Worshipers of False Gods Are Irrational

[iris89]

Worshipers of False Gods Are Irrational

INTRODUCTION:

The hypothesis is that worshippers through the ages are extremely irrational based on how worshippers of false gods reacted as recorded in 1 Kings 18:21-29, "And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.
22 Then said Elijah unto the people, I, even I only, remain a prophet of the LORD; but Baal's prophets are four hundred and fifty men.
23 Let them therefore give us two bullocks; and let them choose one bullock for themselves, and cut it in pieces, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under: and I will dress the other bullock, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under:
24 And call ye on the name of your gods, and I will call on the name of the LORD: and the God that answereth by fire, let him be God. And all the people answered and said, It is well spoken.
25 And Elijah said unto the prophets of Baal, Choose you one bullock for yourselves, and dress it first; for ye are many; and call on the name of your gods, but put no fire under.
26 And they took the bullock which was given them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered. And they leaped upon the altar which was made.
27 And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.
28 And they cried aloud, and cut themselves after their manner with knives and lancets, till the blood gushed out upon them.
29 And it came to pass, when midday was past, and they prophesied until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that there was neither voice, nor any to answer, nor any that regarded." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).

This hypothesis will be proven and/or disproved by contrasting how worshippers of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham react to a very provocative cartoons with how worshippers of false god(s) such as the old middle eastern Moon god act as to whether they act irrationally or rationally. This hypothesis will be proven by actual reactions of the two groups to provocative cartoons.

REACTION OF WORSHIPPERS OF TRUE GOD (YHWH) TO PROVOCATIVE CARTOONS:

Let's look at how worshippers of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham react to a series of provocative cartoon meant to anger and provoke them as shown by a newspaper article:
<<"Muslim cartoon provokes fury among UK Jews
By Marie Woolf, Political Editor
Published: 05 February 2006
An anti-Semitic cartoon in a Muslim paper, which depicts Israel's acting Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, as a hook-nosed figure wearing a giant Star of David, last night drew protests from MPs and Jewish groups.
For days, Muslims across the world have been protesting about European newspapers that published drawings showing the Prophet Mohamed. One MP accused the editors of hypocrisy.
Yesterday a newspaper published cartoons that Jewish groups say they find offensive, and US generals protested about a cartoon in the Washington Post. It showed Donald Rumsfeld, the Defense Secretary, beside a limbless soldier, but the generals said, on behalf of the normally robust Mr Rumsfeld, that the drawing was "tasteless".
The latest cartoon row centres on the British paper Muslim Weekly. Andrew Dismore, the Labour MP for Hendon, said the cartoon was "obscene" and in terribly "bad taste", and has now made a formal complaint to the paper. He added: "This cartoon depicts people in the most obscene fashion, reminiscent of Die Sturmer, the Nazi propaganda sheet. It denigrates and incites hatred towards Jewish people. I sympathise with the Muslim complaints about the cartoon that appeared in Denmark, but it is hypocritical to publish a cartoon like this."
Mr Dismore hinted that if the the paper does not promise to stop carrying artwork of that type he would make a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission. The cartoon, which appeared in last week's edition of the current affairs publication, shows world leaders, including President George Bush, President Jacques Chirac, Tony Blair and Iran's new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and a caricature of an Israeli figure meant to represent Mr Olmert. The caption reads: "The nuclear club (US, UK, France and Israel) is angry for Iran's attempt to enter the nuclear market."
A spokesman for the Muslim Weekly said the cartoon was an "evocative" caricature, not intended to offend or be "stereotypical". He said: "It's a caricature so that's the whole point of it. It's a depiction, a portrayal. If he feels it is anti-Semitic we will try to reach common ground."
Jewish groups have complained about previous cartoon portrayals of Jews that appear in the Arab press. They include a depiction in 2002 of the then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak as Hitler, with his hands dripping with blood. Another shows a Jewish devil with a huge hooked nose haranguing the Pope. The Pope says: "Peace on earth" and the Jew replies: "Colonies on earth."
Cartoonists are defending their right to lamthingy public and religious figures, even the prophet Mohamed. Dave Brown, of The Independent, said: "If there was some important strong, valid point which would have necessitated the drawing of Mohamed, then fine. The one with the turban in the shape of a bomb: the only point it makes is that all Muslims are terrorists, which is crass, stupid and objectionable."
Ralph Steadman said: "I can draw whatever comes into my mind if whatever comes into my mind is legitimate. If it does not incite violence or cause people to get hurt or endangered, I can produce that drawing and make it what it is."
An anti-Semitic cartoon in a Muslim paper, which depicts Israel's acting Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, as a hook-nosed figure wearing a giant Star of David, last night drew protests from MPs and Jewish groups.
For days, Muslims across the world have been protesting about European newspapers that published drawings showing the Prophet Mohamed. One MP accused the editors of hypocrisy.
Yesterday a newspaper published cartoons that Jewish groups say they find offensive, and US generals protested about a cartoon in the Washington Post. It showed Donald Rumsfeld, the Defense Secretary, beside a limbless soldier, but the generals said, on behalf of the normally robust Mr Rumsfeld, that the drawing was "tasteless".
The latest cartoon row centres on the British paper Muslim Weekly. Andrew Dismore, the Labour MP for Hendon, said the cartoon was "obscene" and in terribly "bad taste", and has now made a formal complaint to the paper. He added: "This cartoon depicts people in the most obscene fashion, reminiscent of Die Sturmer, the Nazi propaganda sheet. It denigrates and incites hatred towards Jewish people. I sympathise with the Muslim complaints about the cartoon that appeared in Denmark, but it is hypocritical to publish a cartoon like this."
Mr Dismore hinted that if the the paper does not promise to stop carrying artwork of that type he would make a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission. The cartoon, which appeared in last week's edition of the current affairs publication, shows world leaders, including President George Bush, President Jacques Chirac, Tony Blair and Iran's new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and a caricature of an Israeli figure meant to represent Mr Olmert. The caption reads: "The nuclear club (US, UK, France and Israel) is angry for Iran's attempt to enter the nuclear market."
A spokesman for the Muslim Weekly said the cartoon was an "evocative" caricature, not intended to offend or be "stereotypical". He said: "It's a caricature so that's the whole point of it. It's a depiction, a portrayal. If he feels it is anti-Semitic we will try to reach common ground."
Jewish groups have complained about previous cartoon portrayals of Jews that appear in the Arab press. They include a depiction in 2002 of the then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak as Hitler, with his hands dripping with blood. Another shows a Jewish devil with a huge hooked nose haranguing the Pope. The Pope says: "Peace on earth" and the Jew replies: "Colonies on earth."
Cartoonists are defending their right to lamthingy public and religious figures, even the prophet Mohamed. Dave Brown, of The Independent, said: "If there was some important strong, valid point which would have necessitated the drawing of Mohamed, then fine. The one with the turban in the shape of a bomb: the only point it makes is that all Muslims are terrorists, which is crass, stupid and objectionable."
Ralph Steadman said: "I can draw whatever comes into my mind if whatever comes into my mind is legitimate. If it does not incite violence or cause people to get hurt or endangered, I can produce that drawing and make it what it is."
[source - The Online Edition Independent, Sunday 05/2006]">>

The rational reaction to these provocative anti-Jewish cartoons was rational. Why? Because the Jews are worshippers of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham even though they were not always faithful to him. The reaction can be summarized as follows, <<" The latest cartoon row centres on the British paper Muslim Weekly. Andrew Dismore, the Labour MP for Hendon, said the cartoon was "obscene" and in terribly "bad taste", and has now made a formal complaint to the paper. He added: "This cartoon depicts people in the most obscene fashion, reminiscent of Die Sturmer, the Nazi propaganda sheet. It denigrates and incites hatred towards Jewish people.">>. As can be seen the reaction was one of rational people, and not an irrational reaction such as the reaction of 1 Kings 18:27-29, " And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.
28 And they cried aloud, and cut themselves after their manner with knives and lancets, till the blood gushed out upon them.
And it came to pass, when midday was past, and they prophesied until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that there was neither voice, nor any to answer, nor any that regarded." (AV).

