Botros, Father Zakaria ten demands


In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad.
Allāh–the Glorious and the High,
Lord of the worlds
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms.


There are instances where the Qur’an differs from the Bible, such as the Bible stating that Jesus was born in a stable whereas Allāh revealed in His Qur’an that Mary had birthing pains by a date-palm (though it is not necessarily so that Mary gave birth by the palm tree)–(Luke 2:7; Qur’an 19:22-23). In such matters where the Qur’an differs with the Bible, the Christian argues that the Biblical account is to be taken as correct; seeing that the Bible preceded the Qur’an. But age/antiquity is no guarantee of authenticity or accuracy.

   Also, Christians make all kinds of fancy claims from the Bible in their effort to prove that Jesus was greater than Mohammad. However, the Bible, not only contains “monumental errors” and was “tampered with” as Christians have admitted –a Book from God would not have “errors”– the Books of the Old Testament “were written in several languages over a period of more than nine hundred years, based on oral traditions;” and the Gospels were written more than a hundred years after Jesus; and are “according to” Matthew, Mark, Luke and John –not according to God or Jesus– who “were not eye-witnesses of the data they recorded” and is the King James “Version” –not God’s or Jesus’ Version. And, initially Jesus’ teachings were transmitted “orally” and the current four Gospels did not acquire official status until “170 A.D.” (some 140 years after Christ) and not until “excisions” were made from the prevailing “abundance of literature” on Jesus and after numerous other “Gospels were suppressed.”

So unless Christians have the original HEBREW text of the Old Testament and the original HEBREW or ARAMAIC text (as Jesus was said to have spoken Aramaic) of the Gospels to support their claims their submissions are useless. Judge Julie would not blink twice to throw such “hearsay” materials and its submitter(s) out of Court.



In a video presentation, on the Internet, Father Botros made 10 demands from Muslims (though there were actually only 9, number 5 was expunged. Perhaps if Father Zakaria should study Islam rather than ape Ibn Warraq, seemingly –as charges he made against Islam have already been debunked in my response to Ibn Warraq’s Why I am Not a Muslim). Father Botros also made other statements on various video presentations some of which I will address later.

   First an insight into Jesus. And these are the cardinal doctrines of Christianity:
   -whereas some Christians say Jesus is God some say he is only son of God; who is right?
   -whereas some say there is 
trinity some reject Trinity; who is right?
   -whereas some say Christ died for 
inherited sin some say he died for committed sin; who is right?
   -whereas some believe Jesus was killed, buried, and raised, “some of the early Christian sects did not believe that Christ was killed on the cross. The Basilidans believed that some one else was substituted for him. The Docetae held that Christ never had a real physical or natural body, but only an apparent or phantom body, and that his Crucifixion was only apparent, not real. The Marcionite Gospel (about A.D. 138) denied that Jesus was born, and merely said that he appeared in human form.”1
–(notably these people were closer in time to Jesus and should know more about Jesus than later Christians). 
   Such are Christians and Christianity.

   The doctrines of Trinity; inherited sin, and vicarious atonement were devised by Christians three hundred years after Jesus.

   The Trinity “developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies …The Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is “of the same essence [homoousios] as the Father,” even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit.2
“A council of the clergy was held at Nicaea, in 325 A.D. which council confirmed the doctrine of trinity …The clergy have ever held to this senseless God-dishonoring doctrine…If you ask a clergyman what is meant by the trinity he says: “That is mystery.” He does not know, and no one else knows, because it is false. Never was there a more deceptive doctrine advanced than that of the trinity. It could have originated only in one mind, and that the mind of Satan the Devil.”(For more, see Jesus-trinity).
“The Christian Church had caused a General Council of the Church dignitaries to be appointed in A.D. 325 in which certain doctrines were made to be the foundation of the Christian Church, and belief therein was made essential for one to be Christian. This is known as the Nicene Creed. Under this, the confirmed doctrine of Atonement may be explained as follows:

   (i) Adam (and Eve) committed a Sin, and this Sin was inherited by their descendants.
  (ii) The attribute of “Justice” in God demanded that a sin must be punished, for the wage of Sin is death.
  (iii) God sent his son Jesus Christ to this world, so that he may die on the Cross an “accursed” death, and after spending some time in Hell, atone for the Sins of the human race, and then be resurrected again.”4
(No human concoction can give a life in heaven).  

   Instead of wailing and gnashing their teeth over their false religion Father Botros (and Christians) try to find non-existent faults with Islam and Mohammad.  What a pathetic people. 
   Unlike Christianity, the five cardinal doctrines of Islam are clearly expressed in the Qur’an5 and observed by the Prophet Mohammad.

Here are Father Zakaria Botros’
10 (9) demands from Muslims

1. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims delete verses of the Qur’an and Hadith that deny the divinity of Jesus.
   Response. Sure we will! If you can prove that Jesus claimed divinity! On the contrary, Jesus declared that he was a prophet sent Jesus-only for Jews; that he had no power of his own and that he was a Muslim and taught Islam.
   And he, Jesus, as your Gospels show, considers you, Father Botros (unless you are Jewish) and all other Arabs and non-Jews as “dogs” and “swine” and he preached in parables so that you would not understand and be saved. 

   Moreover Jesus did NOT give “all truth” but commanded his people to follow the Comforter (Mohammad) who guided us into “all truth.” There is nothing omitted from the Qur’an that is needed for our personal, moral, social, intellectual and spiritual upliftment!

   It is a puzzlement that Father Botros and Christians would attribute divinity to Jesus when God made it clear that Jesus would only be “CALLED” son of God–(Luke 1:35) and the Bible is pregnant with a legion of sons and daughters of God; even Satan is son of God.
   And Isaiah 7:14 and Matthew 1:23 state that only Jesus’ NAME shall be “Emmanuel” (which means “God with us),” NOT that Jesus is “God with us.”
   Is it not strange –or even weird some might say– that God and/or son of God would need to eat butter and honey in order to know evil from good?: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall CALL HIS NAME Immanuel. BUTTER AND HONEY SHALL HE EAT, THAT HE MAY KNOW TO REFUSE THE EVIL, AND CHOOSE THE GOOD”–(Isaiah 7:14-15). What kind of God and son of God would need to eat butter and honey (or any thing) so as to “refuse the evil, and choose the good?”

   Moreover, one of the Father’s and Christendom’s great saints, St.(?) Paul, considers this Christians God and son of God as being made into a “sin” a “curse” and “lower than the angels”–(2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 3:13; Heb. 2:9). 
   Clearly to ascribe a son to God –and fatherhood requires the joining of sperm and ovum, and Mary was not the consort of God so that her son, Jesus, should be son of God– is a heinous sin; it is such an “abominable assertion” as Allāh, God, reveals, that “the heavens may almost be rent thereat, and the earth cleave asunder, and the mountains fall down in pieces, that they ascribe a son to the Beneficent”–(Qur’an 19:88-91. Christians are tripping over each other’s shadow to concoct potions to make son of God and the “God-dishonouring” trinity palatable to an intelligent population).

   It is doubtful that a man of dignity would appreciate a child being wrongly ascribed to him; and that a father would appreciate that his child give paternal dues to another. That son of God is only a figurative expression and an epithet of honor is made clear by God: “the Lord came unto Nathan, saying, Go and tell my servant David….I will be his father, and he shall be my son”–(2 Samuel 7:4, 5, 14).

   Interestingly, whereas Matthew and Luke waxed glowingly about Mary’s “immaculate” conception, Mark and John have absolutely nothing to say about this grand “miraculous” entry of their God/son of God into the womb. Perhaps Mary conceiving a child “of the Holy Ghost” was too wide a fantasy for them –maybe they reasoned that since the father Son and Holy Ghost are said to be one, and as Jesus is believed to be God, Jesus would have conceived himself. And Mary’s conception would be effected by her son: Jesus would have effected his own conception and with his mother.

   And, queerly, at Jesus’ baptism God’s Spirit in the form of a dove came and alighted on Jesus and a voice from heaven said: “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”–(Matt. 3:17; also 17:5).
   Whereas this “voice” from heaven is assumed to be that of God, interestingly Jesus said: “Ye have NEITHER heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape”–(John 5:37). Since the “voice” of God has never been heard at any time, to whom then does this “voice” belongs?
   Is it the “voice” of Satan claiming Jesus as his “beloved Son” –Who other than Satan has such power?).

   Paul who knows more than Christians and whom Christians follow taught that Jesus had a human father, he wrote:

   (a) “Therefore (David) being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the FRUIT OF HIS LOINS, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne”–(Acts 2:30); 
   (b) “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ…which was made of the SEED OF DAVID ACCORDING TO THE FLESH” –(Romans 1:3); 
  (c) “Remember that Jesus Christ of the SEED OF DAVID”–(2 Timothy 2:8).  And “seed” is sperm, and “according to the flesh” is male-female union: sexual intercourse.

   As Christianity is built on the foundation of Jesus being son of God  and as there is NO son of God (and NO  inherited sin and thus no vicarious atonement, and NO trinity) what then is Christianity standing on?

   (As noted, Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims delete verses of the Qur’an and Hadith that deny the divinity of Jesus.
  Christians claim that the Bible is the Word of God and that Jesus is God. And their God/Jesus commanded in the Bible (Leviticus 20:13 and Deut. 22:20-21), respectively, about homosexuals and the damsel who does not bleed on her wedding night:  “If a  man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them;”  “But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.”
   Would Father Zakaria Botros demand that his Church and the Pope and all factions of Christianity enforce these commands from their God/Jesus?  Would Father Zakaria Botros demand that Christians not bless the homosexuals in marriage (nor consecrate them as vicars of Christ)?
   Clearly, to apply the laws of God is of major principal importance than making preposterous demands on Muslims to adulterate our Holy Book (as Christians have adulterated their
Bible) to satisfy Christian’s sentiments. (There is no death for homosexuals & lesbians in Islam).
   On the obverse, (never mind the Gospels derogatory labeling of non-Jews as ”dogs” and “swine”) Muslims, being upholders of the Purity of God –He, Allāh, is One and Only; the Eternal, Absolute, on    Whom all depend; He begets not, nor is He begotten; and there is none like Him (Qur’an 112:1-4)–,  have the right to “demand” that Christians “delete” from their creed the false and blasphemous doctrines of divinity of Jesus, inherited sin and vicarious atonement).

2. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims accept that Jesus is the spirit and word of Allāh.
   Response: What is so special about Jesus to single him out for this honor when the spirit of God is in all men, from Adam all the way down to the last child born this very second?–(Qur’an 15:29; 32:9; 38:72; and “Know ye not that…the spirit of God dwelleth in you?”–1 Cor.3:16). 
   As for Jesus being the “word’ of Allāh God; Jesus is termed “a” word –and NOT “the” word– from Allāh–(Qur’an 3:44). “Word” is NOT exclusive to Jesus.
   The words of Allāh are so numerous if all the trees in the earth were pens, and the sea with seven more seas added to it were ink, to write the words of Allāh, the seas would all be exhausted before the words of Allah would be exhausted–(Qur’an 31:27; 18:109. See Qur’an 6:34, 10:64, 66:12 for the “words” of Allāh). Everything created must be a “word” of Allāh. 
   Jesus as “word” means “promise,” as Allāh had promised Mary to give her a son–(Qur’an 3:45). If any needs singling out for special creation it would be Adam and Eve –the first pair.

   Christians try to raise Jesus higher than what he was/is. Any wonder Allāh admonished them to not make excess in their religion, and Jesus warned: “Many will say to me in that day (of resurrection), Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works? And then I will profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity”–(Matt. 7:22-23).
   Which words of Jesus finds consonance in the Qur’an 5:116-117.
And when Allāh will say: O Jesus, son of Mary, didst thou say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allāh? He will say: Glory be to Thee! It was not for me to say what I had no right to say…I said to them naught save as Thou didst command me: Serve Allāh, my Lord and your Lord (comp. Mark 12:29); and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst cause me to die Thou wast the Watcher over them. And Thou art witness of all things.” 
  And to ascribe divinity to Jesus which is the attribute solely of God is blasphemy; and which blasphemy as Jesus said, will lead them to “eternal damnation”: “But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation–(Mark 3:29).

