The Warrior Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

Apparently, the earliest known Christian reference to the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, is recorded in a Greek polemical tract called the Teaching of Jacob which says: “And they said that a prophet appeared, coming with the Saracens and he is proclaiming the arrival of the coming Anointed One and Christ. And when I went out into Sykamina I communicated it to a certain very scriptural old man and I said to him: ‘What do you say to me about this prophet who is appearing with the Saracens?' And with a great groan he said: ‘He is a deceiver. Do prophets come with swords and chariots? Really these are works of disorder set in motion today, and I fear that the Christ who came earlier, whom the Christians worship, was the one sent by God and instead of him we shall accept Hermolaos. For Isaiah said that we Jews have a mistaken and hardened heart, until all the land is made a desert. But go forth, Mr. Abraham, and learn about this prophet who is appearing.' And I, Abraham, thoroughly investigating, heard from those who met him that you find nothing true in this so-called prophet, except shedding human blood. For he says that he has keys of Paradise which is unbelievable.” From this brief excerpt we learn a few matters concerning the Prophesy of Muhammad, peace be upon him, firstly, that he preached the imminent coming of the Messiah, and therefore his Prophesy was apocalyptic and Millenarian. Secondly, one of the claims of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, which had apparently reached the Christians was that he was in possession of the keys of Paradise. This may likely correspond to one of the Ahadith of the Prophet, peace be upon him, such as:

اللهُ أَكْبَرُ أُعْطِيتُ ‌مَفَاتِيحَ ‌الشَّامِ

Allahu Akbar! I have been given the keys to Sham (Musnad Ahmad)

The blessed region of Sham, where Jerusalem is located, is indeed to be the place of gathering at the Resurrection. The New Earth and the New Jerusalem are terms for Paradise. In another Hadith:

مَفَاتِيحُ الْجَنَّةِ شَهَادَةُ أَنْ لَا إِلَه إِلَّا الله

The keys of Paradise are to testify that there is no god except Allah (ibid)

According to this, the meaning of the Prophet, peace be upon him, possessing the keys of Paradise would mean that he is the one who has brought the teaching, or more accurately restored the teaching, that there is no god except Allah and that this is the key to Paradise, to salvation. In another Hadith:

وَبَيْنَا أَنَا نَائِمٌ رَأَيْتُنِي أُتِيتُ بِمَفَاتِيحِ خَزَائِنِ الأَرْضِ فَوُضِعَتْ فِي يَدِي

While I was sleeping I saw that the keys of the treasures of the Earth were give to me and placed in my hand (Sahih al-Bukhari)

Like the first Hadith quoted, it is a prophecy that the Ummah of Muhammad, peace be upon him, particularly his immediate Successors, shall have the Earth opened for them and in particular they will enter into Jerusalem, the Holy Land, which is also called Paradise.

However, the excerpt about our Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon, from the Teaching of Jacob is clearly hostile to him, calling him a “deceiver”, God forbid. Yet the argument behind such an allegation is that only a false prophet comes with a sword, or riding on a chariot, meaning that Prophets are not men of war, violence or bloodshed. This polemic is laughable since many of the Prophets spoken of in the Old Testament did come with a sword and were indeed violent. Consider Moses at the Battle of Rephidim (Exodus 17:8-13). Joshua, who would later become a Prophet himself, served as his general. According to the Book of Joshua, the Prophet Joshua, who was Moses’s successor, initiated the campaign for the Conquest of Canaan, and led his Israelites into no less than thirteen battles. The Prophet Samuel instructed King Saul to utterly decimate Amalek, but when Agag, King of Amalek, was spared, Samuel personally had him cut to pieces (1 Samuel 15:33).

There is no doubt our Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was what one may term a “warlord”, defined as: “a military commander, especially an aggressive regional commander with individual autonomy”, “a military leader of a nation or part of a nation, especially one who is accountable to nobody”. Therefore, I have no objection to our Prophet, peace be upon him, being considered a warlord, nor is the word itself inherently negative in connotation. Although the precise number is contested, the Prophet, peace be upon him, led dozens of military expeditions known as Ghazwat.

