Monday, 31 July 2017

Muslim Reaches Out to Hindu Who Was Using Ethno-PSYOPS and the Genetic Fallacy on Muslims

A Hindu friend of mine, Farhan, goes into what appear to be Hindu nationalist ethno-centred PSYOPS against Indian Muslims. It comes across as really low stuff.

He writes:

"Why do you worship Arabs and their religion? Embrace your ancestry, you are ethnically Hindu"

Muslims don't worship Arabs. Muslims don't worship people. Muslims worship God alone. Just because Islam was revealed in Arabia does not mean it is an Arab religion - Islam is a Revelation for the whole of mankind. It's humanity's religion.

The fallacy he's guilty of here is the genetic fallacy. He's arguing emotionally against Islam due to it not being a religion Revealed in India. Whether deliberate or not, he's seemingly encouraging Muslims to look away from Islam and towards Hinduism simply because of where such a religion comes from. Let's delve into Farhan's barb further with 3 important points.

Point 1

To say Islam is foreign to the Indian subcontinent or to any other region of the world is short-sighted. "Muslim" linguistically means one who submits to God and "Islam" linguistically means submission to God.  Muslims believe Allah (God) sent messengers to all nations and there's a tradition which says Allah sent 124,000 messengers in total (to the whole of humanity) thus "Muslim" messengers would have been sent in various parts of the Americas, Europe and the Indian Subcontinent long before the revelation of the religion of Islam as we know it today with the Quran and Prophet Muhammad.

Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi writes:

Allah has mentioned in the Qur’an that He sent Messengers and guides among all people. Allah Almighty says: “ And verily We have raised in every nation a messenger, (proclaiming): Serve Allah and shun false gods. Then some of them (there were) whom Allah guided, and some of them (there were) upon whom error had just hold. Do but travel in the land and see the nature of the consequence for the deniers!.” (An-Nahl: 36) He Almighty also says, There was not any community except a Warner who lived among them.” (Fatir :24).

In his Musnad, Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal has stated that Allah sent 124, 000 Prophets, and from among them 315 were Messengers.


Those messengers that Allah sent to all nations would have included people indigenous to those nations thus there would have been ethnically Indian messengers. Think about that! This may well have been before the Vedas were written, before the Indus Valley civilization and before the Aryan invasion.

So we expect at least one, although given the size of that region I'd imagine there would have been more than one, ethnically Indian messenger (born and raised in the Indian subcontinent) preaching "Islam" (submission to Allah via pure exclusive monotheism) to people of his ethnicity and geographical location. In fact, if you think about it, many Indians will have an ancestry which will have links to such messenger/s.

To argue against Islam based on emotional genetic fallacies is unfair, myopic and, once we look at the broader picture of the Islamic tradition, it's an argument based on ignorance/myopia.

Point 2

2. Hinduism is not solely a product of India and can we really say all those living there do not have roots beyond India? What role did the Aryans play in the development of Hinduism? There is a standard story in most text books: the theory of the Aryan invasion (although there's a migration theory too). Sometime between 2500-1500 BCE the Aryans (meant something like noblemen or landlords) took over the Indus valley civilisation (around the Indus river) and eventually pushed all the way into India and Aryianised the culture. The Aryans seemed to have their own pantheon, their religious tradition was similar to that of ancient Persia.

How much influence did the Aryans and their descendants have on Hindu scriptures and Hindu philosophies?

For the Hindu nationalist this would be an issue if he's seriously going to use the genetic fallacy against Muslims and Islam.

Point 3

3. The Hindu is communicating in English, a language that is definitely not native to his ancestral region. Is he worshipping English people? Similar comments could be made about the internet, his PC, his phone, his clothes, his accent (obviously not Indian!) etc..

You see how silly the genetic fallacy can get? Surely, folks can see how unfair and inconsistent it is to use the said fallacy on Muslims and Islam.

Asked to think deeper about Islam and Muslims

Farhan's comments on Arabs

Farhan sticks continues with his psychological barbs. He writes:

"Even the Arabs call you Hindi and think you are subservient to their religion and culture"

Well this is negative stereotyping of Arabs, it's almost like he's making them out to be racists and Arab supremacists who look down on other people. Is that fair to tar all Arabs with such an unpleasant theme? No. To say Arabs are all a bunch of bigots would be like saying to Eastern Christians the Europeans consider you subservient to their religion ad culture or to the Indian that Westerners look down on you and think you're subservient to their culture.

It's stereotyping. I bet most Arabs look at Indian Muslims lovingly as their brothers and sisters. In fact, Islam teaches us how irrelevant race is:

In his famous Farewell Pilgrimage sermon, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) declared: "O people! You are all to Adam and Adam was made of dust. No Arab is to be preferred over a non-Arab except by virtue of his piety." In another hadith, he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Allah does not look at your images or your colors but He looks at your hearts (intentions) and your deeds. Creatures are the dependants of Allah and the closest among them to Allah are indeed the most useful to His dependants."

The PSYOPS against the poor Indian Muslims does not let up, Farhan goes on to write:

"Their [I assume he means Arab] history is not your history"

I think we have kind of touched on this in the section covering the genetic fallacy There we saw Islam is EVERYBODY's history as it is a religion for the whole of humanity. Messengers of Allah were sent to every race and every geographical region preaching devotion and worship to God alone.

This is such a powerful unifying thought. Think about it, God sent prophets of your race to your ancestors. I'm saddened to see some of our Hindu friends unaware of this and thus they are making statements which are not only unfair but lacking depth and meaningful insight.

God has sent a last messenger, Prophet Muhammad, with a global message. If you're a Hindu, do you know about this message? Would you like to learn about it if you have not been told about it? If yes, please see here.

He finishes off by playing a clip of Shk. Hamza Yusuf talking about the mistreatment of Indian labourers (as well as maids).