   Christians can save themselves from “eternal damnation” by accepting the Divine truth: Jesus was only a prophet of God sent only for Jews and “There is no God but Allāh; Mohammad is the Messenger of Allāh!” 
    Perhaps Christians are too haughty or have no motivation to fear this “everlasting fire” that “never shall be quenched” and in which there shall be “wailing and gnashing of teeth” as Jesus said–(Matt. 18:8; Mark 9:43; Matt. 23:14, 33; 13:42).
   However, Christians might find motivation if they should stand by a boiling pot and have a few droplets of liquid splash onto their bare skin. They can multiply the sensation by a few thousand degrees and for an eternity instead of a split-second).

   3. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims delete verses of the Qur’an and Hadith that incite killing of Christians, specifically Qur’an 9:29, claiming this is “murder.”
   Response: Firstly, the Qur’an does “not incite killing” of anyone. This verse of Qur’an 9:29 which Father Botros quoted seemingly without knowledge (or care) of its background reads: “Fight those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which Allāh and His Messenger have forbidden, nor follow the Religion of Truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgement of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.” To which Muhammad explains:

“The last word on the wars with the idolaters of Arabia having been said, this verse introduces the subject of fighting with the followers of the Book. Though the Jews had for a long time assisted the idolatrous Arabians in their struggle to uproot Islam, the great Christian power, the Roman Empire, had only just mobilized its forces for the subjection of the new religion, and the Tabuk expedition followed, which constitutes the subject-matter of a large portion of what follows in this chapter. As the object of this Christian power was simply the subjection of the Muslims, the words in which their final vanquishment by the Muslims is spoken of are different from those dealing with the final vanquishment of the idolatrous Arabians. The Qur’an neither required that the idolaters should be compelled to accept Islam, nor was it in any way its object to bring the Christians into subjection. On the other hand, the idolaters wanted to suppress Islam by the sword, and the Christians first moved themselves to bring Muslim Arabia under subjection. The fate of each was, therefore, according to what it intended for the Muslims. The word jizyah is derived from jaza, meaning he gave satisfaction, and means, according to LL, the tax that is taken from the free non-Muslim subjects of the Muslim Government whereby they ratify the compact that ensures them protection; or, according to AH, because it is a compensation for the protection which is guaranteed them, the non-Muslim subjects being free from military service.
The phrase ‘an yad-in has been explained variously. The word yad (lit., hand) stands for power or superiority, the use of the hand being the real source of the superiority of man over all other animals, and the apparent meaning of the phrase is in acknowledgement of your superiority in protecting their lives, etc. (AH). It may also be added that the permission to fight, as given to the Muslims, is subject to the condition that the enemy should first take up the sword, Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you (2:190). The Holy Prophet never overstepped this limit, nor did his followers. He fought against the Arabs when they took up the sword to destroy the Muslims, and he led an expedition against the Christians when the Roman Empire first mobilized its forces with the object of subjugating the Muslims. And so scrupulous was he that, when he found that the enemy had not yet taken the initiative, he did not attack the Roman Empire, but returned without fighting. Later on, however, the Roman Empire, like the Persians, helped the enemies of Islam and fomented trouble against the newly established Muslim Kingdom, as a result of which both these empires came into conflict with the Muslims and, notwithstanding the fact that both the Persians and the Romans were very powerful nations with unlimited resources and strong military organizations, and that they both tried at one and the same time to subjugate Islam, the result was what is predicted here in clear words — they were both reduced to a state of subjection by an insignificant nation like the Arabs.”

   If Islam had “incite killing” of Christians and Jews Prophet Mohammad, on reports that the Romans were preparing for battle, would not have returned from this expedition to Tabuk without wiping out the Romans who were unprepared for war.
If Islam had “incite killing” of Christians and Jews Prophet Mohammad would not have spared the Jews of Khaibar and returned the Torah to them.
   If Islam had “incite killing” of Christians and Jews ‘Umar would not have spared the Christians upon his triumph at Jerusalem. Neither would Salahuddin Ayyub (Saladin) have spared the Christians of Jerusalem; nor would he have invited the Jews back to Jerusalem. 
   If Islam had “incite killing” of Christians and Jews there would not be a Coptic Church in Egypt.
   If Islam had “incite killing” of Christians and Jews there would not be a Cathedral in Istanbul. 

   If Islam had “incite killing” of Christians and Jews there would not be millions of Christians in Muslim lands.

   That the Prophet was required to fight the disbelievers till they say that none has the right to be worshipped but Allāh does not mean that the disbelievers were forced to accept Islam.
   What it means is that just as how they (the disbelievers) had the right to follow in peace what they believe, just as well they must allow the Muslims to follow in peace their belief that none has the right to be worshipped but Allāh.
That the Prophet’s duty was only to deliver the Message of the Qur’an and NOT enforce it is cemented in the following verses from Allāh: “And if thy Lord had pleased, all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them. Wilt thou then force men till they are believers?”–(Qur’an 10:99); “And say: Truth is from your Lord; so let him who please believe, and let him who please disbelieve”–(Qur’an 18:29); “And obey Allāh and obey the Messenger; but if you turn away. the duty of Our Messenger is only to DELIVER (the message) clearly”–(Qur’an 64:12; also 2:272; 3:20; 5:95, 102; 10:99; 13:40; 16:82; 24:54; 29:18; 46:35).
    Islam is the “abode of peace”–(Qur’an 10:25).  

   Regarding the statement of Allāh: “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him” –(Qur’an 3:85).
   Islam means peace and submission to the will of Allāh God. As all prophets submitted to the will of Allāh, they followed Islam. The followers of these prophets who lived by the instructions of their prophets, and thus were submitting to the will of Allāh, were also following Islam.
   However, Jewish belief that they are God’s “chosen people” to the exclusion of others–(Qur’an 62:6-7. Also; 5:18); and Christians divinity of Jesus, inherited sin and vicarious atonement are not Divine revelations –these doctrines were not were not taught by the prophets of Allāh God– and thus the Jews and Christians are not submitting to the will of Allāh God, and thus, are not following Islam. 

   Even if Jews and Christians were following only that which Moses and Jesus taught –and Moses and Jesus foretold the coming of another prophet and commanded their people to follow this new teacher/Comforter who, in the words of Jesus, will guide into “all truth”– once they come to know about the teachings of the Prophet Mohammad, and as Islam is superior to all other religions, whoever rejects Islam is going to Hell; the Prophet Mohammad emphasizes this point: “By Him (Allāh) in whose hand is the life of Muhammad, he who amongst the community of Jews or Christians hears about me, but does not affirm his belief in that which I have been sent and dies in this state (of disbelief) he shall be but one of the denizens of Hell-Fire”–(Muslim, Vol, 1, # 284).

   Allāh God would not call us to account for what we do not know but when knowledge comes to us there is no excuse for not accepting and following it.  There is no Scriptural Message to equal the Message of Islam as brought by the Prophet Mohamad. The Qur’an consists of the teachings of other Scriptures that are applicable for all time, and contains teachings that are not met with in previous Scriptures; thus the Qur'an consists of,  exceeds, and supersedes all Scriptures.

   Whereas Father Botros erroneously charge that the Qur’an and Hadith “incite killing of Christians,” according to the Bible “The Lord is a man of war”–(Exodus 15:3. And considering that Christians claim that Jesus is God then Jesus is “a man of war”).
   Father Botros’ and Christian’s Scriptural history is soaked with the blood of the young and old, including children; not even the “ox, and sheep, and ass” were spared the “edge of the sword,” “but utterly destroyed everything that breathed”–(Deut; 7:1-2; Josh. 6:21; 10:33-40, 12:6); 
  Moreover, Father Botros’ and Christian’s God, Jesus, commanded: “Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished”–(Isaiah 13:16); in fact, even the fetus is not spared: “Everyone that is found shall be thrust through; and everyone that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword,” “and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eye shall NOT spare children,” “Samaria…shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up”–Isaiah 13:15, 18; Hosea 13:16). 
   Even when Father Botros’ God and son of God, Jesus, had no military power he ordered that his enemies who didn’t want him to rule be brought and slain (even though these enemies might not militate against his rule)–(Luke 19:27). Imagine the carnage if this son of God and Christian’s “God” had military power; given that Muslims and Jews and atheists (and perhaps even Hindus) do not accept Jesus as Christian’s project him to be and would thus be considered his enemies, then some six billion people would be slaughtered.
   It is Christians and the Christian’s Bible and God and son of God that “incite killing” of others.  

   4. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims Delete verses of the Qur’an and hadith that incite terrorism and oppression in all forms, such as verses “urging believers to fight,” and hadith that “I was commanded to fight until they say ‘none has the right to be worshipped but Allāh,” claiming that this is “terrorism and murder.” 
   Response: Father Botros needs to read his Bible to know about “terrorism and oppression” and “murder”.
   Islam forbids oppression–(Qur’an 2:193; 8:39; 42:39-42). As noted above there is no “terrorism” in Islam. Muslims are allowed a defensive fighting and to make peace even in the face of possible deception by the enemies–(Qur’an 8:61-62); and that it is better to forgive and reconcile–(Qur’an 42:40-43).
   It is the Christian’s Bible and God and son of God, as shown above, that engages in “terrorism;” (and sanctions slavery and subjugation of women)–(Exodus 21:7; Leviticus 25:44. See

   5. (This was expunged. Though I am eager to know what it was. There is no charge against Allāh, Prophet Mohammad, Islam and the Qur’an that is not trashable. Even some charges against Muslims are easily obliterated).  

   6. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims stop the attack on Jesus and their holy book in Mosques and the media.
   Response:  Will Father Botros call on his Christian brothers and sisters to stop “the attack on” Muslims and their “holy book” in Churches and the media?–See Danish Cartoons & Christian Critics).
   Certainly, Muslims will stop the attack on the Father’s “holy book”! if he can show the “Holy Book” that Allāh revealed, and not the “King James” Version that he and the Pope and the Bible thumpers and their misguided followers are trying to palm off to uninformed and unthinking people as “all” Word of God; and if he can detail these “attacks.”
     However, truth is not “attack.”

   Allāh reveals that the Bible was altered and written by man (which truths are admitted by Christians themselves). And Allāh revealed that son of God belief is paganism (and research has established this without doubt) and that Jesus was only a mortal, and prophet sent to the Israelites, who ate food like all humans (a fact which the Christians of Najran conceded to the Prophet Mohammad).
   If Father Botros Zakaria and Christians can refute these statements by Allāh –and for certain Father Botros and Christians cannot refute these statements– Muslims will “stop the attack” on Jesus and their “holy book” in Mosques and the media.” 
   However, Muslims do NOT “attack” Jesus and the Bible: Muslims comment on Christian’s claims. Muslims teach what Allāh has revealed about Jesus and the Bible, and exposes Christian’s falsehood. Allāh reveals that He raised up messengers among all people and gave them rites and ceremonies. Thus, Muslims have the right to comment on each and every religion that claims Divine dispensation; likewise any non-Muslim has the right to comment on Islam. (As stated, Muslims are to know that there is no charge against Allāh, Prophet Mohammad, Islam and the Qur’an that is not refutable. Even some charges against Muslims are easily refutable).  

   7. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims give people and Muslims freedom to choose their religion and freedom to express their belief. 
   Response: Do Christian Shepherds give the flocks they control the “freedom” to choose their religion or are these sheep required to follow Church dogmas without question –why are some sheep not allowed to wear the cross? Or to fight wars when Jesus explicitly ordered to bring enemies against his rule and slay them?
   Did Christians give Jews and Muslims in Jerusalem and Spain this right? The history of Christianity is evidence that once in power the only choice non-Christians have is either to kiss the useless and ungodly crucifix, lose his head, high-tail it to Buxton or in the case of the Jews of Austria thrown in the furnace..6 (See also
Christianity-enemy to knowledge).
   Allāh/Islam has given man the right to follow whatever he chooses to believe –though faith, like our physical aspects of life, is to be governed by reason: Isaiah 1:18;16:1 Qur’an 25). Muslims are not to deny man this God-given right. What Muslims need to do is learn about Islam and other religions and try and save people from falsehood –to choose a religion other than Islam is like giving up the best of a thing and accept one that is inferior. No religion can be shown to be superior, or equal with, Islam. (See Islam superior to other religions).