Prophet Elijah was Raised up to Heaven and Lives

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

The belief that the Prophet Elijah is alive is held by many Christians and Jews, and stems from the following passage in the Bible: And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven (2 Kings 2:11). Incidentally, many non-Muslims, including Christians and Jews, ridicule the Islamic belief that the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, ascended to Heaven seated on the Buraq, a celestial white creature whose size is described as larger than a donkey but smaller than a mule. Yet they conveniently overlook that according to the Bible, the Prophet Elijah ascended to Heaven on a chariot of fire driven by horses of fire. The Bible also teaches that the Prophet Elijah will return before the Final Judgment: “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord” (Malachi 4:5). Jewish folklore is filled with legends of the Prophet Elijah appearing to certain rabbis especially. There is the tradition of Elijah’s Chair, when an empty chair is set aside for Elijah to sit upon and witness the rite of circumcision, and during the Passover Seder it is customary to set aside an extra cup for Elijah and leave the door open for him hoping he may appear.

But what does Islam teach about this subject? There isn’t any explicit, unambiguous proof in Islam that the Prophet Elijah ascended to Heaven physically and is alive till this day. However, the Ayah in the Quran:

وَّرَفَعۡنٰہُ مَکَانًا عَلِیًّا

And We raised him to a high place

(Surah 19, Ayah 57)

This Ayah is in reference to a Prophet called Idris, whom some identify as Elias (Elijah):

يُذْكَرُ عَنْ ابْنِ مَسْعُودٍ وَابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ إِلْيَاسَ ‌هُوَ ‌إِدْرِيسُ

It was mentioned from Ibn Mas’ud and Ibn Abbas that Elias is Idris (Sahih al-Bukhari)

If indeed Idris and Elias are one and the same then Surah 19:57 is likely a reference to Elijah’s ascension to Heaven as described in 2 Kings 2:11.

Ka’b al-Ahbar said:

‌أَرْبَعَة ‌أَنْبيَاء ‌الْيَوْم أَحيَاء اثْنَان فِي الدُّنْيَا إلْيَاس وَالْخضر وَاثْنَانِ فِي السَّمَاء عِيسَى وَإِدْرِيس

Four Prophets are alive today, two in the world, Elias and Khidr, and two in Heaven, Jesus and Idris (Tarikh Dimashq; v.9, p.207)

Now if Elias is Idris then this reduces the number to Prophets who are said to be alive down to three. Even then, there isn’t any strong evidence to prove a worldly life for Khidr, whose status as a Prophet is disputed as many believe he was a saintly non-Prophet, and some even say he may have been an Angel. Furthermore, when the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said:

أَرَأَيْتَكُمْ لَيْلَتَكُمْ هَذِهِ فَإِنَّ عَلَى رَأْسِ مِائَةِ سَنَةٍ مِنْهَا لاَ يَبْقَى مِمَّنْ هُوَ عَلَى ظَهْرِ الأَرْضِ أَحَدٌ

Do you see this night of yours? No one who is on the surface of the Earth shall remain at the head of a century from it (Sahih Muslim)

The apparent meaning of the Hadith would discount any notion of a Prophet being alive, in the apparent sense, who was upon the Earth on that night. So we are left with Jesus and Idris, who is identified as Elijah, being alive in Heaven. I strongly believe that of the Prophets these two are for sure alive without having tasted death yet, though they reside in Heaven for Allah physically raised them up.

The Messenger of Allah is Among You (Surah 3:101; 49:7)

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

The idea of the Twelver Shi’a that they have an Imam but that he is gha’ib (absent) is plainly ridiculous. What is the purpose of having an Imam if he is totally inaccessible and not performing any function of Imamate? The Twelvers claim their Twelfth Imam initially went into hiding, the Ghaibat al-Sughra, to escape detection by the Abbasid government at the time which would have been inclined to murder him. But during this initial period of absence and concealment from the general public, the Twelfth Imam maintained contact with a select number of authorized deputies or representatives, who conveyed his instructions to the Twelver Shi’a community. This state of affairs continued for seventy years, all the while the Twelvers were eagerly expecting his reappearance. But their hopes were dashed when after such an extended period of time the Imam had not yet resurfaced and it was clear that if he even existed and was still alive he had reached the end of his natural lifespan. So the elders of the Twelver community invented a new doctrine, the Ghaibat al-Kubra. According to the Twelvers, after seventy years the circumstances were still not appropriate for the Twelfth Imam to reappear and now he had gone into a sort of supernatural occultation whose duration is indefinite, and neither would it be possible for any one to act as his authorized agent and envoy to serve as a medium between him and the community. Now over a thousand years have gone by yet the Twelvers claim their Twelfth Imam is still alive somewhere, biding his time in concealment from the public. Yet the Abbasid government is long gone and no more. There is no more question of security given that the Twelvers have several places in the world under their control and influence, especially Iran and Iraq, in the former having established a State in his name. What then is preventing the Twelfth Imam from appearing and assuming his responsibilities of Imamate? If he is still fearful for his safety, does it not indicate his impotence, yet the Twelver Shi’a expect him to accomplish incredible feats and bring about a worldwide transformation.