Of course, this is not by coincidence. It's linked to the other snips of ethno-PSYOPS against Indian Muslims. We must remember, labourers and maids being mistreated is certainly an issue of concern that Muslims around the world should condemn regardless of race but at the same time folks must not use it in propaganda against Arabs and/or Muslims - obviously it is only a tiny fraction of Arabs who are involved and the majority would abhor maltreatment of Indian labourers.

This propaganda by the Hindu would be akin to somebody who is not in Britain stereotyping English people as racists because of a few far right groups getting into the news here. Most English people condemn those groups and are repulsed by their racist sentiment. Likewise, the vast majority of Arab Muslims will condemn such shameful treatment, alongside Shk Hamza Yusuf. It's sad our Hindu friend in his haste misused a good deed by the Muslim scholar; who was correcting the guilty Arab Muslim brethren and warning other Arab Muslim brethren whilst bringing this social ill to the attention of the wider Muslim community in order to alleviate the problem.

The mistreatment of labourers and maids which we see on the news is a departure from Islamic teachings. Islam does not allow such mistreatment, we are taught to be just in the Quran.

O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah, witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do. [Translation of the Meaning of Quran 5:8]


Hindu lady converts to Islam

Muslim Community Respond to Grenfell Tower Block Fire in London

American Woman Goes to Saudi Arabia

Black and Arab Inter-Marriage at Time of Prophet Muhammad (p)

Black being linked with sin - not racist Hamza Yusuf

White supremacy, Abraham Lincoln and Islam

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
 

Non-Arab Muslims With Surnames Like Qureshi, Related to Quraish Tribe?

So a convert to Hinduism was having a go at an panelist, on what I assume to be an Indian news show, who was claiming to be a descendent of Prophet Muhammad. He claimed to be the 35th descended of Prophet Muhammad p. He has an Indian accent so I assume ethnically he is Indian.

The Hindu in his video response writes on a slide: "He has been lied to, he is not the descendent of Muhammad"

To say he's lying or has been lied to is a hefty claim.

Rather than accusing folks of being liars or having been lied to (by their own ancestors) how about we start thinking about how this *could* be the case? Is it possible the Indian sounding man on the news show has some sort of ancestral link to the Quraish tribe? Yes.

There would be two avenues for this man to have such a link to the Quraish tribe:

1. Bloodline. Somebody in his family tree has got to be Quraishi.
2. Marriage. Somebody from his tribe has married a Quraishi Arab man and subsequently the whole tribe/village changed their name to Quraishi.

I know the gentleman claimed to be a descendent so perhaps he did not have 2 in mind. Or perhaps he's not being accurate with his language and the link is actually similar to the type outlined in 2. Or perhaps he does have some link to somebody from the Quraish tribe as per 1.

I'd say it is plausible to think some people from this region (and others) who carry names/titles such as Qureshi or Sayyid do so out of a marriage ancestral bond  (i.e 2 above)

Some folks may have even innocently taken on such names without making any claims of ancestry:

It's possible a tribe/village were preached to by an Arab Quraishi Muslim leading to the tribe/village converting to Islam and taking on such a name. Or somebody took on such a name after he converted to Islam because he wanted a Muslim name so he could be identified with his new religious identity (subsequently this name was passed on to his progeny).

Who knows? But to say he's been lied to seems unfair.

Hindu lady converts to Islam

Paula Fredriksen: Paul was NOT a Trinitarian

Quran’ic Exegesis of al-Ikhlas as a Corrective of Trinitarian Theo-Christology by Ali Ataie

Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Why Islam
 
 

Sunday, 30 July 2017

Influences of Islam and Christianity on Hinduism, Info on Gandhi and Hindu Schools of Thought

4b Hindu doctrines, schools, and history - samsara, moksha, and Vedanta

Variations/disagreements amongst various schools of thought within Hinduism include

Whether Samsara (realm of reincarnation - trap) is real or illusory. A product of ignorance?

Disagreement on Moksha (liberation), whether it comes in degrees or whether it is all or nothing. Whether it’s attainable in this life, if not is it something that comes after the reincarnation cycle.

Moksha’s ultimate stage involves a “union” with Brahman. Two views on this:

- Absolutists believe the union is ontological (you become or realise you are Brahman)

- Theistic Hindus thin of it as a psychological or relational union with God/Brahman (essentially going to heaven, the realm where God is).

3 of the 6 orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy:

Sankhya/Samkhya school – dualists (distinguishes between matter and self). Self (purusha) is pure consciousness. There are many sleves. They deny Atman is Brahman. They don’t believe in an ultimate reality, thus this school contradicts the Upanishads. There are later versions of this school which do include God however. Liberation is knowledge of one’s true self.

Yoga school. Yoga school has been closely associated with Samkhya. It can be theistic or absolutist, thus can be centred around gaining a relationship to a personal God or centred around impersonal Brahman. Focusses on controlling one’s senses, body and mind. They recite mantras. Their goal is to attain a state of pure consciousness called Samadhi: the mind is absorbed into the ultimate or being one with it. They also believe masters of this discipline can fly, levitate, do miracles, stop their heart from beating etc..

Vedanta school – traditionally was a scriptural school (interpreting the Upanishads). It tries to systematise the teaching that there’s only one being – Brahman. It tries to clarify what it means to say Atman is Brahman. Primarily Vishnaivite. 3 main subgroups in this school, 2 biggest:

Advaita Vedanta – Non dualism (no distinction between Atman and Brahman). Samsara is illusory. To get the cure (Moksha) is to have a non-conceptual awareness that Atman is Brahman.

Visistadvaita Vedanta – qualified non-dualism (in one sense a distinction can be made). Samsara is real. To get the cure (Moksha) is to go to Vishnu’s heavenly realm to enjoy him forever.

4c Hindu doctrines, schools, and history - Islam, and Christianity, and Modern Hinduism

Impact of Islam on Hinduism. This began in earnest in 1021 when Muslims (al Ghavni) conquered northwest India

Most notable Muslim rule in India: The Mughal/Mongol empire c. 1526-1857

Possibly a quarter of the population converted to Islam. As a reaction and interaction with Islam the monotheistic views of Hindusim was strengthened in some cases. There was also syncretism, Guru Nanak is thought by some scholars to have combined Hinduism and Islam.

