Wednesday, April 27, 2011

A refutation of a pathetic lie made by anti-Muslim hatemongers against the Holy Quran

I just read a complete bold faced lie from a pathetic anti-Islam hatemonger. These anti-Muslim liars absurdly claim that Quran Surah 9:61 allegedly states: "Gabriel came to Muhammad and said, ‘If a black man comes to you his heart is more gross than a donkey's." This is a complete and utter lie by these devious anti-Islam frauds; Quran Surah 9:61 does not say this at all! Quran Surah 9:61 actually says the following:
Quran Surah 9:61- Among them are men who molest the Prophet and say, "He is (all) ear." Say, "He listens to what is best for you: he believes in Allah, has faith in the Believers, and is a Mercy to those of you who believe." But those who molest the Messenger will have a grievous penalty.(Yusuf Ali translation)

A real Quran translator, Yusuf Ali- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Yusuf_Ali 
and his translation of the Quran from Arabic into English: http://www.islamicbookstore.com/b3917.html




Here is the original Arabic of Qur'an Surah 9:61 directly:  
وَمِنْهُمُ الَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ النَّبِيَّ وَيَقُولُونَ هُوَ أُذُنٌ ۚ قُلْ أُذُنُ خَيْرٍ لَكُمْ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّهِ وَيُؤْمِنُ لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَرَحْمَةٌ لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْكُمْ ۚ وَالَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ {61} 

Transliteration: Wa Minhumu Al-Ladhīna Yu'udhūna An-Nabīya Wa Yaqūlūna Huwa 'Udhunun Qul 'Udhunu Khayrin Lakum Yu'uminu Billāhi Wa Yu'uminu Lilmu'uminīna Wa Raĥmatun Lilladhīna 'Āmanū Minkum Wa Al-Ladhīna Yu'udhūna Rasūla Allāhi Lahum `Adhābun 'Alīmun  

And here is another real English translation of the Arabic of the Quran (in addition to the Yusuf Ali translation of the Quran) from the Marmaduke Pickthall translation of the Quran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmaduke_Pickthall)

What the Holy Quran actually says again: Quran Surah 9:61- And of them are those who vex the Prophet and say: He is only a hearer. Say: A hearer of good for you, who believeth in Allah and is true to the believers, and a mercy for such of you as believe. Those who vex the messenger of Allah, for them there is a painful doom. (Pickthall translation)
There is nothing racist in the entire Quran and the anti-Islam liars have been completely refuted regarding their false allegations and lies about Quran Surah 9:61. The lies of the anti-Islam haters and the devious Christian missionary clowns are truly pathetic and just so easy to refute. It seems these anti-Muslim liars are just going with the old Nazi style of repeating absurd lies over and over and hoping ignorant people will be deluded into thinking their silly lies against Islam are allegedly "true"! But Almighty Allah (God) will make sure these anti-Islam liars will be refuted and punished.

Islam is completely against racism and for complete racial unity; Islam says all human beings are from Adam and Eve and completely equal. Islam is the true answer to stopping racism, as the Mujahid and martyr El-Hajj Malik Shabazz (Malcolm X) wrote in a letter while on the Hajj (Pilgrimage) to Mecca.
http://www.malcolmxonline.com/speeches-letter-from-mecca.html 

"America needs to understand Islam, because this is the one religion that erases from its society the race problem. Throughout my travels in the Muslim world, I have met, talked to, and even eaten with people who in America would have considered 'white' -- but the 'white' attitude was removed from their minds by the religion of Islam. I have never before seen sincere and true brotherhood practiced by all colors together, irrespective of their color."

Just some beautiful quotes from the Quran and other Islamic literature about complete racial equality and unity.


Quran Surah 49:13- O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). (Yusuf Ali translation)

Quran Surah 30:22- And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variations in your languages and your colours: verily in that are Signs for those who know. (Yusuf Ali translation)

From the final Farewell Sermon of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH): http://www.islamicity.com/articles/Articles.asp?ref=ic0107-322 


The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said: "All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves."

The lies of the hateful kuffar (infidels) have been completely refuted.  Allahu Akbar!



Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Alcohol is not healthy

Holy Qur’an Surah 2:219-

يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْسِرِ ۖ قُلْ فِيهِمَا إِثْمٌ كَبِيرٌ وَمَنَافِعُ لِلنَّاسِ وَإِثْمُهُمَا أَكْبَرُ مِنْ نَفْعِهِمَا ۗ وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ مَاذَا يُنْفِقُونَ قُلِ الْعَفْوَ ۗ كَذَٰلِكَ يُبَيِّنُ اللَّهُ لَكُمُ الْآيَاتِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَفَكَّرُونَ {219}

Transliteration: Yas'alūnaka `Ani Al-Khamri Wa Al-Maysiri Qul Fīhimā 'Ithmun Kabīrun Wa Manāfi`u Lilnnāsi Wa 'Ithmuhumā 'Akbaru Min Naf`ihimā Wa Yas'alūnaka Mādhā Yunfiqūna Quli Al-`Afwa Kadhālika Yubayyinu Allāhu Lakumu Al-'Āyāti La`allakum Tatafakkarūna
Holy Qur’an Surah 2:219- They ask you about wine and gambling. Say, "In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit." And they ask you what they should spend. Say, "The excess [beyond needs]." Thus Allah makes clear to you the verses [of revelation] that you might give thought. (Saheeh International translation)

This article will be dealing with the issue of alcohol and all its harm.  I decided to write this article because I have seen a few of the critics of Islam try to attack Islam’s banning of the demonic force of alcoholic beverages.  In this article I will present just some of the evidence of the horrifying impact of alcohol on the world and also give a thorough refutation of the fraudulent claims advanced by some that alcohol if only used a little (which the epidemic of alcohol deaths, injuries, and debauchery shows is next to impossible) is allegedly somehow “healthy”.  In refuting this myth of “healthy” alcohol I will quote Western non-Muslim medical professionals and academics who torpedo this myth of alleged “health benefits” from moderate alcohol use.

To start I want to say one quick thing on Holy Qur’an Surah 2:219.  As I said this article will cite professional medical sources that torpedo the myth of moderate alcohol use having any alleged “health benefits”; so I just wanted to caution my Muslim brothers and sisters against interpreting this verse of the Qur’an (Surah 2:219) as allegedly agreeing that alcohol has any alleged “health benefits” in moderate use (I will again cite the relevant medical evidence that disproves this false propaganda of the alcohol lovers).  It is much more likely that Qur’an 2:219 and any other Islamic literature that mentions any of the so-called “benefits” of alcohol is simply talking about people having “fun” by drinking alcohol and becoming intoxicated.  From my very own limited experience, before I converted to Islam, of being at parties and events where people are imbibing alcohol (often extremely harmful large amounts of the neurotoxin of alcohol) people often seem to be and state they are having a great time.  This is often followed by much vomiting and great sickness the next day!  This simple fact that people quite often “cut lose” and have “fun” when abusing alcohol may be the simple understanding of a Qur’an verse like Qur’an 2:219.  Again this verse states “In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit.” (Qur’an 2:219, Saheeh International translation).  Obviously the sin, evil, and horrific health damage done by alcohol far outweighs a “benefit” of having a crazy, “fun” night on the town.  A good article on the issue of “fun” and Islam: http://islam-qa.com/en/ref/113836/Muslim%20fun

Quote- …
If you want to understand the truth of these words, then read the stories of those among your own people, or others, who entered Islam. Look at the great changes that occurred in their lives, and look at the great happiness that they enjoy now. This is the enjoyment that you should seek. Just as you call on us to have fun and enjoyment, we call you sincerely to come and find enjoyment with us, and follow the path of happiness, and taste true happiness that will be with you as you go to sleep and as you wake up, and will never leave you, until you enter your grave, until your Lord admits you to the abode of happiness, which is Paradise as vast as the heavens and the earth. 

end quote.