   The view that Muslim religious freedom in the West is due to Christian tolerance is a grand illusion. This tolerance is the result of the disempowerment of the Church and the empowerment of secularism –Europe may be the offspring of Christianity but she is not an adherent of the Church. The Church has always been an enemy to knowledge and to the “Other.”7 Non-Christians should go down on their hands and knees and foreheads and thank Allāh God that Christianity is not lording any place in the world. (See Jesus or Mohammad-best system).

   8. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims abolish punishment for apostasy and stop torturing people who convert to Christianity.
   Response: Muslims “torture” them and Christians give them exile, the sword or the fire.  There is no death for apostasy in Islam.  There is death for apostasy in Christianity and Judaism:
-“And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt….If thy brother…entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers…thou shalt surely kill him”–(Deut; 13:5-16).
   -“If there be found among you…man or woman…. And hath gone and served other gods, and worshiped them, either the sun or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded…..Then thou shalt bring forth that man or that woman …and shalt stone them with stones, till they die”–(Deut; 17:2-5).  
    Muslims are not to torture anyone. As stated, Muslims are to learn Islam and Christianity and other religions and try to save the woefully misguided Christians (and others) from impaling their souls on the flames of Hell.
   Allāh informs us that angels pray for all mankind–(Qur’an 42:5), let us Muslims also pray for these Christians who for 2000 years are “wandering in darkness and misunderstanding” and confusion as to who Jesus was and his mission, that they come out from the black hole of falsehood and follow the Divine light of truth: Jesus, who was
a Muslim and taught Islam, was only a prophet sent only for Jews and “There is no God but Allāh, Mohammad is the Messenger of Allāh!” Christian’s and all mankind’s salvation lies in their following the Prophet Mohammad/Islam!

   9. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Arab leaders make formal apologies for the murder of Christians in countries invaded by Islam.
   Response: Have Christian leaders made formal apologies to Muslims (and others) for their murders, considering that “From the dawn of Christianity until today every country of the world has been soaked with blood in the name of Jesus Christ.”8 
   However, Ahmed Deedat has pointed out that “over a hundred million Indonesians are Muslim, yet no conquering Muslim army ever landed on any of its over two thousand islands.” He also points out that in “Malaysia: The overwhelming number of its people in this country are Muslims yet no Muslim soldier had landed there either;” and that in “Africa: The majority of the people on the East coast of Africa as far down as Mozambique, as well as the bulk of the inhabitants on the West coast of the continent are Muslims, but history does not record any invading hoards of Muslims from anywhere. What sword? Where was the sword? The Muslim trader did the job. His good conduct and moral rectitude achieved the miracle of conversion.”9 (The good conduct of the Muslim trader and Islam’s Divine allure of reason!). That Muslims spread Islam by the sword is a myth:

   “History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that   historians have ever repeated.” 10 

   Muslims have generally been tolerant of Christians; though Christians almost invariably prove “treacherous.” Thomas W. Arnold in his book The Preaching of Islam
  “of any organised attempt to force the acceptance of Islam on the non-Muslim population, or of any systematic persecution intended to stamp out the Christian religion, we hear nothing. Had the caliphs chosen to adopt either course of action, they might have swept way Christianity as easily as Ferdinand and Isabella drove Islam out of Spain, or Louis XIV made Protestantism penal in France, or the Jews were kept out of England for 350 years. The Eastern Churches in Asia were entirely cut off from communion with the rest of Christendom, throughout which no one would have been found to lift a finger on their behalf, as heretical communions. So that the very survival of these Churches to the present day is a strong proof of the generally tolerant attitude of the Muhammadan governments towards them.” (p. 80). Mr. Arnold also has noted what may very well be a timeless observation: “Many of the persecutions of the Christians in Muslim countries can   be traced either to distrust of their loyalty, excited by the intrigues and interference of Christian foreigners and the enemies of Islam, or to the bad feeling stirred up by the treacherous or brutal behaviour of the latter towards the Musalmans.” (p. 77).

   Another magnificent demonstration of Islamic “tolerance” is that given by the Caliph ‘Umar upon his conquer of Jerusalem, as noted by Muhammad Ali. When the Christian Patriarch suggested that ‘Umar should offer his prayers –the time being due– at the church of the Resurrection, the honorable Caliph refused; “saying his prayers neither there nor in the famous church of Constantine, where prayer carpets had already been spread out.” Explaining that “Should we say our prayers here,” he observed, “Muslims might some day claim the right to erect a mosque in this place.””12 What magnanimity. There is none that equals Islam’s majestic “tolerance.”

   To emphasize, that Islam forces religion onto people at the point of the sword I only need quote three verses from Allāh:
    -“And if thy Lord had pleased, all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them. Wilt thou then force men till they are believers?”–(10:99);
   -“And say: Truth is from your Lord; so let him who please believe, and let him who please disbelieve”–(Qur’an 18:29);
   -“And the Messenger’s duty is only to DELIVER (the message) plainly”–(Qur’an 24:54. also 2:272; 3:20; 5:95, 102; 10:99; 13:40; 16:82; 29:18; 46:35; 64:12).

   Islam is the “abode of peace”–(Qur’an 10:25). No one can disprove this! This is an open challenge!

   Contrastingly. It is Christianity, as its history and Jesus’ declarations show, that forces religion at the point of the sword: “He that is not with me is AGAINST me”–(Matt. 12:30, Sounds familiar today? That a person is not with you does not necessarily means he is against you: a person can be neutral); and: “Those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and SLAY them before me”–(Luke 22:36; 19:27. Jesus advocates murder). If such views were implemented billions who do not accept Jesus would need to be butchered.

   10. Father Zakaria Botros demands that Arab leaders apologize for insults directed against Christianity throughout history.
   Response: Would Father Botros demand that the Pope and Christians “apologize for insults directed against” Islam and the Prophet Mohammad? See Danish Cartoons & Christian Critics.
   (Father Botros did not give any examples of these “insults”). If he is referring to Allāh’s revealing that 
son of God belief is paganism, that trinity and Mariolatry  are falsehood/blasphemy, (and that inherited sin and vicarious atonement are lies), these are not “insults;” they are truths: the cardinal doctrines of Christianity divinity of Jesus, inherited sin and vicarious atonement– have no Divine foundation, no prophetic foundation, no logical founda-tion and are repugnant to reason. These are not teachings of Christ; in fact even some Christians do not accept trinity and inherited sin.
   As shown in 
Christianity Christians lie on God they lie on Jesus they blame the devil; the Gospels portray Jesus a hypocrite, liar, fraud. 
   Muslims do not apologize for speaking truth! No one should!

   The Father also quotes al-Halabi who is said to have stated that if the Prophet Mohammad wanted a woman, whether she is available or not, whether a slave or married, she is to be made available for him even against her will; and that the Prophet also had the right to put away whoever he wants against her will.
   Al-Halabi may have stated this but can al-Halabi or anyone else give proofs that the Prophet ever did any of these? 
   Instead of commenting on Qur’an 4:24 to besmirch the Prophet, Father Botros and his admirers need to read it in context with verse 23 which are laws regarding what females the Muslim man is allowed to marry.

   Contrastingly, while Father Botros tries to smear Mohammad as a hedonist, he seemed to have forgotten (or tries to hide them by besmirching Mohammad) the sex-capades of the prophets he believes in, as the Bible says: 
   -Abraham married his half-sister, Sarah–(Gen. 20:11-12; such a union is “a wicked thing”–Lev. 20: 17; and Isaac came from such a “wicked” union –from Abraham and Sarah); 
   -Lot –made drunk by his two daughters, and this is one of the dangers of alcohol that Allāh has alarmed us about– dallied with his two daughters and built two nations, the Moabites and the Ammonites–(Gen. 19:30-38. That Lot was “drunk” does not negate the fact that he committed incest with his daughters. He may have been drunk but he was conscious and functional and must have known the girls were his daughters, moreso as he had no wife); 
   Jacob fathered sons with his wives handmaids, Bilhah and Zilpah–(Gen. 30:1-13; and three of these four illegitimate sons, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher, each became a founder of a tribe of the Twelve Tribes of Israel –Rev. 7: 5-8);
   -Judah, who was also a founder of one of the Twelve Tribes of Israel, committed adultery with his daughter-in-law, Tamarr, thinking she was “an harlot”–(Gen. 38:11-18; and Judah was the grandfather of Jesus, Father Botros’ and Christian’s son of God and even God); 
   -And Jesus, Father Botros’ and Christian’s God and son of God who was of the “seed of David” committed adultery with Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife; and even sent poor Uriah to the battlefront so he wouldn’t return–(2 Samuel 11:2-5, 14-15); David also had a “young virgin,” Abishag, to keep him warm because he “gat no heat”–(1 Kings 1:1-4);. this does not negate him from being prophet of God; (and Christians sing his praise to the extent of their lungs and in beautiful, melodious tones; maybe Father Botros also sings; and they crab at Mohammad);
   -Jesus himself had a woman who was not is wife wiped his feet with her hairs and kissed them–(Luke 7:38). Sinner or not, what kind of example is this from God or son God?
   -Jesus also turned water into wine–(John 2:3-9. It may be said that Jesus turned water into wine and all Christendom fell drunk). What kind of example is this from God or son of God? As God or son of God Jesus should have known the adverse effects of alcohol/intoxicants and turned the water into ginger beer or something tasty and nutritious. Alcohol is the Devil’s brew. 
   And Father Botros and Christians mouth off at Mohammad.

Regarding David having the “young virgin,” Abishag to keep him warm. Abishag was probably taken without her consent and given to “lie” with David because “he gat no heat” though “he knew her not” (did not have sex with her)–(1 Kings 1:1-4). However, if the king can be given a “young virgin” because he “gat no heat” he can be given one when he does “gat heat.”
As Ghulam Nabi points out in his book Lady ‘A’ishah’s age at the time of the consummation of her marriage to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (sas):The intention was certainly for sexual enjoyment, otherwise there was no necessity of look-ing for a young, beautiful virgin. A much older woman, perhaps a widow, could have per-formed all these duties, including lying with the king to keep him warm.” (Any wonder the Israelites soldiers were allowed to take young “virgin” girls as war booty–Numbers 31:17-18. One Christian apologist on the Internet tried desperately to show that these “young virgins” who were taken as war booty were not taken for sex. Which has already been dispensed with). 
   That this “young virgin” was given to David for sex is gleaned from the words “the king knew her not.” There would have been no need for this statement if sex was not involved. Perhaps the king “knew her not” because “he gat no” function. 
   Ghulam Nabi also notes an account of Joseph’s marri-age to Mary and points out: “While the Western Christian churches may not accept these accounts as authentic, the Eastern churches in Europe do accept that Mary was 12 years old and Joseph a widower 90 years old when they married. (Emphasis added). (What arguments do the Western Christian churches have that Mary was not twelve years old when she married the 90-year old Joseph?  Do these churches have proofs that God went into Mary's belly and came out her vagina and had the Jews cut His foreskin (astaghferullah!) and that He loaded Adam's sin onto babiers in their mother's wombs and had Jesus killed as scapegoat for this alleged sin?)
That 'Aisha was  19 when her her marriage to the Prophet was consummated see ‘Aisha’s marriage-9 or 19?

                         On other video presentations
                          Father Zakaria Botros notes:  

   1. Noting Qur’an 2:282 in the matter of drawing up an agreement for a business transaction, to have two men as witnesses “but if there are not two men, then one man and two women.”

