com/audio/zakirnaik.shtml

Emusan: I can't stop laughing at the OP, this shows how Muslims strictly follow the teaching of Muhammad "using lie to achieve their aims".
The reason I said this is because if you call this a DEBATE and you went ahead ONLY to provide the challenge QUESTIONS without providing the other part RESPOND to all these, shows how dubious you are.

I challenge you "if you can" to provide in detail the RESPOND of Dr. William Campbell in this debate then we'll know how genuine Dr. Zakir's points are.

*Remember all the challenge Dr. Zakir raised can also be used again Islam.

I HAVE TOLD U WHERE U CAN GET IT THE VIDEO IS MORE THAN 2HR I TRIED TOGET THE PDF BUT IT IS NT AVAILABLE.............U CAN DOWNLOAD THE VIDEO TOLISTEN TO IT UR SELF

abdulwastecx: Quran also contradicts science. .. check faith freedom.com or wiki islam... Quran is a plagiarized version of bible.... religion sucks big time

I HAVE READ MOST OF THEM BEFFORE IF U CANTAKE YOUR TIME TO READ IT U WILL SEE THAT IT IS MEANINGLESS.........NO SIENTIST TOAC WHAT THEY SAID UP AND EVEN THE POST I POSTED IS A DEBATE ETWEEN DR ZAKR NAIK AND A CHRISTIAN PHYSICIAN HE NEVER MAKE ANY ACCUSATION ON SCIENCE AND ISLAM ECAUSE HE KNOWS THE TRUTH TO GET THE IVIDEO GOTO GOOGLE AND TYPE BIBLE AND SCIENCE BY DR ZAKR NAIK

Elantracey: You are pointless.

FOR U TO SAY I AM POINTLESS U AVE TO PROVE ME WRONG

GUD DAY EVERYONE IN THE HOUSE

cloudstar: Bros, abeg - review the topics that I have been engaged in with your likes. When you are done, come back again and try to debate me. I debate objective individuals. If it's the Hadith you want us to review and study; I can provide authentic narrations from Hadiths such as Al-Bukhari which is accepted by nearly all schools of Islamic jurisprudence.

Here is the Hadith proving that Mohammad slept with Aisha when she was 9:

Narrated Hisham's father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236)

Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death). (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64; see also Numbers 65 and 88)

It is also recorded and narrated from Sunan Abu Dawud, another authoritative Hadith

Aisha said: The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) married me when I was seven years old. The narrator Sulaiman said: Or six years. He had intercourse with me when I was nine years old. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Number 2116)

So, please read your Islamic history before you come here and make yourself look silly. You are already good at that . If you want to engage me in an objective debate, I will be more than happy to produce evidence only from Islamic sources for your reference

U TRIED TO DODGE THE ALLEGDED ANTI CHRIST THAT YOU ARE WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MARRIAGE A LADY IS DEEM FIT FOR MARRIAGE WHEN SHE ATTAIN PUBERTY EVEN THIS HAS BEEN WIDELY PRACTICED IN MANY COUNTRIES
NOW I WILL EXPLAIN THE FACT FOR U IN DETAIL BELOW