Another good link on alcohol from this good Sunni Muslim website: http://islam-qa.com/en/ref/40882/alcohol

Now let me briefly give just some of the masses of information on just how devastating and deadly alcohol is.

Quote- Alcohol Responsible for More Deaths Than AIDS, TB or Violence

By Deborah Huso Feb 11th 2011 1:41PM

It is no secret that alcohol abuse and deaths related to alcohol are a serious problem, but it may be worse than many realize. In fact, alcohol is responsible for 2.5 million deaths around the globe each year.

Figures released this week in the World Health Organization's "Global Status Report on Alcohol and Health" showed that alcohol-related incidents and diseases account for nearly 4 percent of deaths worldwide.

end quote.

And just to be succinct (leaving aside all the masses of information I could post here of all the massive dangers of alcohol from drink driving, to cancers, etc.) let me just cite one more link: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_alcohol_related_deaths_occur_each_year

Quote- According to the NHTSA web site (nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/RNotes/2006/810686.pdf), there were 43,443 alcohol related traffic fatalities in 2005 in the USA. As a comparison, AIDS claimed 18,000 lives in 2003.
How can alcohol be blamed for 100,000 deaths each year?
  • 5% of all deaths from diseases of the circulatory system are attributed to alcohol.
  • 15% of all deaths from diseases of the respiratory system are attributed to alcohol.
  • 30% of all deaths from accidents caused by fire and flames are attributed to alcohol.
  • 30% of all accidental drownings are attributed to alcohol.
  • 30% of all suicides are attributed to alcohol.
  • 40% of all deaths due to accidental falls are attributed to alcohol.
  • 45% of all deaths in automobile accidents are attributed to alcohol.
  • 60% of all homicides are attributed to alcohol.

  • (Sources: NIDA Report, the Scientific American and Addiction Research Foundation of Ontario.) Also see Alcohol Consumption and Mortality, Alcohol poisoning deaths, CDC report,
100,000 deaths. That's more than a statistic. That is 100,000 individuals with faces. 100,000 individuals with lives not fully lived. 100,000 individuals grieved by mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and children. Every year.
Go to the FAS Resource Center Main Page
end quote.

After this background information, let me now move to what I believe is the central point of this article demolishing the myths of certain kaafir disbelievers of the alleged “health benefits” of “moderate” alcohol intake.  The first article I will cite: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/dec/20/research.medicalscience

Quote- Healthy wine myth debunked

James Meikle and Tim Radford                                                                                                            The Guardian, Thursday 20 December 2001 10.07 GMT                                                     
The notion that a regular little tipple is good for your health, especially from middle age, is debunked by researchers today.
Taking up alcohol may help older men cut the risks of heart attack, but increases the threat of premature death from other diseases such as cancer, according to a study which monitored the progress of 7,735 men over 16 years.
The work questions the popular wisdom that moderate drinking, particularly of red wine, can help people's overall health. It is a suggestion that campaigners fear interferes with the message about the risks of alcohol.
Gerry Shaper, one of the researchers, said: "There ought to be a debunking of the 'benefits' of alcohol.
"One should be very careful, particularly doctors, of advising people to start drinking because it is good for them. That often happens when men retire. I think it is pernicious."
Dr Shaper, of the Royal Free and University College Medical School, London, questioned whether even the reduced risk of heart disease was down to alcohol. Men who moved from not drinking, or taking the occasional drink, to more regular drinking in middle age tended to have had better lifestyles when younger.
The research is reported in the medical journal Heart. It involved men screened for heart disease by GPs in 24 towns from 1978 to 1980 when they were between 40 and 59. Most were questioned again on their drinking and lifestyles five years later, and their progress was monitored into the 90s.
Most of those who were deemed "new regular drinkers" consumed between one and 15 units a week, considered light drinking. They were less likely to have a heart attack than those who remained teetotal or still only drank occasionally.
However, they were no less likely to die of heart or cardiovascular disease - and 40% more likely to die of other diseases.
The charity Alcohol Concern said: "The health costs of alcohol far outweigh the benefits, with around 33,000 people dying of alcohol related diseases in the UK every year."
The British Heart Foundation said: "This research is of importance because it shows that the effects of alcohol on one organ may not apply to the rest of the body."
Meanwhile, scientists at Queen Mary College, London, believe they have worked out why red wine might help to stave off heart disease.
They found that in laboratory tests, alcohol-free extracts of red wine blocked production of a natural chemical called endetholin-1. This chemical is an important factor in cardiovascular disease because it causes blood vessels to constrict. Rosé and white wines had no effect on mammal blood vessel cells, but the blocking effect of an extract of cabernet sauvignon was seven times more powerful that of than grape juice.
However, Professor Roger Corder, who led the research, said: "The changes that alcohol causes are so modest that you would not in your right mind believe that they could protect you from heart disease.
"What one would want to encourage is a lifestyle that says a couple of glasses of red wine with your evening meal or your lunch is what is required, and alcohol consumption other than that should be avoided."
end quote.
As for the alleged “health benefits” of moderate alcohol intake, a famous British doctor mentioned in the article I cited above, named Dr. Gerry Shaper, completely destroys the very base of the claim that “moderate” alcohol intake has any benefit.  What I’m about to state is HUGELY important, as Dr. Gerry Shaper noticed a massive error in the studies that claimed that moderate alcohol intake had any alleged “health benefit”.  This error in the studies was what Dr. Gerry Shaper called the “abstainer myth”.  See most of these old studies had just two categories in their “experiment” labeled drinkers and abstainers (i.e. non-drinkers).  What these fraudulent “experiments” hid was the fact that many of the people they put in the “abstainer” (or non-drinker) category had actually been past alcohol drinkers!  In many cases these alleged alcohol “abstainers” had only very recently given up alcohol use; in many cases because they were in ill health and doctors had advised them to stop drinking alcohol (indicating that many of them were likely heavy alcohol drinkers before)!  Yet absurdly these people were put in the “abstainer” category; and no mention was made of the fact that they had been alcohol drinkers earlier on and were told to stop drinking alcohol by medical professionals: again most of these people were thus already in bad health (probably from heavy past alcohol use).  This terribly skewed the fraudulent results of these studies and made the overall abstainer category appear less healthy then they really were.
A wonderful article explaining this is the following: http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-03-30/news/17287339_1_drinkers-moderate-alcohol-consumption-abstainers

Quote- UCSF points out flaw in studies tying alcohol to heart health

March 30, 2006|By Sabin Russell, Chronicle Medical Writer

With all the contradictory claims made these days about the health benefits of low-fat diets, the harm of hormone replacements and the dangers of pain relievers, at least we still know that a drink or two a day is good for the heart.
Well, maybe not.
Researchers at UCSF pored through more than 30 years of studies that seem to show health benefits from moderate alcohol consumption, and concluded in a report released today that nearly all contained a fundamental error that skewed the results.
That error may have led to an erroneous conclusion that moderate drinkers were healthier than lifelong abstainers. Typically, studies suggest that abstainers run a 25 percent higher risk of coronary heart disease.