REACTION OF WORSHIPPERS OF FALSE GOD(S) TO PROVOCATIVE CARTOONS:

Let's look at how worshippers of false god(s), such as the old middle eastern Moon god, react to a series of provocative cartoon meant to anger and provoke them as shown by a newspaper article. We will look at several newspaper accounts of their reactions:

First, <<" DAMASCUS, Syria - Several thousand Syrian demonstrators set the Danish and the Norwegian embassies on fire on Saturday to protest at the publishing of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad by European newspapers. The protest marked an escalation in the Muslim world's uproar over the cartoons, which have been reprinted in a number of European publications. One depicted Prophet Mohammad wearing a turban resembling a bomb. The fire badly damaged the Danish embassy's building, a Reuters witness said. Firefighters put out the blaze.
[source - Embassies torched as cartoon furor grows by Reuters]">>

Second, <<"'Cartoons Infused Muslims With a Spirit of Defiance'
Arab News
JEDDAH, 4 February 2006 - An influential imam of the Grand Mosque in Makkah proclaimed a new spirit of defiance among Muslims after worldwide protests over cartoons denigrating the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in European newspapers.
"A great new spirit is flowing through the body of the Islamic Ummah... The world can no longer ignore this Ummah and its feelings," Saleh Bin-Humaid said while delivering his Friday sermon.
"The nation has worked hard in support of its Prophet Muhammad in recent days. It is the right of every Muslim to show joy at this defense of our beloved Prophet," he told hundreds of thousands of faithful who packed the Grand Mosque.
Bin-Humaid commended the leading role played by Saudi Arabia in campaigns protesting the provocative cartoons. The Kingdom withdrew its ambassador to Denmark, saying the government had not done enough to assuage anger over the cartoons published last September in the Jyllands-Posten newspaper.
...
Flemish newspapers yesterday printed a slew of cartoons of the Prophet, including those published by Jyllands-Posten. "Right for Satire," said a front-page headline in Het Nieuwsblad. An editorial in the newspaper called the outcry over the cartoons an attack on freedom of expression.
[source - Arab News - The Middle East's Leading English Language Daily]">>

Third, <<" Syria voices regret over embassy attacks
DAMASCUS - Syria voiced its regret over attacks against the Danish and Norwegian diplomatic missions in Damascus by angry mobs protesting at cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed as a terrorist. Crowds stormed the buildings housing two embassies on Saturday, setting fire to both and pillaging the contents of the first-floor office of the Chilean embassy in one of the buildings. "The foreign ministry expresses its regret over the acts of violence which accompanied the protests yesterday, which caused damage to embassies in Damascus," the ministry said in a statement.
[source - AFP via Yahoo! News on 02/05/2006]">>

Fourth, <<" BEIRUT, Lebanon - Thousands of Muslims rampaged Sunday in Beirut, setting fire to the Danish Embassy, burning Danish flags and lobbing stones at a Maronite Catholic church as violent protests over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad spread from neighboring Syria. Troops fired bullets into the air and used tear gas and water cannons to push the crowds back after a small group of Islamic extremists tried to break through the security barrier outside the embassy. Flames and smoke billowed from the building. Security officials said at least 30 people were injured.
[source - Associated Press 12:00 AM, 02/05/2006]">>

These newspaper accounts speak for themselves with respect to the very irrational reaction of worshippers of the old middle eastern Moon god. The worshippers of this false god are attacking even individuals and groups, such as the Maronite Catholic church that have absolutely NO connection to the provocative cartoons they are objecting to.

CONCLUSION:

The very irrational acts and reactions of false god(s) of ancient times as shown in 1 Kings 18:21-29, previously quoted, and the present day very irrational acts and reactions clearly prove the hypothesis that worshippers of false god(s) do NOT react rational. Even over thousands of years, worshippers of false god(s) remain the same; to wit, reacting very irrational to the slightest provocation.

Whereas, the worshippers of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham do not react irrationally to the slightest provocation even though it is the exact same type of provocative thing, i.e., provocative cartoons. Clearly there is a major difference in the reactions of the two groups. The worshippers of false god(s) react violently and very irrationally; whereas, the worshippers of the true God (YHWH) react very rationally.

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

[iris89]

False God Worshippers Irrational

INTRODUCTION:

As Time Magazine writer Andrew Sullivan put it,

A Danish paper, a while back, had commissioned a set of cartoons depicting the fear that many writers and artists in Europe feel when dealing with the subject of Islam. To Western eyes, the cartoons were not in any way remarkable. In fact, they were rather tame. One showed Muhammad with his turban depicted as a bomb--not exactly a fresh image to describe Islamic terrorism. Another used a simple graphic device: it showed Muhammad surrounded by two women in full Muslim garb, their eyes peering out from an oblong space in their black chadors. And on Muhammad's face there was an oblong too, blacking out his eyes. The point was that Islam has a blind spot when it comes to women's freedom. Crude but powerful: exactly what a political cartoon is supposed to be[source - Time Magazine.

Now we all know what a how rational individuals respond even to the most provocative cartoons. I have friends of mine who are Jewish and the Arab press daily subjects them to depraved provocative cartoons and they react in a rational way. Why? Because the worship the true God (YHWH) of Abraham and NOT some false puppet god(s) of Satan the Devil, such as the celestial old middle eastern Moon god, 'Allah.' But worshippers of false god(s) do not react rationally to provocative cartoons and/or their own failure. Let's first look at ancient history, and then current events with respect to the very irrational behavior of worshippers of false, mythical, god(s).

ANCIENT EXAMPLE OF IRRATIONAL BEHAVIOR OF WORSHIPPERS OF FALSE GOD(S):

Let's consider 1 Kings 18:21-29, " And Elijah drew near unto all the people, and said--How long are ye limping on the two divided opinions? If, Yahweh, be GOD, follow, him, but, if, Baal, follow, him. But the people answered him, not a word.
22 Then said Elijah unto the people--I, am left, Yahweh's, only, prophet,--but, the prophets of Baal, are four hundred and fifty men.
23 Let there be given us, therefore, two bullocks, and let them choose for themselves one bullock, and cut it in pieces, and lay it upon the wood, but, fire, shall they not put,--then, I, will make ready the other bullock, and place upon the wood, but, fire, will I not put.
24 Then shall ye call on the name of your god, and, I, will call on the name of Yahweh, and it shall be, the God that respondeth by fire, he, is GOD. And all the people responded--Well spoken!
25 Then said Elijah to the prophets of Baal--Choose for yourselves one bullock, and make ye ready, first, for, ye, are many,--and call ye on the name of your god, but, fire, shall ye not put.
26 So they took the bullock which was given them, and made ready, and called on the name of Baal--from the morning even until the noon, saying--O Baal! answer us. But them was no voice, nor any that answered. And they leaped about by the altar which had been made.
27 And it came to pass, at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said--Cry with a loud voice, for, a god, he is, either he hath, a meditation, or an occasion to retire, or he hath, a journey,--peradventure, he, sleepeth, and must be awaked.
28 And they cried, with a loud voice, and cut themselves, after their custom, with swords, and with lances,--until the blood gushed out upon them.
29 And so it was, when noon was passed, that although they prophesied until the offering up of the evening gift, yet was there no voice nor any that answered, nor any that hearkened." (Rotherham Bible; RB).