Using this verse which requires TWO women as witnesses as his argument Father Botros opines that Muslim’s taking Lady Khadija’s word that it was an “angel” that had come to the Prophet Mohammad in the cave of Mount Hira (when he received his first revelation from Allāh) is “one of the biggest defects in Islam.” In other words how can Muslims take the testimony of ONE woman when the above-stated verse requires TWO; moreover, considering that Lady Khadijah did not see the angel herself. Christians claim it was a “demon” that came to Mohammad.
  Response:  (These Christians are hilarious. They should be on Jokes ‘R’ Us). If it was a “demon” that came to Mohammad then, who was it that came to him at subsequent revelations? 
   Was Father Botros, or anyone else, with 
Paul on the road to Damascus to substantiate his claim that he saw a light and heard Jesus’ voice? How do you know it was not a “demon” that Paul heard, if he did hear anything, and his claim was not another of his “lie” and “guile.”
   Moreover, how can Father Botros and Christians take the word of 
Paul seeing that Paul was “considered to be a traitor to Jesus’s thought by the latter’s family and by the apostles who had stayed in Jerusalem in the circle around James,” and “created its own collection of official texts”? (For details please see Bible corrupt & obsolete).

   Unlike Mohammad whose prophecies on historical events that are recorded and his pronouncements on science that have been verified and are proofs of his existence). How can Father Botros and Christians take the word of four men –Matthew, Mark, Luke and John– that Jesus was son of God and that he performed miracles and made prophecies and there have been wars and earthquakes and famines from creation and will probably be till the end of time– when we have no miracle to substantiate their claims and when these four men were not eye-witnesses of the data they recorded”? (For details please see Bible corrupt & obsolete).
   Moreover, (as noted at the beginning) considering the conjecture surrounding Jesus as to his not being a real person but a phantom and as these people were closer to Jesus in time, how can Father Botros and Christians be certain that Jesus was real and moreover was God and son of God? Jesus could very well be a human creation like Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Tarzan.
How can Christians take Jesus to be son of God and God and not a “false prophet” considering that even false Christ and false prophet can perform miracles and so much so as to deceive the authorities; and considering that with all his boasting to be able to put his life down and take it up again, instead of reliving the beheaded John the Baptist, this greatest of man to be born, he (perhaps fearing for his own head) scooted off to Bethsaida–(Matt. 14:10-14; Luke 9:9-10)..

   That, how can Muslims take the word of one woman that it was an “angel” that came to Mohammad. Perhaps a snap response to Father Botros would be that, at that time one woman’s testimony was acceptable as Allāh had not yet reveal that two Women’s  witness is equal to one of a man’s (though, as the verse shows. this is only in the field of business as women was not familiar in business). 
   Further, to those who insist that a woman’s witness is only half of a man’s in all facets of life. Allāh tells us in Qur’an 24:6-9, (in the matter of the wife’s alleged infidelity) the testimony of the wife, supersedes that of the husband’s; and no man would dare assert that a man’s testimony in all matters is “one-fifth,” that of a woman’s. 
   However, no testimony from anyone was needed to substantiate that it was words from the Divine Power that was given to Mohammad. The very first words that was communicated to the Prophet was (as noted in the Qur’an 96:1-5): “Read in the name of thy Lord who creates –Creates man from a clot, Read and thy Lord is most Generous, Who taught by the pen, Taught man what he knew not.” Reason alone would dictate that these words could only come from Allāh God.
    There is nothing in the Qur’an that glorifies the Devil or evil, but rather the Qur’an enjoins us to “seek protection in Allāh from the accursed devil”–(Qur’an 16:98); it also tells us that the Devil believes in Allāh would disavow those who followed him: “Like the devil when he says to man: Disbelieve. But when he disbelieves, he (the devil) says: I am free of thee: surely I fear Allāh, the Lord of the worlds”–(Qur’an 59:16).

   If it was a “demon” that came to Mohammad one would expect his words to be similar as those of the Devil’s to Christ (in his temptation13 of Christ –(Matt.4:1-10. Incidentally, unless the devil was incredibly stupid or knowing full well that Jesus was only human and not God/son of God, why would he offer Jesus “all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them” if Jesus was God/son of God, when the kingdoms and glory are already His (God) or his (Jesus) inheritance? John must have seen the humor in this narration and would not touch it with a 40-foot long pen, and instead had Jesus at another wilderness, (of drunks): at a wedding in Cana converting water to wine–(John 2:1-9. See Alcohol & Gambling).

   Again, while Mohammad’s Divine Messengership is not dependent upon Lady Khadija’s testimony. Contrastingly, how could Father Botros and the Pope and all Christians take Jesus as son of God and even as God when he came NOT to give peace and unity but fire and sword and division; when he considered his Fathers (and his own) creatures (that he created in his own “image”) as “dogs” and “swine” and spoke in parables so that they would not understand and be saved; when he behaved like a “gluttonous, and a winebibber;” when he cast devils into dumb, innocent swine and caused them to drown (and loss of property to their owners), and even cursed to death a blameless and helpless fig tree; when he had a woman who was not his wife kissed his feet and wiped them with her hair; when he projected himself as a hypocrite; liar; and fraud –saying that no man hath ascended to heaven when Elijah and Enoch had already ascended to heaven?-(John 3:13; 2 Kings 2:1, 11; Hebrews 11:5. See Jesus-as God). What kind of a character is this that Christians are worshipping as God and son of God?

   If it was a “demon” that came to Mohammad, then this “demon” gave to Mohammad and the world the Qur’an that is not only more sublime in its glorification of Allāh God, than the Bible, but is superior to the Bible in all aspects of life –personal, social, moral, intellectual and spiritual. The Qur’an brought civilization to mankind. But for the Qur’an mankind may yet be waltzing around with flint tools and torches.

   What kind of God and son of God are Father Botros and Christians following that need to “wax strong in spirit” and to “increase in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man,” and need to eat butter and honey to be able to distinguish between good and evil?–(Luke 2:40; 52; Isaiah 7:14-15).
   What kind of God and son of God are Father Botros and Christians following who was made a “sin” a “curse” and “lower than the angels”?–(2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 3:13; Heb. 2:9).
   How can Father Botros and Christians take Jesus as God and son of God when man can do works equal to his and even greater–(John 14:12).
   How can Father Botros and Christians take as God and son of God a man who doesn’t even know when fig is in season–(Mark 11:12-13); who didn’t know the day and hour of future events–(Mark 13:32); and didn’t know that Elijah and Enoch had ascended to heaven–(John 3:13; 2 Kings 2:1, 11; Hebrews 11:5).
   How can Father Botros and Christians take as God and son of God a man who wasn’t able to do things of himself–(John 5:30); and didn’t know if he was going to prepare a place for his followers in heaven and if he could be coming back?–(John 12:32; 14:2-3. See Jesus-second coming). Yet Father Botros and Christians want Muslims and others to join them in their blind faith. (And only the peripheral Muslims [and Hindus, as even Hinduism is superior to Christianity] and the unthinking would embrace the useless and unGodly crucifix). 

   2. Father Botros tried to ridicule the Prophet for telling some men who had come to him complaining about stomach pain to drink camel milk and urine; which cured their ailments. These men later killed Muslims and absconded with the camels. The Prophet had them captured, cut off their hands and feet and branded their eyes. The Father also commented on this killing. (See also Wafa Sultan’s (Allah) A God Who Hates).
   Response: (This hãdith is found in Bokhari Vol. 7, #590. Mohammad also told us about several other cures as well as foods and medicine. See Bokhari Vol. 7, books XVI (65) and LXXI (71). Whether the men were faking stomach ailment just to steal camels or not is immaterial. Camel urine has healing properties. The Saudi Gazette (on the Internet) Monday, 19 July 2010, reports in the article Nano-particles in Camels’ urine may help treat cancer,by Farah Mustafa Wadi.14 I recall the statement of one public figure that (unless there is an infection) urine, upon leaving the body, is sterilized.

   While it may be loathsome to drink camel urine in our time, perhaps it was the only and/or best cure at that time. However, whether in Seventh-century Arabia or in Twentieth-century America if camel urine should be the only cure for an ailment it is doubtful that a person would not consume it to save his life or free him from some chronic condition. Even Father Botros.   Perhaps Mohammad’s critics and denigrators (men and women)  engage in oral sex and come in contact with genital fluid and urine, and they fault Mohammad for helping people with whatever cure was then available.

   Whereas Mohammad was justified in making these men who violated his benevolence and hospitality and were cold-blooded killers and thieves an example for such future criminals, (and whatever they suffered was the result of their own orchestration)   –modern nations who are transgressors torture mere suspects, some of whom are innocent– contrastingly Father Botros’ God and son of God, Jesus, ordered the slaughter of young and old, including children; the “ox, and sheep, and ass” with the “edge of the sword”–(Deut; 7:1-2; Josh. 10:40, 12:6); and:'
   -“Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished”–(Isaiah 13:16);
   -even the fetus is not spared: “Everyone that is found shall be thrust through; and everyone that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword,” “and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eye shall not spare children,” “Samaria…shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up”–Isaiah 13:15, 18; Hosea 13:16).
   Again, whereas Father Botros tried to besmirch the Prophet Mohammad about that invaluable cure at the time, Father Botros’ God of the Bible told the prophet Ezekiel to make cakes with “dung that cometh out of man;” (and as Christians believe that Jesus is God, this is what “Jesus” said to do): “Take thou also unto thee wheat, and barley….and make thee bread there-of….And thy meat which thou shalt eat shall be by weight…And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man…Then said I, Ah Lord God! behold, my soul hath not been polluted…Then he said unto me, Lo, I have given thee cow’s dung for man’s dung, and thou shalt prepare thy bread therewith”–(Ezekiel 4:9-15).    

(One party on the Internet attempts to explain this injunction from “God” by saying that the“human dung” and “cow’s dung” were to be used as “fuel” to bake the cakes.  But even if Jews did save human and cow’s dung to be used as fuel and even if fresh dung can burn as fuel, the Bible itself belies the claim. God tells Ezekiel to take a mixture of barley and other grains: “And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it WITH dung that cometh out of man, in their sight. And the Lord said, Even thus shall the children of Israel EAT their DEFILED bread among the Gentiles…Then said I, Ah Lord God! behold, my soul hath not been POLLUTED: for from my youth up till even now have I not EATEN of that which dieth of itself, or is torn to pieces; neither came there ABOMINABLE FLESH INTO MY MOUTH.
   The bread could not be “defiled” if the dung was used as fuel, moreover if it was a common practice by Jews to use dung as “fuel.” The bread could only be “defiled” and an “abomination” to eat if it was mixed with human dung. 
   Clearly, it was meant for Ezekiel to eat the human “dung” which to him was an “abomination” whereupon God substituted “cow’s dung”instead: “Then he (God) said to me, Lo, I give thee cow’s dung FOR MAN’S DUNG, and thou shalt PREPARE THY BREAD THEREWITH” –(Eze 4:15).

Unlike the camel urine curing the men, God telling Ezekiel to eat cakes made with human “dung” or cow’s “dung” is not for any cure.

