Friday, January 14, 2011

Religious Freedom Day

His Grace has been sent another missive by The White House.

He is deeply honoured that the President should think of him; jolly decent, in fact, when you consider how busy he must be.

It his the text of his Proclamation of Religious Freedom Day, 2011. The day is the anniversary of the passage, in 1786, of the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom. Thomas Jefferson drafted the legislation and considered it one of his greatest achievements. It stopped the practice of taxing people to pay for the support of the local clergy, and it protected the civil rights of people to express their religious beliefs without suffering discrimination.

The men who drafted the US Constitution leaned heavily on Jefferson’s statute in establishing the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom. As we see an oppressive world steadily diminishing the rights of believers to express their faith, this declaration has become more than mere symbolism:

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release January 14, 2011


Our Nation was founded on a shared commitment to the values
of justice, freedom, and equality. On Religious Freedom Day,
we commemorate Virginia's 1786 Statute for Religious Freedom,
in which Thomas Jefferson wrote that "all men shall be free to
profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters
of religion." The fundamental principle of religious freedom --
guarded by our Founders and enshrined in our Constitution's
First Amendment -- continues to protect rich faiths flourishing
within our borders.

The writ of the Founding Fathers has upheld the ability
of Americans to worship and practice religion as they choose,
including the right to believe in no religion at all. However,
these liberties are not self-sustaining, and require a stalwart
commitment by each generation to preserve and apply them.
Throughout our Nation's history, our founding ideal of religious
freedom has served as an example to the world. Though our
Nation has sometimes fallen short of the weighty task of
ensuring freedom of religious expression and practice, we have
remained a Nation in which people of different faiths coexist
with mutual respect and equality under the law. America's
unshakeable commitment to religious freedom binds us together
as a people, and the strength of our values underpins a country
that is tolerant, just, and strong.

My Administration continues to defend the cause of
religious freedom in the United States and around the world.
At home, we vigorously protect the civil rights of Americans,
regardless of their religious beliefs. Across the globe, we
also seek to uphold this human right and to foster tolerance
and peace with those whose beliefs differ from our own. We bear
witness to those who are persecuted or attacked because of their
faith. We condemn the attacks made in recent months against
Christians in Iraq and Egypt, along with attacks against people
of all backgrounds and beliefs. The United States stands with
those who advocate for free religious expression and works to
protect the rights of all people to follow their conscience,
free from persecution and discrimination.

On Religious Freedom Day, let us reflect on the principle
of religious freedom that has guided our Nation forward, and
recommit to upholding this universal human right both at home
and around the world.

United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in
me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do
hereby proclaim January 16, 2011, as Religious Freedom Day.
I call on all Americans to commemorate this day with events
and activities that teach us about this critical foundation
of our Nation's liberty, and to show us how we can protect it
for future generations here and around the world.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand
this fourteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord
two thousand eleven, and of the Independence of the
United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.


For those who are interested, here follows the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom

Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as it was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical; that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and is withdrawing from the ministry those temporary rewards, which proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct, are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitting labours for the instruction of mankind; that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry; that therefore the proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which in common with his fellow-citizens he has a natural right; that it tends only to corrupt the principles of that religion it is meant to encourage, by bribing with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments, those who will externally profess and conform to it; that though indeed these are criminal who do not withstand such temptation, yet neither are those innocent who lay the bait in their way; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own; that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them:

Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

And though we well know that this assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act to be irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present, or to narrow its operation, such act shall be an infringement of natural right.


Blogger srizals said...

I would always support the ones that let religions free, and the believers, freedom from forced diaspora or banishment, especially conversion, like the Israelites/Jews once or twice experienced themselves. But we have to have a give and take situation, a win-win situation to a lesser evil.

And what is the solution for increasing numbers of Muslims in our backyard? Would it be replicating our hideous history, for everyone to see and ponder in unbelief? Mr. Bluedog would have something to say about it, I hope.

15 January 2011 at 00:39  
Anonymous Preacher said...

If only the Islamic world would hold a 'religous day of freedom', what a day of rejoicing THAT would be.
However after watching the howling mobs of hate in Pakistan demanding the release of the 'bodyguard' who murdered a government minister for opposing the so called apostasy law I feel it will be a cold day in Hell before that happens.

But in the midst of this darkness a glimmer of light glows.
Please pray for the heroic stand of another minister who is refusing to bow to the death threats sent to him for daring to publicly declare his support for the repeal of the same evil 'Law'.
A brave & honourable man who has earned our respect & deserves our support.

