Quran

"That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-" (Quran 4:157)
http://www.answering-christianity.com/y ... uption.htm

Who is addressing genes? You see Farid, this is why Islam and Islamic apologists are hypocrites.

Now you are ignoring the laws and traditions of adoption.

Oh, so the fact Muslims have applies this verse to justify killing "unbelievers" is not the issue, when you don't want it to be an issue.

I checked my facts, the two was incorrect. Maybe you should check "facts" instead of relying on propaganda.

I posted Scripture that shows your story is a fabrication. The priests did not have to ask questions regarding a heifer, they knew what was required and so would any Jew who lived in an agrarian culture. What is do difficult about finding a red heifer without blemish? I can do that without asking one question.

we are discussing the Qur'an, which does permit Muslims to lie

What is missing from your response is proof that Muhammad fought only those who attacked him first, which proves that Muhammad did not agree with what you have posted, or is it your contention that forcing people to convert to Islam is a "just cause"?

The History of Christianity in the Light of Modern Knowledge, A Collective Work, Harcourt Brace and co., p. 520


Muslims did indeed wage many wars, just as many Jews and Christians did both before and after this. Muslims waged their wars in self-defense or in order to abolish idolatry, tyranny, slavery, and oppression. Muslims were commanded to not attack those who did not attack them, to not cut down a fruit tree, to not kill the animals, to not take the people's property, to not harm women or children or old people so long as they did not fight with them, and to not burn crops.


When they were victorious, the Muslims were commanded not to destroy the churches nor the synagogues, nor to force the people to convert to Islam. The people were allowed to continue to practice their religion without persecution or being forced to convert

"There is no compulsion in religion. The right path is henceforth distinct from misguidance"

If Islam was indeed spread by the sword and not by it's spiritual appeal, then how do we explain, for example, the fact that Islam is the religion of the majority of the people of the country of Indonesia even though no Muslim army ever set foot on their land and they can by no stretch of the imagination be labeled as Arabs? The only contact these people ever had with Islam was through Muslim traders who passed through their lands.


If the truth were to be known, in almost every single battle the Muslims ever participated in, they were almost always vastly outnumbered. For example, when the Muslims finally overthrew the pagan Byzantine superpower in the battle of Al-Yarmook of the year 636 C.E., the Muslim army consisted of 40,000 fighters verses 200,000 solders in the Byzantine army. So although many historians may like to attribute the fall of this superpower to any number of factors such as claiming that they were taxed and weary from previous battles with the Romans, (while not claiming that the Muslims were taxed and weary from their previous battles), and although they refuse to believe that this victory could have come from the Almighty, still, one needs to wonder if this victory were not through divine intervention then how do we explain the fact that an ill-equipped army of Bedouin sheep herders who were outnumbered more than four to one could so resoundingly defeat one of the two "superpowers" of their age?


"The extinction of race consciousness as between Muslims is one of the outstanding achievements of Islam and in the contemporary world. There is, as it happens, a crying need for the propagation of this Islamic virtue."

The Genuine Islam, Vol. 1, George Bernard Shaw, No. 81936.


"I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him-the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today."

Hamilton Gibb, Whither Islam, London, 1932, p. 379.
http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/libr ... ch6.5.html