1-It was a divine inspiration:
Before describing the rationale behind this married relation,
let it be known that the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him)
married Sayyida Aisha not of his own desire rather it was a
Divine inspiration. Read the following Hadith;
Narrated ‘Aisha:
That the Prophet said to her, “You have been shown to me
twice in my dream. I saw you pictured on a piece of silk
and some-one said (to me). ‘This is your wife.’ When I
uncovered the picture, I saw that it was yours. I said, ‘If
this is from Allah, it will be done.” {Bukhari :: Volume 5 ::
Book 58 :: Hadith 235}
2-It was not out of his physical desires:
The Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) did not marry
Sayyidah Aisha out of his physical desires. One need to
note that for first 54 years of his life he had only one wife.
His only wife till 50th year of his life was Sayyida Khadija.
He spent his entire youth with her and she was a two time
widowed woman, 15 years elder to him. For next four years
his only wife was Sayyidah Sa’uda.
3-Age of Marriage in Old Ages:
One must first understand that 1400 years ago was very
different than now, times have changed and so have
humans. 1400 years ago it was something very common to
marry young girls, in fact they were not considered young
girls, and rather they were considered young women back
then. It is a historic fact that girls from the ages of 9 to 14
were being married in Europe, Asia, and Africa, in fact even
in the United States girls at the age of 10 were also being
married just more than a century ago.
Yet with these facts no historian claims that all these
people were sick perverts, historians would call anyone
who made such a claim to be arrogant and very stupid
who has no grasp or understanding of history.
Even in Indo-Pak Sub-Continent girls used to be married at
12-13 even 50-60 years ago. And those ‘girls’ infact raised
much better families. There were less family problems then.
A simple analyses of the divorce rate then and know would
certainly make it clear that maturity level earlier used to be
different i.e. people used to come of age rather quickly.
4-Child Brides in Byzantine Empire:
http://www.roman-emperors.org/aggiefran.htm
Visit this link to see how common were the child brides in
the Byzantine Empire.This article clearly states;”Child
brides, whether Byzantines or foreign princesses, were the
norm rather than the exception, especially from the late
twelfth century”.
5-The Pagans of the Prophet’s time:
The fact that it was a completely acceptable thing can also
be seen from the response of the pagans at that time. No
Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it
was widely practiced. And even until today in 3rd world
countries (Muslims and non-Muslims), little girls as young
as 9 or 10 do get married. Anyway, the reason no one
objected was to the Prophet’s marriage was:1-People used
to have very short life-spans in Arabia. They used to live
between 40 to 60 years maximum. So it was only normal
and natural for girls to be married off at ages 9 or 10 or
similar.2-Marriage for young girls was widely practiced
among Arabs back then, and even today in many non-
Muslim and Muslim countries
6-Engagement with Jubair bin Mutim:
It ought also be noted that Sayyidah Aisha ( RA) was
engaged to Jubayr son of Mut’im before Prophet
Muhammed (Peace be upon him. This indicates the age of
marriage and engagement in Prophet’s time. However, the
engagement was later nullified by Jubayr’s parents due to
Abu Bakr (RA) embracing Islam.Doesn’t this indicate there
was nothing bad in marrying a 9 year girl at that time?She
must have been even younger when she was engaged to
Jubair
7-Sayyidah Aisha was fit for marriage:
Furthermore as to the Holy Prophet’s marriage with
Sayyidah Aisha, something people will notice is that the
completion of the marriage was done when Sayyidah Aisha
was 9 years old, not when she was 6, and there is a reason
for that. The reason why this happened is because
Sayyidah Aisha had been through puberty by the age of 9,
and in Islam a female who under-goes puberty is
considered a lady and is fit for marriage.
If we read the hadiths, we find that right before Sayyidah
Aisha got married off to the Holy Prophet that she was sick
and not feeling too well:
Narrated Sayyidah Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years).
We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-
Harith bin Khazraj then I got ill and my hair fell down.
Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman,
came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of
my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not
knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by
the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I
was breathless then, and when my breathing became all
right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head
with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the
house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes
and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted
me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage).
Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon
and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I
was a girl of nine years of age.” {Sahih Bukhari Volume 5,
Book 58, Number 234}
So as we can see, Sayyidah Aisha got ill and her body was