Clearly shows how very irrational worshipers of false god(s) acted in ancient times around 1040 to 1580 BCE. Now let's look at modern times, the first part of February 2006.

MODERN EXAMPLE OF IRRATIONAL BEHAVIOR OF WORSHIPPERS OF FALSE GOD(S) AND CONCLUSION:

Let's ratchet the clock forward to our day and a statement by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said violence triggered by the publication of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad isn't justified and called on Muslims to refrain from more attacks on Nordic diplomatic missions after protests in Lebanon, Syria and other Islamic nations.
Crowds yesterday set fire to the Danish consulate in Lebanon's capital, Beirut, a day after the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Syria's capital, Damascus, were attacked. Protests have taken place in recent days in countries including Indonesia, home to the world's largest Muslim population.
``Such resentment cannot justify violence, least of all when directed at people who have no responsibility for, or control over, the publications in question,'' [source - UN Web Site by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan]

And,

Muslim Anti-Cartoon Clashes Turn Deadly
KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghan security forces opened fire on demonstrators Monday, leaving at least four dead, as increasingly violent protests erupted around the world over published caricatures of Islam's Prophet Muhammad. European and Muslim politicians pleaded for calm. The worst of the violence was outside Bagram, the main U.S. base in Afghanistan, with Afghan police firing on some 2,000 protesters as they tried to break into the heavily guarded facility, said Kabir Ahmed, the local government chief. [source - AP - on 02/06/2006]

Now it is readily apparent that worshippers of false god(s) have not changed, but remain very irrational with regard to trivia's. As seen above, even the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has acknowledged this fact. Rational individuals do NOT COMMIT serious criminal acts over a cartoon and/or kill people. Look at the Jews, the Arab papers regularly post very provocative anti-Sematic cartoons, but when did you seen any of them react very irrational to a mer cartoon? Never. Sure says a lot about the worshippers of false god(s) does it not?

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

[iris89]

Two Wrongs Do Not A Do Not Make A Right

INTRODUCTION:

The present furor over cartoons published in Jyllands-Posten newspaper raise some very serious issues.

First, Why did the Jews remain rational and calm all these years with respect the very nasty and vulgar provocative cartoons against them published in Muslim newspapers?

Second, Why did Muslims who have been publishing very nasty and vulgar provocative cartoons against others arc so insane and irrational when Jyllands-Posten newspaper published 12 very tame cartoons against them? Seems like they feel it is alright to vehemently attack others with very nasty and vulgar provocative cartoons, but it's a real NO-NO for others to do likewise to them and this with even very tame cartoons.

Third, One Muslim nation is even planning an anti-Jewish cartoon campaign, probably with very nasty and vulgar provocative cartoons. Yet the reality is that the Jews had nothing to do with the cartoons published in Jyllands-Posten newspaper. So what is the rational for this? It is completely irrational behavior to do such a thing, attack a third party over tame cartoons they did not like. Hum this is getting absurd.

Fourth, The strange fact that, <<" the Egyptian Newspaper El f*gr published 6 of the Muhammad cartoons during Ramadan with no apparent adverse reaction.">> [source - www.jp.dk/english_news/artikel:aid=3548386/ ]

Why this provoked no reaction is difficult to contemplate.

PROVOCATIVE CARTOON THROWING BY MUSLIM NEWSPAPERS:

For many years, Muslim newspapers have been publishing very nasty and vulgar provocative vile cartoons against the Jews, the sovereign nation of Israel, and many others, but since this was Muslims doing the wrong against none Muslims, they considered this okay. In other words, Muslims newspapers like to taunt others with vile cartoons, but consider it the gravest of offense for anyone to dare to do likewise to them even in a very tame way. This is of course definitely NOT fair play nor freedom of the press. Fair play means you treat others as you want to be treated and in a civil and considerate way.

Now if they, Muslim publications, did not treat others according to the rule of fair play, what right do they have to expect others NOT to treat them in kind? Regularly anti-Christian vile cartoons have been appearing in the same Muslim publications. Now when did anyone see either Christians, either genuine (true) Christians or apostate (counterfeit) Christians, and/or Jews committing criminal acts against the property of Muslims over this? When did any of these three groups ever riot over the vile cartoons of Muslim publications? NEVER.

Why did they not turn to violence and crime with regard to the vile cartoons of Muslim newspapers? Simple, while they many not have liked the cartoons, they saw NO reason to act completely insane and irrational over them. Why? Maybe, and this applies even to the apostates, they remained rational individuals not given to insane and criminal acts.

The Muslim World League (MWL) called on UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to activate international laws against insolence toward religion, but said nothing about the extreme insolence toward religion of others shown by their own Muslim newspapers for many years. Now is this NOT a double standard?

<<" It has also been pointed out that cartoons in the Arab and Islamic press "demonising" Jews and Israelis are common.">>[source - Q&A: The Muhammad cartoons row," BBC News, 3 February 2006. ]. And, <<" The latest cartoon row centres on the British paper Muslim Weekly. Andrew Dismore, the Labour MP for Hendon, said the cartoon was "obscene" and in terribly "bad taste", and has now made a formal complaint to the paper. He added: "This cartoon depicts people in the most obscene fashion, reminiscent of Die Sturmer, the Nazi propaganda sheet. It denigrates and incites hatred towards Jewish people. I sympathise with the Muslim complaints about the cartoon that appeared in Denmark, but it is hypocritical to publish a cartoon like this."

Mr Dismore hinted that if the the paper does not promise to stop carrying artwork of that type he would make a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission. The cartoon, which appeared in last week's edition of the current affairs publication, shows world leaders, including President George Bush, President Jacques Chirac, Tony Blair and Iran's new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and a caricature of an Israeli figure meant to represent Mr Olmert. The caption reads: "The nuclear club (US, UK, France and Israel) is angry for Iran's attempt to enter the nuclear market."

A spokesman for the Muslim Weekly said the cartoon was an "evocative" caricature, not intended to offend or be "stereotypical". He said: "It's a caricature so that's the whole point of it. It's a depiction, a portrayal. If he feels it is anti-Semitic we will try to reach common ground."
Jewish groups have complained about previous cartoon portrayals of Jews that appear in the Arab press. They include a depiction in 2002 of the then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak as Hitler, with his hands dripping with blood. Another shows a Jewish devil with a huge hooked nose haranguing the Pope. The Pope says: "Peace on earth" and the Jew replies: "Colonies on earth.">> [source - The Online Edition Independent, Sunday 05/2006].

IRRATIONAL REACTIONS TO A RATHER TAME SET OF 12 CARTOONS BY A DANISH NEWSPAPER:

Now we have seen that Muslim papers have posted for many years very vile, nasty provocative cartoons against others, but now Muslims when some none Muslim newspaper publishes some rather tame cartoons that offend them do not react rationally as did their victims for many years. They react in an insane irrational manner completely without common sense and/or reason. Let's look briefly at this unconscionable irrational reaction.