Without the error, the analyses shows, the health outcomes for moderate drinkers and non-drinkers were about the same.
"This reopens the debate about the validity of the findings of a protective effect for moderate drinkers, and it suggests that studies in the future be better designed to take this potential error into account," said Kaye Fillmore, a sociologist at the UCSF School of Nursing and lead author of the study.
The common error was to lump into the group of "abstainers" people who were once drinkers but had quit.
Many former drinkers are people who stopped consuming alcohol because of advancing age or poor health. Including them in the "abstainer" group made the entire category of non-drinkers seem less healthy in comparison.
This type of error in alcohol studies was first spotted by British researcher Dr. Gerry Shaper in 1988, but the new analysis appears to show that the problem has persisted.
Fillmore and colleagues from the University of Victoria, British Columbia; and Curtin University, in Perth, Australia, analyzed 54 different studies examining the relationship between light to moderate drinking and health. Of these, only seven did not inappropriately mingle former drinkers and abstainers.
All seven of those studies found no significant differences in the health of those who drank -- or previously drank -- and those who never touched the stuff. The remaining 47 studies represent the body of research that has led to a general scientific consensus that moderate drinking has a health benefit.
Fillmore's team of researchers took their initial finding one step further, and introduced the error into the data compiled in the seven studies and, voila, the results changed to show drinkers had better health than abstainers.
end quote.
http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-03-30/news/17287339_1_drinkers-moderate-alcohol-consumption-abstainers/2
Quote- (Page 2 of 2)
"We are not proving anything," Fillmore insisted. "But the results are certainly suggestive."
The UCSF study appears today in an online edition of the journal Addiction Research and Theory.
Kaiser Permanente cardiologist Dr. Arthur Klatsky, who led some of the largest studies showing a protective effect for moderate alcohol consumption, said his first study in 1981 contained the flaw, but subsequent studies took it into consideration.
"Without question, it is a serious flaw, which we have readily admitted," he said. He contends, however, that Fillmore's analysis mistakenly attributes the same mistake to later research.
"The evidence is still pretty compelling that there are likely to be benefits" from moderate drinking, he said. In addition, he said, studies show that alcohol raises the level of HDL -- the so-called good cholesterol -- and also has anti-clotting effects, which can reduce the risk of heart attack.
Klatsky said that there are inherent weaknesses in all the epidemiological studies of alcohol and heart health. What is needed, he said, is a randomized trial in which a group is assigned to consume one or two drinks a day and another abstains, and their comparative health is assessed over a period of years.
Dr. Tim Naimi, a physician who works for the National Center for Chronic Disease at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, said "the whole field of 'moderate drinking' studies is deeply flawed," because of the lack of randomized trials.
In a study published in May 2005 in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Naimi and other CDC colleagues found that the comparatively higher risk of heart disease in abstainers could be explained by socioeconomic factors rather than lack of protection from alcohol consumption.
Non-drinkers, for example, tended to be poorer than drinkers, had less access to health care, and had less healthy diets.
"Anyone who suggests that people should begin drinking, or drink more frequently, to reduce the risk of heart disease is misguided," he said.
end quote.
This information absolutely obliterates the whole claim of the silly infidel alcohol lovers (again most of my refutation of them is coming from Western non-Muslim medical professionals and researchers).  Again almost all of these deceptive studies (mostly from the 1980s) that claimed “moderate” alcohol drinking allegedly made one’s heart “healthier” are all worthless as they all contained the “abstainer error” (first pointed out by the respected British medical professional Dr. Gerry Shaper).  This “abstainer error” again frivolously and wrongly included people who had recently given up drinking alcohol on doctor’s orders because they were already in terrible health (likely from having been heavy alcohol drinkers in the past).  Including these heavy alcohol drinkers, who had been made to stop by medical professionals, in the “abstainer” category (because they had recently given up their past alcohol use) was the trick these pathetic alcohol lovers used to produce the deceptive and false claim that moderate alcohol drinking allegedly is “good” for one’s health.  Again Dr. Gerry Shaper torpedoed this silly claim of the alcohol lovers!  Also Dr. Tim Naimi and his CDC (US government Centers for Disease Control) colleagues also gave another huge explanation that refuted the alcoholic propagandists.  Dr. Naimi and company showed how these deceptive people didn’t include socioeconomic issues in some of their deceptive studies.  Again: http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-03-30/news/17287339_1_drinkers-moderate-alcohol-consumption-abstainers/2
Quote- Dr. Tim Naimi, a physician who works for the National Center for Chronic Disease at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, said "the whole field of 'moderate drinking' studies is deeply flawed," because of the lack of randomized trials.
In a study published in May 2005 in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Naimi and other CDC colleagues found that the comparatively higher risk of heart disease in abstainers could be explained by socioeconomic factors rather than lack of protection from alcohol consumption.
Non-drinkers, for example, tended to be poorer than drinkers, had less access to health care, and had less healthy diets.
"Anyone who suggests that people should begin drinking, or drink more frequently, to reduce the risk of heart disease is misguided," he said.
end quote.
Another good article from the website of the University of California, San Francisco itself (where UCSF School of Nursing Adjunct Professor Kaye Fillmore, PhD and her colleagues are from) continues in destroying the myths of the alcohol lovers.
From: http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2007/03/7215/debate-rekindled-two-drinks-day-road-heart-health

Quote- Debate Rekindled on the Two-Drinks-a-Day Road to Heart Health

March 29, 2007
By Kristen Bole
No one really wants to hear that alcohol isn't good for us after all, which could be why scientists worldwide have convened on paper this month to debate a UCSF researcher's study that debunks the popular notion.
UCSF School of Nursing Adjunct Professor Kaye Fillmore, PhD, led an international team on a meta-analytic study that found a common error in most significant studies connecting moderate alcohol consumption to healthy hearts. The study was published last year in Addiction Research and Theory, a bimonthly medical journal in England.
Now, eight independent scientists have filed their responses to the Fillmore study in the March 29 issue of Addiction Research and Theory, with further response from Fillmore, creating what journal editor Derek Heim said "may well constitute the most complete critical discussion of the protective effect [of alcohol] to date."
Three of those researchers donned their boxing gloves, taking issue with Fillmore's inclusions, exclusions or conclusions in the research, including which studies were considered flawed or were chosen for the analysis. Yet the majority agreed that most previous studies had included the same error.
The error, according to the 2006 study, was in counting among "abstainers" the people who had given up alcohol for health reasons. That inclusion skewed the health profile of the abstainer group, Fillmore said, making moderate alcohol drinkers look healthier.
The story generated huge interest, not only among media mavens, but also in the halls of the alcohol industry, which has supported past research substantiating the heart-health link.
"It's probably the most ferocious debate in medical epidemiology right now, because we really hit the alcohol industry below the belt," said Fillmore, who admitted she personally enjoys a drink, but said she does it for pleasure, not for her heart. "This was a tremendous threat to the industry."
Other researchers on Fillmore's team included William Kerr, PhD, Alcohol Research Group, USA; Tim Stockwell, PhD, University of Victoria, Canada; Tanya Chikritzhs, PhD, Curtin University, Australia; and Alan Bostrom, PhD, University of California, San Francisco.
One of the authors currently contesting the Fillmore study, Arthur Klatsky, MD, from the Division of Research at the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, cited his own eight-year study of 128,934 Kaiser patients. The study, which Klatsky had led, was included by the Fillmore study in the group that contained flaws.
While Klatsky contested inclusion in the flawed group, citing precise questions in his study that had separated ex-drinkers from lifelong abstainers, his conclusion actually bolstered Fillmore's case. His study, Klatsky wrote, found that ex-drinkers do have increased risk and should be separated from lifelong abstainers. Infrequent drinkers (those who have less than one drink per month), he said, were shown to have the same risk as abstainers.
Fillmore, whose team also published a response to the responses in the current journal, said her original paper drew international recognition precisely because so many physicians have started prescribing alcohol to prevent heart disease. That's especially true in developing countries, where medications aren't readily available to most people, but where alcohol - commercial or homemade - is both ubiquitous and cheap.
"The bottom line is, nobody knows what alcohol's effect is on our hearts, because these studies are so difficult to construct to eliminate error," Fillmore said. "We do know that it is associated with a huge number of other killers, from cirrhosis to cancer to car accidents."
Her hope is that governments and physicians alike will at least think twice about prescribing the two- or three-drinks-a-day "medicine," especially for those on medications that might interact with alcohol.
"That's just dangerous. And for older people, whose tolerance to alcohol has decreased, you're going to have a lot of broken hips from falls, or car accidents," she said. "Why risk that, when it would be just as easy to tell them to take an aspirin a day?"
Related Links:
International Study Questions Health Benefits of Moderate Drinking
UCSF News Release, March 30, 2006
UCSF Study Disputes Recent Reports that Alcohol-abstainers Are at Greater Risk of Mortality
UCSF News Release, January 31, 1998
end quote.
This was such a thorough refutation let me just cite a few of the amazing quotes from this above article again! Quote- The story generated huge interest, not only among media mavens, but also in the halls of the alcohol industry, which has supported past research substantiating the heart-health link.
"It's probably the most ferocious debate in medical epidemiology right now, because we really hit the alcohol industry below the belt," said Fillmore, who admitted she personally enjoys a drink, but said she does it for pleasure, not for her heart. "This was a tremendous threat to the industry."

