Love Thy Neighbour »« California does not Fail Biology, You Do

I Get Mail – Habermas’ Six Reasons Why Christianity is Real

This one’s from a guy quoting the Christian Apologist Habermas. Habermas is supposedly set to go to Sweden and wow them with his “proofs” that Atheism is failing but his Christianity is not. Here’s some answers to that.

 

Six reasons that people can use for believing specifically in the Christian faith, listing them as follows:

  • Recent documentations of miracle claims: referring to thousands of cases around the world of documented miracles, including those where medical doctors witness prayer healing people with severe physical disabilities.

And yet none of these are repeatable or occur in well known hospitals. It’s like alien abduction. They always abduct some person in the middle of nowhere who sounds barely believable or who happened to be drinking or was tired or drowsy. For beings of incredible power and technology they sure seem to be slinking around a lot.

Surviving stage 4 cancer is a miracle, yet being eaten by a shark is not.

  • Double-blind prayer experiments: where people pray for others with terminal illness. Habermas admitted that most such experiments have not worked, but the three that he knows of that have indeed worked were cases of orthodox-Christians praying for the sick.

Yes but the majority failed. And if orthodox christians praying for the sick works then Catholicism is wrong.

Secondly? Those studies were STILL not statistically significant. There is a reason why we do repeat studies and/or statistics. One simply being bigger than the other is NOT a statistical study.

If you took 10 people and asked them if they liked chocolate or vanilla and if 6 said vanilla and 4 said chocolate it doesn’t mean that 60% of people like vanilla. Statistics are important.

  • Jesus as a miracle healer: the research professor noted that when he went to graduate school, most people did not believe that Jesus was a miracle healer, but that has changed and many scholars now believe in the real miracles presented in the Bible.

Do you even realise how ridiculous it sounds to someone who has treated lepers, doled out vitamin A and worked in a fracture clinic and intends to qualify in orthopaedic surgery and trauma how utterly mundane Jesus’s miracle healing sounds? It’s like declaring that you can conjure fire.

And these people are “bloody gullible” if they think that’s a miracle. They are just claims. Claims that are unverified and unrepeatable to be taken on faith.

  • Jesus proclaimed the resurrection beforehand: meaning that Jesus did not simply rise from the dead, but revealed beforehand that he would be resurrected. “It’s one thing to rise from the dead, but you claim double the significance of it if you told everybody what was going to happen ahead of time, which shows that you’re in control and know what’s going on,” the apologist argued.

In this book we totally wrote about him around 100 years after his death that was not edited in any way by a Council that may or may not have been in Nicaea.

  • Resurrection of Jesus Christ: Habermas said that “we are on the strongest grounds up here on the resurrection argument. Today, there are more scholars who believe that something happened to Jesus than there are those who believe that nothing happened to Jesus.”

We achieved this by declaring all the people who don’t think Jesus rose from the dead as “not scholars”. That sorted that problem out.

  • Shroud of Turin: the apologist referred to an hour-long session he led on Friday about recent discoveries surrounding the Shroud, but admitted, “It deserves to be put on the board, at least now. It could be proven wrong tomorrow.”

The Shroud of Turin dates to 1260 to 1370 AD and dates to Medieval France where it was “revealed”. It is a fake. A forgery. A fraud.

The interesting thing is I am interested in catholic relics. I have seen no less than 3 spears of Longinus and enough pieces of the true cross (all with handy nail hole) to crucify half a dozen messiahs.

I also saw the skull of the Dragon of St. George. It was a Crocodile. A small one considering the saltwater crocs that live in the estauries here and the Romulus Whittaker Crocodile Sanctuary which (and I still think it has) a s 25 ft long salt water crocodile. This thing was a baby.

I also have seen the skull and bones of the “cyclops”. In a Museum of Curios these would wander around and this was donated to the British Museum.

It’s the skull of an elephant. And cyclopia is a rare genetic disorder. So people would have seen baby “cyclops” surely there must be some who survive right?

Habermas concluded: “We have got to get the world out there, because the challenge is there, naturalism is losing, and we need to see Christianity ascend, because we have the data.”

Data which people insist they have but never demonstrate. Because you know, the proof of a god wouldn’t win a Nobel Prize?

Ultimately, Habermas is just another apologist with no answers. If you think he is going to wow the people of Sweden with this then I am afraid you will be rather mistaken.