going through some changes, indicating that she was going
through her puberty.
8-Sayyida Aisha never showed her displeasure:
Another striking thing to observe is that among hundreds of
her narrations there is not even a single one showing her
displeasure about this marriage. Hence, she had no
problem with this relation. Infect it is manifest from several
traditions that she loved the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon
him) too much and even felt some sort of jealousy when
she found others around him. Does this not prove that she
was extremely happy about this marriage? So, when she
herself had no problem at all then what’s the matter of
concern for others?
9-A 9-year old Thai girl gave birth:
A 9 old girl can become a mother. If you don’t believe me
then see here is the proof;
The news item is from the New Straits Times, 10/3/2001.
In our world today, we still have people who marry very
young girls. Why should we object to someone who
married a 9-year old girl 1400 years ago, when we still
practice it today? The girl above even gave birth at the age
of 9!
10-It was absolutely legal:
Prophet Muhammad’s marriage with Aisha was 100% legal
and acceptable by all laws and Divine Religions. It is
important to know that girls during the Biblical and Islamic
days used to be married off at young ages when they either
had their first periods, or their breasts start showing off. In
other words, when they turn into “women”, then they get
married off. It was quite different for men on the other
hand, because physical power and the ability of living an
independent life had always been and will always be a
mandatory requirement for men to have in life. So men
waited much longer than women in terms of getting
married. The guy had to develop both his body and mind
before he was ready for marriage. That is why you see
girls as young as 9 or 10 were married to men as old as
30 or even older. The culture back then and in many of the
world countries today (NON-MUSLIM ONES TOO) is quite
different than what you live in today.And there is no divine
law which is broken in marrying a girl of nine at any costs.
11-Her parents never objected:
Sayyidah Aisha’s mother and the Muslim women back
then were O.K with her marriage. It was part of the Arab
custom and still is in many of the Muslim and non-Muslim
countries today for girls to marry at a very young age.
When a girl’s body starts showing up (her breasts and her
height and physical size), then she would be ready for
marriage
The only reason why Sayyidah Aisha’s father, Abu Baker Al
Sidique, broke her engagement with Jober is because he
was a non-Muslim. Later, a woman named Kholeah Bint
Hakeem suggested for Prophet Muhammad peace be upon
him to marry Sayyidah Aisha, because the Prophet and
Abu Baker became best friends. Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him) engaged Sayyidah Aisha for 3 years
before he married her.
12-Muslims never concealed it:
Had there been any bad thinking regarding this marriage in
minds of the people at that time. Muslims would have tried
there best to conceal at that time. But they didn’t.
13-Refuting unjust Pagan views:
There were many baseless traditions in practice among the
Arabs in those days. So Prophet Muhammad (peace be
upon him) was usually ordered by the Almighty ALLAH to
refute such traditions through personal examples. Similar
is the case of Prophet Muhammad’s marriage with Umm al
Momineen Aisha (R.A.)
1-For a bad omen, Arab considered Shawwal a month
prohibited for marriage. Sayyidah A’isha’s betrothal and
departure from her parent’s house took place in Shawwal.
This changed the ridiculous custom.
2-Another bad custom was that the Arabs did not give the
hands of their daughters to those who they “called” their
brothers (though were not actual brothers). This was the
objection raised by Abu Bakr himself, when the Prophet
(peace be upon him) made the proposal. The Prophet
(Peace be upon him) then told him that a brother in faith
was not an actual blood brother to be placed in the
prohibited category.
14-Great Wisdom behind this marriage:
Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) marriage with Sayyidah
Aisha at that age was indeed a great blessings for all the
Muslims ever since. Most of the matters related to
cleanliness, married relationship and other household
issues have been cleared due to her narrations. She lived a
long time after the death of the Holy Prophet (peace be
upon him) and continued to teach the Ummah about
matters of daily routine and great importance.
15-What was Sayyidah Aisha famous for ??
Well what was her specialty? I ask the critics.
Was it beauty?
Was it wealth?
No it was religion!Thus proving the DIVINE LOGIC.
Arwa Bin Zubair says, “I did not find anyone more
proficient (than Aisha ) in the knowledge of the Holy Quran,
the Commandments of Halal (lawful) and Haram
(prohibited), Ilmul-Ansab and Arabic poetry. That is why,
even senior companions of the Prophet used to consult
Aisha in resolving intricate issues”.
(Jala-ul-Afham by Ibn Qaiyem and Ibn Sa’ad, Vol.2, p.26)
Also see this;
Abu Musa al-Ashari says: “Never had we (the
companions) any difficulty for the solution of which we
approached Aisha and did not get some useful information
from her”. (Sirat-I-Aisha, on the authority of Trimidhi, pg.
163)
INDEED ALLAH KNOWS THE BEST!!!