<<" Violence, fatwas and online anti-Jew images: a world of protests

The ferocious Muslim protests at the publication of the cartoons in the European press escalated into a global phenomenon at the weekend. The violence appeared likely to intensify despite calls for restraint from some leading clerics. Denmark, where cartoons of the prophet Mohammed first appeared in September, was the main target of arson, threats and calls for an economic boycott.

Syria, On Saturday protesters in the capital, Damascus, set fire to the Danish and Norwegian embassies. The Swedish embassy, in the same building as the Danish mission, was damaged. Protesters also tried to storm the French embassy but were held off by riot police. No diplomats were injured. The Danish and Norwegian foreign ministries advised citizens to leave Syria as soon as possible. Last night the Syrian foreign ministry said it "expresses its regret regarding the violent acts which accompanied the protests and caused material damage at some embassies".">> [source - Owen Bowcott, Monday February 6, 2006, The Guardian (UK)]

Now, not was the reaction to some rather tame provocative cartoons insane and very irrational, but most of the anger was directed at individuals and institutions and groups that had absolutely NOTHING to do with the publication of the cartoons; to wit, the Danish government for permitting freedom of the press, other governments for reasons that does not even make sense, and at the Jews who in no way were connected to the cartoons. In fact, as previously mentioned, the Jews have been the victim of some very vile and nasty cartoons by the very same groups that go insane when some one gives them back some of what they have been doing to others for years, and that in a very tame version. I guess the motto is throw vile cartoons at others, but let not they even throw the tamest of cartoons at us.

CONCLUSION:

Muslims who for years have been throwing the most vile and nasty cartoons at others and feeling that is their right with regard to freedom of their press do NOT WANT TO permit the same freedom of the press of others even when it involves some very tame cartoons. Why? Because it appears many Muslims have no respect for the rights of others, and do not know how to act rationally, and this incident clearly proves this.

All should realize the right to satire if it is funny and not vile. One Finish newspaper made this point with respect this right, <<""Right for Satire," said a front-page headline in Het Nieuwsblad. An editorial in the newspaper called the outcry over the cartoons an attack on freedom of expression.">>
[source - Arab News - The Middle East's Leading English Language Daily]

When nations even apologize for the insane irrational behavior of some of their citizens, it shows things are out of hand, <<" Syria voices regret over embassy attacks... "The foreign ministry expresses its regret over the acts of violence which accompanied the protests yesterday, which caused damage to embassies of Chile and other countries in Damascus," the ministry said in a statement.">>
[source - AFP via Yahoo! News on 02/05/2006]

Appendix:

Some anti-Jew Muslim cartoons:

www.christadelphians.com/israel/arabtoon6.gif
www.christadelphians.com/israel/arabtoon5.gif
www.christadelphians.com/israel/arabtoon4.gif
mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/AELcartoon1.jpg
www.judeoscope.ca/IMG/jpg/ael-110x94.jpg

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

[iris89]

A Commentary On Insane Irrationality Over Silly Cartoons and Who Is Responsible For It:

FIRST, Let's face it, any grown-up or group of grown-ups that would go insanely irrational over silly cartoons is only grown-up in size and age, but is mentally a very immature person or group of persons. Now why would any so called grown-up act so insane? Only because he/she is a worshipper of false god(s) such as the old middle eastern Moon god, 'Allah,' one of the Celestian puppet god(s) of Satan the Devil. Let's look at the facts in brief:

In Arabia, the sun god was viewed as a female goddess and the moon as the male god. As has been pointed out by many scholars such as Alfred Guilluame, the moon god was called by various names, one of which was Allah! [source - Islam: Muhammad, and His Religion, New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1958 p. 7].

The name Allah was used as the personal name of the moon god, in addition to other titles that could be given to him.

Allah, the moon god, was married to the sun goddess. Together they produced three goddesses who were called "the daughters of Allah." These three goddesses were called Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat.

The daughters of Allah, along with Allah and the sun goddess were viewed as "high" gods. That is, they were viewed as being at the top of the pantheon of Arabian deities.

"Along with Allah, however, they worshipped a host of lesser gods and "daughters of Al-lah" [source - Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend, I:61]

Worshippers of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham do not act that way over silly cartoons, so get a dose of reality!

SECOND, Now here is my comment on a post out on the internet that I shall use to clarify the situation with respect who should be punished and why:

Gwladys Fouché
Monday February 6, 2006

Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that have caused a storm of protest throughout the Islamic world, refused to run drawings lamthingying Jesus Christ, it has emerged today.
The Danish daily turned down the cartoons of Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.

In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to Jyllands-Posten.
Zieler received an email back from the paper's Sunday editor, Jens Kaiser, which said: "I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."

The illustrator said: "I see the cartoons as an innocent joke, of the type that my Christian grandfather would enjoy."

"I showed them to a few pastors and they thought they were funny."

But the Jyllands-Posten editor in question, Mr Kaiser, said that the case was "ridiculous to bring forward now. It has nothing to do with the Muhammad cartoons.
"In the Muhammad drawings case, we asked the illustrators to do it. I did not ask for these cartoons. That's the difference," he said.

"The illustrator thought his cartoons were funny. I did not think so. It would offend some readers, not much but some."

The decision smacks of "double-standards", said Ahmed Akkari, spokesman for the Danish-based European Committee for Prophet Honouring, the umbrella group that represents 27 Muslim organisations that are campaigning for a full apology from Jyllands-Posten.

Jens Kaiser, the Sunday editor, but NOT for the reasons that any of you may agree or disagree with his actions. For example, the political and religious satire cartoons published in various south Florida newspapers for their humor and people living in south Florida do NOT get 'wrapped up' in them. When the readers of a particular publication no longer find them interesting and/or humorous then a paper would be well advised NOT to publish them.

I have no objections to cartoons meant to be humorous for their INTENDED audience. For example, I am quite sure readers of newspapers in the middle east, Indonesia, Nigeria, etc. would not find the cartoons about Florida's governor Jeb Bush humorous and if I were a newspaper editor in those areas, I would definitely not publish them! Cartoon humor depends on the audience so stop being childish.

With respect the tame provocative cartoons about a prophet, the general audience in Denmark probably found them quite humorous; whereas, they would NOT find the ones about Christ humorous. What one culture finds humorous is NOT necessarily what another culture finds humorous. Now if one is posting on the Interned, a world wide medium, they should only post what almost all cultures will find humorous. Why? Every culture has its own type of humor, take the English, they love hyperbole; whereas, I can NOT stand it do to my Arab-Spanish upbringing. I find NO humor in it.

The Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, published strictly for a Danish audience, and not on a middle eastern or world wide media. Now if anyone should be punished and/or apologize it should be the individual who intentionally took the tame provocative cartoons to another area to stir up trouble. I feel he should be tried for high treason by the world community, the UN, as he did so with the intent of causing unrest/harm as he knew, or should have known, that some groups, due to being worshippers of false god(s) other than the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, react in a very insane irrational way. So let's get realistic.

As I previously said, worshippers of false god(s) have always reacted insanely and irrationally, take a look at what I previously posted.

The very irrational acts and reactions of false god(s) of ancient times as shown in 1 Kings 18:21-29, previously quoted, and the present day very irrational acts and reactions clearly prove the hypothesis that worshippers of false god(s) do NOT react rational. Even over thousands of years, worshippers of false god(s) remain the same; to wit, reacting very irrational to the slightest provocation.

Whereas, the worshippers of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham do not react irrationally to the slightest provocation even though it is the exact same type of provocative thing, i.e., provocative cartoons. Clearly there is a major difference in the reactions of the two groups. The worshippers of false god(s) react violently and very irrationally; whereas, the worshippers of the true God (YHWH) react very rationally.