15 January 2011 at 00:42  
Blogger OldSouth said...

'Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free;'

Eight of Jefferson's most powerful words, out which so much of his work flowers.

Thanks for sharing these words with us. The contrast between Jefferson's inspiration and Obama's self-serving mediocrity is striking.

15 January 2011 at 01:47  
Blogger English Viking said...

I wonder what the adulterer Jefferson would have written instead, should he have been tasked with his writing on September 12th, 2001?

'Strike off their heads and their fingertips'?

Oh wait, I'm getting confused with Mo.

15 January 2011 at 02:01  
Blogger srizals said...

It's ok, English Viking. You always are.

15 January 2011 at 02:11  
Anonymous Oswin said...

srizals old bean, I wager you secretly fear of waking one day, and seeing Mohammed for con-man he truly was, eh?

If I had a hundredth of the evidence against MY saviour, as the world has against yours, I'd be considering alternative options.

I would like to believe that I had the moral, and intellectual courage, to be honest with myself.

All religion is an act of faith, but not necessarily against all evidence; and certainly not against a mass of evidence to the contrary. To persist against such evidence is to deny truth; to persist beyond truth, is to embrace fanaticism.

Give it up, a nice man like you deserves better I think.

15 January 2011 at 02:14  
Blogger srizals said...

My wish is as yours to you.

15 January 2011 at 02:19  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Come on old chap, you know what the differences are; many have pointed them out to you already. We don't need to perpetually cover old ground re' the life and character of Mohammed.

I'm not comparing meercats here, just one man against another, is all.

15 January 2011 at 02:27  
Blogger English Viking said...


I can speak several languages, so I know that it can sometimes be hard to master one or the other, but really, PLEASE learn English.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

BTW Your religion is idolatry. I know so, because the God of heaven (not the demon, allah), has said so.

Please don't behead me on Youtube for saying so.

On the other hand, Come and have a go, if .... well, you should know the rest of a well known English idiom.

15 January 2011 at 02:32  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Now let's be fair here, I understood Srizals perfectly this time around. I believe he was acknowledging your expressed confusion. Mind you, his initial post ain't so hot...

15 January 2011 at 02:41  
Blogger English Viking said...


You're a better man than me if you can make head or tail of his ranting.

15 January 2011 at 02:49  
Blogger srizals said...

English Viking,

No, I won't circumcise you like that on youtube, but only if you promise that you won't behave like Bible John.

Ok, I'll try to communicate with this English Viking.


If you can, please loose your axe in your next post. If not, there's no point of communicating with an obtuse, as his grace has graciously said it before. I have a very unpleasant experience in dealing with a king obsessed with capitals before, I don't wish to repeat my mistake of trying to reason with 'unstable' characters again.

If you can understand me, please read this unbiased link, which I believe forgot to mention about other faiths, especially the humanistic atheists.

And I hope you are not a Fred West fan either.

Oswin, we have gone down that road before. We just need to read Cranmer's old posting. Or start anew, it's up to you. But let's not.

15 January 2011 at 03:14  
Blogger English Viking said...


The 'Church' (not mine, you'll note) was responsible for less religious killings over a 400 year period than your filthy 'religion' killed in 2 hours, on Sept. 11, 2001.

Are you going to 'Fatwa' me?

I don't care if you do. The more people who declare your religion for the filth that it is, the better.

Sunni, are you?

I'm coming to the belief that you may not need to sleep when you say you do, that you are, in fact, a resident of a different country, that your English is deliberately bad, that you are a troll.

15 January 2011 at 03:31  
Anonymous Oswin said...

My point entirely old fruit; was just wondering when you'd awaken, is all.

We won't be beastly to you when you throw in the towel, you know.
The British are far too polite to say 'I told you so' ...

15 January 2011 at 03:34  
Anonymous Oswin said...

well, most of us are!

15 January 2011 at 03:36  
Anonymous IanCad said...

Thanks for posting this YG.

While celebrating the religious liberties enshrined in the First Amendment we have to remember that it was from Protestantism that this noble document was penned. Roger Williams was the primary influence upon the founders, of the notion of the separation of church and state. It is somewhat disturbing to note that the U.S. Supreme Court, the final arbiter of judicial interpretation, today has not one Protestant justice gracing its benches. Currently the court consists of three Jews and six Catholics. One of whom (Antonin Scalia) is openly contemptuous of the principles of religious freedom guaranteed within the U.S. Constitution.
If today a new constitution were required for the U.S.A. it would bear no resemblance to the original grand document. In the current climate of fear and paranoia, combined with the apparent belief that "Manifest Destiny" should include the entire world, it would be a sorry and ignoble tome.