Consider also the doctrine of the Tayyibi Isma’ilis known as Satr (concealment). It is a little different than the Twelver conception of Ghaiba. According to the Isma’ili doctrine, there were times when their Imam’s life was in danger so went into hiding and was concealed from the public. Before going into such a concealment, he would authorize an agent to represent him and act on his behalf to lead the community. Such a state of affairs apparently existed after the death of their Imam, Muhammad bin Isma’il (grandson of Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq) until the establishment of the Fatimid government in Egypt when the Isma’ili Imam reappeared and took charge of his leadership responsibilities. But when their twenty-first Imam, al-Tayyib, was born, he had to be taken into concealment due to his life being jeopardized by a rival Isma’ili faction (the Nizaris). The Imamate of the Nizaris has remained present till this day, and they consider the Aga Khan their living, present Imam. But the Tayyibis have, since the concealment of al-Tayyib, been led by the Da’i al-Mutlaq, the authorized representative of the concealed Imam. According to the Isma’ili doctrine, the Da’i al-Mutlaq is relatively autonomous, and appoints his successor of his own prerogative, as he is not in contact with the concealed Imam. Furthermore, the Isma’ili doctrine of Satr differs from the Twelver doctrine of Ghaiba in that the Isma’ilis say their line of Imams continues in concealment, with Imams dying naturally and being succeeded by their sons, though all of this is in concealment, and their identity remain unknown to all. Compared to the Twelver doctrine of Ghaiba, it has to be said that the Isma’ili doctrine of Satr is relatively more logical and coherent. Yet for the Tayyibi Isma’ilis, for all intents and purposes, the Da’i al-Mutlaq has essentially usurped the role of the Imamate, and the existence of a concealed Imamate seems useless.

As for us Sunni Muslims, we do not have a conception of an infallible Imamate. For us, the Prophets are the only infallible, inerrant guides that Allah raised up for the benefit of mankind, and the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, is the last Prophet after whom the institution of Prophesy has concluded, having reached its pinnacle in beauty and perfection. For us, an Imam is a pious, male Muslim who wields leadership over the people, though not necessarily the entire Ummah, either formally or informally. Here formally means in the sense of being in charge of the affairs of the government, meaning a ruler, and informally means wielding considerable influence over the people without temporal authority. So we Sunnis consider sayyiduna Husain, Ali al-Sajjad, Muhammad al-Baqir and Ja’far al-Sadiq our Imams, though none of them were rulers, and we do not consider them infallible and divinely appointed as Prophets are, unlike the Imamiya Shi’a. Yet it is necessary that if someone is actually an Imam that he is a public figure accessible to the public, someone who is practically leading and guiding them. An Imam that is invisible, concealed, hidden or inaccessible for a long duration of time defeats the very purpose of him being an Imam.

So the Isma’ili doctrine of Satr is strange because according to it many Imams have come and gone whose identity no one knows and who practically didn’t perform the function of Imamate for even a single day.

But here I would like to reveal a subtle truth that among us Sunnis there is a conception of Satr that many may be unaware of. It is that the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, after having passed away from this world, is nevertheless alive with a higher form of life except that now he is concealed from us. Therefore, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, is Mastur (concealed), despite being alive and present in Medina. The basis for this doctrine is the Holy Quran:

وَکَیۡفَ تَکۡفُرُوۡنَ وَاَنۡتُمۡ تُتۡلٰی عَلَیۡکُمۡ اٰیٰتُ اللّٰہِ وَفِیۡکُمۡ رَسُوۡلُہٗ

And how can you disbelieve while upon you are recited the Signs of Allah and among you is His Messenger

(Surah 3, Ayah 101)

وَاعۡلَمُوۡۤا اَنَّ فِیۡکُمۡ رَسُوۡلَ اللّٰہِ

And know that among you is the Messenger of Allah

(Surah 49, Ayah 7)

The Hadith of the Prophet, peace be upon him, makes plain the meaning of the reality described in these Verses for the time subsequent to his passing away:

‌الأَنْبِيَاءُ ‌أَحْيَاءٌ ‌فِي ‌قُبُورِهِمْ يُصَلُّونَ

The Prophets are alive in their graves, praying (Musnad Abi Ya’la; v.6, p.148, #3425 & Musnad al-Bazar; v.13, p.299, #6888)

In his checking of this Hadith, Husain Salim Asad has graded it “Isnaduhu Sahih”.