Christianity also had an effect on Hinduism. Big impact came with colonialism and British imperialism (1777-1947). Today 2.3% of Indians are Christian. British scholars actively preserved some Hindu texts. They brought the printing press to India. Contact with British and Indians stimulated a number of reform movements.

Rammohum Roy (1774-1833) was influenced by Unitarian Christians (non-Trinitarian Christians who happened to be modernists). He argued there was an original Vedic tradition which was later corrupted. Roy thought it was originally monotheistic, mythology free and was aniconic. Roy founded a group, inn 1828, called Brahmo Samaj – a group which tried to purge Hinduism of idol worship and polytheism. This group still exists today.

Ramakrishna movement (1836-1886). A devotee of Kali. He was a convinced religious pluralist. Ramakrishna is widely worshipped in India today. Controversial character in Western writings.

5b Hindu Practices - Gandhi's pluralism and death


Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated in 1948 by a Hindu nationalist (people who believe india should be a Hindu country – extreme proponent of hindutva, hinduness) held to religious pluralism. He opposed:

Caste discrimination (untouchability).
Sati
Partition
Communalism (basing politics on religious groupings – people voting in blocks) [There was also the problem of communal violence in the subcontinent – Gandhi tried to stop this]
Religious conversion
Child marriage

He promoted/became:

Tea-totalism
Became celibate
Experimented with brahmachariya (an attempt in eliminating all desire in the face of temptation). Part of this spiritual experiment was to sleep in bed with naked teen girls. He did not have sex with them. At some point before his death he stopped doing this. There are pictures of him with teenage girl helpers.


Screencast lectures by Dr. Dale Tuggy, for his INDS 120 World Religions - a college course surveying the traditions of Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and introducing students to the terms and classic theories of Religious Studies.

Lizzie Schofield and Hatun Tash Presenting Anti Muslim Spin to Abbas at Speakers Corner

Lizzie Schofield and Hatun Tash of DCCI Ministries claimed Muslims curse Jews and Christians in prayer 17 times a day. This is simply anti-Muslim propaganda. Surah Fatiha does not contain a curse, this seems to be intellectually dishonest evangelical propaganda picked up from Jay Smith. Here's a short response via video to Lizzie and Hatun, hopefully they will learn from this. Jay really has a lot of explaining to do. He should know he does not honour his prophet Paul of Tarsus with such tactics.


Video also uploaded here and here


Right, let’s swiftly put this this polemic to bed and highlight gross inconsistency and what appears to beintellectual dishonesty. Polemicists like Jay Smith and Pastor Tony Costa claim Surah Al Fatiha (the chapter in the Quran) is a prayer cursing Jews and Christians. They claim the last Verse of the Quran is a curse on the Jews and the Christian.

This is not true at all - read it for yourself.


Anybody with scintilla of comprehension and fairness can see that it is not a curse. A curse is when one prays for bad to fall upon a person: Muslims are not asking for God to be angry with Jews and Christians here!

Pastor Tony Costa states he finds this “disconcerting” as he shockingly styles the prayer in Surah Al Fateha as “systemic cursing of Jews and Christians” that “vilify Jews and Christians” [Timeframe 5.50] whilst Jay Smith’s team spin it as “the cursing prayer”! 

My response to Tony is that you need to actually read the text for yourself and comprehend it rather than going off what some Christian polemicist is saying on the internet. No need to feel disconcerted about Muslim prayers, Tony.

However, Tony Costa in his written work, has said Paul of Tarsus (in Galatians 1) curses anybody who does not teach the same Gospel as him:

There are such things as divine curses in the Bible where God for instance pronounces judgment on those who pervert and preach a different Gospel (see Galatians 1:6-9), or brings a curse on those who do not love the Lord Jesus (see 1 Corinthians16:22). [Pastor Tony Costa]

Here's Paul of Tarsus in his own words:

8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!


Tony Costa and his Trinitarian missionary colleagues will believe Paul’s words are a curse against Muslims, Jews, Unitarian Christians, Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons as the aforementioned do not accept the Trinitarian view of Jesus.

Tony Costa, if consistent, would find Paul’s words in Galatians to be “disconcerting” and a “systemic cursing of Jews” which “vilify” Muslims, Jews, Athests, Hindus, Sikhs, etc.

Perhaps Tony forgets what he writes in his academic work when he is in the company of polemicists against Islam? From this example, it seems, he totally forgets academic standards, intellectual integrity, fairness and comprehension skills when he puts his anti-Islam hat on.

Muslim Reacts to Jay Smith's Retirement From Pfander Films

Answering Daniel and (Lizzie Schofield?) On Shaking Hands FAO Pfander Centre for Apologetics

Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Films Indirectly Rejects the Bible and Attacks the Trinitarian Version of Jesus

Jay Smith Pfander Ministries' Theological Problem With Christian Countries and Domestic Violence



 
Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Why Islam



Saturday, 29 July 2017

Hindu Scriptures, Pantheon and Doctrines

First part: World Religions: Notes on Hinduism

3b Hindu Scriptures and Pantheon - meet the deities

There are many gods and goddesses in Hindu belief.

Amongst these there’s a grouping of three Hindu deities (sometimes called the Hindu Trinity, trimurti): Brahma (the creator) Vishnu (the preserver) and Shiva (the destroyer). Brahma is the oldest of these deities but the least worshipped of the three. Vishnu is said to have had many avatars/descents. They believe he becomes incarnate whenever the world is in trouble in order to save the world. Shiva is thought to currently be the most popular deity amongst Hindus. Ganesh (with an elephant head) is considered the remover of obstacles.

Most of the Gita is about Krishna talking to Arjuna.

More reflective and philosophically minded Hindus have a strong tendency to say all their gods are different manifestations or forms of the one god.

3c Hindu Scriptures and Pantheon - Is Hinduism monotheistic or polytheistic?