Comments

  1. had3 says

    Lots of people came back from the dead, it wasn’t that big of a deal several thousand years ago. Now, make Jon Lovitz career come to life, then we’re talking miracles!

  2. Bukhari Muslim says

    ALLAH HATES ATHEISTS

    Hadith
    Atheism is synonymous with disbelief
    Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, “Whoever possesses the following three qualities will have the sweetness (delight) of faith:

    1. The one to whom Allah and His Apostle becomes dearer than anything else.

    2. Who loves a person and he loves him only for Allah’s sake.
    3. Who hates to revert to Atheism (disbelief) as he hates to be thrown into the fire.”
    Sahih Bukhari 1:2:15, See also: Sahih Bukhari 1:2:20 and Sahih Bukhari 9:85:74
    Ali commands to have atheists burned to death
    Narrated ‘Ikrima: Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to ‘Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn ‘Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”
    Sahih Bukhari 9:84:57
    The “who created God?” argument is from Satan
    Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “Satan comes to one of you and says, ‘Who created so-and-so? ’till he says, ‘Who has created your Lord?’ So, when he inspires such a question, one should seek refuge with Allah and give up such thoughts.”
    Sahih Bukhari 4:54:496
    Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah’s Apostle said, “People will not stop asking questions till they say, ‘This is Allah, the Creator of everything, then who created Allah?’ ”
    Sahih Bukhari 9:92:399
    It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Men will continue to question one another till this is propounded: Allah created all things but who created Allah? He who found himself confronted with such a situation should say: I affirm my faith in Allah.
    Sahih Muslim 1:242
    This hadith has been transmitted by Mahmud b. Ghailan by another chain of transmitters (and the words are): The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: The Satan will come to everyone of you and say: Who created the heaven, who created the earth? (And the man) replies: It is Allah, Then the remaining part of the hadith was narrated as mentioned above and the words ‘His prophets” were added to it.
    Sahih Muslim 1:243
    It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah may peace be upon him) observed: The Satan comes to everyone. of you and says: Who created this and that? till he questions: Who created your Lord? When he comes to that, one should seek refuge in Allah and keep away (from such idle thoughts).
    Sahih Muslim 1:244
    This hadith is transmitted by Urwa b. Zubair on the authority of Abu Huraira (and the words are): The Satan comes to the bondsman (of Allah) and says: Who created this and that? The remaining part of the hadith is the same.
    Sahih Muslim 1:245
    It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) observed: People will constantly ask you questions pertaining to knowledge till they would say: Allah created us, but who created Allah? he (the narrator) says: he (Abu Huraira) was (at the time of narrating this hadith) catching hold of the hand of a man and he said: Allah and the Messenger told the truth. Two persons have already put me this question, and this is the third one, or he said: One man has put me this question and he is the second one.
    Sahih Muslim 1:246
    It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that he said: The people will constantly, and the rest of the hadith is the same as that transmitted by ‘Abdul-Warith with the exception that there is no mention of the Apostle of Allah in that, but he observed at the end of the hadith: Allah and His Messenger told the truth.
    Sahih Muslim 1:247
    Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said to me: they (the people) till constantly ask you, Abu Huraira, (about different things pertaining to religion) the they would say: Well, there is Allah, but after all who created Allah? He (Abu Huraira) narrated: Once we were in the mosque that some of the Bedouins came there and said: Well, there is Allah, but who created Allah? He (the narrator) said: I took hold of the pebbles in my fist and flung at them and remarked: Stand up, stand up (go away) my friend (the Holy Prophet) told the truth.
    Sahih Muslim 1:248
    Yazid b. al-Asamm said: I heard Abu Huraira saying that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) observed: people will certainly ask you about everything till they will propound: Allah created every thing, but who created Allah?
    Sahih Muslim 1:249
    Anas b. Malik transmitted it from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) that the Great and Glorious Allah said: Verily your people would constantly question about this and that till they would say: Well, it is Allah Who created the creation, but who created Allah?
    Sahih Muslim 1:250
    This hadith has been narrated by another chain of transmitters with the exception that Ishaq made no mention of this: Allah said: Verily your people.
    Sahih Muslim 1:251
    Scholars
    Atheism is a greater crime than shirk
    First of all, you should know that both kinds of persons whom you mentioned are in great danger. However, if we compare between the two, then the person who claims that he does not believe in Allaah and he neither worships Allaah nor any other god, is worse than a Mushrik (i.e. a person who associates partners with Allaah), because a Mushrik worships Allaah but he associates with Him another god. Ibn Taymiyyah stated the same thing as he mentioned that Pharaoh is worse than a Mushrik.