While Klatsky contested inclusion in the flawed group, citing precise questions in his study that had separated ex-drinkers from lifelong abstainers, his conclusion actually bolstered Fillmore's case. His study, Klatsky wrote, found that ex-drinkers do have increased risk and should be separated from lifelong abstainers. Infrequent drinkers (those who have less than one drink per month), he said, were shown to have the same risk as abstainers.

"The bottom line is, nobody knows what alcohol's effect is on our hearts, because these studies are so difficult to construct to eliminate error," Fillmore said. "We do know that it is associated with a huge number of other killers, from cirrhosis to cancer to car accidents."
Her hope is that governments and physicians alike will at least think twice about prescribing the two- or three-drinks-a-day "medicine," especially for those on medications that might interact with alcohol.
"That's just dangerous. And for older people, whose tolerance to alcohol has decreased, you're going to have a lot of broken hips from falls, or car accidents," she said. "Why risk that, when it would be just as easy to tell them to take an aspirin a day?"
end quote.
I have presented on the evidence refuting the claims of the alcohol promoters and their baseless claim of the alleged “health benefits” of moderate alcohol use!  Alcohol may give the disbelievers some feelings of fun and wild careless sex with strangers, but these are short-lived pleasures and the demonic effects of alcohol follow soon after (which Allah tells us in his Qur’an in verses again like Qur’an Surah 2:219).
To leave you with a few more interesting links:

http://articles.cnn.com/2000-03-31/health/wine.heart.wmd_1_grape-juice-nonalcoholic-wine-john-folts?_s=PM:HEALTH Wine or Welchs Grape juice provides health benefits without alcohol

http://alcoholism.about.com/od/cancer/Alcohol_and_Cancer_Risk.htm

http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/news/News/heavy-alcohol-use-may-increase-prostate-cancer-risk Heavy Alcohol Use May Increase Prostate Cancer Risk

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-12-10/health/drinking.breast.cancer.recurrence_1_breast-cancer-marisa-weiss-alcohol-intake?_s=PM:HEALTH Study: Moderate drinking ups risk of breast cancer return December 10, 2009|By Denise Mann, Health.com

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/cancer/articles/2009/08/07/drinking-moderately-or-more-ups-mens-cancer-risk Drinking Moderately or More Ups Men's Cancer Risk; Canadian study links regular alcohol consumption to six cancers Posted: August 7, 2009

 

 

 







                                                           
                                                                                               
           

 


Sunday, March 13, 2011

Muslim women, Hijab, Skin Cancer, and Vitamin D. Refuting anti-Islamic liars.

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/234986555-muslim-women-hijab-skin-cancer-and-vitamin-d/

I just came across an old claim that was being made by anti-Islamic people years ago. This claim was yet another attack on the Islamic veil (hijab) for Muslim women made by the kaafir (infidels). I’m sure everyone has heard the claims of the enemies of Islam who claim the veil (hijab) is allegedly “oppressive”; when in reality it guards the dignity and purity of the Muslim women from bad men. The hijab was worn by Mary (pbuh) the mother of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) and is still worn by Catholic nuns till this day as well! Well another claim these enemies of Islam made in the past was that the hijab allegedly prevented Muslim women from obtaining “enough sunlight” thus allegedly making them more susceptible to Vitamin D deficiency. This claim was discussed and refuted here: http://www.shiachat....d-muslim-women/
Also these two links from Saudi Arabian websites refuted the claims of the anti-Islamic liars: http://www.saudigaze...D=2010012561279 and http://islam-qa.com/.../hijab%20health

I wanted to add a crucial piece of information that I found from an American medical website; showing how the hijab not only protects Muslim women from indecent men but also actually is extremely healthy for the Muslim women as it protects them from the very dangerous UV rays of the sun which is the cause of the deadly disease of skin cancer. I will now quote professional research done by The Skin Cancer Foundation. Whose website states; http://www.skincancer.org/: Quote- “The Skin Cancer Foundation is the leading skin cancer prevention organization. We have doctor-approved information and sun-safety instructions.” end quote. The Skin Cancer Foundation states on the issues of Vitamin D, proving that Muslim women in the hijab are actually healthier then non-Muslim women who do not wear a veil in sunny conditions. http://www.skincancer.org/Vitamin-D/
Quote- Vitamin D is essential for strong bones and a healthy immune system. While a limited amount of vitamin D can be obtained from exposure to the sun’s ultraviolet (UV) radiation, the health risks of UV exposure — including skin cancer — are great. Instead, The Skin Cancer Foundation suggests you get your recommended daily 600 IU (international units) of vitamin D a day from food sources like oily fish, fortified dairy products and cereals, and supplements. Read on to learn more about the best way to get your vitamin D.

The Foundation cautions the public against intentional exposure to natural sunlight or artificial UV radiation (tanning beds) as a means of obtaining vitamin D, since the health risks of UV exposure — including skin cancer and premature skin aging — are significant and well proven.
end quote.

The Skin Cancer Foundation also states: http://www.skincance...-d-dilemma.html
Quote- People are at greater risk for these diseases, they say, because dermatologists have scared them out of the sun. Since skin manufactures vitamin D in response to ultraviolet (UV) light, they explain, the simple solution to the deficiency is 5-10 minutes of unprotected UV exposure from the sun or tanning machines two or three times a week.
Most dermatologists and cancer groups, including The Skin Cancer Foundation, have argued strongly against this "solution," since all unprotected UV exposure contributes to cumulative skin damage, accelerating aging and increasing our lifetime risk of skin cancer. And a new analysis from the Department of Dermatology, Boston University School of Medicine, supports this stance.