More reflective and philosophically minded Hindus have a strong tendency to say all their gods are different manifestations or forms of the one god. In modern Hinduism this monotheistic tendency is very strong. It’s possible this view is influenced by Christianity and Islam.

In some Hindu literature Shiva is the high god and Vishnu is created by Shiva. Whilst in other literature Vishnu is the high god and Shiva is created by Vishnu. Some say the high god is Krishna. Contradictory stories?

Is it monotheism or polytheism? Can be both for Hindus depending on how they view their traditions.

4a Hindu doctrines, schools, and history - Brahman, atman, and reincarnation

Occasionally in the Vedas and prominently in the Upanishads there’s the idea of an underlying unity behind all phenomena – what is called nowadays as the ultimate reality by philosophers. “This One”. In the Upanishads it’s called Brahman (the inner self of everything including inanimate objects). In some sense everything is Brahman deep down including the gods according to Hinduism. It’s described as pure consciousness , unborn, mysterious, ineffable (no human thought captures it), enduring and is expressed by the sacred mantra word Om (aum).

A disputed teaching in the Upanishads is that Atman is Brahman. Atman is one’s deep self – what is most fundamental to you.



Hindus believe humans are trapped in a cycle of reincarnation (Samsara). The goal is moksha (liberation, release) from the cycle. There are three paths to this liberation:

1. Karma yoga (action, fulfilling your duties, doing your darma)

2. Jnana yoga (mystical, nonsensory perception of atman being Brahman)

3, Bhakti yoga (devotion, surrendering to in love to a god or goddess)

[Timeframe 8.50] Scholars think this is different to the earlier Vedic religion which is seen as very ritualistic. A development? Scholars think in Vedic religion one’s soul ends continues after death, is judged and then ends up in something like heaven or hell.

In the later Upanishads the ideas of reincarnation/rebirth is taught. The assumption is that this process never began, this has always been ongoing. The law of karma determines a better or worse birth. An explanation for undeserved suffering. This belief could get in the way of motivating somebody to remove injustice and suffering in this world

Screencast lectures by Dr. Dale Tuggy, for his INDS 120 World Religions - a college course surveying the traditions of Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and introducing students to the terms and classic theories of Religious Studies.

Friday, 28 July 2017

World Religions: Notes on Hinduism

2a Hinduism - origins and social structure - India and defining "Hinduism

India is the homeland of Hinduism. The terms Hindi and Hindu have historically, at some point, referred to people from India regardless of their faith. Nowadays, Hindu tells you what religion somebody is and Hindi is referred to a language.

The term Hinduism is thought to have been coined by a British scholar in the early 19th century. It’s a term used, by the British, for non-Muslim Indians. Before the British, there was no word for this religious tradition/s. People of India enthusiastically adopted this term to describe themselves. The British at the time generally regarded traditional religions as paganism and backward.

There are some scholars that object to the term Hinduism as it makes it sound like it is like one religious tradition when it is a term referring to a family of religious traditions.

Working definition of Hinduism: The religious traditions indigenous to the Indian subcontinent, not including Sikhism, Buddhism or Jainism.

In 1955, the Indian supreme court relating to marriage laws considered Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains as Hindus. Although most people from those traditions would disagree.


Modern Hindus are mostly committed to some version of religious pluralism. The evaluative claim that all/most religions are equal/true to certain degrees. Most modern Hindus would say other religions are fine (all paths lead to the same mountain) but at the same time they do think Hinduism is superior.

2b Hinduism - origins and social structure - ancient history and Hindu origins

Ancient history of the Indian subcontinent is still unclear. There is a standard story in most text books: the theory of the Aryan invasion. Sometime between 2500-1500 BCE the Aryans (meant something like noblemen or landlords) took over the Indus valley civilisation (around the Indus river) and eventually pushed all the way into India and Aryianised the culture. The Aryans seemed to have their own pantheon, their religious tradition was similar to that of ancient Persia. Some scholars are sceptical of this standard story. Perhaps the Indus valley civilisation collapsed due to an ecological disaster. No temples have been found in their excavations around the region though. The written language of the Indus valley civilisation has not been decoded so much is to be learned. There’s a theory that the Aryans may have migrated into the area rather than entered via an invasion.

Hinduism does not have an official creed thus it contains people who would be described as monotheists, polytheists, atheists, pantheists, agnostics and so one. There’s some commonalities between the strands of Hinduism such as the belief in Brahman.

2c Hinduism - origins and social structure - the four varnas, women, and sati

Hinduism teaches people can be classified into four colours (Varnas). This is not a racial classification but of ritual purity.

1. Brahmans (priestly class) - white
2. Kshatriya (rulers, nobles, warriors) – red
3. Vaisya (farmers, merchants, traders) – yellow
4. Sudra (labourers, servants) – black

Not everybody has a Varna. There are outcasts, people without a class. The Chandalas (also called untouchables, dalits which literally means “broken”). This group is as the bottom of the social totem pole.

This is a simplification. It’s actually more complicated than this and there are regional variations

Traditional Hindus (particularly those in the higher castes) argue these distinctions were given by God and nature.The traditional justification for this caste system ties in with reincarnation and karma. Belief in karma and reincarnation is the idea that the universe is set up so that if you behave well you come back in a better next life, if you’re bad you will go down in scale (maybe even become a lower caste or animal). The justification is that people are getting what they deserved – based on previous life actions. Another justification for their four-part Varna system is in their scripture (Baghavad Gita 4.13) – Vishnu is thought to have set it up.



Place of Women in Hinduism

Code of Manu (200 BCE-200CE)

In chapter 5 in particular, women are made dependent on men in their society. They are commanded to worship their husband as they worship a god, they have to have a reverence for their husbands. They are expected not to remarry upon the death of the husband.

Hindus cremate their dead. They don’t bury them. The practice of Sati is unclear as to how widely it was practiced and some would say the practice of Sati would have been voluntary although in some cases it appears to have been forced on the women.