    As regards your second question, it is confirmed that some people were following the true religion which ‘Eesa (Jesus) came with, and they did not stray until the advent of Islam. The Prophet , said: “Allaah looked at the people of the earth and he abominated the Arabs and the non-Arabs amongst them, except some of the people of the Book.” [Muslim]

    Therefore, these people were following what was in the Injeel (Gospel) which was revealed on ‘Eesa even though there were other people who forged and falsified this Book.
    Allaah Knows best.
    Which crime is worse: atheism or polytheism?
    Islam Web, Fatwa No. 104658, February 12, 2008
    Praise be to Allaah.

    Atheism, in modern terminology, means denying the Creator altogether, denying that He exists and not acknowledging Him, may He be glorified and exalted. The universe and everything in it, according to their claims, came about purely by chance. This is a strange view which is contrary to sound human nature, reason and logic, and is contrary to simple logic and indisputable facts.

    As for shirk (polytheism or associating others with Allah), it implies belief in Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, and affirmation of Him, but it also includes belief in a partner to Allah in His creation, who creates or grants provision or brings benefit or wards off harm. This is shirk al-ruboobiyyah (ascribing partners to Allah in His Lordship). Or it means belief in a partner to whom some kind of worship is devoted as an act of love and veneration, as it is devoted to that person or thing as it should to devoted to Allah, may He be glorified and exalted. This is shirk al-‘ibaadah (associating others with Allah in worship). By studying these two deviations, we may see that each of them involves sin and evil which tells us that they are bad and we see how Allah described them as being like dumb animals.

    Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “Have you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) seen him who has taken as his ilaah (god) his own vain desire? Would you then be a Wakeel (a disposer of his affairs or a watcher) over him?

    44. Or do you think that most of them hear or understand? They are only like cattle nay, they are even farther astray from the Path (i.e. even worse than cattle)”

    [al-Furqaan 25:43-44]

    “And surely, We have created many of the jinn and mankind for Hell. They have hearts wherewith they understand not, and they have eyes wherewith they see not, and they have ears wherewith they hear not (the truth). They are like cattle, nay even more astray; those! They are the heedless ones”

    [al-A’raaf 7:179].

    Nevertheless, the atheist who denies the existence of Allah and rejects His Messengers and disbelieves in the Last Day, is in a greater state of kufr and his beliefs are more reprehensible than the one who believes in Allah and the Hereafter, but he associates something of His creation with Him. The former is stubborn and arrogant to an extent that can not be imagined or accepted by sound human nature. Such a person would transgress every sacred limit and fall into every sin; his worldview would be distorted to an inconceivable level. Yet many scholars who discussed the issue of atheism doubted that this has deep roots in the hearts of the atheists, and they affirmed that the atheist is only professing atheism outwardly; deep down he believes in one God.

    Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said a great deal which indicates that this group of atheists who deny and reject the existence of God are in a worse state of kufr than the mushrikeen who associate partners with Him. We will quote a little of what we have come across:

    He (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Kufr (disbelief) means not believing in Allah and His Messengers, whether it involves rejecting or it consists of doubt and uncertainty about the issue or ignoring the issue altogether, out of envy or arrogance or following whims and desires that divert a person from following the Message. However, the kaafir who rejects and disbelieves is in a state of greater kufr, although the one who rejects and denies out of envy, even though he believes that the Messengers brought the message of truth, is also in a state of kufr. End quote.

    Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 17/291

    He also said:

    The one who denies the Hereafter but believes that this universe is created is described by Allah as a kaafir. The one who denies it and says that this universe existed from eternity is a worse kaafir in the sight of Allah, may He be exalted. End quote.

    Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 17/291

    He said (may Allah have mercy on him) refuting those who deny the Divine attributes:

    (Denying the Divine attributes) implies complete denial which reaches the point that says: There is nothing that must exist and cannot have not existed. If he believes that and says: I do not affirm either existence or non-existence, then the answer to that is: Suppose you state that verbally and in your heart you do not believe either of the two; rather you turn away from knowing Allah and worshipping and remembering Him, so you never remember Him, worship Him, call upon Him, put your hope in Him or fear Him; (in that case) your denial of Him is worse than that of Iblees who (at least) acknowledged Him. End quote.

    Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 5/356.