However, the Satr of our Prophet, peace be upon him, is somewhat different than that Isma’ili conception of Satr of their Imams. Firstly, the Prophet, peace be upon him, is theoretically accessible at his grave, as we known from the practice of some of the Salaf who would go to his grave and ask him to pray for them. And the Prophet, peace be upon him, would usually appear in the dream of such an individual who requested his intercession at his grave. So we also know the exact location of our Prophet, peace be upon him, despite him being concealed from us. The Prophet, peace be upon him, is exactly alive as he was alive before he tasted death, the only difference is that we are unable to perceive his life subsequent to his having tasted death:

بَلۡ اَحۡیَآءٌ وَّلٰکِنۡ لَّا تَشۡعُرُوۡنَ

Rather, they are alive but you do not perceive

(Surah 2, Ayah 154)

Furthermore, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, completed his mission of Prophesy and conveying the Message of Allah during his apparent lifetime. His therefore still being alive, while located in his grave and concealed from us, does not elicit the objection we Sunni Muslims have concerning the Shi’a conceptions of the Ghaiba and Satr of their Imams.

Hypocrites and Apostates are Unreliable

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

Many people are unable to make sense of the attack in Magdeburg, Germany on December 20, 2024, in which a man rammed his vehicle over people participating in a Christmas market. Over two hundred people have been injured in this attack, with at least five having been killed to date. Since so many people are in critical condition many more are expected to die in the coming days.

What makes this incident unusual is that the perpetrator, Taleb bin Jawad Abdulmohsen, is apparently an ex-Muslim, an apostate from Islam (though from a Shi'ite background, making his apostasy nothing remarkable). A Saudi national who was granted asylum in Germany, where he has been a resident since 2006, his social media profile reveals he is strongly critical of Islam. In fact, his hatred of Islam and Muslims is so strong that he is openly supports Zionism and the Islamophobic Far-Right in Europe, including the Alternative for Deutchland (AfD) political party in Germany. Ironically, the AfD and the like are using this mass-murder, committed by one of its ardent backers, as justification for its politics of hostility toward Islam and Muslims. Taleb was deeply critical of the German government for what he perceived as their complacency in the “Islamification” of Germany, and later for what he claimed was their betrayal of Saudi dissidents and other ex-Muslims seeking asylum. This is likely his motive for the mass-murder he committed in Magdeburg, though of course madness is probably another factor. It is quite common for Murtads, apostates from Islam, to eventually be driven insane by the touch of the devils that surround them and have taken their souls captive. They are a people filled with internal rage and whose hearts are blackened with hatred for Allah and His Apostle, peace be upon him. It is also well-known that the overwhelming majority of individuals who leave Islam do so because they are unable to accept the Faith’s restrictions and condemnation against unnatural sexual activity, particularly homosexuality. Upon leaving the Faith they usually go wild in their newfound freedom, and adapt an extremely hedonistic lifestyle which even ordinary non-Muslims find objectionable. Their condition is described by Allah Most High in the following Verse:

لَعَمۡرُکَ اِنَّہُمۡ لَفِیۡ سَکۡرَتِہِمۡ یَعۡمَہُوۡنَ

By your life [My Apostle] they are wandering blindly in their intoxication

(Surah 15, Ayah 72)

This betrayal of the German unbelievers by a Saudi apostate reminds one of a similar treachery committed by the Munafiqin against the Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him.

The story starts with a plot of the Jews of the Bani Nadir tribe to assassinate the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him:

خرج رسول الله ص إِلَى بَنِي النَّضِيرِ يَسْتَعِينُهُمْ فِي دِيَةِ ذَيْنِكَ الْقَتِيلَيْنِ مِنْ بَنِي عَامِرٍ اللَّذَيْنِ قَتَلَ عَمْرُو بْنُ أُمَيَّةَ الضَّمْرِيُّ لِلْجِوَارِ الَّذِي كَانَ رَسُولُ الله عَقَدَهُ لَهُمَا - كَمَا حَدَّثَنِي يَزِيدُ بْنُ رُومَانَ- وَكَانَ بَيْنَ بَنِي النَّضِيرِ وَبَيْنَ بَنِي عَامِرٍ حلف وعقد فلما أتاهم رسول الله يَسْتَعِينُهُمْ فِي دِيَةِ ذَيْنِكَ الْقَتِيلَيْنِ قَالُوا نَعَمْ يَا أَبَا الْقَاسِمِ نُعِينُكَ عَلى مَا أَحْبَبْتَ مِمَّا اسْتَعَنْتَ بِنَا عَلَيْهِ ثُمَّ خَلا بَعْضُهُمْ بِبَعْضٍ فَقَالُوا إِنَّكُمْ لَنْ تَجِدُوا هَذَا الرَّجُلَ على مثل حاله هذه- ورسول الله إِلى جَنْبِ جِدَارٍ مِنْ بُيُوتِهِمْ قَاعِدٌ- فَقَالُوا مَنْ رَجُلٌ يَعْلُو عَلَى هَذَا الْبَيْتِ فَيُلْقِي عَلَيْهِ صَخْرَةً فَيَقْتُلُهُ بِهَا فَيُرِيحُنَا مِنْهُ فَانْتُدِبَ لِذَلِكَ عَمْرُو بْنُ جِحَاشِ بْنِ كَعْبٍ أَحَدُهُمْ فَقَالَ أَنَا لِذَلِكَ فَصَعِدَ لِيُلْقِيَ عَلَيْهِ الصَّخْرَةَ- كما قال- ورسول الله فِي نَفَرٍ مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ فِيهِمْ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وعمر وعلى فاتى رسول الله ص الْخَبَرُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ بِمَا أَرَادَ الْقَوْمُ فَقَامَ وَقَالَ لأَصْحَابِهِ لا تَبْرَحُوا حَتَّى آتِيَكُمْ وَخَرَجَ رَاجِعًا إِلَى الْمَدِينَةِ فَلَمَّا اسْتَلْبَثَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَصْحَابُهُ قَامُوا فِي طَلَبِهِ فَلَقَوْا رَجُلا مُقْبِلا مِنَ الْمَدِينَةِ فَسَأَلُوهُ عَنْهُ فَقَالَ رَأَيْتُهُ دَاخِلا المدينة فاقبل اصحاب رسول الله حَتَّى انْتَهَوْا إِلَيْهِ ‌فَأَخْبَرَهُمُ ‌الْخَبَرَ ‌بِمَا ‌كَانَتْ ‌يَهُودُ ‌قَدْ ‌أَرَادَتْ من الغدر به وامر رسول الله ص بِالتَّهَيُّؤِ لِحَرْبِهِمْ وَالسَّيْرِ إِلَيْهِمْ

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, went out to Banu Nadir to ask for their help in the blood money of the two men killed from Banu Amir whom Amr ibn Umayyah ad-Damri had killed because of the protection that the Messenger of Allah had made for them and there was an alliance and a contract between Banu Nadir and Banu Amir. So when the Messenger of Allah came to them to ask for their help in the blood money of those two men killed, they said: Yes, O Abul-Qasim, we will help you with what you liked what you asked us for help with. Then some of them spoke to one another and said, “You will never find this man in such a state as this.” The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was sitting next to a wall of their houses. They said, “Who is the man who will climb up to this house and throw a rock at him and kill him with it, thus relieving us of him?” So Amr bin Jihash bin Ka’b, one of them, volunteered for this, and he said, “I will.” So he went up to throw the rock at him - as he said - and the Messenger of God was with a group of his companions, among them Abu Bakr, Umar and Ali. Then the news came to the Messenger of God from Heaven about what the people wanted, so he stood up and said to his companions, “Do not move until I come to you.” Then he went out, returning to Medina. When the Messenger of God had tarried for a long time, his companions went in search of him and they met a man coming from Medina, so they asked him about him. He said: I saw him entering the city, and the companions of the Messenger of God approached him until they reached him. He informed them of the news of what the Jews had intended to do to him, and the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, ordered them to prepare to fight them and to march towards them (Tarikh at-Tabari; v.2, pp.551-552)

So when the Prophet, peace be upon him, ordered the banishment of the Banu Nadir for their treachery, the Munafiqin, led by Ibn Ubayy, sent them a dispatch pledging to protect them, and this is mentioned by Allah Most High in the Holy Quran:

اَلَمۡ تَرَ اِلَی الَّذِیۡنَ نَافَقُوۡا یَقُوۡلُوۡنَ لِاِخۡوَانِہِمُ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا مِنۡ اَہۡلِ الۡکِتٰبِ لَئِنۡ اُخۡرِجۡتُمۡ لَنَخۡرُجَنَّ مَعَکُمۡ وَلَا نُطِیۡعُ فِیۡکُمۡ اَحَدًا اَبَدًا ۙ وَّاِنۡ قُوۡتِلۡتُمۡ لَنَنۡصُرَنَّکُمۡ ؕ وَاللّٰہُ یَشۡہَدُ اِنَّہُمۡ لَکٰذِبُوۡنَ