How Lawrence Krauss Has Misled Atheists

Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Why Islam
 
 

Thursday, 27 July 2017

How Lawrence Krauss Has Misled Atheists

Can something come from nothing. A Muslim speaker at Speakers Corner shows how Lawrence Krauss has misdirected people.



Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam


Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Wednesday, 26 July 2017

RE: "Farhan Qureshi Continually Changing his Faith"

There's an interfaith discussion featuring Farhan Qureshi and the interviewer said I said Farhan continually changes his religion. I assume he was referencing the following the comment:







Click the image to enlarge.

I do stand by this comment, Farhan has changed his approach to religion a few times. That's not necessarily something I'm criticising him for. It's positive in that he may come to Islam. However I do believe the comment is true in that he does change his approach and views to religion regularly. Ahmadi, Salafi, Sufi, Universalist and then full blown Hinduism. Farhan can email me* if he was not following any of these paths - I would not be surprised if there are more approaches to faith Farhan has taken in between especially considering somebody recently said he was a gnostic Christian.  He may say Universalism and Hinduism are the same thought patters, they aren't the same. We can get in to that at another time.







If I get time I will critique some of Farhan's comments and views, perhaps even debate him privately if I feel there will be value in it. He has been promoting Hinduism and exMuslims recently.

NOTE: I don't recommend listening to the Farhan Qureshi interview. It was very repetitive and the there was little refutation and rebuttal material to some of the views Farhan was expressing. Farhan was quite contradictory too.

*Farhan emailed me stating he never gave allegiance to a Sufi pathway. He has also stated he does not recall ever saying he was a gnostic Christian.


Farhan Qureshi - Ego or Bad Comprehension

Sam Shamoun Confuses Hindu Philosophy with Christianity: Debate "Is Jesus God?" Inamullah Mumtaz vs Farhan Qureshi

Farhan Qureshi From Ahmadiyya, Islam to Hinduism

Paula Fredriksen: Paul was NOT a Trinitarian

Wayne Grudem Shoe-horning Partial Trinitarianism into the Old Testament

Edgar G Foster: Trinity Came After the Council of Nicea

Quran’ic Exegesis of al-Ikhlas as a Corrective of Trinitarian Theo-Christology by Ali Ataie

Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Why Islam

Muslim Reacts to Jay Smith's Retirement From Pfander Films

Paul Williams sums up what Muslims think of Jay Smith and his career of  "Christian" missionary work. Hilarious!




Jay Smith Pfander Ministries' Theological Problem With Christian Countries and Domestic Violence

Christian Asks About Child Killing in the Bible - Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Blog and YouTube

Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Films Indirectly Rejects the Bible and Attacks the Trinitarian Version of Jesus

Answering Daniel and (Lizzie Schofield?) On Shaking Hands FAO Pfander Centre for Apologetics

Justin Brierley, do you Believe Jay Smith's "Hyperbole" Excuse?

Are Jay Smith and Beth Grove of Pfander Centre Radicalising People to Hate Muslims?

Refuting the Claim Petra was the Qibla Before Mecca

Christian Polemicist Jay Smith and The Christian Apologetics Alliance Debunked Again

Blog: Jonathan McLatchie, yes it is Islamophobic to say what you said...

Brief Chat on Andy Bannister's Approach to Evangelism Re Jonathan McLatichie's Facebook

Solas CPC Rebuked by Muslim

Tuesday, 25 July 2017

Jay Smith Pfander Ministries' Theological Problem With Christian Countries and Domestic Violence


 
Christian missionaries are shamefully using a possibly distorted statistic related to domestic abuse in Turkey to promote Christianity. It's a case of simplistic handling of stats and simplistic thought patterns.

The missionary group makes out 86% of Turkish women are abused domestically (highly likely this is conflated with spousal abuse which we will see later). The Christian missionary propagandist holds Islam responsible for this and then concludes the whole “country needs Christ”.

The missionary propaganda omits the fact that the Prophet Muhammad never beat any of his wives and that wife bashing can lead to an annulment of marriage according to Mufti Ismail Menk, listen to the qualified Muslim scholar on the subject clarifying the Quranic and Islamic position on the subject of wife beating at the end of this article.

As for Turkey and domestic violence, it appears there may have been some misreporting taking place through shock headlines. I’d image the Christian missionary got the statistic from an Israeli news source which stated:

A new study conducted by the Turkish Ministry of Family and Social Policies revealed that no fewer than 86% of Turkish women have suffered physical or psychological violence at the hands of their partners or family, and pursued legal proceedings afterwards. [Israel National News] 

Israel National News, stated in turn, that they got the statistic from Hurriyet Daily News. It becomes quite clear the headline statistic of 86% is quite misleading as it includes psychological as well as physical violence. In addition, the physical violence was not all spousal as it included family members (including in-laws?) and neighbours along with partners (spouses).

So clearly it is misleading to put that type of headline out there. In fact, another source on domestic violence in Turkey specific to husband-wife abuse states the figure to be 40%:

Four out of 10 women in Turkey are beaten by their husbands, according to the recent study entitled "Domestic Violence against Women in Turkey,” which has collected the first official statistics on this topic in Turkey. [Source]

Interestingly enough, 40% is pretty much on par with the respective statistics coming out of the USA.
More than 31 percent of women in the United States have been physically abused by an intimate partner at some point in their lives, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [Washington Post]

Now America is a Christian country which the missionary probably thinks has “Christ” yet there may be no significant difference between Turkey and the USA in the prevalence of domestic violence. A complete deflation of the slogan, they "need Christ"!

However, let’s look at other Christian countries which “have Christ” according to missionaries. Uganda, with a Christian population consisting of over 80%,  has a huge domestic violence problem:
A study conducted by ActionAid found that up to 70% of Ugandan women over 15 years of age had experienced physical or sexual violence. This report also found that in 2013 up to 360 deaths were due to domestic violence and out of the 1,042 rape cases reported, only 365 suspects were arrested. [Source]

For our Christian missionary friends this is a theological problem as well as Christian communities are considered (by Christians) to be “in Christ” and “indwelt by the Holy Spirit”. CS Lewis in Mere Christianity explains what Christians mean by the term “in Christ”:

“...they mean Christ is actually operating through them; that the whole mass of Christians are the physical organism through which Christ acts – that we are His fingers and muscles, the cells of His body”

This will be a theological issue for Christian missionaries. How can a society which "has Christ and the Holy Spirit” purportedly acting through it be producing such domestic violence figures in Uganda?