However, they pointed out that UV is an officially recognized environmental carcinogen. There has been "a near epidemic" of skin cancers, they say, with more than 1.3 million diagnosed yearly in the U.S.— and the cause of most is sun exposure.
As for the advocates of unprotected sun exposure, Drs. Wolpowitz and Gilchrest say the studies supporting them are of "variable quality" and merely "observational": The data generally link mortality from colon, breast, and prostate cancer in specific regions with the amounts of UV in those regions. Such studies may be confounded by climatic factors such as pollution, variations in population genetics (such as darker- or lighter-skinned populations), and cultural or lifestyle factors (such as socioeconomic status and diet). The studies cannot directly correlate disease with individual sun exposure, and "cannot establish that solar exposure decreases incidence or mortality from these cancers."
In contrast, research ranging from animal studies and surveys to large population studies and human DNA studies has strongly established the connection between sun exposure and skin cancer. Sun exposure also causes wrinkles, brown spots, leathering and sagging. Drs. Wolpowitz and Gilchrest further note that very small amounts of sun exposure provide all the vitamin D the body can manufacture. Even when you wear sunscreen, some UV reaches the skin, and this may be plenty, at least for fair-skinned individuals. "Greater exposure adds nothing to vitamin D stores, while increasing DNA damage in a linear fashion," they add. The authors conclude, "The tradeoff of vitamin D production today for photoaging and skin cancer decades hence may have made sense millennia ago, when life expectancy was 40 years or less, but it's a poor exchange when life expectancy has doubled, skin rejuvenation is a $35 billion/year industry, and one in three Caucasians develops skin cancer."
Fortunately, Drs. Wolpowitz and Gilchrest point out, there are "effective and almost effortless" noncarcinogenic alternatives-vitamin D-fortified foods and/or dietary supplements. James Spencer, MD, clinical professor of dermatology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York City, concurs. If you want more vitamin D, he says, you can obtain all you need from your diet. "Drink vitamin D-fortified orange juice or milk or other enriched products. Eat salmon and other fatty fish. Or take a daily multivitamin containing 600 units of vitamin D. It's so easy. And it's a lot safer than lying in the sun or climbing undressed into a tanning booth and frying your whole body."
end quote.
The American Cancer Society (at http://www.cancer.org/) tells us about just how dangerous skin cancer caused by the damaging UV rays of the sun is: http://www.cancer.or...in-cancer-facts
Quote- “Skin cancer is the most common of all cancers. It accounts for nearly half of all cancers in the United States. More than 2 million cases of non-melanoma skin cancer are found in this country each year. Melanoma, the most serious type of skin cancer, will account for about 68,130 cases of skin cancer in 2010.”

Can skin cancer be prevented?
The best ways to lower the risk of non-melanoma skin cancer are to avoid intense sunlight for long periods of time and to practice sun safety. You can continue to exercise and enjoy the outdoors while practicing sun safety at the same time. Here are some ways you can do this:
Avoid the sun between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.

end quote.

With this in mind The Skin Cancer Foundation explains the sun’s UV rays and the dangers associated with them: http://www.skincance...va-and-uvb.html. So I think we can see quite clearly that the sun is very dangerous and its rays and radiation causes the very deadly disease of skin cancer that kills tons and tons of people yearly. These anti-Islam fools really have no case and should actually promote the hijab as it protects women from the sun’s deadly skin cancer causing rays.
All men and women (both Muslim and non-Muslim; hijab wearing or non-hijab wearing) should make sure to get enough of all their essential vitamins including Vitamin D; but this can easily be done simply by eating Vitamin D fortified foods like fortified diary products (milk), oily fish, and cereals; or by also taking Vitamin D supplements. For example 2% Milk sold in the United States contains 25% of your needed Vitamin D amounts daily per 8 fluid ounce glass. So someone just needs to drink four 8 fluid ounce glasses of 2% milk daily and they will have achieved all their needed daily levels of Vitamin D. The sun is not the proper source as The Skin Cancer Foundation once again states: http://www.skincancer.org/Vitamin-D/
Quote- While a limited amount of vitamin D can be obtained from exposure to the sun’s ultraviolet (UV) radiation, the health risks of UV exposure — including skin cancer — are great. Instead, The Skin Cancer Foundation suggests you get your recommended daily 600 IU (international units) of vitamin D a day from food sources like oily fish, fortified dairy products and cereals, and supplements. Read on to learn more about the best way to get your vitamin D.
end quote.
http://www.skincance...-d-dilemma.html
Quote- Fortunately, Drs. Wolpowitz and Gilchrest point out, there are "effective and almost effortless" noncarcinogenic alternatives-vitamin D-fortified foods and/or dietary supplements. James Spencer, MD, clinical professor of dermatology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York City, concurs. If you want more vitamin D, he says, you can obtain all you need from your diet. "Drink vitamin D-fortified orange juice or milk or other enriched products. Eat salmon and other fatty fish. Or take a daily multivitamin containing 600 units of vitamin D. It's so easy. And it's a lot safer than lying in the sun or climbing undressed into a tanning booth and frying your whole body."
end quote.

Also some last closing points. Muslim women are required to wear the protective, blessed Islamic hijab: http://www.islam-qa....ref/13998/hijab. But Muslim women are allowed to be outside without their hijab as long as they are protected from the view of non-Mahram men (that is men they are not related to or married to). We read from the Islamic scholarly source: http://islam-qa.com/.../hijab%20health that Muslim women can be exposed to the sun in a protected environment, but again it should be noted that nobody needs much sun exposure as the sun’s damaging UV rays cause skin cancer and we can easily get all our needed Vitamin D from healthy food (like oily fish, milk, diary products, Vitamin D fortified cereals) and Vitamin D supplements. Again the Islamic source states: http://islam-qa.com/.../hijab%20health: “and by exposure to the sun in a place where there are no non-mahram men, such as exposure to the sun through windows, on the roof of the house, in remote parks, and so on.” The health problem of osteoporosis (that anti-Islamic fools try to claim wearing the hijab might allegedly "increase") is actually caused by many different health issues, and Vitamin D deficiency is actually not the most serious issue causing weak bones (i.e. osteoporosis); putting aside the fact that skin cancer is far more dangerous! The most common cause of osteoporosis is simply old age, especially in women. The main cause of osteoporosis in women is estrogen deficiency in post menopausal women. The following link explains this: http://jdr.sagepub.c...t/85/7/584.full
Quote-Although most patients suffering from osteoporosis are post-menopausal women exhibiting loss of estrogen, elderly men also develop primary osteoporosis. Women exhibit two phases of age-related bone loss: The first starts at menopause, predominantly in trabecular bone, is caused by estrogen deficiency, and results in a disproportionate increase in bone resorption as compared with formation. When this phase peaks after 4–8 years, the second phase starts, exhibiting a persistent, slower loss of both trabecular and cortical bone, and is mainly a result of decreased bone formation.
end quote.

This completely refutes the lying claims of the anti-Islamic fools against the beautiful Islamic hijab, also it should simply be stated the hijab does not cover the whole face and the skin of Muslim women certainly is exposed to some amounts of sun (which is better as again too much sun exposure causes skin cancer).

 The proper way to get necessary Vitamin D (from foods like milk, Vitamin D fortified cereals, oily fish and Vitamin D supplements), not the dangerous UV rays of the sun which cause skin cancer.


Also quite simply the Hijab allows the Muslim woman's face to be exposed to some sunlight, which is by far enough (and again helps prevent her from getting the deadly disease of skin cancer caused by the dangerous UV rays and radiation of the sun).

 and the blessed Niqab also allows enough; also usually the woman's hands are uncovered:


And again all you need to get the necessary Vitamin D is food rich in Vitamin D (milk, fortified cereal, oily fish, etc.) and Vitamin D supplements. This is again safer as nobody needs to be in the dangerous sun whose UV rays cause skin cancer with too much exposure.