    And he (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

    The arrogant one is the one who does not acknowledge Allah outwardly, like Pharaoh. He is in a worse state of kufr than them (meaning the mushrik Arabs). Iblees, who enjoins all of that and loves it and is too arrogant to worship his Lord and obey him, is in a worse state of kufr than them (the mushrikeen), even though he was aware of the existence and might of Allah, just as Pharaoh was also aware of the existence of Allah. End quote.

    Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 7/633

    He also said:

    The view of the philosophers — those who say that the universe is eternal and that it is dependent on that which inevitably must exist — came from the minds and hearts of those who worshipped heavenly bodies and made images of them on Earth, such as Aristotle and his followers. This view is worse kufr and is more misguided than that of the Arab mushrikeen who believed that Allah created the heavens and the earth and everything between them in six days by His will and power, but they attribute falsely without knowledge sons and daughters to Him (cf. al-An’am 6:100) and joined others in worship with Allaah, for which He had sent no authority (cf. Aal ‘Imraan 3:151). Similarly, the permissive people, who do not believe in any command or prohibition at all and refer to the Divine will and decree as an excuse for their evil deeds, are worse off than the Jews, Christians and Arab mushrikeen, because even though the latter are kaafirs, they still believe in some kind of command and prohibition, and the promise and warning (i.e., the Hereafter), but they had partners with Allaah (false gods) who instituted for them a religion which Allaah had not ordained (cf. al-Shoora 42:21), unlike the permissive people who ignore all laws altogether. They are only pleased with whatever suits their whims and desires, and they get angry on the basis of their whims and desires; they do not get pleased for the sake of Allah, or angry for the sake of Allah, or love for the sake of Allah, or hate for the sake of Allah; they do not enjoin that which Allah has enjoined and they do not forbid that which Allah has forbidden, unless that suits their whims and desires, in which case they do it for that purpose and not as an act of obedience to their Lord. Hence they do not denounce what takes place of kufr, evil doing and sin unless it goes against their whims and desires, in which case they will denounce it, prompted by their devilish nature and not prompted by sharee’ah and love of Allah. Hence the devils plunge them deeper into error, and they never stop short (cf. al-A’raaf 7:202), and the devils may show themselves to them and address them and help them with some of their whims and desires, as the devils used to do with the mushrikeen who worshipped idols. End quote.

    Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 8/457-458.

    Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allah be pleased with him) said: It is shirk to worship something other than Allah completely; that may be called shirk or kufr. Whoever turns away from Allah altogether and directs his worship to something other than Allah, such as trees, rocks, idols, the jinn or some of the dead, those whom they call awliya’ (“saints”), worshipping them or praying to them or fasting for them, and forgetting Allah altogether — and this is the worst kind of kufr and shirk. We ask Allah to keep us safe and sound.

    The same applies to denying the existence of Allah and saying that there is no God and life is material, like the Communists and atheists who deny the existence of Allah. These are the worst disbelievers among mankind, the most astray, the most involved in shirk and the most misguided. We ask Allah to keep us safe and sound. End quote.

    Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 4/32-33

    He also said (may Allah have mercy on him):

    Meat slaughtered by Communists is haraam and is like the meat of the Magians and idol worshippers; in fact their meat is even more haraam, because their degree of kufr is greater due to their atheism and denial of the Creator (may He be glorified and exalted) and His Messenger, and other kinds of kufr. End quote.

    Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 23/30
    And Allah knows best.
    Atheism is a greater sin than shirk
    Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 113901
    A marriage to an atheist is null and void
    Praise be to Allaah.

    The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) encouraged us to marry those who are religiously-committed, because basically women are weak and may change their beliefs and thoughts and even their religion for the slightest reason. So you should not have even considered marrying one whose religious commitment was not great, let alone marrying one who has no religious commitment at all, on the grounds that you would be able to guide him.

    Marriage to an atheist is invalid and the marriage contract is basically null and void. It is not permissible for a woman who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to enter into such an invalid marriage on the grounds that this man may possibly be guided after marriage. She should have done what the great Sahaabi woman Umm Sulaym did when she refused to marry Abu Talhah – who was a kaafir at the time – unless he became Muslim, and he did so. This was the greatest mahr (dowry) in Islam as Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said. (al-Nasaa’i, 3341; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani).

    The evidence that the marriage of a Muslim woman to a kaafir man is invalid is very clear. This is one of the matters on which there is unanimous agreement among all the scholars of the ummah.
    . . .