Have you not seen those who are hypocrites? They said to their brethren, those who disbelieve among the people of the Scripture: “If you are expelled we shall go out with you, and we will never obey anyone against you. And if you are fought against will aid you.” But Allah bears witness that they are liars

(Surah 59, Ayah 11)

لَئِنۡ اُخۡرِجُوۡا لَا یَخۡرُجُوۡنَ مَعَہُمۡ ۚ وَلَئِنۡ قُوۡتِلُوۡا لَا یَنۡصُرُوۡنَہُمۡ ۚ وَلَئِنۡ نَّصَرُوۡہُمۡ لَیُوَلُّنَّ الۡاَدۡبَارَ ۟ ثُمَّ لَا یُنۡصَرُوۡنَ

If they are expelled, they will not go out with them, and if they are fought they will not aid them. And even if they aided them they would assuredly turn [their] backs. Then they would not be aided

(Surah 59, Ayah 12)

And so the Bani Nadir decided to remain put and defy the Prophet’s order of banishment, having confidence in the pledge of the Hypocrites to defend them. Little did they know that the Hypocrites, because of their cowardice, low character and morals, would betray them and fail to show up to defend them. And this reveals the fact that the hypocrites (fake Muslims), many of whom eventually openly renounce Islam as apostates, are slimier than even the Jews and other unbelievers who are hostile to the Believers.

New Catholic Heresy: Blessing Homosexuals

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

A new abomination of the Roman Catholic Church is the Fiducia Supplicans controversy. The antichrist and taghut Jorge Mario Bergoglio, known as “Pope Francis” has publicly expressed accommodating views on homosexuals and the so-called LGBTQ community. He opposes the criminalization of homosexuality. In the Fiducia Supplicans, the Church has gone further in allowing for priests to bless same-sex couples: “Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit.” One is at a loss as to what could possibly be “true, good, and humanly valid” in a same-sex relationship, which is intrinsically illicit and abominable. It is clear that the Church is heading in the direction of acceptance, tolerance and even celebration of homosexuality, like many liberal Protestant denominations have already done.

New Catholic Heresy: Abolition of the Death Penalty

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

The Roman Catholic Church is objectively a false religious institution because it constantly amends and updates its own teachings. Whereas in the past the Church was an extremely bloodthirsty and violent institution that called for the Crusades and the violent purge of heretics and heathens, today it calls for the abolition of the death penalty: “Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good. Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption. Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2267)

This teaching is evil and opposes what Allah, Holy and Exalted is He, says:

یٰۤاَیُّہَا الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا کُتِبَ عَلَیۡکُمُ الۡقِصَاصُ فِی الۡقَتۡلٰی

O you who believe! Equitable retribution in the matter of the slain is prescribed for you

(Surah 2, Ayah 178)

وَلَکُمۡ فِی الۡقِصَاصِ حَیٰوۃٌ یّٰۤاُولِی الۡاَلۡبَابِ لَعَلَّکُمۡ تَتَّقُوۡنَ

And there is life for you in retribution, O people of understanding, that you may become righteous

(Surah 2, Ayah 179)

Rejection of the death penalty is a heresy that has appeared in modern times. Apart from Islam, historically, the Church and the nation of Israel also accepted it.

Permitting Unnatural Sex Sign of a False Religion

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

One of the signs of a false religion is that it permits that which is abominable. Islam strictly prohibits sodomy, which is not merely the homosexual act but would necessarily include a man penetrating his wife in her anus (anal intercourse). Hence, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said:

مَنْ أَتَى حَائِضًا أَوِ امْرَأَةً فِي دُبُرِهَا أَوْ كَاهِنًا فَقَدْ كَفَرَ بِمَا أُنْزِلَ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ

Whoever comes to a menstruating woman [for intercourse] or to a woman in her anus, or goes to a soothsayer has disbelieved in what was sent down to Muhammad (Jami’ al-Tirmidhi)

مَلْعُونٌ مَنْ أَتَى امْرَأَتَهُ فِي دُبُرِهَا

Accursed is the one who comes to his wife [for intercourse] in her anus (Sunan Abi Dawud)

On the basis of this and many other Hadith it is established in the Shari’ah of Islam that anal sex is totally prohibited and considered a cursed, abominable act. Incidentally, having intercourse with one’s wife when she is menstruating is also an abominable act. That is because Islam is a religion of purity, while these perverted sexual acts are disgusting and unholy.

Yet we find that in the societies and cultures of the infidels they are not only widespread but celebrated. For instance, the phrase “earning red wings” in American culture is a celebrated custom of a man having sex with his partner while she is menstruating.