   3. Father Botros also repeated the age-old worn-out slander that Mohammad’s wife, Hafsa, returned home to find Mohammad in bed with his other wife, Mary the Coptic, in Hafsa’s bed, and when it was Hafsa’s turn to be with Mohammad. This is dealt with fully in Hafsa Scandal (& Mary). For a response to the other bit of Christian’s (and critics) crud, about the Prophet “lusting” after Zainab, his adopted son, Zaid’s, wife, see Zainab Scandal.
    The Christian has no intelligent discourse on which to advance his beliefs (illogical and unGodly doctrines) –there is nothing intelligent about God spending time in a woman’s womb and coming out her vagina; and loading one man’s sin onto everybody’s head then colluding in the murder of one innocent man to wipe away everyone’s sins. 
   The Christian has nothing to offer mankind but the body and mythical blood of Jesus Christ -SPIRITUAL CANNIBALISM-, a seat in the pew of Paul's paganism; and a Heaven where they read past-time stories and watch the lion stripping hay like the ox –a heaven that can only be spelled B-O-R-I-N-G– and as he has no argument against the lofty and sublime doctrines of Islam –as the Divine system is perfect– the only thing he has is to obsess himself with Mohammad’s “particularly active sex life.”15
    Christians believe that by blackening Mohammad they could snare a convert for Christ. This is reminiscent of Christians of yesteryear as noted by Muhammad Ali (writing about late nineteenth century India):

“The preaching of the Christian missionary until a short time ago was of quite a different character from what it is today. In those days, the Christian missionary was under the impression that the darker the picture he drew of the Prophet of Islam, the greater would be his success in winning over converts from among the Muslims (and some ignorant ones were snared)…Some of the Christian controversial books of those days must indeed be ranked as the filthiest literature that has ever been produced, apart from the fact that the founder of the Arya Samaj and some of his blind votaries imitated the Christian missionary, and, later on, the Arya Samajist preacher even surpassed the Christian missionary in the art of vituperation.
…To call the Holy Prophet an impostor, Dajjal or Anti-Christ, a deceiver, a dacoit, the slave of his sensual passions whose lust knew no bounds, and to attribute every conceivable crime to him became a habit with these Christian controversialists.”16

   In fact, as Muhammad Ali continued, one Christian’s writings “were found to be so grossly abusive that even Christians began to complain of them.” (p. 81). (See also Mohammad Movie Muslim outrage). 
   Like their fathers and grandfathers of yesteryear Christians have descended to the despicable depth of depicting Mohammad as depraved. While the Christian (and critic) tries to paint Mohammad as a libertine, let us see what facts reveal about Mohammad. Mohammad was born in 570 AC (After Christ). He received the call to prophethood in 610. He died in 632. His ministry lasted 22/23 years.

   For twenty-five years Mohammad lived a life of celibacy. For twenty-nine years, from 25-54, he lived in a monogamous marriage, with a woman fifteen years his senior. Only from 54 did he enter into multiple marriages. After the death of his first wife, Khadijah, Mohammad married Saudah, “a widow of advanced age;” then 'Aisha; Hafsa, a widow; Zainab, “daughter of Khuzaimah,” a widow; Umm Salmah, a widow; Zainab, the former wife of Zaid; Umm Habibah, a widow; Juwairiyah, Maimunah, and Safiyyah, three widows taken as war captives, whose marriages “in each case” “led to the union and pacification of a whole tribe;” and in the case of his marriage to Juwairiyah “a hundred families” of her tribe, “the Bani Mustaliq” “was at once liberated by the Muslims;” and Mary, the Coptic.17 
During this twenty-three year period of his mission the Prophet Mohammad suffered persecution; bloodied from stoning (at Ta’if); death threats; exile; fasted and spent two-thirds of the night in prayer–(Qur’an 17:79; 73:2-4, 20; 76:25-26); went hungry; cobbled his own shoes and mended his own garments; sought the welfare of the poor and the orphans and the Woman; fought the slave-masters and freed the slaves; fought at least four wars –Badr, Uhud, Hunain and Allies– and toiled alongside his people, planned for the welfare of the State, and preached the Divine Message to the people. Surely, such a person can hardly be labeled a voluptuary.

   If Mohammad had sought to have the female sex “abandoned” to his desire, it is doubtful that he would have waited until the heat of his youth had dissipated, neither would he have pursued widows who were old and laden with children, there were scores of virgins of beauty and youth (which lustful old men often relish) for him to command. And when he became victorious, instead of enrobing himself in fine silk and jewelry, wore only coarse garments; instead of choosing a crown and scepter of gold and gems, he had only a wooden staff; instead of choosing a bed of cushion and linen, had only a mat of palm fiber; (and as noted, instead of choosing a harem of vestal nubiles, he ennobled in the sanctity of marriage the elderly, the widow, and the fallen); instead of leaving monuments of stones to himself he charged us with the precepts of God. 
   This man who never lied, refused all wealth, and who returned the riches to his conquered subjects could hardly be viewed as an “impostor” whose enthusiasm of his “youth” was to gratify the “appetites” of a man. 
   The reasons for the Prophet Mohammad's several marriages were manifold: (1) Social (2) Federal (3) Diplomatic (4) Compassion (5) Divine Instructions (6) Religious expediency. (For a comment on “fables invented by Christian writers who seek to vilify Islam” see Muhammad Ali’s Qur’anic comm. 2517 –to Qur’an 66:1).

   Now let us examine the life of Father Botros’ and Christian’s son of God and “God.” After Jesus’ birth and circumcision at eight days old the next we hear about him was when he was twelve –for the first eleven/twelve years of Father Botros’ and Christian’s God and son of there is no account: some devotees– during which time Jesus “waxed strong in spirit” and “increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man–(Luke 2:42, 40, 52. God and son of God need to “wax” strong in spirit; and “increase in wisdom”? and if Jesus is God how can he find “favour with God”?); the next time we hear about Jesus was when he was about thirty years old, baptizing at the River Jordan–(Luke 3:23. Jesus’ mission is said to have lasted for some three years, at the age of thirty-three). 
   So, for some twenty-nine years the Gospels have no record of Father Botros’ and Christian’s God and son of God. (Contrast this Christian’s God and son of God to Mohammad whose almost every movement is on record). Did Father Botros’ and Christian’s God and son of God “waxed” in his father’s carpenter’s shop in Palestine or was he in India learning from the Hindu priests how to heal? (Read Khwaja Nazir Ahmad Jesus in Heaven on Earth See Jesus-18 missing years).  

   During these three years of his ministry –apart from his lambasting the Jews as “generation of vipers;” “evil and adulterous generation;” as “fools” and “blind guides” etc;–(Matt. 12:34, 39; 23:16-17, 24); and excoriating the people of Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum for not accepting his miracles and reforming–(Matt, 5:44; 11:20-24. Though Mohammad prayed for his enemies and would have prayed seventy-times-seven times if they would be forgiven– all Jesus did was perform a few miracles (which even false Christs and prophets can do)  made vague prophecies –there have been earthquakes and famines and drought and floods since time began and would likely be till the end of time; and Nostradamus also is said to have made prophecies– and taught absurd doctrines:

   -Jesus says “resist not evil;” give the other cheek; give the plaintiff our cloak along with our coat in settlement, go an extra mile with the compeller (though he booted his compellers out the Temple–Matt. 5:39-41).
   So if John compels you to steal Mark’s chickens you are to voluntarily steal Luke’s chickens as well for him.
   It is doubtful an intelligent woman (and man) would give her daughter to be violated after she was; or would also give secret treasure to the robber, and give more to the plaintiff than his dues; or allow themselves to be pummeled if they have a measure of defense against the assailant.
   If one is to give the other cheek in all situations the Allies of WW II should have let Hitler become Emperor of Europe, Britain should have thrown in England or Scotland along with the Falklands to the Argentines, and America should have let the 9/11 attackers have a blast all over the U.S. Contrast this to Mohammad who taught through the Qur’an that there are times to give the other cheek and times to take an eye in return.

   –Using as examples that the birds and the lilies and grass do not toil yet they survive as God takes care of them, Jesus says: “Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on.….for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you”–(Matt. 6:25-34). 
   There is no question the higher purpose of life is the Hereafter, and whereas God does provide for the birds and the lilies and the grass (and whereas the lilies and grass have no mobility and if water is not given to them they will wilt and die) the worm and berries do not go to the bird: the bird has to take flight and even battle other birds for the worm and berries.
   By telling man to pray only and leaving it all to God to send him groceries through handouts, Father Botros’ and Christian’s God and son of God is teaching man to be loafers and mendicants.  If America was to follow such a doctrine, instead of her being on the pinnacle of progress she would regress into the black-hole of backwardness. 
    Contrast the Christians’ “God” and son of God, Jesus, with the injunctions of Allāh and His noble Messenger, Mohammad. While Islam does not allow pursuit of the material to the detriment of the spiritual; Allāh tells us that everything in the heavens and earth were created for our benefit and urges us to seek knowledge to put them to our service; and that after we finish offering our prayers to go into the land and seek of His bounties. And His magnanimous Messenger informs us we have a duty to Allāh, to ourselves, families, and the community. Earning bread honestly is a part of righteousness and an act of worship.

   -Jesus says the “meek” (who may also be atheists shall inherit the earth; though it seems odd that atheists should inherit the earth) and “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”
   Thus, if you are not “meek,” and righteous but not “persecuted” you get nothing–(Matt. 5:5, 10).
Contrastingly, Mohammad taught us that the “meek” as well as the rich and poor who believe in Allāh and do good works shall inherit the “kingdom of heaven.”

   -Jesus empowered his followers: “whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained”–(John 20:23). 
   Thus, mass murderers who may be Christians can be forgiven by men –Hitler and his SS Officers may already be sitting with Jesus “at the right hand of God” (tell this to Jews).  What if a Protestant priest should not forgive but if the criminal converts to Catholicism and is forgiven, whose office will be honored, Protestant or Catholic?

   -Jesus advises: “Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison”–(Matt. 5:25-26. which agreeing would entail lying in every matter the adversary requires –that Moses says not to bear false witness is superseded by Jesus who is said to be God/Son of God and who came centuries AFTER Moses– and God, whom Christians say is Jesus, used “a lying spirit” to deceive Ahab into getting him killed–1 Kings 22:12-23; and Paul “lied” to bring people to worship God–see Allah and Jesus or Paul.
   Jesus saying to “Agree with thine adversary” lest you get thrown in jail and kept there “till thou hast paid the utmost farthing” could not be about, or restricted to, a law-suit (Jesus clearly says to give the suer your cloak as well as coat–Matt. 5:40). A suer would not necessarily receive judgment in his favor so that one would have to agree with him. Unless he likes jail, seems only a crook would wait till he is jailed before paying every “farthing” to be freed.

Wonder what Nelson Mandela, modern-day anti-Apartheid icon, would say about this dictum of Jesus to “agree with thine adversary”: he may have saved himself thirty years jail; and his brother-in-cause, Steve Biko, may be alive; and South Africa may still be in “prison” –Apartheid).

   So for fear of imprisonment, a Christian must agree to frame an innocent man for murder and send him to the gallows.
   The Christian nations that acquiesced to or supported German invasion were only following Jesus’ precept to “agree” with their “adversary.”  And Christian individuals who handed Jews over to the Germans should be honored for obeying Jesus to “agree” with their adversary. (Perhaps this is why the Vatican was silent during Hitler’s reign, for fear of violating Jesus’ decree to agree with the adversary. As noted, Jesus taught to bring his enemies who did not want him to rule and slay them, and that he who is not with him is against him; perhaps these also are reasons why the Vatican was silent when “Christian” Europe was being purged of Jewish presence). (See also Jesus-absurd doctrines. Please note, this is the Christian's Jesus; for the Muslim's Jesus read the Qur'an).
   Contrastingly, Mohammad/Allāh requires us to give justice even it be against one-self or parents, to aid not in sin and aggression, nor let hatred incite us to transgress–(Qur’an 4:135; 5:3). (See Jesus or Mohammad-best system).

   Instead of wasting their invaluable few hours trying to find non-existent flaws in Islam Father Zakaria Botros and his woefully misguided Christian brothers and sisters should be crying over the absurdities and falsehood they follow. Only the peripheral Muslim and the unthinking would embrace the useless and ungodly crucifix.

   Given the humanness of the Bible/Gospels and the clouds of conjectures surrounding the existence of Jesus, but for the Qur’an/Islam/Mohammad Jesus may have long since been relegated to the bin of myths and legends. It is the Qur’an/ Islam/Mohammad that is keeping Jesus alive; and not only keeping him alive but has cleansed him and his mother, Mary, of the calumnies of “bastard” and “adulteress,” respectively, hurled on them by Jewish Fathers, and appareled them in rubious robes of righteousness and have secured for them today the unflagging allegiance of some one-and-one-half billion Muslims. (See Jesus-the three wise men).
   Significantly, whereas Mohammad was married to Hafsa and Mary the Coptic, (as noted above) the prophets Father Botros (and Christians) believes in engaged in sex-capades with daughters, half-sister, another’s wife, daughter-in-law, and wives handmaids. 
   Father Botros needs to cry over the falsehood he calls religion from God than waste invaluable time carping at Mohammad.