How about South Africa, a population which consists of almost 80% Christian? It’s not much better than Uganda:

A study conducted by the World Health Organisation in 2012 found that 65% of women in South Africa had experienced spousal abuse a year before the research was conducted. The study also showed that their partners always or sometimes used alcohol before the assault. [Source]

Westernised Christians will think Christianity forbids wife beating but is that more due to Westernisation or due to Biblical exegesis? Clearly there have been Christians in the past who did think wife beating was allowed, many of them!

Both the Hebrew Bible and Christian Scriptures contain story after story of violence against women: e.g. Dinah (Genesis 34), Tamar (2 Samuel 13), the Levite's concubine (Judges 19), Jephthah's daughter (Judges 11), Vashti (Esther 1), Suzannah (Daniel 13), and probably the persistent widow in Luke's Gospel (Luke 18) 2 . Later Christian texts also condone male violence against women and the domination of women. For example, the right of chastisement was the enforcer of women's subordination in marriage.

In the "Rules of Marriage" compiled by Friar Cherubino in the 15 th century (Bussert, 1986) we find the careful instruction to a husband to first reprimand his wife; "And if this still doesn't work . . . take up a stick and beat her soundly . . . for it is better to punish the body and correct the soul than to damage the soul and spare the body" (p. 13). Unfortunately, this doctrine has been viewed as consistent with scriptural passages interpreted to confirm male dominance over women: "Wives be subject to your husbands as you are to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church, the body of which he is the Savior. Just as the church is subject to Christ, so also wives ought to be, in everything, to their husbands" (Ephesians 5.22-24 NRSV).

Either by its silence or its instruction, the church has too often communicated to battered women that they should stay in abusive relationships, try to be better wives, and "forgive and forget." To batterers, it has communicated that their efforts to control their wives or girlfriends are justified because women are to be subject to men in all things. They have been permitted to "discipline" their wives and their children all for the "good of the family." Christian history is filled with examples of church leaders justifying abuse of women by men. Church fathers like Martin Luther unapologetically described their own physical violence towards their wives (Smith, 1911).
[Violence Against Women and the Role of Religion Rev. Dr. Marie M. Fortune and Rabbi Cindy G. Enger]

20258439_1953445408274039_7455209646199025050_n
Interestingly enough, evangelical Christians come from the reformation tradition, a tradition which was sparked by Martin Luther yet he did not condemn wife beating:

Although he disapproved of wife-beating, he did not categorically condemn it if no other means of discipline sufficed. [p13 of Luther on Women] 

In the mid-19th century, the Reverend Mr Bird considered it was the “Law of God” to allow a husband to beat his wife (in this case she was beaten for not going to church to hear Mr Bird!) [Newspaper clipping]

The Christian masses over here in the UK considered it to be a right to beat their wives:
During the 1800s wife beating was extremely common and only caused outrage if it was exceptionally brutal or endangered life. There was a widespread belief among ordinary people, male and female, that it was every man's 'right' to beat his wife so long as it was to 'correct her' if she did anything to annoy or upset him or refused to obey his orders. The editor of the Hull Packet (7 Oct 1853) remarked that wife-beating was 'being accepted as the habit of the nation'. The phrase 'a stick not thicker than his thumb' was often bandied about. [History of Women]

For hundreds of years husbands have cited an old Common Law (i.e. a law created by precedent or custom, not statutory or written law) that made it legal for them to beat their wives for various 'offences' such as lack of obedience to him. Various sources say that it was indeed once included in Common Laws or England, Wales and Ireland. [History of Women]

Again, this causes theological issues for Westernised Christians. If they truly believe Jesus and the Holy Spirit are with Christians and wife beating is wrong, then why was wife beating so common and even seen as allowed according to Christianity by so many for so long?

The same applied in mainland Europe and amongst the early settlers in American so we have two continents of Christians who saw wife beating as a right of the husband.

In Europe, squires and noblemen beat their wives as regularly as they beat their serfs; the peasants faithfully followed their lords’ example. The Church sanctions the subjection of women. Priests advise abused wives to win their husbands’ good will through increased devotion and obedience. The habit of looking upon women as a species apart, without the same feelings and capacity for suffering which men possess, becomes inbred during the Middle Ages. In a Medieval theological manual, a man is given permission to “castigate his wife and beat her for correction…”

...Bernard of Siena suggests that his male parishioners “exercise a little restraint and treat their wives with as much mercy as they would their hens and pigs.”

Early settlers in America base their laws on old English common-law that explicitly permits wife-beating for correctional purposes. However, the trend in the young states is towards declaring wife-beating illegal. One step towards that end is to allow the husband to whip his wife only with a switch no bigger than his thumb. [Source]

Mufti Ismail Menk on wife beating [from the 1min timeframe]



Our extremist Trinitarian Christian friends who are into propaganda against Muslims and Islam may want to think how you can talk about domestic abuse whilst believing Jesus allowed the severe beating of female slaves as long as they got up after a day or two:

“If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.” [Bible: Exodus 21:20-21]

I hope Beth Grove and Sarah Foster can learn from this piece too.

Christian Evangelical Propagandizes Distortion of Bill in Turkey

1 Samuel 15:3: Lizzie Speakers Corner (Paul and Lizzie Schofield)

Christian Missionaries and Pakistan's Valentines Day Ban

Hashim Corrects Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Films Website

Christian Asks About Child Killing in the Bible - Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Blog and YouTube

A Reputation for Rudeness Is Difficult to Shake Off, Ask Pfander...