Likewise, in the Tantric tradition of Hinduism “Chandamaharoshana-tantra goes even further and declares: A man should regard every substance discharged from a woman’s body as pure and should be willing to touch it and ingest it if requested to do so.” (Menstruation Across Cultures: The Sabarimala Confusion—A Historical Perspective by Nithin Sridhar, pp.25-26) “This association of menstruation with sacredness is further reinforced in Tantric practices such as Yoni Puja (worship of the female Yoni), wherein a ritual worship is carried out not only of a woman, but also of her Yoni or Vagina...Menstrual blood is, in fact, considered pure and sacred, and plays a very important role in these Tantric rituals...Describing the menstrual blood as a pure and eternal substance, Kaulajnananirnaya of Matsyendranath (Patala 8), says: ‘In Kaula Agama, the five pure and eternal substances are ash, wife’s nectar, semen, menstrual blood and ghee mixed together. In occassional rites and in [the] acts of Kama Siddhi, the great discharge is without doubt and most certainly what one should do in Kaula Agama...One should always consume the physical blood and semen. Dearest One, this is the obligation of the Yoginis and Siddhas.’...It further notes in Patala 18 that: Blood is the female (Vama) elixir. Mixed with wine and semen, it is the Absolute.” (ibid, p.38) “The Bauls believe that through the ritual practice of sexual Yoga during menstruation, the ‘fish’ (the feminine aspect of the divine) that ‘swims’ in the menstrual fluid could be united with the Kshir, and a state of Yogic bliss or Ananda can be attained. In other words, the Bauls perform sexual intercourse during menstruation as a means to attain divine bliss and spiritual emancipation...Even Yoga-upanishad texts like Yoga-Shikha Upanishad, which is among the 108 authentic Upanishads listed in Muktika Upanishad, describes sexual sadhana during menstruation as ‘Raja-Yoga’. It says: There abides in the great spot in the middle of the Yonis of creatures: Rajas (menstrual fluid) resembling the Japa and Bandhuka flowers in colour, well-protected and (representing) the Devi (feminine) principle. By the conjunction of the Rajas with the Retas (of the male organ), (i.e., of Shakti with Shiva), there is what is known as Raja-yoga. From Raja-yoga (the Yogin) shines out after attaining the psychic powers of attenuation and the like.” (ibid, pp.40-41) “menstruation...becomes associated with ritual Shaucha (purity), sexual intercourse and worship in the case of Yoni puja, Deha sadhana and similar other Tantric practices.” (ibid, p.42)

Sikhism teaches that all taboos and restrictions associated with menstruation are false, and allows for sexual intimacy during menstruation. Likewise, Christianity, which dispenses with the ceremonial Mosaic Laws, doesn’t consider sexual intimacy during menstruation sinful.

But while Judaism, like Islam, strictly prohibits sexual intimacy during menstruation, it differs from the latter on the question of anal sex: “The Talmud (Nedarim 20a-b) states: R. Yohanan b. Dahavai said, The ministering angels told me four things. Why are people born lame? Because [their fathers] flipped over their tables (that is, had anal intercourse). Later in the discussion, R. Yohanan said, These are the words of Yohanan b. Dahavai, but the Sages said that the halakha does not follow Yohanan b. Dahavai. Rather, whatever a man wishes to do with his wife, he may do. The Talmud further recounts: A certain woman came to R. Yehuda Ha-Nasi and said to him, I set the table for my husband, and he overturned it. (I.e., I prepared for normal intercourse, and he penetrated me anally. Is this forbidden?) R. Yehuda Ha-Nasi replied, My child, the Torah permits this. What then can I do? His answer implies that he was uncomfortable with this, but could not forbid it since the Torah allows it. Perhaps in this case the woman took no pleasure in it, but agreed on condition that it was not prohibited. The Talmud continues with yet another story: A woman came to Rav and said, Rabbi, I set the table for my husband, and he overturned it. He replied, How is this any different from fish? Rav was invoking an opinion of the Sages cited a few lines earlier: Whatever a man wishes to do with his wife, he may do. An analogy can be drawn to meat from the butcher. If he wishes to eat it salted, he may; if he wants to eat it roasted, he may; if he wants to eat it seethed, he may; if he wants to eat it stewed, he may. The same is true of fish delivered from the fisherman. The implication is that according to Rav, there is no prohibition, just as a person may eat fish however he likes.”