Good links:

http://www.skincance...-d-dilemma.html

http://www.skincancer.org/Vitamin-D/

http://www.skincance...n-Cancer-Facts/

Quote- Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer in the United States. More than 3.5 million skin cancers in over two million people are diagnosed annually.1

end quote.

http://www.gawaher.c...ic=730913.html

http://www.sunniforu...hp/t-23579.html

http://www.saudigaze...D=2010012561279

http://islam-qa.com/.../hijab%20health

http://www.islam-qa....ref/13998/hijab

...

Another side point, of course with that fact that exposure to the sun's UV rays again causes deadly skin cancer, is that research has shown that Asian people in general tend to have a slightly higher rate of Vitamin D deficiency. Note that this includes all Asians, the majority of which likely are non-Muslims who do not even wear hijab. Real unbiased researchers think this anomaly likely is related to diet. In the Arab context many bedouins eat a significant amount of the bread food chapati.


http://www.nature.co...s/1600717a.html

Quote- Results: Plasma vitamin D values are lower in the three groups of Asian children than values reported for children of a similar age in the National Diet and Nutrition Survey. Between one third and a half of children with a low haemoglobin also had low plasma vitamin D values; there was a significant association between failure to take a vitamin supplement, chapati consumption and low vitamin D values.

end quote.

Chapati for some reason inhibits absorption of Vitamin D, an important and interesting point, this has nothing to do with hijab. It should be noted that Indian people (including Hindus) also eat this type of food. Also see the following among Americans! http://www.saudigaze...D=2010012561279

Quote- Studies however have also shown something else: 54% of black and 42% of white childbearing women in the Northern US were found with insufficient vitamin D levels.
Unless it is believed that such a large percentage of North Americans are good Hijabis who cover themselves up completely, the accusation falls flat.

Dr. Abdul Majid Katme of the Islamic Medical Association in Britain said, “This is a common fallacy among the people of the West. It is a medical fact that diet is the main cause of vitamin D deficiency among some Asians, and not lack of exposure to the sun. We Muslims who live in the East and Asia are exposed to the sun all the time and our houses, yards and private gardens are full of sunshine.” (Q-News, 1995)

end quote.

Again all one needs to do to get adequate Vitamin D is eat food rich in Vitamin D (milk, Vitamin D fortified cereals, oily fish, etc.) and it is good advice to take a Vitamin D supplement if necessary. Sun exposure is again not recommended as it is known to cause skin cancer.

 
Again read:

http://www.skincancer.org/Vitamin-D/

Quote- Vitamin D is essential for strong bones and a healthy immune system. While a limited amount of vitamin D can be obtained from exposure to the sun’s ultraviolet (UV) radiation, the health risks of UV exposure — including skin cancer — are great. Instead, The Skin Cancer Foundation suggests you get your recommended daily 600 IU (international units) of vitamin D a day from food sources like oily fish, fortified dairy products and cereals, and supplements. Read on to learn more about the best way to get your vitamin D.

end quote.

http://www.skincance...-d-dilemma.html

Quote- Most dermatologists and cancer groups, including The Skin Cancer Foundation, have argued strongly against this "solution," since all unprotected UV exposure contributes to cumulative skin damage, accelerating aging and increasing our lifetime risk of skin cancer. And a new analysis from the Department of Dermatology, Boston University School of Medicine, supports this stance.

The authors, Deon Wolpowitz, MD, PhD, and Barbara A. Gilchrest, MD, reviewed massive research on vitamin D and sun exposure. They found that in regions where people have greater sun exposure, fewer cases of colon cancer occur (presumably because of sun-induced vitamin D), and fewer deaths occur from colon, breast, and prostate cancers. However, they pointed out that UV is an officially recognized environmental carcinogen. There has been "a near epidemic" of skin cancers, they say, with more than 1.3 million diagnosed yearly in the U.S.— and the cause of most is sun exposure.

As for the advocates of unprotected sun exposure, Drs. Wolpowitz and Gilchrest say the studies supporting them are of "variable quality" and merely "observational": The data generally link mortality from colon, breast, and prostate cancer in specific regions with the amounts of UV in those regions. Such studies may be confounded by climatic factors such as pollution, variations in population genetics (such as darker- or lighter-skinned populations), and cultural or lifestyle factors (such as socioeconomic status and diet). The studies cannot directly correlate disease with individual sun exposure, and "cannot establish that solar exposure decreases incidence or mortality from these cancers."

In contrast, research ranging from animal studies and surveys to large population studies and human DNA studies has strongly established the connection between sun exposure and skin cancer. Sun exposure also causes wrinkles, brown spots, leathering and sagging. Drs. Wolpowitz and Gilchrest further note that very small amounts of sun exposure provide all the vitamin D the body can manufacture. Even when you wear sunscreen, some UV reaches the skin, and this may be plenty, at least for fair-skinned individuals. "Greater exposure adds nothing to vitamin D stores, while increasing DNA damage in a linear fashion," they add. The authors conclude, "The tradeoff of vitamin D production today for photoaging and skin cancer decades hence may have made sense millennia ago, when life expectancy was 40 years or less, but it's a poor exchange when life expectancy has doubled, skin rejuvenation is a $35 billion/year industry, and one in three Caucasians develops skin cancer."

Fortunately, Drs. Wolpowitz and Gilchrest point out, there are "effective and almost effortless" noncarcinogenic alternatives-vitamin D-fortified foods and/or dietary supplements. James Spencer, MD, clinical professor of dermatology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York City, concurs. If you want more vitamin D, he says, you can obtain all you need from your diet. "Drink vitamin D-fortified orange juice or milk or other enriched products. Eat salmon and other fatty fish. Or take a daily multivitamin containing 600 units of vitamin D. It's so easy. And it's a lot safer than lying in the sun or climbing undressed into a tanning booth and frying your whole body."

end quote.

http://www.skincance...n-Cancer-Facts/

Quote- Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer in the United States. More than 3.5 million skin cancers in over two million people are diagnosed annually.1
...
1. Rogers, HW, Weinstock, MA, Harris, AR, et al. Incidence estimate of nonmelanoma skin cancer in the United States, 2006. Arch Dermatol 2010; 146(3):283-287.

end quote.

Again this:

Not this:
 
Which causes skin cancer:
...
Foods with lots of Vitamin D, that give you nearly your total daily amounted recommended!

See how easy it is to get Vitamin D from purely food sources (add to this a Vitamin D supplement if you choose to take one)! Just one 8 fluid ounce glass of 2% Reduced Fat Milk or Vitamin D fortified Orange Juice (like Florida's Natural Orange Juice with Vitamin D added: http://www.floridasn...added-vitamin-d) already gives you 25% of your needed daily amount of Vitamin D! Thus two 8 fluid ounce glasses gives you 50% of your daily Vitamin D and just four 8 fluid ounce glasses and you have 100% (or all) of your Vitamin D needed for the day!

A fortified cereal with Vitamin D, Lucky Charms Cereal:

Also a good Vitamin D supplement (you don't want to get skin cancer from the sun's deadly UV rays)!
 ...

Interesting video, proving my point see 3:11 stay covered up!

Another interesting video from CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta on the massive epidemic of deadly skin cancer in the United States; link: http://www.youtube.c...player_embedded

Again:
http://www.skincance...-d-dilemma.html

http://www.skincancer.org/Vitamin-D/
 
http://www.floridasn...added-vitamin-d

http://nutritiondata...ml?maxCount=165 Cereals with Vitamin D

And again just Vitamin D supplements (i.e. vitamin pills you take by mouth).