THIRD, The following was found out on the Internet and shows how absurd some of the conspiracy theories are that worshippers of false god(s) put forth.

Flemming Rose, the cultural editor responsible for the offensive anti-Muslim cartoons, on a trip to Estonia. Rose is a supporter of the Zionist "clash of civilizations" promoted by the Neo-Con Daniel Pipes.

First, this claim has NOT been substantiated.

Second, If true, this gentlemen would be guilty of hate speech if he published the tame provocative cartoons with the intent of inciting wrong action, but I have seen zero evidence of this as he did NOT send them to any area out of Denmark, i.e., the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, is ONLY published for a Danish audience and NOT a world wide audience.

Third, As I have said previously in this article, the individual that took them to the middle east for the purpose of inciting wrong acts, in my way of thinking, is like the evil individual that would yell "FIRE" in a crowded confined place and cause a stampede that resulted in the deaths of others. This individual who intentionally took the tame provocative cartoons to another area with the intent to stir up trouble should be tried and punished. I feel he should be tried for high treason by the world community, the UN, as he did so with the intent of causing unrest as he knew, or should have known.

Fourth, The entire affair is mass insanity and irrationality whipped up by a person who lacked love, and just wanted to stir up and cause much trouble.

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

[iris89]

Worshippers of False God(s) Through The Ages Always React In Insanely Irrational Ways:

INTRODUCTION:

Since 1 Kings 18:25-29, "And Elijah said unto the prophets of Baal, Choose you one bullock for yourselves, and dress it first; for ye are many; and call on the name of your gods, but put no fire under. 26 And they took the bullock which was given them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered. And they leaped upon the altar which was made. 27 And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked. 28 And they cried aloud, and cut themselves after their manner with knives and lancets, till the blood gushed out upon them. 29 And it came to pass, when midday was past, and they." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).

Now days the worshippers of the old middle eastern Moon god, "Allah/Hubal al'iah/Baal," now days want cartoonist put to death for drawing a cartoon they do not like. Let's look at the facts.

THE CURRENT WORLD:

Which world are we living in that people get killed, embassies bombed, riots the world over for the cartoon on the right hand side? Let's look at the writing of another on the subject.

I have to say in all seriousness the more I read the views of Muslims protesting cartoons the more shocked I become, of all the nonsense being perpetrated on the world by Muslims, there has not been one organized protest against the suicide bombings outside of the west, [Muslims miss the point entirely - just because your feelings get hurt by (and let me emphasize this) INK ON PAPER doesn't mean you get to ban free speech, this contradicts any and every constitution in Europe].

If you don't like the cartoons, then change your actions so the cartoons have no point, this is the point of satire, if the satire is a lie, you can sue for libel, go through the proper channels and prove the satire false, why for the love of God don't Muslims prove the cartoons are libelous?

The reason many and I reiterate MANY find the cartoons NON OFFENSIVE, are they expose and satirize precisely what Muslims are doing in Iraq, they are bombing people, ergo prophet is drawn with a bomb.

If this weren't true, then the cartoons would miss the mark.

Besides, these cartoons were already published in September, 2005 in Denmark - and a few weeks later IN EGYPT (which we all know is a Muslim nation) and there were no riots.

The riots started when a frustrated Danish imam who wants to prove how important he is called his friends and began circulating the cartoons - plus new ones that THEY added. Their additions also "defamed" Mohammed - even though one is already proven to be o***uy at a *** contest in France- NOTHING to do with Mohammed at all, except in the mind of the imams-- which means that THEY ARE THE ONES THAT ARE DEFAMING MOHAMMED.[source - an anonymous author]

THE DISTORTION OF REALITY AND COMMON SENSE BY WORSHIPPERS OF FALSE GODS:

Here in their own words of one Muslim URL.

Asslam-o-alaikum!!! (Muslims). On the behalf of Muslim Ummah, We ********.com staff, strongly condemns the publishing of blasphemous sketches of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w) in Danish, Norwegian, Italian and French newspapers. It is the supreme responsibility of every Muslim to respect for the sanctity and dignity of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w); and who so ever pass derogatory remarks against Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w); IS LIABLE TO DEATH. We record our statement to the concerned Governments that they SHOULD MAKE THOSE CULPRITS SENTENCE TO DEATH. Moreover we strongly appeal from the Muslim Ummah to boycott socially and economically from such affiliated countries.

CONCLUSION:

Now as can be clearly seen worship of false god(s); to wit, the old middle eastern Moon god, "Allah/Hubal al'iah/Baal," have not changed in three thousand years. Whereas, the worshipers of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham do not act insanely irrational over trivia's. In fact Islam is even warring on itself as shown by the following:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Sunnis and Shiites traded bombings and mortar fire against mainly religious targets in Baghdad well into the night Tuesday, killing at least 68 people a day after authorities lifted a curfew that had briefly calmed a series of sectarian reprisal attacks. At least six of Tuesday's attacks hit clearly religious targets, concluding with a car bombing after sundown at the Shiite Abdel Hadi Chalabi mosque in the Hurriyah neighborhood that killed 23 and wounded 55. [source - Associated Press on 02/28/2006 AP - at 5:00 pm]

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

[iris89]

Islam Does Not Understand The Bible Who Really Is Their God

INTRODUCTION:

Members of Islam are so busy throwing figurative stones at the Bible that they fail to see that their holy book, the Quran, is nothing but a distorted knockoff of the Bible with Arabian tradition and some items from the Talmud, Babylon or eastern, thrown in. A strong hint of this fact is found at Sura 3:48, "And He will teach him the Book and the wisdom and the Tavrat and the Injeel." (The Holy? Qur'an, translated by M.H. Shakir and published by Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, Inc.).

The figurative stone throwing my members of Islam such as the following untruth, "why did Christianity experience a Great Schism between Peter and Paul". As this shows, members of Islam have a great capacity for daydreaming and reaching illogical conclusions.

And their way of trying to avoid seeing reality with respect who their god really is. They falsely claim their god is the same true God (YHWH) of Abraham, and strangely one of the proofs they use is the claim that the name "Allah" isused for god (Ilah) in Arabic. Partially true, but one must ask why. Simple they have been worshipping to old middle eastern Moon god, "Allah," a heathen celestial puppet god of Satan the Devil for so long that they started to use his name as a general term for god (Ilah). It is like how all cellophane tape in the US took on the name Scotch tape when in reality, only the tape manufactured by the 3M company really is Scotch tape. Same goes for the name "allah." This was pointed out by Professor Carleton S. Coon in his book, Southern Arabia, when he states,
"The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the moon god, but early in Arabian history the name became a general term for god, and it was this name that the Hebrews used prominently in their personal names, such as Emanu-el, Israel, etc... " [source - Southern Arabia by Professor Carleton S. Coon]
So as we can see, the name got wrongly applied to mean god in general as shown by Professor Coon's statement, but as he noted it actually belongs to the Moon god; therefore, as can be seen, Muhammed in his time was clearly referring to the Moon god, "Allah," as it had yet to take on the general term usage. The significance is that Islam is just kidding themselves when they try to mislead by claiming it in any way refers to the true God (YHWH) of Abraham.

This point was clearly made by the well-known Middle East scholar H.A.R. Gibb, when he stated,
"the reason that Muhammad never had to explain who Allah was in the Quran is that his listeners had already heard about Allah long before Muhammad was ever born" [Mohammedanism: An Historical Survey, New York: Mentor Books, 1955, p.38]. But more on that later.