    Conclusion: This marriage of yours is invalid and it is not permissible to allow him to be intimate with you unless he comes back to Islam and enters the faith by pronouncing the Shahaadatayn and following the rulings of Islam. If he does not do that then the marriage must be annulled in a sharee’ah court. If you cannot do that or if there is no sharee’ah court where you live, then you should ask him for a divorce. If he refuses then you should divorce him by means of khula’, returning his mahr or more or less so that you can be separated.
    And Allaah knows best.
    Ruling on marrying an atheist
    Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 22468
    …You have to know that it is not permissible for a Muslim man to establish a relationship with an Alien woman and it is not permissible for him to talk with her except for a need and without being in seclusion with her, and provided he feels secure from being tempted by her.

    Therefore, you have to avoid talking to this woman or keeping company with her, to be safe in relation to your religion. As regards calling her to Islam, you can only guide her to some Muslim websites in English. You can also inform her about some Islamic centers in her country.
    But it is not permissible to marry her, as she is still a Kafir (non-Muslim) and has not yet embraced Islam wholeheartedly without any doubt. Allah says: “And do not marry Al-Mushrikât (idolatresses, etc.) till they believe (worship Allâh Alone). And indeed a slave woman who believes is better than a (free) Mushrikah (idolatress, etc.), even though she pleases you.”(Al-Baqarah 2:221). Being convinced by Islam and wishing to embrace it is not an excuse for you to get married with her…
    Thinking of marrying an atheist
    Dr. Abdullah Al-faqih, Islam Web, Fatwa No. 88328, July 21, 2004
    No prayers for dead atheists and other non-Muslims
    Praise be to Allaah.

    If the matter is as you describe, and your friend became an atheist and did not believe in Islam, and he died in that state, as appears to be the case, then it is not permissible for the one who knew his situation to offer the funeral prayer for him or to say du’aa’ for him, or to wash him or shroud him or bury him in the Muslim graveyard, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “It is not (proper) for the Prophet and those who believe to ask Allaah’s forgiveness for the Mushrikoon, even though they be of kin, after it has become clear to them that they are the dwellers of the Fire (because they died in a state of disbelief)”

    [al-Tawbah 9:113]

    “And never (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) pray (funeral prayer) for any of them (hypocrites) who dies, nor stand at his grave. Certainly they disbelieved in Allaah and His Messenger, and died while they were Faasiqoon (rebellious, — disobedient to Allaah and His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم)”

    [al-Tawbah 9:84].

    Muslim (976) narrated that Abu Hurayrah said: The messenger of Allaah (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) said: “I asked my Lord for permission to pray for forgiveness for my mother but He did not give me permission. And I asked Him for permission to visit her grave and He gave me permission.”
    This is evidence that it is not permissible to say du’aa’ for one who died in a state of shirk or kufr.
    His friend became an atheist then he died. Can he offer the funeral prayer for him and say du’aa’ for him?
    Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 127301
    Ibn Sina was an atheist
    Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all his Family and Companions.

    Ibn Sinna (Avicenna) was accused of being a Kafir and an atheist because of his statements about the antiquity of the world, his rejection of the Hereafter, and other atheist theories, in addition to his inner legendary ideology.

    Other scholars stated that Ibn Sinna was an atheist before Sheikh Al-Huwaini did; amongst them is: Al-Ghazali, Ibn Taymiyah, Ibn Al-Qayim, and Al-Dhahabi.
    Allah knows best.
    Claims about Ibn Sina being an atheist or Kafir
    Islam Web, Fatwa No. 87783, May 20, 2004

  3. smrnda says

    Attack of the cut and paste again…

    Wow, Habermas has some pretty weak reasons, his whole presentation seems to be “well, instead of this shitty evidence, I could have even worse evidence!” The ‘more people believe in X’ – even if demonstrated, totally irrelevant.

  4. lpetrich says

    Christian Apologist: 10 Reasons for the Fall of Atheism — Mr. Habermas has these 6 arguments, and he has 4 more general arguments: Cosmology, Intelligent Design, Fine Tuning, and Near-Death Experiences.

    A Muslim apologist like our good friend Bukhari Muslim would likely agree with at least some of the latter 4 arguments, but would likely have Islam-based analogues of the first 6 arguments. So it would be fun to pit Mr. Habermas or some other such Xian apologist against a Muslim one.

  5. says

    @ Bukhari Muslim

    Islam Web, Fatwa No. 87783, May 20, 2004

    Yeah. The Internet has been good for the fatwa industry. Don’t like the outcome of one self-appointed online fatwa-factory? Just click some more and get its opposite.