Jay Smith's Pfander Films Asked to Condemn Death Threat to Muslim Apologist

Hamza Myatt and Lizzie Schofield on Violence in Bible - Unbelievable and Pfander Films Take Note

Are Jay Smith and Beth Grove of Pfander Centre Radicalising People to Hate Muslims?

Adnan Rashid Racist Abuse Condemned - Jay Smith's Pfander Films' Radicalised Viewers

Jay Smith's Student Lizzie Schofield Believes Jesus Mistreats Women in Deut 21:10-14

Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Why Islam
 
 

Saturday, 22 July 2017

Paul Williams Discusses Human Sacrifice and Forgiveness of Sins at Speakers Corner



Hamza Myatt and Lizzie Schofield on Violence in Bible - Unbelievable and Pfander Films Take Note

Hamza Myatt Preaching and Teaching Islam at Speakers Corner

Actions that lead to Apostacy - Islamqa - Shaykh ibn Baz

Muslim Complains About BBC The Big Questions - Nicky Campbell

Muslim to Head DCCI Ministries?

DCCI Ministries' Lizzie Schofield Asks Why People Call her a Bigot

1 Samuel 15:3: Lizzie Speakers Corner (Paul and Lizzie Schofield)

Christian Missionaries and Pakistan's Valentines Day Ban

Hashim Corrects Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Films Website

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam
 
 

Response to Christian Missionary Rhetoric on Saudi Arabia Apostasy Laws

Real quick, I literally have a train to catch this morning.

Lizzie of DCCI Ministries is writing about apostasy and Islam. I skimmed through her latest blog and it was ominously a “part 1”. Really hate multi-part blogs. Get all done and dusted in one go!

Anyways, I didn’t read it all. It was basically about some Saudi Arabian guy who has been sentenced to death for apostasy…in Saudi Arabia.

Who cares, we are in the West. Everybody reading Liz’s blog will be from the West. Saudis have the right to self-autonomy. If a bunch of them get together and agree upon a rule for the collective is it really a big problem?

After all, John Calvin’s Geneva had something similar in place, right? He was up for killing those deemed heretics. That was a Christian state.

There was another nation which insisted on the death penalty for apostates too — Israel.

Now, somebody (a Westernised non-thinking Christian) can get all up in arms and yell but that has nothing to do with Jesus or Christianity. Mate, the Trinitarians believe Jesus gave the rules in the Old Testament concerning apostates.

In fact the Saudis are being less violent than what Christians believe Jesus ordered. Trinitarian Christians believe Jesus (as the second person of their triune Godhead doctrine) ordered the killing and destruction of whole towns if some people amongst them called to the worship of other gods:

12“When you begin living in the towns the LORD your God is giving you, you may hear 13that scoundrels among you are leading their fellow citizens astray by saying, ‘Let us go worship other gods’ — gods you have not known before. 14In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find that the report is true and such a detestable act has been committed among you, 15you must attack that town and completely destroyb all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. 16Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the open square and burn it. Burn the entire town as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. 17Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a large nation, just as he swore to your ancestors. [Deut 13]

Lizzie winds up doing propaganda, Jay Smith type of propaganda, which is not fair. She conflates the killing of somebody in Germany, allegedly for apostasy, with Islamic apostasy laws.

Apostasy is a serious crime investigated by the state — it’s not a vigilante rule. There’s no Islamic state here so that law cannot be enacted. Listen to Dr Yasir Qadhi on this.

Lizzie Schofield also seems to be culturally unaware too. Recently, I heard Will Storr drawing a dichotomy between Eastern and Western mindsets with relation to the community and the individual. For us in the West an apostasy law contradicts that personal, individual freedom that our lives are centred around. But for the Easterner it’s not the same — the group is central. The research experiment he spoke about was quite interesting. They recorded the reaction (eye movements) of Westerners and Easterners to a fish tank. The Westerners foccussed primarily on an unusual fish and were fascinated by that individual fish while the Easterners were looking around in the whole of the tank at other fish more.

This would partly explain why we see more restrictive sets of laws in the Eastern countries with their respective Easterners generally in favour of laws which would contravene typical rights of the self in the West. China for example.

Look I’ve got to get a wash and jump on that train. In summary:

1. She conflated an alleged apostasy killing in Germany (a vigilante killing which is not allowed in Islam) with what the Saudi state does. There’s a big difference.

2. Theocracies of the past have had apostasy for theological divergence. We mentioned Christian Geneva and Jewish Israel, both basing their laws on the Bible, the book Lizzie believes to be from Jesus…

3. Lizzie is being more than a tad inconsistent. She believes Jesus allowed the killing of apostates in the Bible. She also believes Jesus will come back with a SWORD to terrorise and kill Muslims.
So that Saudi man on death row for apostasy really doesn’t matter in Lizzie’s mind because in her mind, if Jesus came back tomorrow Jesus would kill him…and all the Saudis…and me!

Another example of inconsistency below. Off to catch that train!




Notes from Sean Finnegan's interview with Patrick Navas: Is the Trinity Biblical
 
 
 
 
 

Muslim to Head DCCI Ministries?

Dear Hatun Tash

I am writing to apply to join DCCI Ministries. I have a ton of great ideas to move this new project forward in the right direction through my marketing, and multi-media abilities.

Look dear, let’s cut to the chase, your organisation needs me!

Firstly what we need to do is tweak the name of the organisation: Defend Christ Critique Islam. It sounds Jay Smithy. Almost like he named it for you. So, out goes foreign interference in our company. We’ll name our own companies, thank you very much Jay!



We need to stick with the “Defend Christ” bit. I like that bit.

As you know, there are a number of people (mainly folks with American accents) accusing Jesus of allowing the severe beating of female slaves (Ex 21:20–21), allowing the burning of priest’s daughters (Lev 21:9), ordering the killing of women and children (1 Samuel 15:3), he allowed abortion, Jesus will kill all Muslims on his return, etc..

These people are large in number, quite vocal and they carry a book called the Bible with them which they interpret through a later church doctrine called the Trinity.