MORE EVIDENCES IN THE OLD TESTAMENT ON THE
APPROVAL OF JESUS'S PRAYER BY GOD:
Bible says:
"The eyes of the LORD [are] upon the righteous, and his ears
[are open] unto their cry." (Psa 34:15)
"[The righteous] cry, and the LORD heareth, and delivereth
them out of all their troubles." (Psa 34:17)
"The LORD [is] nigh unto them that are of a broken heart;
and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit." (Psa 34:18)
Prophet David perceived the event of his son's state of
sorrow of death, and said exactly what Jesus said:
"I will call upon the LORD, [who is worthy] to be praised: so
shall I be saved from mine enemies." (Psa 18:3)
"The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of
ungodly men made me afraid." (Psa 18:4)
"The sorrows of hell compassed me about: the snares of
death prevented me." (Psa 18:5)
"In my distress I called upon the LORD, and cried unto my
God: he heard my voice out of his temple, and my cry came
before him, [even] into his ears." (Psa 18:6)
Note
Prophet David already prophesied the acceptance of Jesus'
prayer by God, right from his time. He said:
"...he heard my voice out of his temple, and my cry came
before him, [even] into his ears."
He then prophesied Jesus' departure to the heaven as both
Qur'an and the Gospel mentioned:
"And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly: yea, he did fly upon
the wings of the wind." (Psa 18:10)
" He made darkness his secret place; his pavilion round
about him [were] dark waters [and] thick clouds of the
skies." (Psa 18:11)
"He sent from above, he took me, he drew me out of many
waters." (Psa 18:16)
"He delivered me from my strong enemy, and from them
which hated me: for they were too strong for me." (Psa
18:17)
Prophet David said again:
" [But] verily God hath heard [me]; he hath attended to the
voice of my prayer." (Psa 66:19)
" Blessed [be] God, which hath not turned away my prayer,
nor his mercy from me." (Psa 66:20)
Note
These verses also confirm that, Jesus did not die on the
cross, right from the time of prophet David Allah informed
him about the answering of Jesus's prayer and divine rescue
he given to him (Jesus).
Then Bible also reconfirmed it more and more:
"The fear of the LORD prolongeth days: but the years of the
wicked shall be shortened." (Pro 10:27)
Allah said in the Qur'an:
Surah Ghafir, Verse 60:
"And your Lord says: Call upon Me, I will answer you; surely
those who are too proud for My service shall soon enter hell
abased." (English - Shakir)
Allah also says in Chapter Baqarah:
"When my servants ask you (O Muhammad) concerning me
say, I am very close to them, I hear the prayer of the
supplicant when he calls on me, therefore let them answer
my call (by obeying my commandments) so that they would
be guided (to the right path of faith)." (Qur'an 2:186)
Therefore, the above verses are pin-pointing to the fact that,
God does not disappoint the prayers of His righteous people,
but whenever they called on Him in their afflictions he
answers their supplication very quickly. The verses are also
proving to us that, Jesus' prayers for God to rescue him from
the plot of his enemies were answered by God. And thus,
obliterates the Christians dogma about Jesus' death on the
cross. The belief has no base at all. All what they follow were
just conjecture, and can only lead them to uncertainty and
confusions. In the sense that, if the request of Jesus Christ
was not answered by God as Christians want us to believe,
then the Bible is not saying the truth. And, either they
contradict Bible, or Bible contradicts their dogma. But if the
Bible is right in telling us that, the prayers of Jesus Christ
were heard and accepted by God, and He saved him from
the death, then the whole Christians who believed and
preached that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of
mankind, are not only liars but deceivers. Either the Bible is
right and Christians are wrong; or the Christians are right
and the Bible is wrong. So, ponder over it, and judge by your
self!
SO, IT MEANS PAUL'S TEACHINGS TO CHRISTIANS WERE
INVAIN, IF CHRIST DID NOT DIE ON THE CROSS AND
RAISED:
Paul said:
"And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless
and so is your faith." ( 1Co 15:14 ) (N.I.V)
Note
Based on the above solid evidences, Jesus was not even
dead, so, how will he raised from the dead? So you see the
preaching of Paul, and your faith are useless? It is not me
said it, it was the preacher of the dogma clearly said it in
1Corinthians 15:14!
Paul continued saying:
"More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses
about God, for we have testified about God that he raised
Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the
dead are not raised." ( 1Co 15:15 ) (N.I.V)
"For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been
raised either." ( 1Co 15:16 ) (N.I.V)
"And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are
still in your sins." ( 1Co 15:17 ) (N.I.V)
Note
Paul said, if really Jesus did not die and raise up from the
dead - they were lying against God. And their faith is useless.
And Christians still remained in their sins.
He says again:
"Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are
lost." ( 1Co 15:18 ) (N.I.V)
King James Version says:
"Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are
perished." ( 1Co 15:18 ) (K.J.V)
Note
Look the 1Corinthians 12:3 - made Paul to be a liar by
calling Jesus a Lord,
i.e. :
"Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking
by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no
man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy
Ghost." ( 1Co 12:3 ) (K.J.V.)
There several verses where Paul called Jesus accursed in the
book of Galatians 3:13, as I mentioned above. And kept
calling Jesus 'Lord' almost everywhere in the New
Testament. And it was not the Holy Ghost told him to call
Jesus like that, it was the Messenger of Satan's instructions -
because, in the book of 2Corinthians 12:7 - Paul clearly
explained how the Messenger of Satan was torturing him,
and giving him abundance of Revelations so that he might
exalt in the world. Therefore, the above verse 1Corinthians
12:3 vividly exposed Paul as a liar in the world of
Christianity.
In the book of 1Corinthians 15:18 Paul was trying to show to
the Christians their abode in the hereafter - because
Christians' hope was on Jesus' resurrection, and Paul told
them that: "... if Christ has not been raised,(their) preaching
is useless and so is (their) faith." ( 1Co 15:14 ), and anybody
died with a futile faith, will remain in his sins and certainly
the sins would lead him to the Hell (especially when he died
in associating Allah with other deities in worship), and he
would abide in it!
Certainly, Christ did not raised from the dead, and thus, their
faith is vain, and that their sins, still remained, till they follow
the truth, by accepting and believing, in One God (Allah) -
who is Only worthy of worship. Then believing and accepting
Prophet Muhammad as Allah's slave and His final
messenger. Then believing and accepting Prophet Jesus as
Allah's slave and His Messenger. If they believed in this,
certainly, they are Muslims. And Allah promised that, they
would never be perished in the hereafter. If they refused and
denied the truth, then the prophecy of Paul of 1Corinthians
15:18 would certainly be fulfilled upon them!