 Vitamin D (and other necessary vitamins) dietary supplements: http://nutrition.abo...whyvitamins.htm

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

A follow up to my most recent post about silly Christian missionaries and alleged symbols

I just recently wrote this article http://muslimbeliefsandnews.blogspot.com/2011/02/another-delusional-islamophobic-theory.html which refuted a silly Christian missionary claim that the Greek language spelling of the "mark of the beast" (or "666" which academics say was used in the Bible as a historical reference to Roman Emperor Nero Caesar) allegedly looked "similar" to the Arabic letters that make up the Arabic word Allah (meaning God in the Arabic language).  Well while thinking on this topic another thing actually came to my mind, that using these silly Islamophobic Christian missionary's own logic (or in their case shall I say lack of logic) I could make a very damning assertion against their Christian faith!  (Note: My example is only to show how this silly sort of argument, employed by deceitful Christian missionaries, can actually come back to bite these very same Christian missionaries in their own butts!  I don't mean to offend any good Christian, who does not attack the religion of Islam).

We all know that in the English language the main word for a religious deity is the English word "God".  We get the following definition from this online dictionary link for the English word "God": http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/God "the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe."  The English word God is thus the main word all English speaking American Christians (and all other English speaking Christians for that matter) use in reference to the deity of their Christian religion.  Trinitarian Christians (the majority of Christians in America and around the world today) also hold a central belief that Prophet Jesus (PBUH) is allegedly also God or a part of God in the Christian Trinity.  The trinity is a whole separate issue I will not get into here, but let me just say we Muslims believe in pure monotheism (called Tawheed in Arabic) and that God is only One: http://www.almujtaba.com/en/index.php/left-menu-articles/77-principles-of-islam/260-tawheed-monotheism


With this information in mind, let us now see what the English word "God" is spelled backwards, it is "dog": may Allah (God) forgive me if it seems I'm comparing Almighty Allah to the creature of a dog, this is not my intention at all.  But if we use the Christian missionaries own silly arguments this would be very damning for English speaking Christians.  You want to know why that is?  I could make an argument (like the silly Christian missionaries try to do with the Greek language against Almighty Allah) that since the English word "dog" is the English word "god" spelled backwards English speaking Christians must be worshipping the ancient Greek and Roman mythological guardian of hades (meaning hell in Greek and Roman mythology or pagan religion) the three headed dog creature called a Cerberus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerberus
"Cerberus (pronounced /ˈsɜrbərəs/),[1] or Kerberos, (Greek form: Κέρβερος, [ˈkerberos])[2] in Greek and Roman mythology, is a multi-headed hound (usually three-headed)[1][3][4] which guards the gates of Hades, to prevent those who have crossed the river Styx from ever escaping. Cerberus featured in many works of ancient Greek and Roman literature and in works of both ancient and modern art and architecture, although, the depiction and background surrounding Cerberus often differed across various works by different authors of the era."

Here are three illustrations of what the Cerberus, which is the guard of hades or hell in Greek and Roman mythology, is suppose to look like:







So again using the same type of asinine "logic" employed by wicked anti-Islamic Christian missionaries, I could easily claim that Greek and Roman mythology allegedly predicted the Christian religion and the English Christians use of the English word "God" and that this Cerberus is a sign that the Christians worship Satan!  Because again the English word "god" spelled backwards is "dog"; so I could claim Greek and Roman mythology was allegedly predicting and implying that later English speaking Christians were demonic Satan worshippers because they allegedly follow the demonic, rabid Cerberus (three headed dog) that is suppose to dwell in hell.  Something that is rabid and vicious must be from hell!  Also I think anyone who has seen a dog would agree these animals are very dirty creatures that often drink out of toilets, lick themselves clean and so they thus can not be claimed to be at all angelic (as angels and holy things are pure and clean).

  
As for any Christians that would reply back that English speaking Muslims also uses the English word "God" in reference to Allah(SWT); I could easily refute this by stating clearly that we Muslims worship only Allah and that the Arabic word Allah can never truly be translated into any other language.  Thus we (that is English speaking Muslims) only use the English word "God" when speaking with English speakers (particularly non-Muslims as they don't use the term Allah).  We Muslims believe Allah (in the Arabic language of the Holy Qur'an) is the only true name of (and word for) the Creator, Sustainer, and Deity of the Universe.
 
Again I'm just giving this as a counter-example to show just how silly these pathetic Christian missionaries and their claims (i.e. lies) against the true religion of Islam really are.


A last interesting quote on the word or term "God" in different languages of the world.  http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongod.html
"This contrasts with the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English words for God, all of which descend from words that were commonly used by pagans in reference to pagan deities."

Peace be upon those who follow true guidance.


Sunday, February 27, 2011

Another delusional Islamophobic theory of hateful Christian missionaries

I was searching the web and found the following assertion being put forward by many silly Islam hating individuals (who seem to be mostly lying, clownish Evangelical Christian missionary fools).  This assertion of these Christian missionary evildoers is that in the original Greek of the Christian's New Testament Bible; the Greek letters for the number "666" (which is the so-called "mark of the beast" in Christian theology) allegedly look like the Arabic letters for Allah (which is the Arabic word for God).  In this short post I will go about refuting these evil claims made against the divine religion of Islam and Allah the one true God.

To begin with, as my old posts have dealt with, the mark of the beast or the number "666" is mentioned in the following section of the Christian's New Testament Bible.  Revelation 13:15-18

15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. 16 It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, 17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.
 18 This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man.  That number is 666. (NIV Bible)

All real historians and Christian theologians admit that the mark of the beast and the number "666" specifically are historic references made by the anonymous author of the Book of Revelation to the Roman Emperor Nero Caesar (also spelled Neron Caesar).  The anonymous author of the Book of Revelation used what is called gematria in the Hebrew language to make a secret code for Nero Caesar as the beast: who oppressed the Christians in Rome.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gematria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_Beast
Quote- Some scholars contend that the number 666 is a code for the Roman Emperor Nero.[13][14][15][16][17][14][16][18][19][20] Charagma is well attested to have been an imperial seal of the Roman Empire used on official documents during the 1st and 2nd centuries.[21] In the reign of Emperor Decius (249–251 AD), those who did not possess the certificate of sacrifice (libellus) to Caesar could not pursue trades, a prohibition that conceivably goes back to Nero, reminding one of Revelation 13:17.[22]
...
However, rumors circulated that Nero had not really died and would return to power.[29] It has also been suggested that the numerical reference to Nero was a code to imply but not directly point out emperor Domitian,[30][31] whose style of rulership resembled that of Nero and who put the people of Asia Minor, whom the Book of Revelation was primarily addressed to at the time, under heavy taxation.[32]
The Greek spelling, "Nerōn Kaisar", transliterates into Aramaic as "נרון קסר", nrwn qsr. The Aramaic spelling is attested in a scroll from Murabba'at dated to "the second year of emperor Nero." [33] Adding the corresponding values yields 666, as shown:

Resh (ר) Samech (ס) Qof (ק) Noon (נ) Vav (ו) Resh (ר) Noon (נ) Sum
200 60 100 50 6 200 50 666

end quote.

Lastly on this point, that in Christian theology the mark of the beast aka "666" was simply a historical gematria code in Hebrew that was used to refer to Nero Caesar, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero_Caesar#Christian_tradition

Quote-
Some modern biblical scholars [190][191] such as Delbert Hillers (Johns Hopkins University) of the American Schools of Oriental Research and the editors of the Oxford & Harper Collins study Bibles, contend that the number 666 in the Book of Revelation is a code for Nero,[192] a view that is also supported in Roman Catholic Biblical commentaries.[193][194]
The concept of Nero as the Antichrist is often a central belief of Preterist eschatology.

end quote.

