Cry Baby Mohammed Says

Thanks to Thomas the Wraith

6 Responses to “Cry Baby Mohammed Says”

  1. # Anonymous english kaffir

    you need to enter it here,  

  2. # Anonymous Anonymous

    who ever has done this be ware soo or later you will be rewarded however you tight ur security around u u will be ffucked by ur son  

  3. # Blogger jonz

    Anonymous, was that a threat you little cunt? I've got your details;

    England, Bradford, United Kingdom (  

  4. # Anonymous Islamophobe

    I think more of us should complain about that person too. If it is circulated in the right places, all over blogsphere im sure there will be many who will write and complain about this offensive little cretin.  

  5. # Anonymous Anonymous

    Anonymous you are a punk!!  

  6. # Blogger M.M.S. FATAH TRADING


    The third question, an affirmative answer to which establishes
    the need of the Quran, is : Had the earlier books come to
    suffer from defects which called for a new book, which was the
    Quran ?
    In answer to this we must remember that the first criterion
    by which we can measure the usefulness of a book is freedom
    from external interference. A revealed book is superior to a
    man-made book because we can assume that the former will
    not lead us into error. God is sheer guidance. In a book
    revealed by Him, therefore, we may expect to find only light
    and truth, no darkness or error. If our conception of God does
    not imply such a trust in what He reveals, then that conception
    has no value. If communications from God also can err,
    then what ground have we for holding divine teaching superior
    to human teaching ? Belief in a book entails belief that that
    book is free from error. It is possible, however, that a book
    originally revealed by God may come to suffer from human
    interference. If the contents of a book have suffered additions
    and subtractions at human hands, then that book can no longer
    serve as a guide.
    When we examine the earlier revealed books from this point
    of view, we find them entirely unsatisfying. The followers of
    the Old Testament regard it as a revealed book. Christians
    also describe it as a Book of God, and Muslims also think that
    it was a revelation. But it is one thing for a book to be revealed,
    and quite another for that book to retain intact its
    revealed text. No doubt, all the three peoples-Jews, Christians
    and Muslims, agree that God spoke to the Prophets of
    the Old Testament. But they no longer believe, and external
    and internal evidence no longer support the view, that the
    record of the Old Testament as we possess it today constitutes
    the word of God as it was first revealed. From the history of
    Israel we learn that in the time of Nebuchadnezzar the books of
    Israel were burnt and destroyed. They were rewritten by the
    Prophet Ezra, and of Ezra we read in Jewish literature :
    "It was forgotten but Ezra restored it" [(Suk. 20a). Jew. Enc.
    Vol. 5, p. 322].
    And again :
    Ezra re-established the text of Pentateuch, introducing therein
    the Assyrian or square characters [(Sanh. 21b.) Jew. Enc.
    Vol. 5, p. 322].
    Similarly we read :
    He showed his doubts concerning the correctness of some
    words of the text by placing points over them. Should Elijah,
    said he, approve the text, the points will be disregarded ;
    should he disapprove, the doubtful words will be removed from
    the text [(Ab. R. N. XXXI V ) Jewish Encyclopaedia, Vol. 5, p. 322].
    From these quotations it is evident that the Torah, in whatever
    form it existed at the time-whether the form which Ezra
    gave to it or the form which it had received from earlier times
    -was a very uncertain and unreliable book. Its general text
    could no longer be regarded as the word of God preserved in
    pristine purity. The "Book of Ezra" is no longer included in
    the Bible as we know it today. Yet it is no less reliable than
    any of the other books of the Bible. It is called the "Greek Book
    of Ezra." In olden times it was put before the books of Ezra
    and Nehemiah. Later on Jerome, a notable Christian priest
    who was entrusted by the Pope with the task of editing the
    Bible, dropped it out of the Bible on the ground that its Hebrew
    original was no longer available. This book is described by
    some as the third book of Ezra and by some as the second book.
    In any event it seems that though this book was dropped out of
    the Bible, a great majority of Jews and Christians describe it as
    the "Book of Ezra." In verses 20-25 of the 14th chapter of
    this book we read :
    Behold, Lord, I will go, as thou hast commanded me and
    reprove the people which are present : but they that shall be
    born afterward, who shall admonish them ? thus the world is
    set in darkness, and they that dwell therein are without light.
    For thy law is burnt, therefore, no man knoweth the things
    that are done of thee, or the works that shall begin. But if I
    have found grace before thee, send the Holy Ghost into me, and
    I shall write all that hath been done in the world since the
    beginning, which were written in thy law, that men may find
    thy path, and that they which will live in the latter days may
    live. And he answered me, saying, Go thy way, gather the
    people together, and say unto them that they seek thee not for
    forty days. But look thou prepare thee many box trees, and
    take with thee Sarea, Dabria, Selemia, Ecanus, and Asiel,
    these five which are readyto write swiftly ; And come hither,
    and I shall light a candle of understanding in thine heart, which
    shall not be put out, till the things be performed which thou
    shalt begin to write (Apocrypha ; II ESDRAS, 14).
    From this it appears that Ezra and the five scribes worked
    hard for forty days in seclusion and with the help of God
    composed 204 books. In verse 44 of this very chapter we
    read :
    "In forty days they wrote two hundred and four books"
    (Apocrypha ; II ESDRAS, 14).
    From this we may conclude :
    (a) that in the time of the Prophet Ezra, who lived about 450
    years before Jesus, the Torah and the books of the other
    Prophets had become mixed up ;
    (b) that no reliable copy of these books was then in existence ;
    (c) that Ezra wrote down the books again.
    True, we are told that the books were revealed. But revealed
    only means that God helped in their composition. It does not
    mean that the text, word for word, was revealed by God.
    We learn from Jewish history that Ezra himself rejected parts of
    the text on the ground of unreliability, and that he left the final