My question is that, IS CHRISTIANS' SALVATION TRUE OR
FALSE?
The following details from the Bible proves Christian's
Salvation as futile!
Paul said:
"And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless
and so is your faith." ( 1Corinthians 15:14 ) (N.I.V)
"And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are
still in your sins." ( 1Corinthians 15:17 ) (N.I.V)
"Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are
perished." ( 1Corinthians 15:18 ) (K.J.V)
So, I am going to use their Bible and prove it to them that,
they are in their futile faith - by confirming that, Jesus did not
even die, not even to talk of rising from death!
Paul (the father of Christianity) himself said it very clearly,
and was challenging Galatian people, was even calling them
fools, just because they believed that, Jesus was crucified.
Paul said:
“O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose
eyes Jesus Christ was publically portrayed as
crucified?” (Galatians 3:1) – (R.S.V)
In King James Version, the verse reads as follows:
“O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should
not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been
evidently set forth, crucified among you?” (Galatians 3:1) –
(K.J.V)
Note
Is’t not a shame to those who persistently believed that,
Jesus was killed and crucified?
Look, Paul does not only refer Galatians as fools but, any
person who believes that Jesus was crucified is also a fool.
Again vivid foolishness in the belief on crucifixion:
Paul said:
"But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling
block, and unto the Greeks foolishness;" ( 1Co 1:23 )
My Comment:
So, here he said crucifixion to the Jews was a stumbling
block! He was a liar here! Disbelieving Jews were fully happy
to hear that, Jesus was crucified, in order to be-little and
disrespect him globally, this was the reason why they wrote
it in the Bible and inculcated the dogma to the minds of
Christians for them to be pleased. And they sent Paul in
order to be preaching it among the Gentiles (Christians - as
they consider them 'fools') exactly as he said it in the above
verse i.e. 1Corinthians 1:23. Though he was sometimes
telling them the truth of the matter, but Christians failed to
understand him - because he always teach them in a
dubious manner - he will say something here and changed it
there, in the same Bible. He highly twisted the Gospel and
made it very obscured for them to understand. Consequently
Christians failed to understand him. And they blindly refused
to be taking the corrections from Muslims.
In a very corny and fashioned manner, he was mocking
Gentiles again. He said:
"Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the
weakness of God is stronger than men." ( 1Co 1:25 )
Note
Is this the speech of a believer? How can a believer relate
foolishness and weakness to God Almighty? Never! God
forbid!
He said again:
"But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to
confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of
the world to confound the things which are mighty;" ( 1Co
1:27 )
Note
So, you see what I mentioned above 'of twisting and
obscuring the Gospel'? He said "God chosen the foolish
things of the world to confound the wise" - this means that,
he was using his distorted manner of teachings (crucifixion,
the Trinity dogma, the dogma of divinty of Jesus, the divine
sonship of Jesus, the dogma of Original sin and Atonement
etc) to stupefy and confuse the Gentiles (Christians) and
cause them to be unable to think clearly. In his cunny way of
preaching and writings, he make them to believe and accept
his gospels as if it was from God, without any objections.
Consider the following:
"And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the
affections and lusts." ( Galatians 5:24 )
Note
Paul said, the Jews and Roman Soldiers who attempted to
kill Jesus, were the Christ's people, they profoundly love and
adore him, that's why they wanted to kill him. Here in a
cunny way Paul was trying to legalize their wickedness on
Jesus.
In the following verse he said Jesus made a curse for them
and said that's why Jews hanged him on the tree:
"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being
made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one
that hangeth on a tree:" ( Gal 3:13 )
Jews and Paul wrote some detestable words against God
and Jesus (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). They
said:
"And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and
of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve
him:" ( Rev 22:3 )
Note
Jews and Paul made their insertion of their agenda of
publicizing the curse on Jesus and on God Himself. God
forbid! May God curse unbelieving Jews. Amen. And see how
foolish Gentiles follow his teaching steadfastly, and even
claiming to be on the right way! A disbeliever and enemy of
God, and open enemy to Jesus, who killed several true Jesus'
followers, just overnight to bring message and said it was
from Jesus. And blindly Christians with open hands accepted
him as Saint, disciple and a messenger of Jesus! While he
openly said it was a 'MESSENGER OF SATAN' torturing him
and wanted to exalt him (in the world) by giving him
adequate Revelations. Bible said it very clearly:
"And lest I should be exalted above measure through the
abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn
in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I
should be exalted above measure." ( 2Corinthians 12:7 )
Therefore, how will you expect the guidance from such kind
of people dealing with Satan (devils) in their activities? And
boldly you come out and say you are on the right path
having the right Salvation! Think over it!
And then Paul wrote the following again which is contrary to
what is in the Galatian 3:13:
"Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking
by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no
man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy
Ghost." ( 1Corinthians 12:3 )
Note
In the book of Galatians 3:13 and the book of Revelation 22:3
he and Jews openly called Jesus accursed. And in the same
Bible (his own gospels) i.e in the book of 1Corinthian 12:3,
he was contradicting their earlier claims.
This also testifies that, what he said ealier was not from God.