Now let's look at the first item, Sura 3:48 and the Isa - Jesus (Yeshua).

SURA 3:48 AND THE ISA [JESUS (YESHUA)]:

Getting back to Sura3:48 and the Isa [Jesus (Yeshua)] we will look at the meaning of some of the terms that might not be readily understood - Book, Tavrat, Injeel; and information on the Isa - Jesus (Yeshua).

Now what is the Book, simple, the Bible. Now what is the Tavrat, simple, the Torah - first five books of the Bible. Now what is the Injeel, simple, the Gospel - first four books of the New Testament. The Wikipedia Encyclopedia says this of Injeel, "The word Indjil usually denotes the New Testament." [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on 03/102006].

The word Injeel occurs many places in the Quran, and the Wikipedia Encyclopedia says, "The word Injil occurs twelve times in the Quran(III, 2, 43, 58; V, 50, 51, 70, 72, 110; VII, 156; IX, 112; XLVIII, 29; LVII, 27 - exact place depends on version of the Qur'an) and refers to the revelation transmitted by Isa. The word also means the scripture possessed and read by the Christian contemporaries of Mohammed (V, 51; VII, 156), i.e., the four Gospels often extended in current usage to mean the whole of the New Testament. Although the Qu'ran refers to the message of Isa, the contents of the relevation contained in the Injeel transmitted by Isa is not known from the Qur'an. [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on 03/102006].

Now who is the Isa? Let's turn to the Wikipedia encyclopedia,
"Isa (?Isa), often seen as Isa, son of Mary (`Isa ibn Maryam) is the Arabic name for Jesus, who is one of the Prophets of Islam. According to the Qur'an, he was one of God's most beloved prophets sent specifically to guide the Children of Israel (Beni Israel). Christian Arabs refer to Jesus as Yasu'al-Masih or Isa al-Masih (? Yasu`a al-Masih). [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on 03/102006].

Now the Quran on the Isa is as follows:
"In the Qur'an, stories about the life and teachings of Jesus are common. The Qur'an tells of his miraculous birth, his teachings, the miracles he performed by God's permission, and his life as a respected prophet of God. The Qur'an also states repeatedly that Jesus was only a human prophet sent by God and not part of God Himself.
Muslims believe that Isa was sent down as a prophet and to be the Messiah. Like Judaism, Islam holds that sin is an act and not a state of being and therefore it does not admit the idea of an Original Sin inherited to the descendants of Adam, so the Islamic meaning of Messiah is different than the Christian view of a 'Redeemer'. Islam does not accept any human sacrifice for sin. The Islamic understanding of forgiveness is that it is made on the basis of divine grace and repentance. According to the Islam, no sacrifice can add to divine grace nor replace the necessity of repentance.
The Qur'anic verse below explicitly calls Isa by the title Messiah. The verse says that Allah (God) sent word to Mary about it, and it also calls him the Word of God. However, Muslims strongly disagree with the mainstream Christian belief that Jesus was divine himself as part of the trinity (Son of God), regarding it as a blasphemous denial of tawhid (monotheism). Therefore, he is not considered the Son of God but only human. (See below for relevant Qur'anic verses.) [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on 03/102006].

And the Quran at Sura 3:45 says, "When the angels said: O Marium, surely Allah gives you good news with a Word from Him (of one) whose name is the '. Messiah, Isa son of Marium, worthy of regard in this world and the hereafter and of those who are made near (to Allah)." ." (The Holy? Qur'an, translated by M.H. Shakir and published by Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, Inc.).

Now the Basic Islamic Beliefs with respect the Isa, Jesus (Yeshua) are:
"Jesus (Isa in the Qur'an) was one of God's highest ranked and most beloved prophets. He was sent specifically to guide the Children of Israel. He was neither God nor the Son of God, but rather a human prophet, one of many prophets sent over history to guide mankind. Jesus' message to mankind was originally the same as all of the other prophets, from Adam to Muhammad, but has been distorted by those who claim to be its adherents. Jesus was born miraculously without a human biological father by the will of God. His mother, Mary ("Maryam" in Arabic), is among the most saintly, pious, chaste, and virtuous women ever. Jesus was able to perform miracles, but only by the will of God. Besides his miraculous birth, his first miracle was when, although only a few days old, Jesus spoke and defended his mother against accusations of adultery. The Qur'an mentions, among other miracles, that he raised the dead, restored sight to the blind, and cured leprosy. Jesus renounced all worldly possessions and lived a life of strict nonviolence, abstaining from eating animal flesh and from drinking alcohol. Jesus received a Gospel from God, called (in Arabic) the "Injeel", and corresponding to the New Testament. However, Muslims hold that the New Testament Christians have today has been changed and does not accurately represent the original. Some Muslims accept the Gospel of Barnabas as the most accurate testament of Jesus. The authenticity and date of this text is disputed in Islamic, Christian and secular academic circles. Jesus was neither killed nor crucified; but God made it appear so to his enemies. Some Muslim scholars (notably Ahmad Deedat) maintain that Jesus was indeed put up on the cross, but did not die on it, but was revived and then ascended bodily to heaven, while others say that it was actually Judas who was mistakenly crucified by the Romans. Jesus is alive in heaven and will return to the world in the flesh following Imam Mahdi to defeat the dajjal ("the deceiver", anti-Christ in Islamic belief), once the world has become filled with injustice. Islam does not admit the idea of an original sin transmitted to the descendants of Adam and in that sense neither is Jesus a Redeemer of mankind as many Christians believe he is."[source - [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on 03/102006].

ISLAM LOVES TO THROW FIGURATIVE STONES BUT GOES INSANE WHEN ON RECEIVING END:

Members of Islam love to throw figurative stones, most of course are nothing but outright lies such as the following,
"why did Christianity experience a Great Schism between Peter and Paul." But overlook the most significant fact, there was no great schism, not even a little one, between Peter and Paul, i.e., what they false allege never happened. But then what can you expect from a group who has a Moon god, "Allah," as their supreme god whom they falsely claim is the true God (YHWH) of Abraham. When you base your religion on the 'big lie' you must continue to tell lies in support of it and to make false accusations against anyone who dares to bring out the truth in line with John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (Authorized King James Bible; AV).

They even go so far as to call genuine (true) Christians and/or infer such when Devil inspired false doctrine is rejected, none Christians and/or imply such.

Of course they call good research when it rejects their beloved safety blanket false beliefs all types of names and make accusations against it. Here is a good example of this,
<<"If this whole quote is so true, then why did Christianity experience a Great Schism between Peter and Paul upon spreading Christianity, because of the different view points that they had regarding the teaching of Christ and the Almighty, above all things
If everyone were in such harmony and pizaazzz, then they wouldn't have broken the first lineage of the Church at this point.
Divinely inspirational, eh?! Why didn't they write down their own DIVINED words instead of allowing others to write those divined words for them? Something divined inspirational wouldn't have allowed for a second or third or fourth person to write it down many, many years later.
In addition, the way secretary transcribes things is by using a voice recorder. Stenotypist use long hand then retype it. They didn't have that back then. One Therefore, using your words, that divine inspiration had to written down by memory, but as you and I know, those men were quite old and they didn't write anything down themselves.. Those up under them had written it. One more thing, secretaries who are transcribing things, as they are taught, only write down the things that they figure to important...ya know, human reasoning of what is more important than the other stuff.">>

You will this member of Islam is alluding to something that never occurred, i.e., a schism between Peter and Paul. This same individual goes on to imply the first lineage of the church was broken at this point clearly showing he has no idea what he is talking about, but is just throwing figurative stones.