Clearly Jesus Christ needs defending against their claims. I don’t believe any of those strange claims about Jesus above, do you? I can’t wait to get working for DCCI Mnistries…rolls up sleeves!

We’ve got to tweak this “Critique Islam” business.

Lizzie Schofield and yourself are reeling from that stint where Jay Smith had both of you badger some Muslims in a park and look rude, ignorant and embarrassing.

Let’s change it to “Critique Islamophobes”. We can do similar to what Rebel Media does with that…erm… Islamophobe Tommy Robinson. I’ll send both of you out to shove a camera and mic in the face of a different Islamophobe in Britain each week. Harass him/her and get all the tough questions in. We can do the same for people who believe things like Jesus allowed the severe beating of female slaves too (warning you may have to be adept at getting past church security). We’ll post the footage online each week.

Look at that, my first 30 mins on the job and I’ve revolutionised the organisation from the ground up. It’s amazing what a savvy person can do for any organisation (definitely beats the old stale stuff that was being trotted out by the brains at Pfander Ministries, go on ladies feel free to have a chuckle at your former bosses…I won’t call you disgruntled ex-employees..promise!)

I’ll do all the blogging too. I’m super keen, aren’t I? What was that Hatun? What, Lizzie is doing the blogging? Nay worries, let her work on something else. I’ve got another idea (Ahh this new guy is boss, ain’t he full of smashing ideas and enthusiasm?). What we’ll do is have two wings to the organisation.

If we truly want to professionally Defend Christ and Critique Islamophobes at DCCI Ministries we need some paper. No, Hatun, not the newspaper (was that the Sun you just pulled out? Smh.). We need some cash. Green. Funds. Dollars. Pounds. You know, the stuff Jay Smith was rolling in!

We’ll run another wing of DCCI Ministries. This wing will stand for Delicious Cup Cakes International (DCCI). I’m confident Lizzie is a dab hand at baking. Bet she loves being in the kitchen. Let her bake a load of cupcakes each week and we’ll sell them to raise funds for the main project. Between you and I, she isn’t the best writer working for DCCI Ministries. It’s me. She writes like VI Lenin. You ever read some of his work? Probably not eh? There’s no change of pace, it’s turgid, it’s er..er..let me draw it out for you…think about reading a transcription of a Jonathan McLatchie talk. You get the picture. Zzzzzzz.

PS Thanks for the job. We can discuss pay later. Just so you know, I’m not willing to get paid in rice crackers.

PPS Your first gig for DCCI Ministries is to target an old Islamophobe operating at Speakers Corner in Hyde Park this Sunday. He’s called Jay Smith, you’ll see him on a ladder yelling about Muslims and Islam from 15:00. I think you may scare him off into retirement when you turn up to grill him!

PPPS Can I have your head sizes? I’m thinking of getting a sponsorship deal in. A hijab company may be willing to sponsor you. Can you imagine that, the pair of you wearing hijabs whilst tracking down Islamophobes and giving them what for every week? 1sec, Hatun I just got a new email. It’s only Nike, they want to sponsor you with Nike Sports Hijabs!

Jay Smith’s Pfander Films Asked to Condemn Death Threat to Muslim Apologist

Justin Brierley, do you Believe Jay Smith’s “Hyperbole” Excuse?

1 Samuel 15:3: Lizzie Speakers Corner (Paul and Lizzie Schofield)

Christian Missionaries and Pakistan's Valentines Day Ban

Hashim Corrects Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Films Website

Christian Asks About Child Killing in the Bible - Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Blog and YouTube

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Thursday, 20 July 2017

DCCI Ministries' Lizzie Schofield Asks Why People Call her a Bigot


This video has also been uploaded here

In this video DCCI Ministries' Elizabeth Schofield makes bigoted comments about Muslims after asking why people on the internet call her a "bigot". I hope Hatun Tash and Lizzie will think about how they come across.


1 Samuel 15:3: Lizzie Speakers Corner (Paul and Lizzie Schofield)

Christian Missionaries and Pakistan's Valentines Day Ban

Hashim Corrects Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Films Website

Christian Asks About Child Killing in the Bible - Lizzie Schofield of Pfander Blog and YouTube

A Reputation for Rudeness Is Difficult to Shake Off, Ask Pfander...

Jay Smith's Pfander Films Asked to Condemn Death Threat to Muslim Apologist

Hamza Myatt and Lizzie Schofield on Violence in Bible - Unbelievable and Pfander Films Take Note

Are Jay Smith and Beth Grove of Pfander Centre Radicalising People to Hate Muslims?

Adnan Rashid Racist Abuse Condemned - Jay Smith's Pfander Films' Radicalised Viewers

Jay Smith's Student Lizzie Schofield Believes Jesus Mistreats Women in Deut 21:10-14

Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Why Islam
 
 

Christian Priorities: Attack Islam and Muslims Or Solve Their Sex Problem?

I am going to be frank with you, you'll be hard pressed to find Christians dedicated to trying to reduce this problem. You'll easily find Christians investing time, energy and money in attacking Muslims and Islam on and offline. Priorities?

Saudi Arabia, India and Indonesia (all countries which have been in English language press for opposition to Valentines Day) are amongst those that have the lowest rates of children born out of wedlock (1% or less).

Now compare that to the Britain where it was reported in 2013 that over 50% of all babies will be born out of wedlock in less than 5 years time. That’s the “Christian” country of Britain.

The countries with the highest rates of children born out of wedlock are historically and culturally Christian countries:

The highest rates of non-marital childbearing occur in Latin America (55–74 percent). The only other countries to share these high rates are South Africa (59 percent) and Sweden (55 percent). The range within Europe is huge: from 18 percent (Italy) to 55 percent (Sweden). Those in North America and Oceania are also high and rising, though New Zealand (47 percent) and the United States (41 percent) stand out, with more than four out of ten births outside of marriage in these two countries.

Notice which countries have the highest rates of children born out wedlock? “CHRISTIAN” countries!