Because,they clearly called Jesus as an accursed person,
(and this claim, testifies that, what he says was from Satan -
i.e. Messenger of Satan). And according to 1Corinthians 12:3,
Paul was a liar, because he preaches that 'Jesus was the
Lord,' and Holy Ghost did not teach him, but MESSENGER OF
SATAN. Precisely, he made it very clear to Christians that,
what he tells to them was a futile dogma. Shine your eyes oo!
AND THE SAME MAN WAS TRYING TO BE FREE FROM
CUNNINGLY DEVICES FABLES IN HIS SPEECHES AND
LETTERS:
"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? [shall]
tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or
unclothedness, or peril, or sword?" (Romans 8:35 )
Paul made efforts to make sure his followers remained in his
course:
"Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my
decease to have these things always in
remembrance." (2Peter 1:15 )
" For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when
we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord
Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty." (2Peter
1:16)
Note
What Paul said here was not true. Because, majority of his
teachings are deliberately invented and masqueraded false.
Now he was saying "For we have not followed cunningly
devised fables..." This very claim does not even nearly
correspond to the majority of his teachings. Therefore, it is
another crafty way of deceit, so that, nobody fits to separate
them from loving Christ, but in a mysterious and deceitful
manner. We Muslims want Christians to love Christ in a
better and truthful way but not in deceitful manner, - Jesus
said:
"If ye love me, keep my commandments." (Joh 14:15 )
" If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love;
even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide
in his love." (Joh 15:10)
And we want all Christians to copy exactly as Jesus did in
his lifetime, but not in the way these dubious people taught
in their gospels. You can only know the true activities and
sayings of Christ by either following the Gospel of Barnabas
or the revelation of God (Qur'an).
My question is that, how will they succeed by following the
false teaching in the name of loving Christ? Even if they
succeeded in misleading people in this world, they would
certainly never succeed in the hereafter. So, Be ware!
AGAIN, THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCES CONFIRM THAT JESUS
WAS NOT CRUCIFIED
IF TRULY JESUS CAME TO THIS WORLD TO DIE FOR THE
SINS OF THE WORLD, WHY DID HE PRAYED AND ASKED
Allah TO SAVE HIM FROM THE DEATH ON THE CROSS?
Bible says:
" And they came to a place which was named Gethsemane:
and he saith to his disciples, Sit ye here, while I shall
pray." (Mar 14:32)
"And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and
began to be sore amazed, and to be very heavy;" (Mar
14:33)
" And saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful unto
death: tarry ye here, and watch." (Mar 14:34)
Note
If truly Jesus came to the world and died for the sins of
mankind, why was he unhappy and lamenting unto his
death? Think over it please! And don't let to others deceive
you!
The Bible continues:
"And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and
prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from
him." (Mar 14:35)
" And he said, Abba, Father, all things [are] possible unto
thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I
will, but what thou wilt." (Mar 14:36)
" And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto
Peter, Simon, sleepest thou? couldest not thou watch one
hour?" (Mar 14:37)
" Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit
truly [is] ready, but the flesh [is] weak." (Mar 14:38)
"And again he went away, and prayed, and spake the same
words." (Mar 14:39
"And when he returned, he found them asleep again, (for
their eyes were heavy,) neither wist they what to answer
him." (Mar 14:40 )
"And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on
now, and take [your] rest: it is enough, the hour is come;
behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of
sinners." (Mar 14:41)
Note
Here Jesus called himself the "son of man" neither the son of
God nor the God himself! Shine your eyes oo!
Again, if what Jews were trying to do (i.e murder) was in
order, why Jesus called them sinners? And how comes his
death became lawful and for atoning world sins? Think over
it!
"Rise up, let us go; lo, he that betrayeth me is at hand." (Mar
14:42)
"And immediately, while he yet spake, cometh Judas, one of
the twelve, and with him a great multitude with swords and
staves, from the chief priests and the scribes and the
elders." (Mar 14:43)
"And he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying,
Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he; take him, and lead
[him] away safely." (Mar 14:44)
"And as soon as he was come, he goeth straightway to him,
and saith, Master, master; and kissed him." (Mar 14:45)
"And they laid their hands on him, and took him." (Mar
14:46)
Also in the book of Matthew 26:36-44, Jesus did the same
prayer for God to save him from the death of which
Christians were amplifying for the redepmtion of their sins. If
it is true, his death was for their sins, why did he appealing to
God, to give him protection? Think over it!
Again Jesus said:
"Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save
me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this
hour." (Joh 12:27)
Why did Jesus not agree to die for the sins of mankind as
Christians say?
Or did he forget the contract he took from heaven of coming
to die for the sins of the world, as Christians proclaime?
Certainly it seems that, the dogma does not have base!
The last and most important question:
Did God answer the prayer of Jesus or did God reject his
prayers? And where does Bible says, God rejected the prayer
request of Jesus?
The Bible will tell:
The first assurance, God gave to Jesus of answering his
prayer was to send his Angel to strengthen him, in the
following verses:
"And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount
of Olives; and his disciples also followed him." (Luk 22:39)
"And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that
ye enter not into temptation." (Luk 22:40)
" And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast,