4. Christians, like some Muslims, erroneously claim that there is abrogation in the Qur’an. (See Qur’an-abrogation & collecting). 
   Christians also claim that
Jesus-loves us and that God is love.  NO, he does not! Jesus loves his own people, Jews. It is not love to view non-Jews as “dogs” and “swine” and to preach in parables so these “dogs” and “swine” would not understand and be converted and saved –this is naked hate! 
   That God is love, the Bible itself rejects this claim as Moses (a great prophet of God who received revelation from God) declared: “The Lord is a man of war”–(Ex. 15:3).
   And as Christians claim that Jesus is God, God/Jesus com-manded His prophets that they “utterly destroyed everything that breathed” and “Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished”–(Isaiah 13:16); and even the fetus is gored to death: “Everyone that is found shall be thrust through; and everyone that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword,” “and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eye shall NOT spare children,” “Samaria…shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up”–Isaiah 13:15, 18; Hosea 13:16). 
   Here’s a longer listing of the Christian’s “God is love”:   “
“Jesus/God gave orders to burn the daughter who commits “whoredom” –(Gen 38:24; Lev. 21:9); 
“Jesus/God” killed “all the firstborn in the land of Egypt”– (Exod. 12:29);
“Jesus/God” orders that the “firstling of an ass” –a helpless and blameless animal who had no say in the order in which he/she was born– that is not redeemed with a lamb to “break his neck”–(Exod. 34:20);
“Jesus/God” orders “All the firstborn of thy sons thou shalt redeem” (and if not, what? break their necks?) and “the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me” (in sacrifice?)–(Exod. 34:20; 22:29);
“Jesus/God” sanctions slavery–(Lev.25:44); punishes children for their parents “whoredoms”–(Num. 14:33-34.Also Rev. 2:20-23); answered prayers to have Jews “utterly destroy” peoples’ “cities”–(Num. 21:2-3. See also Deut. 3:6; 7:2; 20:17; Joshua 6:21; 10:28-43; 12:1-24; and several other places in the Bible);
“Jesus/God” delights in decapitation: “And the Lord said unto Moses. Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the Lord against the sun”–(Num. 25:4);
“Jesus/God” requires young male prisoners and matron women to be killed and the young virgin girls become concubines: “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves”–(Num. 31:17-18); to kill disbelievers–(Deut. 13:12-16);
“Jesus/God” orders cutting off the hand of the wife who, trying to help her husband in a fight, grabs the “secrets” (genitals) of the other man–(Deut. 25:11-12);
“Jesus/God” commands the killing of women and children
                 :“thou shalt smite every male thereof: But the women, and the little ones…shalt thou take unto thyself;” “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves”–(Deut.20:12-17; Num. 31:17-18).
                   :“When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it…thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them, thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them” –(Deut. 7:1-2. See Josh. 12:1-6).
stay ye not, but pursue after your enemies, and smite the hindmost of them; suffer them not to enter into their cities: for the Lord   your God hath delivered them into your hand;” “and Joshua called for all the men of Israel…Come near, put your feet upon the necks of these kings… And afterward Joshua smote them, and slew them, and hanged them on five trees.” “So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded…And all these kings and their land did Joshua take at one time, because the Lord God of Israel fought for Israel;” “And they utterly destroyed all that  was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword”–(Joshua 10:19, 24, 26, 40-42; 6:21. Read Joshua chs. 10-12; Numbers 21:24, 35; 31:17-18; Deut. 20:16-17; 1 Sam. 15:2-3, for slaughters by Joshua, Moses, and Saul). 
“Jesus/God” smote people “with the emerods (hemorrhoids)…with madness, and blindness”–(Deut. 28:27-28. See also 1 Samuel 5:6, 9); 
“Jesus/God” enjoins cannibalism: “and thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters”–(Deut. 28:53, 57. See 2 Kings 6:28-29: “So we boiled my son, and did eat him”);
“Jesus/God” orders to slay even the “infant  and suckling”–(1 Samuel 15:2-3);
“Jesus/God” takes men’s wives and giving them in adultery: “Thus saith the Lord, Behold…I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun”–(2 Samuel 12:11);
“Jesus/God” smites adults and children, with an “incurable disease”: “And thou shalt have great sickness by disease of they bowels, until thy bowels fall out” even to the point of death–(2 Chron. 21:14-19); righteous “shall wash his feet in the blood of the   wicked”–(Psalms 58:10);
“Jesus/God” enjoys mutilating  “little ones”: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones” –(Psalm 137:9); “There children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished”–(Isaiah 13:16);
“Jesus/God” (contrary to his "Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God"-Luke 18:16), orders the lancing of the fetus: “Everyone that is found shall be thrust through; and everyone that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword,” “and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eye shall not spare children,” “Samaria…shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up”Isaiah 13:15, 18; Hosea 13:16;
“Jesus/God” sends to earth a “sword” and “fire” and “division” instead of “peace”–(Matt. 10:34; Luke 12:49, 51);  slaughter enemies opposed to rule–(Luke 19:27); condemns those who do not share your views as being “against you” (and a person can be neutral)–(Matt. 12:30. If these two statements of Jesus–Luke 19:27 and Matt. 12:30– were to be implemented some eighty percent of the world would be slain);
“Jesus/God” loads dumb, innocent swine with devils causing them to drown, and the owners loss of property and finance–(Matt. 8:28-33. Wonder what the SPCA would say about this cruelty); to hate family circle: “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my  disciple” –(Luke 14:26. Mohammad/Islam teaches us to honor parents and pray for God’s mercy on them and esteems womanhood as the symbol of purity and mothers/motherhood as the gateway to Paradise.
   If this is “God is love,” I doubt any person would want to know “God is hate”/“God is evil.” Evidently, and from the Christian’s own source, the Christian’s God is hate! (See also
Christianity-Sex Slaves & Prepubescent Girls).

   Contrast the Christian’s Biblical God with the Muslim’s Qur’anic God Who only allows fighting to end persecution and to fight only those who first take up arms against you; and that it is better to forgive and reconcile–(Qur’an 42:40-43); and He implores us through the Prophet Mohammad in loving com-passionate terms to forgive us our sins: Say, O My servants who have sinned against their souls, despair not of the mercy of Allāh; surely Allāh forgives all sins. Verily, He is Most Forgiving, Ever Merciful”–Qur’an 39:53). Glory be to Allāh! Praise be to Allāh! Allāh is Great!

   Unlike the Bible which was handed down through oral traditions and has more human weavings than a Galilean’s fish-net and unlike Christians who are wandering for two thousand years in “darkness and misunderstanding” and confusion as to who Jesus was and his mission, contrastingly, the Qur’an is a “world reforming power,” the Divinely inspired code that catapulted backward Seventh-century camel-drivers into ”universal con-querors” for nearly a thousand years (until our progress made us drunk with laziness).
   This throne of excellence is ever available for Muslims to ascend; all we need do is uproot and incinerate our sectism and return to serving Allah; it is Muslims’ destiny to be successful victorious and triumphant. “O man, We have not revealed the Qur’an to thee that thou mayest be unsuccessful”-(Qur’an 20:1-2).

    That God made Jesus a “sin” and a “curse” and “lower than the angels,” do Christians know what they are saying about this righteous messenger of God whose mother God had chosen from among all women to send Angels to announce his birth, and who did only that which God instructed him?
   And considering that Christians claim that Jesus is God then what Christians are saying is that God was made into a “sin” and a “curse” and “lower than the angels;” and all these indignities upon the word of a man, 
Paul, who claimed he saw a light and heard Jesus’ “voice” –and he may never have met Jesus to know what Jesus’ voice sounded like; and if Jesus was/is God, then no man has ever “heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape” as Jesus said (John 5:37)– forged his own gospel; gave his own judgment; lured people through “craft” and “guile” and “lie;” and grafted paganism onto Jesus’ head and condemned the “law” that Jesus upheld and enjoined. 
   Do Father Botros and Christians realize they are nose-deep in purgatory? And Father Botros likely expects to sit with Jesus “on the right hand of God.” “God” sitting “on the right hand of God” (???????)

   As noted in item #1, Father Zakaria Botros demands that Muslims delete verses of the Qur’an and Hadith that deny the divinity of Jesus.
   Ahmed Deedat has shown in his booklet Is the Bible God’s Word? that the word “VIRGIN” in Isaiah 7:14 has been replaced with the phrase “a young woman” in the RSV Bible; that the word “BEGOTTEN” of “begotten son” of John 3:16, has been “excised;” and the verse of 1-John 5:7 which speaks of  the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost (the Trinity) “has also been scrapped from the RSV” Bible; also the verses of Mark 16:19 and Luke 24:51 which refer to the 
ascension of Jesus were “expunged” but later “restored to the text.”
   Ahmed Deedat also notes that while these terms have been “unceremoniously excised” from  English Bibles, they are retained in the Bible’s nearly 1500 other languages. (Such is Christian’s deception and desperation to snare the innocent natives into drinking the mythical “blood” of Jesus Christ. This is probably   the lowest depth of spiritual depravity).
   Would Father Zakaria Botros, in the name of decency at least, "demand” that Christians “delete” these false materials  from the nearly 1500 non-English Bibles?

  And in his book Jesus in Heaven on earth, Khwaja Nazir Ahmad has noted numerous forgeries, alterations and interpolations in the Bible.
   For example, regarding the birth of Jesus, Khwaja exposes: “In Matthew the phrase originally was: And Jacob begat Joseph, and Joseph begat Jesus of Mary. But the simple phrase: and Jacob begat Joseph, and Joseph begat Jesus of Mary was soon changed into: And Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. Discussing this change in this verse Rev. C. J. Scofield in his Reference to the New Testament had to admit: “The changed expression was introduced to convey that Jesus was not begotten of natural conception.”18 
One of the copyists made another alteration. He changed the phrase to: And Jacob begat Joseph, and Joseph, to whom was married the virgin Mary, begat Jesus.”19  The introduction of the word virgin clearly, but rather awkwardly, exhibited the object for which the alteration was made; and the Church was compelled to disown it.” (While manuscripts of Luke do not permit scrutiny as Matthew’s, Khwaja notes): “But that it has been changed is self-evident and sufficiently proved by the reading of the relevant verse:  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph…20  The words as was supposed are in brackets and betray an addition, as Loisy justly observes: “to abrogate the idea of natural sonship which the text of this passage originally suggested.”” (pp.123-125/153-155.

Are such the works of divine messengers or devil disciples? Are they works of decency and dignity or of dishonesty and deception?  It is hardly believable devotee(s) of God will mutilate God’s Book and lead others astray. For more on Christian’s jugglery over Jesus’ birth see Jesus-birth miracle or mechanix.
   Let Father Botros and the Christian apologists explain why these forgeries were made. Will Father Zakaria Botros inform the world about the falsity of Divinity of Jesus, virgin birth, inherited sin and vicarious atonement? “God’s anger is revealed from heaven against all the sin and evil of the people whose evil ways prevent the truth from being known–(Rom.1:18).21  “Let them bear, on the Day of Judgment, their own burdens in   full, And also (part) of the burdens of those without knowledge, whom they misled. Alas, how grievous the burdens they will bear”–(Qur’an 16:25).
   Capable Muslims (and honest individuals) should make booklets in the languages of these nearly 1500 non-English poor natives enlightening them to the false teachings of the
Bible/Christianity. God warns: “Keep thee far from a false matter…And thou shalt take NO GIFT: for the gift blindeth the wise, and perverteth the words of the righteous”–(Exodus 23:7-8).

Father Zakaria Botros made 10 (9) demands from Muslims. I have no demand(s) to make from Father Zakaria Botros and Christians. I have only one humble request –and I suggest that you not be like Pharaoh and wait till your last breath.22
   If you are a religionist because of belief and not for benefit and if you desire a life in
Heaven, of eternal peace and bliss, and not in “eternal damnation” –engulfed in the “everlasting fire” of Hell that “never shall be quenched” and in which there shall be “wailing and gnashing of teeth”– please accept the Divine Truth as revealed by the All-Knowing God Allāh:
                             Jesus was only a messenger 
                    sent only to the Children of Israel and 
                              “There is no God but Allāh, 
                    Mohammad is the Messenger of Allāh.” 