Then he goes on to deceive by questioning the divine inspiration of the Bible; yet his words remind one of the Devils deception at Genesis 3:1-5, "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." (AV).

Now let's look at the reality with respect the Bible, the Bible is NOT the product of one committee or strongman. It has over 40 individual writers who wrote under divine inspiration/guidance putting the thoughts of God (YHWH) into the words of men much as transcribing secretaries today taking transcription and then later typing it out. In other words one real author, God (YHWH), and many scribes each of whom wrote in his own style over a period of approximately 1,600 years. All of what people call or consider inconsistencies are really not such, but most often just a problem of translation and/or understanding, i.e., lack of understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing. What is remarkable, is the writers over such a period of time all wrote in harmony when even most posters on threads on this forum can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject of the thread. This fact of harmony over a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination shows that it had one guiding force or author who divinely inspired its writers as humans of their own volition can not keep on track over short periods of time.


To wit, the Bible is the ONLY book God (YHWH) ever inspired men to write as his scribes. In other words, God is its author and men only put his thoughts given to them by divine inspiration into their own words, the words of men. Not only that, all the other writers of later so called religious guidance books borrowed from it and made changes in accord with their strong man or so called prophet. Take the example of Joseph Smith who borrowed from it to write the Book of Mormon, but failed to give credit or source to the Bible and twisted some borrowed things into bizarre distortions. Other examples are of course the bizarre writings of David Koresh the Prophet of the Branch Dividians of Waco, Texas; and the Quran, etc.

Strange, they throw stones at the Bible, clearly they fail to realize what Muhammed wrote at Sura 3:48 clearly shows where he got his information, but modern day members of Islam do NOT want to know or accept this fact. This fact is clearly shown since Muslim scholars generally dispute that Injil refers to either the scripture possessed and read by the Christians nowadays or the four Gospels. The word Injil is used in the Qur'an, the Hadith, and early Muslim documents to refer specifically to the revelations made by God to Isa, and is used by both Muslims and some Arabic-speaking Christians today.[source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on 03102006].

Sounds like a child rejecting its own mother does it not. Yet, the indisputable fact is that the New Testament was Muhammed's source for data on the Isa - Jesus (Yeshua). Just a quick comparison between Luke 1:35 and Sura 3:47 clearly shows this. Let's look at the two and compare.

Luke 1:34-35, "Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." (AV).

Sura 3:47, "She said: My Lord! when shall there be a son (born) to I me, and man has not touched me? He said: Even so, Allah creates what He pleases; when He has decreed a matter, He only says to it, Be, and it is."

Clearly Muhammed used Luke 1:34-35 for data to write his Sura3:47. (The Holy? Qur'an, translated by M.H. Shakir and published by Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, Inc.).

See Part 2:

[iris89]

Part 2:



"ALLAH" THE OLD MIDDLE EASTERN MOON GOD AND PRESENT GOD OF ISLAM:

Allah, the Moon god has long been the god of the middle east and with the rise of Muslim culture under Muhammed became the god of the new religion he started, and Middle East scholar H.A.R. Gibb, noted this fact when he stated,
"the reason that Muhammad never had to explain who Allah was in the Quran is that his listeners had already heard about Allah long before Muhammad was ever born" [Mohammedanism: An Historical Survey, New York: Mentor Books, 1955, p.38].

The word "Allah" comes from the compound Arabic word, al-ilah. Al is the definite article "the" and ilah is an Arabic word for "god." It is not a foreign word. It is not even the Syriac word for God. It is pure Arabic. [Arabic Lexicographical Miscellanies" by J. Blau in the Journal of Semitic Studies, Vol. XVII, #2, 1972, pp. 173-190].

Neither is Allah a Hebrew or Greek word for God as found in the Bible. Allah is a purely Arabic term used in reference to an Arabian deity. Hastings' Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics I:326, T & T Clark, states:

'"Allah" is a proper name, applicable only to their [Arabs'] peculiar God. '

According to the Encyclopedia of Religion:

'"Allah" is a pre-Islamic name . . . corresponding to the Babylonian Bel' [Encyclopedia of Religion, I:117 Washington DC, Corpus Pub., 1979].

In fact the common symbol used in much of Islam, the Crescent Moon, like in the Green Crescent the Arab equivalent of the Red Cross, as used by the Ottomans, on most Mosques, etc. But here is what history and archaeology shows:

The symbol of the worship of the moon god in Arabian culture and elsewhere throughout the Middle East was the crescent moon.

Archaeologists have dug up numerous statues and hieroglyphic inscriptions in which a crescent moon was seated on top of the head of the deity to symbolize the worship of the moon god. In the same fashion as the sun is pictured above the Egyptian deity.

While the moon was generally worshiped as a female deity in the Ancient Near East, the Arabs viewed it as a male deity.[source - The Islamic Invasion by Dr. Robert Morey; Harvest Home Publishers, 1992. ISBN 0-89081-983-1]

Now there are strong indicators that the heathen god, Baal, was the god of very early antiquity that actually evolved into the present day Moon god "Allah," by way of an intermediary figure, the god "Hubal al'iah." In fact in his name you can actually see how the name for the pagan Moon god became.

One Encyclopedia said this,
"ALLAH...The term is a contraction of the Arabic al-ilah, "the God." Both the idea and the word existed in pre-Islamic Arabian tradition, in which some evidence of a primitive monotheism can also be found. Although they recognized other, lesser gods, the pre-Islamic Arabs recognized Allah as the supreme God."[source - Microsoft(r) Encarta(r) Online Encyclopedia 2000]
So we can now see one part of the timeline of the evolution of the old middle eastern Moon god, "Allah."

Let's consider the indicators of this evolution from the earliest of time. The data conclusively shows that as the timeline of the centuries unfolded the Ishmaelites forsook the God of their ancestors Abraham and Jacob, Yahweh or Jehovah (YHWH), for the worship of some false god. The false god whom they worshiped as the true God was quite possibly Baal. The data also shows that Hubal was the high god worshiped at Mecca, which is supportted by the view that he was the Allah of pre-Islamic times. He Allah or Hubal was the high god of the Makkans [residents of ancient Mecca]; although, they had many other gods and goddesses such as the daughter celestial goddesses of Allah who was the old middle eastern Moon god.

Allah was also known as Hubel, ""Among the gods worshiped by the Quraysh, the greatest was Hubal
...
Some additional details on this cleromantic deity, the most powerful of the pagan idols of Mecca, is supplied by the Meccan historian Azraqi ...
Amr ibn Luhayy brought with him (to Mecca) an idol called Hubal from the land of Hit in Mesopotamia. Hubal was one of the Quraysh's greatest idols so he set it up at the well inside the Kab'a and ordered the people to worship it. Thus a man coming back from a journey would visit it and circumambulate the House before going to his family, and would shave his hair before it ... "[Peters, Hajj: The Muslim Pilgrimage to Mecca and the Holy Places [Princeton University Press, NJ, 1994], pp. 24-25]

And, ""Khuza 'ah thus shared the guilt of Jurhum. They were also to blame in other respects: a chieftain of theirs, on his way back from a journey to SYRIA, had asked the MOABITES to give him ONE OF THEIR IDOLS. They gave him HUBAL, which he brought back to the Sanctuary, setting it up within the Ka'bah itself; and it became THE CHIEF IDOL OF MECCA." [Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources, Inner Traditions International, LTD. One Park Street, Rochestor Vermont 05767, 1983, p. 5].