and kneeled down, and prayed," (Luk 22:41)
"Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me:
nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done." (Luk 22:42)
"And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven,
strengthening him." (Luk 22:43)
"And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his
sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the
ground." (Luk 22:44)
Note
Now, why did God sent His Angel to Jesus when he was in a
serious agony and in excessive sweat because of the
seriousness of his request?
And why the Angel did come and strengthened him? It is a
common knowledge and experience that God always sent His
Angels to comfort his chosen prophets or Saints by telling
them that their requests have been accepted by Him (Allah),
or to help them in their situations. The following verses
confirm it:
"For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee
in all thy ways." (Psa 91:11)
"The angel of the LORD encampeth round about them that
fear him, and delivereth them." (Psa 34:7)
"[Then] Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed [be] the
God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent
his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and
have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that
they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own
God." (Dan 3:28)
Likewise, the Glorious Qur'an says:
Surah Fussilat 41, Verse 30:
"(As for) those who say: Our Lord is Allah, then continue in
the right way, the angels descend upon them, saying: Fear
not, nor be grieved, and receive good news of the garden
which you were promised." (English - Shakir)
Surah Fussilat 41, Verse 31:
"We are your guardians in this world's life and in the
hereafter, and you shall have therein what your souls desire
and you shall have therein what you ask for:" (English -
Shakir)
Therefore, the purpose of coming of the Angel to Jesus at the
time of his fear and suffering, when he was praying for the
cup of death to be taken away from him was to inform him
that his blood-like sweating prayer was accepted by God.
And if this earnest prayer of Jesus was accepted by God,
how could he have died on the cross? Never!
FURTHER EVIDENCES ON THE APPROVAL OF JESUS
PRAYER:
"Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up
prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto
him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in
that he feared;" (Heb 5:7)
The verse says, Jesus prayed to be saved from the death,
and was heard in that he feared (death) - means God
accepted his prayer and grant his request - means he was
saved from what he feared - which is death. So, if Christians
still insisted that, Jesus was crucified, then the Hebrew 5:7 is
in a serious contradiction - of which Christians seriouly hate
to hear!
Bible says again:
"Then they took away the stone [from the place] where the
dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up [his] eyes, and said,
Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me." (Joh 11:41)
"And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the
people which stand by I said [it], that they may believe that
thou hast sent me." (Joh 11:42)
Note
"...And Jesus lifted up [his] eyes, and said, Father, I thank
thee that thou hast heard me." - What dose this mean
please?
This means that, they tried but not succeeded, because God
intervened and saved him from his enemies. Thus, they were
not able to kill him, and consequently he was thanking God
for saving him from the death on the cross. Therefore, where
did Paul and his followers (Christians) found, Jesus as dead
on the cross? If they still believe that, he was dead on the
cross, so they disbelieved with the above Biblical passages,
which certainly such, will lead them to miss road of true
salvation, and enter into a dilemma, that they can never
come out of it. Again, as I mentioned above, if they still
insisted that, Jesus was crucified, then the John 11:41 & 42
are in a serious contradiction - of which Christians also
seriouly dislike to hear!
Therefore, Islamic teaching is perfectly true. Whereas,
Christian's dogma is obviously false!
Bible confirms the divine emancipation of Allah on Jesus
from the death:
"Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man
be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he
heareth." (Joh 9:31)
Note
This verse shows that, Jesus' prayers were accepted by God
of Mighty Power, because he was a true worshipper of God
and a righteous person. But, the reverse is the case in God's
enemies - their attempt was in vain, because of their evils,
and were not true worshippers of God.
Jesus also said: "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in
prayer, believing, ye shall receive." ( Mat 21:22 )
Bible also said:
"Confess [your] faults one to another, and pray one for
another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer
of a righteous man availeth much." ( James 5:16 )
Note
Jesus' prayers were very effectual and serious in Luke 22:39
- 46; and so his prayer was accepted; or is James 5:16 does
not say the truth? No! It says the truth!
Christian reader may wonder, how a Muslim can easily see
all these truth in the Bible, while its followers (Christians) fail
to see it? We (Muslims) can easily see it, because Allah
already told us everything in the Glorious Qur'an. Allah says
concerning the so-called Christians' dogma on Jesus' death
on the cross:
Surah Name: (Qur'an 4:157)
"That they (Jews) said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the
son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him
not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them,
and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no
(certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a
surety they killed him not:-"
"Nay! Allah took him up to Himself; and Allah is Mighty,
Wise." (Qur'an 4:158)
(English - Shakir)
So, you see, Allah has spoken the truth. He already told
prophet Muhammad that, Jews did not kill nor crucified him,
but it was made to appear to them as they killed him, but
certainly they did not. But Allah took him to heaven (to
Himself). So, we are the best in position to easily see it, and
notify any Christian for them to take correction and revert to
the original belief.