1. Ali, Yusuf, Qur’anic comm. 663.

2. Ency. Brit. 15th Ed. Vol. X, art; Trinity, p. 126. Emp. Added.

3. Vidyarthi, Abdul Haque, Muhammad in World Scriptures, Vol. 1, p. 313, quoting the “creed of the Church of England.” Emphasis added.

4. Faruqui, M.A. The Crumbling of the Cross, pp. 109-110. Emphasis added.

5. Islam consists of five components which are clearly expressed in the Qur’an, and observed by the Prophet Mohammad:

   -Unity of Allāh, God–(Qur’an 20:14; 21:25; 22:34; 23:32; 38:65-66); He has no partners–(6:22-24, 136-137, 163; 39:45; 112:1); He has no consort or daughter–(6:100-101; 16:57; 37:149-159; 43:16-19); He has no begotten son–(2:116; 6:100; 10:68; 19:35, 92; 23:91).

   -Prayer–(Qur’an 2:43, 110, 177; 6:72; 14:31; 17:78; 22:78; 24:56; 29:45; 30:31; 31:3-5; 35:29; 42:36-39; 58:13; 73:20); five daily prayers -(4:103; 11:114; 17:78; 20:130; 30:17-18).

   -Zakaat/Charity–(Qur’an 2:110, 177, 195, 215, 219, 254, 261-274; 3:134; 30:39; 57:18; 63:10; 64:16-17).

   -Fasting–(Qur’an 2:183-185, 187).

   -Hajj –a duty men owe to Allāh–(Qur’an 3:97); Abraham and Ishmael enjoined to purify Ka’bah–(2:125); complete the Hajj and Umrah–(2:196-207); greater pilgrimage–(9:3); proclaim to men–(22:27); rites and restrictions of Hajj–(22:26-38); Safa and Marwah–(2:158); station of Abraham a place of prayer–(2:125). While Allāh has appointed for every nation acts of devotion (rites and ceremonies–Qur’an 22:34), the Hajj is the only Divinely instituted pilgrimage.

6. In Vienna “hundreds of Jews were burned alive in 1421 for refusing to convert to Christianity,” Tor; Star, Sat; Sept; 8, 2007; p. AA2; Pontiff shows…by Tracy Wilkinson. 

7. The Church has always been an enemy to knowledge and to the “Other.” Her history is testimony to this –from the slaughter and forced conversion in the Holy Land and Spain to the Americas; and on the intellectual front, (Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, responding to the Bishops Of Salisbury & London in the early 1900’s):

“Dogmatized Christianity placed an embargo on freedom of thought. The Church destroyed all that it believed it could not turn to its own advantage. History can multiply in support of this characteristic of the Church, but I would content myself with quoting one–the destruction of the invaluable library of Serapis, at Alexandria in 389, by the Archbishop Theophilus of Alexandria. Gibbon says, in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.c “The valuable library of Alexandria was pillaged and destroyed, and nearly twenty years afterwards the appearance of empty shelves excited the indignation of every spectator whose mind was not totally darkened by religious prejudice.” ……

……There are two conflicting descriptions of the Creation as contained in the first and second chapters of Genesis, and they have led some to believe in the six-day theory, and others in the instantaneous idea. Luther declared, “the world, with all creatures, was created in six days,” but he also believed that it was done in an instantaneous way. Calvin preached the six-day idea. The Church presented the Bible as infallible, and all ideas regarded as against the cosmogony of the Bible were punished severely. A certain Vanini had the misfortune to believe in the theory of evolution. He was at once branded as atheist; and on the evidence of De Francon, the Judge de Catel in the tribunal of Toulouse, found Vanini guilty and sentenced him to have his tongue torn out from his mouth and to be burnt alive. …..
The spheroidicity of the earth is denied by the Bible. There are many passages which uphold the geocentric theory, i.e. that the earth is the centre of the solar system and that the sun and the stars revolve around it.
“The world also shall be stable, that it be not moved” (1 Chron. 16:30).
“Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed forever” (Psalm 104).
“And after these things, I saw four angels, standing on the four corners of the earth” (Rev. 7:1).
“The Devil taketh him (Christ) up into an exceeding high mountain, and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world” (Matt. 4:8). 
The Christian Fathers taught that Jerusalem was the centre of the world, and quoted Ezekiel 5:5, which reads: “Thus saith the Lord God: This is Jerusalem, I have set it in the midst of the nations and countries that are round about her.”

“St. Paul taught that the Gospel had been preached to all nations, and that, therefore, there were no more nations to be discovered. This teaching discouraged any attempt at geographical investigation and the finding of new continents. It was to the Muslim universities in Spain that Columbus learned that the earth was spheroid, for one of the Muslim educational appliances was the globe. Columbus was convinced of the spheroidicity of the earth, but the Bishop of Ceuta showed him his error by quoting from the Bible, and a Bull was issued by Pope Alexander VI, in 1493, to the same effect, but he was not deterred from his aim. The idea that there were people on the opposite side of the earth had long before been taught by Cicero and Pliny, and believed by many in Greece and Rome, but when it was taught in Christendom, it was met with the severest criticism. Lactantius, speaking with reference to the heretical doctrine of the globular form of the earth, said: “Is there anyone so senseless as to believe that the crops and the trees on the other side of the earth hand downward and that men have their feet lighter than their heads? If you ask them how they defend these monstrosities, how things do not fall away from the earth on that side, they reply, The nature of things is such that heavy bodies tend towards the centre, like the spokes of a wheel, while light bodies, such as clouds, smoke and fire, tend from the centre, to the heavens, on all sides. Now, I am at a loss what to say of those, who, when they have once gone wrong, steadily persevere in their folly and defend one absurd opinion by another.”  

St. Augustine quoted the Scriptures to prove that there could be no Antipodes. He said that the Almighty would not allow men to live on the opposite side of the earth because they would not be able to see Christ at his second coming. He said, “Scripture speaks of no such descendants of Adam.” He quotes the 19th Psalm and St. Paul’s saying that Gospel has been carried “to the ends of the world,” and contended that as the teachers had not gone to the opposite sides of the earth, there was no such place. He quotes Job 26:11 about “the pillars of heaven” in support of his argument.

The new ideas were denounced as “empty and false.” “The miserable fiction of Eusebius had subverted the chronology of Manetho and Eratosthenes, the geometry of Euclid and Appolonius was held to be of no use, the geography of Ptolemy a blunder. …” (Draper). In 1316 an Italian physician, named Peter of Abano, was called to account for the new heresy of the spheroidicity of the earth by the Inquisition; he fortunately escaped the torture by the intervention of a natural death. Cecco d’Ascoli, a noted astronomer, was compelled to vacate his professional chair at Bologna, and was burned alive at Florence, 1327.

Cosmas said: “The earth is a parallelogram, flat and surrounded by four great seas. At the edges of these seas rise immense walls, closing in the whole structure. These walls support the vault of the heavens, whose edges are cemented to the walls; walls and vault shut in the earth and all the heavenly bodies.” He supports his description by many passages from Holy Writ, e.g. “It is He that sitteth upon the circle of the earth,…that stretcheth out the heavens like a curtain, and spreadeth them out like a tent to dwell in” (Isaiah 40:22).

Passages in the Bible, as, “The earth standeth fast for ever,” “Sun, stand thou still upon Gideon, and thou moon, in the valley of Ajalen,” made the Fathers of the Church uphold that the earth was in the centre of the solar system. Pythagoras, the Greek philosopher (580-500 B.C.), taught what is known as the heliocentric sys-tem of astronomy. His system placed the sun in the centre and around it in circular orbits the planets revolved in the following order: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. Philolaus and Aristarchus followed with the same theory, but it was not heard of again till the fifth century A.D. when Martianus Capella resuscitated it. Then it disappeared for another thousand years, till it was rediscovered and established by Nicholas Copernicus. Its sporadic appearance and disappearance as due to no other cause but Holy Writ. Copernicus’s book, The Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies (The Qur’an 21:33; 36:40 inform us about this truth in the 7th century), was first published in 1543, when the author was on his deathbed. The great astronomer had not dared to publish it for thirty solid years, for the bloodthirsty vengeance of the Church loomed large before his eyes. He sent it to a friend, Osiander, who wrote a soporific preface to the book, whereby he sought to camouflage the views of the author by saying that they were to be taken rather as fiction than as fact. The book, when published, was placed in the feeble hands of the astronomer, who smiled and died in peace. But in spite of the lulling precautions taken by Osiander, it was seized and condemned and excited furious comments. Fromundus, from the Cathedral of Antwerp, said: The Copernican theory cannot be true, because the wind would constantly blow from the east; we should with great difficulty hear sounds against such a wind; buildings and the earth itself would fly off with such a motion.” Martin Luther wrote: “People gave ear to an upstart astrologer, who tried to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens, or the firmament, the sun and the sun….this fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy, but Sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand and not the earth.” Calvin was equally loud in his denunciation of the Copernican theory.

Among the many poor victims of the Church, who took up the Copernican theory and advanced it, was Giordano Bruno. He was hunted from country to country. From Italy, his native land, to Switzerland, France, England, Germany, his persecutors ever on his trail. Upon his return to Venice, he was apprehended, and imprisoned in the Piombo for six years. During his travels, he had delivered lectures in England and written many books, and had criticized the teachings of the Bible. He said: “The Bible teaches that the earth is a flat surface supported by pillars; that the sky is a firmament –the floor of heaven. But the truth is that the universe is infinite, and that it is filled with self-luminous and opaque worlds, many of them inhabited; (Allāh says there are beings in the earth as well as in the heavens–Qur’an 19:93-95; 42:29); that there is nothing above and around us but space and stars.” Bruno was transferred from Venice to Rome on the demand of the spiritual authorities and handed over to Cardinal San Severino. He was arraigned before sixteen cardinals, who put him several questions and demanded a recantation. Bruno replied, “I neither ought nor wish to recant.” They tried to exact a recantation through torture, but they failed, for mental strength cannot be broken by material weapons. They declared this magnificent character to be an “impenitent and obstinate heretic” and sentenced him to death in 1600 by a fire made slow, to increase the torture. How time has mocked at the Church is shown by a splendid statue of Bruno, unveiled by the Rationalists in 1899, on the very spot where he was burned alive.        

Galileo Galilei, who adorns the list of the Church victims, was another well-known martyr to the cause of science. His crime was that he had demonstrated the truth of the Copernican theory. The Church was set, also, against mathematics, and had denounced the geometry of Euclid. Caccini was promoted by the Church for his brilliant denunciation of geometry and Mathematics, such as “geometry is of the devil” and “mathematicians should be banished as the authors of heresies.” Pope Paul V, fortified by his archbishops and cardinals, condemned Galileo and his teachings. They said: “If there are other planets, since God makes nothing in vain, they must be inhabited; but how can their inhabitants be descended from Adam? How can they trace back their origin to Noah’s ark, and how can they have been redeemed by the Saviour?” (As noted above, Allāh says there are beings in the earth as well as in the heavens–Qur’an 19:93-95; 42:29).