And this Hubel or Allah the Moon god is indicated to be known by others as the Biblically condemned god, 'Baal.' Commenting on 'Abd al-Muttalib's rediscovery of the well of Zamzam and its treasures, Lings writes:
"... So 'Abd al-Muttalib continued to dig without any actual move being made to stop him; and some of the people were already leaving the sanctuary when suddenly he struck the well's stone covering and uttered a cry of thanksgiving to God. The crowd reassembled and increased; and when he began to dig out the treasure which Jurhum had buried there, everyone claimed the right to share in it. 'Abd al-Muttalib agreed that lots should be cast for each object, as to whether it should be kept in the sanctuary or go to him personally or be divided amongst the tribe. This had become the recognised way of deciding an issue of doubt, and it was done by means of divining arrows inside the Ka'bah, in front of THE MOABITE IDOL HUBAL ..." (Lings, p. 11; bold and capital emphasis ours)
'Amr then asked them to give him an idol he could take to Arab lands where it could be worshipped, and they gave him one named Hubal. This he brought to Mecca and set on a pedestal and ordered the people to worship and venerate it. (The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), Volume I, translated by professor Trevor Le Gassick, reviewed by Dr. Ahmed Fareed" [Garnet Publishing Limited, 8 Southern Court, south Street Reading RG1 4QS, UK; The Center for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, 1998], p. 42]

Interestingly, Ibn Kathir shows that the god of Muhammad's family was Hubal, and that his grandfather even prayed to Allah by facing Hubal's idol! Ibn Ishaq stated, "It is claimed that when 'Abd al-Mutallib received such opposition from Quraysh over the digging of zamzam, he vowed that if ten sons were born to him who grew up and protected him, he would sacrifice one of them for God at the ka'ba."

In the Collier's CD-ROM Encyclopedia, we find the following information on Baal:
"Referred to as Aliyan (I Prevail), Baal triumphed over the champions he encountered in battle. He came to be distinguished by the name of the locality in which he was adored and by the special character or function attributed to him. Every major aspect of religious life could, moreover, develop the cult of its own Baal. In general, he was credited with being the male author of fertility in soil and flock, and offerings in kind were presented to him at proper festivals." [source - Collier's CD-ROM Encyclopedia]

This Baal was considered in earliest times to be the supreme god of the people we now know as Arabs, and cultures usually always maintain there supreme god even though he/she may change his form or even name. Therefore, this is a very strong indicator that in all probability he evolved into Hubal al'iah who later evolved into Allah, but always remaining the supreme god of the people of the area.

As noted,
"Archaeological, linguistic, and non-Arabic data support the view that there were among the Arabs, long before the emergence of Islam, worshipers of a supreme god known as Allah...leaves little doubt that the Meccans, despite their idolatry, recognized that Allah was Creator and Supreme Provider...Allah was recognized as a High God to whom the inhabitants of the desert and the townsfolk turned in all great difficulties. Two pagan bards, Nabighah and Labid, used the name "Allâh" in connection with the Supreme Deity, while the so-called Hanifs, in their search for an acceptable religion, rejected polytheism and sought freedom from sin by appeal to the will of Allah." [source - Collier's CD-ROM Encyclopedia].

As can be readily seen from the foregoing, it is very likely that Baal evolved into Allah in progressive steps which are indicated to be as follows,

Baal evolved into Hubal al'iah and Hubal al'iah into Allah the middle eastern Moon god.

How so, the Meccans at the time were pagan heathens and worshipped this heathen god from time im-memorable in his various evolutionary forms. Of course this is the way heathen beliefs usually progress, but let's look once more at Allah as the modern Moon god.

"Allah is found . . . in Arabic inscriptions prior to Islam" [Encyclopedia Britannica, I:643].

"The Arabs, before the time of Mohammed, accepted and worshipped, after a fashion, a supreme god called Allah" [Encyclopedia off Islam, I:302, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1913, Houtsma].

"Allah was known to the pre-Islamic . . . Arabs; he was one of the Meccan deities" [Encyclopedia off Islam, I:406, ed. Gibb].

"Ilah . . . appears in pre-Islamic poetry . . . By frequency of usage, al-ilah was contracted to Allah, frequently attested to in pre-Islamic poetry" [Encyclopedia off Islam, III:1093, 1971].

"The name Allah goes back before Muhammad" [Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend, I:41, Anthony Mercatante, New York, The Facts on File, 1983].

"The origin of this (Allah) goes back to pre-Muslim times. Allah is not a common name meaning "God" (or a "god"), and the Muslim must use another word or form if he wishes to indicate any other than his own peculiar deity" [Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, I:326, Hastings].

To the testimony of the above standard reference works, we add those of such scholars as Henry Preserved Smith of Harvard University who has stated:

"Allah was already known by name to the Arabs" [The Bible and Islam: or, The Influence of the Old and New Testament on the Religion of Mohammed, New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1897, p. 102].

Dr. Kenneth Cragg, former editor of the prestigious scholarly journal Muslim World and an outstanding modern Western Islamic scholar, whose works are generally published by Oxford University, comments:

"The name Allah is also evident in archeological and literary remains of pre-Islamic Arabia" [The Call of the Minaret, New York: Oxford University Press, 1956, p. 31].

Dr. W. Montgomery Watt, who was Professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies at Edinburgh University and Visiting Professor of Islamic studies at College de France, Georgetown University, and the University of Toronto, has done extensive work on the pre-Islamic concept of Allah. He concludes:

"In recent years I have become increasingly convinced that for an adequate understanding of the career of Muhammad and the origins of Islam great importance must be attached to the existence in Mecca of belief in Allah as a "high god." In a sense this is a form of paganism, but it is so different from paganism as commonly understood that it deserves separate treatment" [William Montgomery Watt, Muhammad's Mecca, p. vii. Also see his article, "Belief in a High God in Pre-Islamic Mecca", Journal of Semitic Studies, Vol. 16, 1971, pp. 35-40].

Caesar Farah in his book on Islam concludes his discussion of the pre-Islamic meaning of Allah by saying:

"There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that Allah passed to the Muslims from the Christians and Jews" [Islam: Beliefs and Observations, New York, Barrons, 1987, p. 28].

According to Middle East scholar E.M. Wherry, whose translation of the Quran is still used today, in pre-Islamic times Allah-worship, as well as the worship of Ba-al, were both astral religions in that they involved the worship of the sun, the moon, and the stars .

CONCLUSION:

Muhammad founded his religion on the slippery slopes of a heathen Moon god whom his later followers tried to say was the same as the true God (YHWH) of Abraham. And their argument is of course very transparent, and was shown false in the introduction as follows,
<" Simple they have been worshipping to old middle eastern Moon god, "Allah," a heathen celestial puppet god of Satan the Devil for so long that they started to use his name as a general term for god (Ilah). It is like how all cellophane tape in the US took on the name Scotch tape when in reality, only the tape manufactured by the 3M company really is Scotch tape. Same goes for the name "allah." This was pointed out by Professor Carleton S. Coon in his book, Southern Arabia, when he states,
"The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the moon god, but early in Arabian history the name became a general term for god, and it was this name that the Hebrews used prominently in their personal names, such as Emanu-el, Israel, etc... "> [source - Southern Arabia by Professor Carleton S. Coon]

He used the Bible as the data source that he used to write the Bible and attempt to wrap a heathen god into new wrappings and connect him to the Isa - Jesus (Yeshua). But of course wrapping heathen god(s) and celebrations and practices in no way transforms their real nature, heathen things belonging to the Devil.


Your Friend in Christ Iris89