eyeopener: For allah commanding muslims to fight the Jews and Christians (Surah 9:29), it means he is not their God. Since I have proven to you that allah is not the God of the Jews and Christians, nothing like Hajj or Muhammad can be in the bible. The Jew and Christian God cannot recognise the operations and prophet of another god, allah.

Therefore all prophesies in the bible is referring to Jesus.

And beginning at Moses and ALL prophets, he expounded unto them in ALL the Scriptures the things concerning HIMSELF (Luke 24:27).

And he (Jesus) said unto them, these are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were WRITTEN in the law of Moses and in the PROPHETS and in psalms concerning ME (Jesus). Luke 24:44

Therefore Muhammad, Hajj or anything islamic is not and cannot be found in the bible. All of your bible references and the meanings you gave to them are misinterpretations.

THIS U POSTED HAS ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED U JUST DENY IT.........READ ALL MY POST AND REFERENCES

malvisguy212: stop twisting the scripture. Can't you for once answer question?

And the book is delivered to him that is
not learned,.... Or that knows not a book
or letters, as before, and so consequently
cannot read, having never been put to
school, or learned to read: saying, Read this, I pray thee; or
"now" (w), at once, immediately: and he saith, I am not learned; he does
not excuse himself on account of its
being sealed, but on account of his want
of learning; which shows the former was
but an excuse. In short, the sum of it is
this, that neither the learned nor unlearned, among the Jews, cared to
read their Bibles, or to search the
Scriptures, and the prophecies in them,
concerning the Messiah, and that neither
of them understood them; these things
were hid from the wise and prudent, as well as from the ignorant and unlearned
of the people, in common, and were only
made known to a few babes and
sucklings. There was great ignorance of
the Scriptures in the times of Christ, to
which these passages truly belong, Matthew 11:25.

SEE TWISTING

I PITY MOST ALL OF U GUYS AFTER ALL THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED FOR U U DENY THE TRUTH OW I ONLY LIKE U THAT IS WHY I AM TELLING U THE TRUTH IF U LIKE LISTEN I JUST DISCOVER THAT UR HEARTH HAS BEEN HARDENED U ARUED ABOUT BACA I PROVE IT FOR U I ALSO PROVE THAT JERSALEM IS NOT HOLY ND MANY OTHERS BUT U NEVER LISTEN DONT WORRY CONTINUE WITH UR DEEN AND LET WE MUSLIM DO OURS I JUST PRAY U REALISE THE TRUTH, IN TIME ALL WHAT U POSTED HERE ARE FALLACY NOT WORTH ARGUING WITH...........ATLEAST I HAVE TRIED MY POSSIBLE BEST FOR U