    If you’re an islamist that enjoys oral sex, don’t seek fatwas on Askimam.org, rather go to Islamonline.net for your religious endorsment. I’d like to create an app that seeks out a fatwa in support every frikkin’ opinion one could contrive to spew on the interwebz. Want to gain internet credibility? Just download my app!

    (The above is a real example. I am simply incapable of making such ridiculous shit up.)

    @ CJO

    Hi CJO. {waves}

  6. Wrath Panda says

    @Bukhari Muslim

    Wow, just…

    I tried to read your post, I really did, but after about the third or fourth paragraph, I could feel my brain cells committing suicide one by one. Seriously, Avi, is there some sort of club you blogging types get to join when you receive a reply of this magnitude? I’d be keeping that one for posterity!

    @theophontes

    Perhaps a website, somewhat akin to the Daily Mail headline generator site that did the rounds a few years back. Just keep clicking refresh until you find the fatwa for you! Minutes of fun, guaranteed!

  7. Hairy Chris, blah blah blah etc says

    The folks who write these fatwa thingies really need to get a good copy editor.

  8. says

    @ Wrath Panda

    I found it: Linky.

    Yeah, something like this but more verbose.

    In British colonial times, the manufacture of isnads was the in thing. They are like long daisy chains of evidence (“he said, she he said”) that links stuff you make up all the way back to Mohammad or the Salafs. These were very useful in Northwest India, as one could bamboozle the locals into giving up some of their land. (Hey, who wouldn’t want a divine descendant living next door?)

    The new new thing is fatwas. They have been spreading like wildfire of late. Early Moslems were rather loath to make legal pronouncements with regard to the Koran or hadiths. Nowadays islamists are falling over themselves to get their fatwas out the door as fast as they can type.


    @ All

    …Ibn Taymiyyah … Ibn Al-Qayim…

    When someone praises these two malcontents, you will know you are dealing with a religious fascist and hypocrite. They are the two who brought torture into Islamic jurisprudence (it had formerly been forbidden). They did this by simply making shit up. This is why they are so popular with the likes of Bukhari Muslim.

    These guys were really innovative:

    Ibn Taymiyya was the guy who said it is fine for a Muslim to kill a co-religionist in battle. His attitude was that god would know his own. Great for terrorist attacks as you don’t need to worry about killing innocent Muslims.
    His student, Ibn Al-Qayyim, was the medical wünderkind who could test for male infertility by having the poor guy ejaculate into a pot of boiling water. If the sperm turned white, the man was fertile and it was all the wife’s fault.

  9. says

    Dude, can you put the guy’s first name so I don’t have a heart attack thinking you’re labeling philosopher Jurgen Habermas as a Christian apologist?

    When there is a MORE famous Habermas, just make sure people don’t think you’re mistakenly referring to him!
    :P

  10. Joe Marino says

    Just a quick correction on this point:

    “[Jesus predicted his own resurrection] In this book we totally wrote about him around 100 years after his death that was not edited in any way by a Council that may or may not have been in Nicaea.”

    To be fair, the first document which records this claim is the Gospel of Mark, which was written about 35 to 40 years after Jesus’ death.

    Furthermore, the Council of Nicaea in no way edited the Gospel of Mark, or any other book of the Bible, for that matter. That is a common myth, which has gained immeasurable traction thanks to Dan Brown and the Internet. The Council of Nicaea was called to discuss whether Jesus was subordinate to God the Father, or co-equal with God the Father. It had nothing to do with the composition of the Bible.

  11. angharad says

    You know about 15 years ago I heard a Catholic priest explain the miracle of loaves and fishes in purely rational terms. When even the people who are supposed to believe in miracles think they need more plausible explanations to appeal to the modern world you know that reason is at least making some headway. But this guy really thinks that the best proof of Christianity is ‘because miracles’?

  12. Heretical Ryan says

    For me the jumping off point from Bukhari’s tirade was when I read this part

    The “who created God?” argument is from Satan
    Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “Satan comes to one of you and says, ‘Who created so-and-so? ’till he says, ‘Who has created your Lord?’ So, when he inspires such a question, one should seek refuge with Allah and give up such thoughts.”

    The message here is blatantly obvious:

    Don’t ask questions. Don’t think for yourself. Stick your fingers in your ears and chant la-la-la-I-can’t-hear-you-because-Allah-is-great.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>