Galileo was summoned to Rome by Pope Paul V in 1616, where he tried to convince them by requesting the Fathers of the Church to look through the little telescope which he had invented. Many declined, and those who did “denounced the satellites as illusions of the devil.” Father Clavius declared that “to see the satellites of Jupiter, men had to make an instrument which would create them.” Another bold statement made by Galileo was that the moon shines by reflected light. (Allāh tells us this in Qur’an 91:1-2; 25:61; 71:15-16). The wrath of the Church knew no bounds, for this statement of his contradicted the “truth” of Genesis that the moon ‘is a great light.” He was tried by the Holy Inquisition and his opinions condemned. In defence Galileo said that the Bible was not intended to serve as a book science. But it seems this is what they wanted the Bible to pass for. And should we blame them for this, in view of the fact that they did nothing else but give their due to the infallible words of Holy Writ? Pope Paul V issued a decree in the following words: “The doctrine of the double motion of the earth about its axis and about the sun is false and entirely contrary to Holy Scripture.” But again, in 1652, Galileo published his book, the Dialogo, thinking that the new Pope Urban VIII would be more tolerant than his predecessor, but he was just as bigoted. He placed Galileo and his book, the first edition of which had been exhausted and had found great favour with thinking minds, in the hands of the Holy Inquisition. Galileo had a friend, named Castelli, who had to forfeit his benefice for trying to save his friend Galileo. The aged Galileo as thrown into a dungeon, and forced to recant in the following words: “I, Galileo, being in my seventieth year, being a prisoner and on my knees before your Eminences, having before my eyes the Holy Gospel, which I touch with my hands, and abjure, curse and detest the error and the heresy of the movements of the earth.”

What else could the broken-hearted, aged Galileo do under the circumstances? He recalled to memory how the Church had burned Bruno alive, and that if he would not recant the same fate awaited him. What the Inquisition was he knew well!

Nevertheless the Holy Inquisition was not content with a mere recantation. It sent him into exile for the rest of his life, persecuted his friends, suppressed his writings, and went so far as to torture those, like Campanella, who had the temerity to write in defence of Galileo.  

Now let us see what it was which the Church wanted the people to believe instead. Cardinal Barberi says: “Animals which move have limbs and muscles; the earth has no limbs or muscles, therefore it does not move. It is angels who make Saturn, Jupiter, the Sun, etc; turn round. If the earth revolves, it must also have a centre to set it in motion, but only devils live there; it would therefore be a devil who would impart motion to the earth.”

The Bible dabbles in anthropology as well! The Bible contains a so-called chronology, childish as it is, by which it is claimed we can trace the antiquity of man and his pedigree. The Christian Fathers were generally agreed that man had his beginning about six thousand years ago, and would not tolerate any other view but that Adam was the first man. The advancing of any other view was looked upon as a contradiction of the apparent chronology of the Bible, and its criticism a crime. When La Peyrère, about the middle of the seventeenth century, published his work, Pre-Adamites, in which he claimed that men existed before Adam, the Parliament of Paris burned his book. La Peyrère was imprisoned by the Grand Vicar of the Archdiocese of Mechlin until he retracted the statement.
    (Pre-Adamites: Allāh tells us that there was a long time over man when nothing was known of him–Qur’an 76:1. And Muslim scholars are of the view that there were many Adams before our Adam. That this Adam was not the first man seems to be borne out by the fact that after Cain killed Abel, Cain is said to have gone to the land of Nod where he knew his wife who conceived–(Genesis 4:16-17). Since Cain and Abel were the only two children, and there is no mention of any other children so that Cain could be said to have taken a sister as wife, where then did Cain find this woman for wife if there were no other human beings on the earth? As noted, the verses of the Qur’an are either of basic or allegorical in meanings–Qur’an 3:6).

The pagan world of the Greeks and Romans had made a beginning in geological knowledge, but when Christianity appeared on the world’s stage all such beginnings were nipped in the bud. In the middle of the eighteenth century Buffon published the results of his studies in geology. The faculty of Sorbonne compelled him to make and publish a recantation, which ended with these words: “I abandon everything in my book respecting the formation of the earth, and generally all which may be contrary to the narration of Moses.” But a century later the tables were turned, and the power of the Church had waned in 1830, for by this time science had made so much progress, and people had begun so far to recover from the Christian blight, that Charles Lyell, the author of Antiquity of Man (1863) and Principles of Geology (1830), was not made to suffer from the Holy Inquisition.  

Gregory I–who has won the attribute of the Great– distinguished himself by his rage for destruction, for his enmity towards all higher education. This “Slave of the Slaves of God” had one principle in view: “Ignorance is the mother of devotion”; and with this standpoint not only did he commit to the flames all the mathematical studies of Rome, but also burned the precious Palatine Library, which was founded by the Emperor Augustus. He destroyed the greater part of the writings of Livy; he forbade the study of the classics; he maimed and mutilated the architectural remains of the ancient days–(Draper, vol. 1, p. 357).

The schools of philosophy were closed, the last of them in 529. The renowned commentator on Plato, Hypatia, was cruelly put to death by St. Cyril, in 414, in the open market of Alexandria, Draper says: “She was assaulted by Cyril and a mob of many monks, stripped naked in the street, she was dragged into a church and killed by the club of Peter the Reader. The corpse was cut in pieces, the flesh was scraped from the bones with shells, and the remnants cast into the fire. For this frightful crime Cyril was never called to account–(Draper, vol. 1, p. 324).  

The hatred of learning was such that, in the words of Draper, “every manuscript which could be seized was burnt.” Throughout the east, men in terror, destroyed the libraries for the fear that some unfortunate sentence contained in any of the books should involve them and their families in destruction.”

But to ascertain the truth of our statement, we need not go so far back. We can always expect the Church to live up to its historic past. It is in our own living memory that Francisco Ferrar was murdered in 1909, in Spain, for the sole offence that he wanted to educate the people. And the Church hated education, as it has always hated it. It is said he was stood against the prison wall, and before the shots were fired he said in a clear and fearless voice: “Aim straight, my brothers. Long live the modern school!” No regretting, no cringing, no recanting ever escaped his lips. And the fact that only very recently one of the Italian cities has decided to remove the street name of Francisco Ferrar from one of its thoroughfares, intensifies the truth of this statement that the Church is the same to-day, yesterday and for ever. The only condition is opportunity.

There is one thing that is remarkable in the history of material science in relation to Christianity and Islam. In the case of the former, as long as religion kept its hold on its adherents, Europe made no progress in any way, but when the Western mind became emancipated from canonical rule and Church thralldom, civilization came in leaps and bounds in every form. On the other hand, Islam, at its very advent, gave a tremendous impetus to science and culture. In its various departments, modern civilization owes its salient factors to Islam, but unfortunately, in modern days–notably in the last two centuries– our mundane prosperity and success began to prove too intoxicating to keep our steps sober and steady; we ceased from treading in the footprints of our ancestors, and turned our backs on Muslim principles of life.”
   “The Western nations made their present progress when they liberated themselves from the hold of Church religion and began to think independently for themselves on Islamic lines.” (pp. 45-56, 147. c Chap. xxviii, p. 132. London (Dent’s). Emphasis added). (For full quote see
Arabia -Non-Muslims and Worship).  
As late as 2008, the Pope is accused of being “hostile to science”–(Toronto Star, Sat; Jan; 19, 2008, p. A21). Rather than bemoan Muslim presence in Europe, Pope Benedict XVI should be singing praises to Muslims. But for Muslims “Christian” Europe would yet be waltzing around with flint tools and torches. Blind faith may be blissful, but it is no passport to Paradise.

8. Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, p. 213.                                                          

9.  Ahmed Deedat, Muhummed the Greatest, p. 31.

10. Cited in Prof. K. S. Ramakrishna Rao, Muhammad the Prophet of Islam, p. 32. Emphasis added.

11. Pandit Gyanandra Dev Sharma Shastri, at a meeting in Gorakhpur, [India]. 1928. Quoted in Ahmed Deedat, Muhummed The Greatest, p. 37. Emphasis added.

12. Muhammad Ali, The Early Caliphate, pp. 89-90.

13. After Jesus’ baptism. Whereas Matthew, Mark and Luke have Jesus in the wilderness being “tempted” by the devil; John, probably seeing the humor in this temptation –if Jesus was the son of God why would the Spirit want the son of God “tempted” by the devil; surely the Spirit trusts the son of God to be faithful to his Father. (Unless the Spirit is another personality than the Holy Ghost) if the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one, God (as the Spirit) is leading Himself to be tempted; and if the Spirit is not the Holy Ghost, can the Spirit lead God? Why would God have Himself tempted by the devil; surely God is confident of His nature to do good. (Unless the devil was incredibly stupid or knowing full well that Jesus was only human and not God/son of God), why would he offer Jesus “all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them” if Jesus was God/son of God, when the kingdoms and glory are already his or his inheritance?

   Thus John opted for his own “wilderness,” putting Jesus at a wedding in Cana, catering to boozers –turning water into wine–[and ridiculing his mother: “Woman, what have I to do with thee?”]–(John 2:1-9. Contrast this Christians’ God/son of God to Mohammad, whose mother died when he was only six years of age; Mohammad never addressed anyone’s mother in such demeaning terms; he exhorts us to speak generous words to parents and to be humble and merciful and pray for them–(Qur’an 17:23-24), and that paradise lies at the feet of mothers. (See also Jesus-the three wise men;  Jesus-inherited sin to ascension).

14. As stated, This hãdith of the Prophet Mohammad is found in Bokhari Vol. 7, # 590. As noted, I recall the statement of one public figure that (unless there is an infection) urine upon leaving the body is sterilized. The Saudi Gazette (on the Internet) Monday, 19 July 2010, reports in the article Nano-particles in Camels’ urine may help treat cancer,by Farah Mustafa Wadi:

   "Dr. Faten Abdel-Rahman Khorshid is responsible for one of the Kingdom’s greatest national achievements in the field of science for her work which began with the urine of camels and concluded in a potential cure for cancer.… (She) has discovered that nano-particles in the urine of camels can attack cancer cells with success. Her work began with experiments involving camel urine, cancer cells found in patients’ lungs and culminated in injecting mice with leukemic cancel cells and camel urine to test the results.

  Speaking to the Saudi Gazette, Dr. Khorshid claimed that she was inspired by Prophet Muhammad’s (pbuh) medical advice and that camel urine consists of natural substances that work to eradicate malignant cells and maintain the number of healthy cells in a cancer patient. “This treatment is not an invention, but rather, taken from our Prophet’s legacy,” she remarked. A Hadith narrated by Al-Bukhari (2855) and Muslim (1671) claims that some people came to Madina and fell ill with bloated abdomens. The Prophet (pbuh) told them to combine the milk and urine of a camel and drink that, after which they recovered. A swollen abdomen may indicate edema, liver disease or cancer. ….

  In the case of a volunteer patient with lung cancer, the medicine helped in halving the size of the tumor after only one month. The patient, and others like him, are still undergoing treatment. Heeding the advice found in the Hadith, Dr. Khorshid is combining specific amounts of camel milk and urine to develop her medicine and focuses on particular types of cancer, including lung cancer, blood cancer, stomach cancer, colon cancer, brain tumors and breast cancer.”

15. Ibn Warraq, Why I am Not a Muslim, p. 307. See also Canadian Hindu Advocacy Group

16. Muhammad Ali, The Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, pp. 78-   80.

17. Muhammad Ali, Qur’anic comm. # 2000.

18. Scofield, The New testament and Psalms, 2.

19. Conybear, Dialogue of Timothy and Aquila, 16. See also Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 701.

20. Luke 3:23.

21. Good News Bible, Canadian Bible Society.

22. Following his failed attempt to capture the Israelites, Pharaoh, as he was drowning professed belief in Allāh, but his confession was denied: “And We brought the Children of Israel across the sea. Then Pharaoh and his hosts followed them for oppression and tyranny, till, when drowning overtook him he said: ‘I believe there is no God but He in Whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am one of those who submit.’ What! Now! And indeed before (this) thou didst disobey and thou wast one of the mischief-makers”–Qur’an 10:90-91).
   Incidentally, whereas the Bible says that Pharaoh’s body was lost at sea, Allāh saved Pharaoh’s body to be a “sign” to future generations”–(Qur’an 10:92). And Muhammad Ali points out: “That the body was really cast ashore, though the Bible does not mention it, is clear from the fact that the body of Rameses II, who is regarded as the Pharaoh of Moses, has been discovered as preserved among the mummies in Egypt (En. Br. Art. Mummy). This is another instance of the insufficiency of the Bible narrative and of the truth of the Qur’anic statement where it supplements the Bible. The discovery now made could not have been known to the Holy Prophet (Mohammad); it was not known to any person in the world till very recently.”