Incidentally, anal intercourse is permitted in the heretical Twelver Shi’ah sect. So it is sufficient to reject these false religions (Tantric Hinduism, Sikhism, Christianity, Judaism, Shi’ism, etc.) because they permit sexual activity which is unnatural and abominable.

Jesus is the Word of God

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله

In Islam one of the names of the Messiah Jesus, peace be upon him, is كلمة الله the “Word of Allah”. He is unique in the sense of being the only human who is given this name, which is otherwise reserved for Revelation and Scripture. Allah says:

اَنَّ اللّٰہَ یُبَشِّرُکَ بِیَحۡیٰی مُصَدِّقًۢا بِکَلِمَۃٍ مِّنَ اللّٰہِ

Allah gives you glad tidings of Yahya, who shall testify of a Word from Allah

(Surah 3, Ayah 39)

So one of the functions of the Prophet Yahya—John the Baptist—was to attest the Messiah Jesus who is called a “Word from Allah” in this Ayah.

اِذۡ قَالَتِ الۡمَلٰٓئِکَۃُ یٰمَرۡیَمُ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ یُبَشِّرُکِ بِکَلِمَۃٍ مِّنۡہُ ٭ۖ اسۡمُہُ الۡمَسِیۡحُ عِیۡسَی ابۡنُ مَرۡیَمَ

When the Angels said: Mary! Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him. His name is the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary

(Surah 3, Ayah 45)

ؕ اِنَّمَا الۡمَسِیۡحُ عِیۡسَی ابۡنُ مَرۡیَمَ رَسُوۡلُ اللّٰہِ وَکَلِمَتُہٗ ۚ اَلۡقٰہَاۤ اِلٰی مَرۡیَمَ وَرُوۡحٌ مِّنۡہُ

Verily, the Messiah Jesus son of Mary is the Apostle of Allah and His Word conveyed to Mary, and a Spirit from Him

(Surah 4, Ayah 171)

And the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, informed us that on Judgment Day the Prophet Moses will tell those who come to him seeking his intercession:

اذْهَبُوا إِلَى ‌عِيسَى ‌كَلِمَةِ ‌اللهِ وَرُوحِهِ

Go to Jesus, the Word of Allah and His Spirit (Sahih Muslim)

That the name of Jesus is “Word of God” is affirmed in the Bible: “And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God” (Revelation 19:13)

The explanation of Jesus’s name “Word of God” is that he is the one to whom the Word of God, the Scripture that God spoke and breathed to His Prophets and Apostles, points to the Messiah. It also means that through the word “Become” Jesus was created:

اِنَّ مَثَلَ عِیۡسٰی عِنۡدَ اللّٰہِ کَمَثَلِ اٰدَمَ ؕ خَلَقَہٗ مِنۡ تُرَابٍ ثُمَّ قَالَ لَہٗ کُنۡ فَیَکُوۡنُ

Surely, the example of Jesus with Allah is like the example of Adam: He created him from dust then said to him “Be!” and he was

(Surah 3, Ayah 59)

And in a sense every Prophet is the Word of God since he speaks on God’s behalf the words of God. Why then is Jesus singled out with the name كلمة الله in Islam? For one thing, it may be a confirmation of the vision of John of Patmos, who may have been one of the mursalin or apostles of the Messiah; wherein Jesus is called “The Word of God”. Indeed, much of the content in the Book of Revelation accords with what is taught in the Holy Quran and Prophesy of Muhammad, peace be upon him. I believe that Jesus being the Word of God is due to the emphasis on the Word in his prophetic ministry, and that in his prophetic capacity he wielded authority to repudiate the argumentation of his scholarly opposition in the form of the scribes, lawyers and priests who attempted to counter him with an appeal to the written Scripture. So it signifies that the Prophet is the Word of God as the Scripture is. And this name being singled out for Jesus among all the Prophets and Apostles may also be in reference to the power of his breath and his words: “with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked” (Isaiah 11:4), which the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, confirmed when he said:

فَلَا يَحِلُّ لِكَافِرٍ يَجِدُ ‌رِيحَ ‌نَفَسِهِ إِلَّا مَاتَ وَنَفَسُهُ يَنْتَهِي حَيْثُ يَنْتَهِي طَرْفُهُ

An unbeliever who feels his breath will die, and his breath will reach the extent of his sight (Sahih Muslim)

This suggests that merely by speaking the Word of God and breathing the Messiah shall slay the wicked unbelievers.

This destructive power associated with the mouth and breath of the Messiah is mentioned elsewhere in the Bible too: “And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will slay with the breath of His mouth” (2 Thessalonians 2:8) “And from His mouth proceeds a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations” (Revelation 19:15)