    decision about them to Elijah. The Torah as we know it today,
    therefore, is not the Torah which was revealed to Moses. It
    is the Torah which Ezra recorded from his memory, and about
    parts of which he himself was in doubt. We should even say
    that the present Torah is not even the one which Ezra wrote,
    for Ezra wrote 204 books, and we do not find 204 books in the
    Of Ezra's memory, Christian scholars themselves express
    great doubts. Adam Clark, the well-known commentator of
    the Bible, says in his commentary (1891), under I Chronicles
    (7 : 6), that here Ezra mistakenly writes names of grandsons
    instead of sons and that to try to reconcile contradictions of this
    kind is useless (p. 168). In 7 :6 we read : The sons of Benjamin;
    Bela and Becher, and Jediael, three ; whereas in 8 : I we have :
    Now Benjamin begat Bela his firstborn, Ashbel the second, and
    Aharah the third, Nohah the fourth, and Rapha the fifth.
    Jewish scholars take the view that Ezra did not quite know
    whether a given person was son or grandson of another person.
    When this is the view held by Jewish and Christian scholars
    of Ezra's memory, how can ordinary Jews and Christians and
    other ordinary people be satisfied about the spiritual value of a
    book with as little authority as the Bible ?
    Let us now pass on to the internal evidence on the point.
    The most important and the most decisive argument in this
    connection is provided by Deuteronomy (34 : 5-6) :
    So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of
    Moab, according to the word of the Lord. And he buried him
    in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Beth-peor: but
    no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
    These verses show clearly that they were composed and
    added hundreds of years after the time of Moses. It does not
    stand to reason that God ever addressed Moses, saying,
    "Nobody knows about your sepulchre unto this day." Can
    such words be addressed to a living human being ? Can thewords "unto this day" be used in a speech addressed to him ?
    Then in verse 8 we read :
    And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of
    Moab thirty days : so the days of weeping and mourning for
    Moses were ended.
    This verse also shows that it cannot have been revealed to
    Moses but is a later addition.
    Then in verse 10 we read :
    And there arose not a Prophet since in Israel like unto Moses,
    whom the Lord knew face to face.
    This also does not seem to be a revelation of Moses but an
    invention made many hundreds of years after his death and
    entered in the Book of Moses. It is possible that it is the
    work of Ezra, but it may equally be the work of somebody else.
    For further internal evidence on the point that the Torah, as
    we know it, was compiled after the time of Moses, and that it
    contains the writings of other persons, we should read Genesis
    14: 14:
    And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive,
    he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three
    hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan.
    Compare this passage with Judges 18 : 27-29, in which it is
    said that this city which is called Dan in the book of Genesis
    was first called Laish. About 80 years after Moses this city
    was conquered by Israel and renamed Dan. We read :
    And they took the things which Micah had made, and the
    priest which he had, and came unto Laish, unto a people that
    were as quiet and secure : and they smote them with the edge
    of the sword, and burnt the city with fire. And there was no
    deliverer, because it was far from Zidon, and they had no
    business with any man ; and it was in the valley that lieth by
    Beth-rehob. And they built a city and dwelt therein. And
    they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan
    their father, who was born unto Israel : howbeit the name of the
    city was Laish at the first.
    The point is that a name which was proposed 80 years after
    Moses, could not possibly occur in the Book of Moses. It is
    quite clear, therefore, that the Book of Moses had additions
    made to it after his death and many writers entered in it their
    own thoughts and speculations.
    This sort of editing is not confined to the Book of Moses.
    Other books of the Bible also suffer the same fate.
    In Joshua 24 : 29 we read :
    And it came to pass after these things, that Joshua the son
    of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died, being an hundred and
    ten years old.
    Similarly in Job 42 : 17 it is written :
    "So Job died, being old and full of days."
    From these quotations it is quite obvious that the book of
    Joshua was not recorded by Joshua and the book of Job was
    not recorded by Job. They were instead the compilations of
    persons who came later, and who compiled these books from
    what they heard from other people. It is possible also that the
    Prophets whose teachings are recorded in the Bible collected
    the word of God as it was received by them, but the records left
    by them could not endure the ravages of time, and when they
    became extinct the people who came after wrote them again
    from their memory, and in doing so entered many of their own
    thoughts and judgements into them. Is it any wonder that
    these books, which on historical as well as on their own internal
    evidence are maimed and mutilated, ceased to give satisfaction
    to their readers ? Is it any wonder that therefore, God also
    withdrew His protection from them so that mankind began to
    look and long for a book which should be free from and immune
    to all kinds of human interference ? If even after these books
    had become contaminated, God had not revealed to the world a
    book which could be regarded as the very word of God, and
    protection of which from human interference could not be
    doubted, then we would have had to admit that God is not
    concerned to guide man and that He sows the seed of faith not
    in the soil which brings forth certainty and conviction but in
    the soil which brings forth uncertainty and doubt and that He
    wishes to confer upon belief not even the measure of certainty
    which disbelief enjoys. But can we entertain such a thought ?
    Is it worthy of God ? If it is not true, and it certainly is not
    true, that God is not concerned to guide man, then we have to
    look for the book which superseded the Bible and replaced this
    garbled and interpolated version of the word of God.  

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

Looks odd? Use Firefox!

Email drunkenblogging AT