So "666" almost certainly meant Nero Ceasar whom the Roman people thought actually had not died and would return to rule the Roman Empire one day.  Neron Caesar again adds up to "666" in Hebrew gematria, and even more telling the spelling "Nero Caesar" (that is Nero instead of Neron, which is a different method of spelling the same name) adds up to "616" in Hebrew gematria and this variant "616" is found in many early Christian New Testament manuscripts in place of "666" for this verse Revelation 13:18!  Adding more clear evidence that this verse of the New Testament means Nero Caesar and thus is in that historical context.

As for the stupid Christian missionary claim I am addressing here, the lying claim is made at this following link (among others): http://makofthebeast.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html

One of the images given by these Christian missionary fools is the following, this image below has one top a pair of swords, the Arabic letters of the word "Allah" (meaning God in the Arabic language), followed by another odd looking sword!  Then below these images the bottom line has the Greek language text of "666" taken from the New Testament Book of Revelation 13:18 (again in the original Greek language text).

 These pathetic anti-Islamic Christian missionary charlatans claim that if you "flip" the middle character in the bottom Greek language text of "666", in Revelation 13:18 of the Greek Bible, this Greek character allegedly "looks" like the Arabic script for Allah.  By claiming this these Christian missionaries are asserting that Islam and Allah are allegedly the Antichrist or the "666" mark of the beast mentioned in the Bible (which historians tell us means Nero Caesar anyway): Almighty Allah forgive me for repeating these evil kaafir disbelievers claims!  One of the many good refutations of this Christian missionary insanity and propaganda is the following post from this Islamic forum from a poster named "Gajibur": http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-22387.html


Quote- Here's my answer to this propaganda. Firstly, the presenter of this little propaganda film shows his deep ignorance, because like brother "sahih baba" indicated rather sarcastically, the Arab Christians also call God "Allah". Arab Jews also call God "Allah", Why? Because "Allah" is the Arabic word for God. The Arab Christians and Jews were using the word 'Allah' way before Prophet Muhammad(s.a.w) was even born. They think the Muslims invented the word 'Allah' but it was in use before Islam. So now this ignorant presenter has to say that those christians and jews were also worshipping the devil. :lol: .

Secondly, the Greek symbol for '666' only has a slight resemblance as far as i can see to the Arabic 'Allah'. Therefore it is quite desperate on their part to say the word 'Allah' is the same as the Greek symbol for '666'. What about those "x" shapes i saw in the Greek symbol for '666', why have the Christians conveniently forgotten about that.

Thirdly, Christian prophecies say that the Antichrist will deny Jesus(a.s) came from God. Islam does not deny this, in fact Islam says Jesus(a.s.) came from God and that he was a prophet of God. So according to Christian scriptures Islam can't be a satanic or Antichrist religion because it does not deny Jesus(a.s.) came from God.

end quote.

The silly Christian missionary website I cited and posted the image from above again includes swords, claiming these are the "X" looking letter or Greek character from the Greek language version (or translation) of "666".  See this link with an original Greek language version of the Christian New Testament Bible: http://gknt.org/gnt/chapters.html

For Book of Revelation 13:18 see: http://gknt.org/cgi-bin/gnt?id=2713

The last two letters or characters are the Greek language text of  "666" or "mark of the beast".  As for the "X" portion of this Greek text, the silly Christian missionaries again assert that this "X" like character somehow looks like the Saudi Arabian "sword" emblem!  To begin with the "sword" emblem is only a symbol or emblem of the government or monarchy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia the religion of Islam itself has no "symbol" as that is part of idolatry which we as Muslims fight against as true monotheists.  As for the "sword" emblem it is the coat of arms of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_Arms_of_Saudi_Arabia
This coat of arms from Saudi Arabia, looks nothing like an "X" lol!  Just look at this above Saudi emblem (or coat of arms) again it has two clearly hooked swords that hook outwards.  This would be a very deformed alleged "X"!


In fact again this "X" like character or letter from the Greek New Testament of Revelation 13:18 is actually just the Greek letter X!  And looks nothing like the Saudi Arabian coat of arms (emblem) which again has two swords crossed hooking clearly downwards which would be a very deformed alleged "X"!
Greek"X" or Chi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi_%28letter%29:

To conclude the Christian missionary clowns have nothing but their own imaginary claims made by flipping the Greek text sideways and claiming these Greek letters allegedly look somewhat like the Arabic word "Allah" (meaning God in the Arabic language).  And then also these deceptive Christian missionaries claim the "X" and other Greek symbols included in the Greek of Revelation 13:18 allegedly look like "swords" which these Christian missionaries claim look like alleged "Islamic" swords (putting aside the "sword" is not an Islamic symbol as the religion of Islam forbids symbols as idolatry,  the Christian missionaries only try to use the Saudi monarchy's coat of arms or emblem).  As I showed the Saudi Arabian coat of arms looks nothing like a standard "X" shape as the two crossed swords in the Saudi coat of arms have sword blades that hook sharply downward and could only be called a very deformed alleged "X"! As for the last shape or "sword" the Christian missionaries use in their image, this is not a symbol found in any Arabic or Islamic source whatsoever (much less some alleged "symbol" of the religion of Islam as these Christian missionaries absurdly try to claim)!  It is just a random hook like blade, that actually looks nothing like the Greek language text below it: showing the Christian missionary liars are just grasping at straws.

The last sword image the Christian missionaries put on the Arabic section of their deceptive photo actually looks a little like a flipped around picture of this Roman Gladiator sword/big dagger I found called the "Sica": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sica http://www.lonelymountain.hoplologia.org/roman.htm


This particular Christian missionary claim against the true religion of Islam reminded me of another thing American Christians are famous for doing.  That is claiming they allegedly found images of Jesus Christ on different food items!  These include claims of Christians that they have found alleged "images of Jesus" on such benign food items as grilled cheese sandwiches, potato chips, cheetos, bananas, etc!  http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Religious_pareidolia

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nwzchik/category?cat=1182
Jesus allegedly on a grilled cheese sandwich LOL!
Jesus allegedly on a Potato Chip!


A Cheeto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheetos that allegedly looks Jesus: nicknamed the Cheesus!  Followed by some photos of other regular Cheetos.

              
Jesus allegedly on a banana


Another famous image many desperate Christians make claims about is this image below of what these Christian claim is the face of the "devil" in the fireball of the second plane hitting the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, 2001.

Apparently these Evangelical Christian nutcases see this kind of stuff everywhere!
Bringing up "9/11", here are some good links on that:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/
http://www.kersplebedeb.com/mystuff/s11/churchill.html
(Above: "Some People Push Back: On The Justice of Roosting Chickens"By Ward Churchill
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html
(Above: Five Dancing Zionist "Israeli" Mossad agents arrested on September 11, 2001 dancing and celebrating in New Jersey across the river from Manhattan as the World Trade Center towers burned)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone
(CIA created "al-Qaeda" aka al-CIA-duh!)
http://www.rense.com/general61/myths.htm
(CIA created "al-Qaeda" aka al-CIA-duh!)
http://killinghope.org/
(Above: Excerpts of a good book "Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since WWII" by American author William Blum
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Rogue_State_Blum.html
Another good book: "Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower" by William Blum

Also the list of food products were Evangelical Christians claim to have seen images of Jesus or the Virgin Mary could go on and on!  These lying Islamophobic Christian missionary clowns are refuted.