15 January 2011 at 05:56  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

But with respect to future debt; would it not be wise and just for that nation to declare in the constitution they are forming that neither the legislature, nor the nation itself can validly contract more debt, than they may pay within their own age, or within the term of 19 years.

Thomas Jefferson, September 6, 1789

15 January 2011 at 07:00  
Anonymous bluedog said...

So Mr Srizals, you want to hear from me. I’m not sure that you will understand this post let alone believe it, but for family reasons I am passionately in favour of religious freedom.

Both my grandmothers had French surnames and were of Huguenot descent. In case you don’t know, the Huguenots were French protestant Christians who were allowed to practice their religion by the good French King Henry IV under a royal decree known as the Edict of Nantes. Nantes is a town in western France which had a largely Protestant population during his reign. Wearing a French hat I can say that everything was fine until a megalomaniac called Louis XVI became our King, and then he revoked the Edict of Nantes in 1685. Rioting followed in many French cities and the Catholic population turned on the Huguenots, killing many of them in what was known as the St Bartholomew’s Day Massacre. You may be disappointed to realize that my ancestors escaped and fled to England. Very pointedly from 1685 my family tree on that particular side is written in English and we swore allegiance initially to James II, who was almost immediately deposed.

In summary, if it wasn’t for the religious freedom offered by the English crown in the late seventeenth century I would either not have been born at all, or be writing to you in French.

But now we get to the point. Having ancestors who have fled for their lives from religious persecution gives me a certain perspective. I have no alternative but to be profoundly tolerant in religious matters, anything less would be a hypocrisy I could not live with. On the other hand, this perspective gives me the right to be profoundly intolerant of those who are themselves murderously intolerant, such as the adherents of Islam.

My folk memory has seen it all before. In France we were out-numbered and could not fight, so had to run. When we Christians in the West see how the Middle East is being ruthlessly purged of its Christians we know what fate could befall us, unless we are careful. Of course we are taking in the Chaldean and Maronite Christians throughout the West where we can. But what if we are outnumbered by Muslims in our homelands? It’s not impossible, and already there are Muslim majority localities. These localities are no-go zones for western Christians and are becoming religiously-determined depressed areas; ‘Zones-sensibles’ as the French police call them. My instinct is to fight the Muslim menace in every way we can while we have the numbers on our side. It may not be a Christian thing to say, but God is on the side of the big battalions.

Time is not.

15 January 2011 at 07:53  
Blogger Edward Spalton said...

It is often forgotten that a number of the original American states had their own churches, ESTABLISHED BY LAW. Connecticut's ,for example, was Congregationalist not Episcopal.As in England the parishes were the basic unit of government.

The First Amendment (if I remember rightly) says that CONGRESS shall make no ordinance concerning the establishment of any religion. Religion was an area of state, not federal, jurisdiction.

If I were a Virginian, I would see this apparently harmless proclamation as an attempt by Washington to muscle in on the act and establish a federal right to meddle in affairs concerning religion. Given the PC aspirations of the "Liberal" (in the American sense) tribe, I would be filled with foreboding.

15 January 2011 at 08:08  
Blogger Prodicus said...

Thank you. New to me. I have made a note of 'that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion' etc. Might come in handy. You never know ;)

15 January 2011 at 11:57  
Blogger srizals said...

It's okay Oswin, The Viking would not influence my world view on the English. The ones that I had shaken hands with are nothing compared to him. They are a lot taller than me, but a true representative of the gentlemen of the West!

Mr. E. Viking, are you saying that if a person or a group of any religion commit a crime, then it would mean the religion of the culprits is to be blame?
Do you realise how dangerous your assumption is to your own religion? Could you show me any religion or faith or the faithless (which is also a faith in something, actually) that has followers behaving like angels? If you can't, you would be debunking your own ingenuity for daring to utter such nonsense!

Do you know the difference between a Sunni and a Shia, Mr. E. Viking? Or you just like to pretend to be an educated unbeliever? Do you think all Sunni is the same or slightly different?

I am a Malay in the lands of the Malay! When did I ever claimed to be a native speaker of the British English? Do check the alcohol level in your blood before addressing me. I won't entertain a drunk!

15 January 2011 at 14:33  
Anonymous IanCad said...

Thank you for posting this YG.

While celebrating the religious liberties enshrined in the First Amendment we have to remember that it was from Protestantism that this noble document was penned. Roger Williams was the primary influence upon the founders of the notion of the separation of church and state. It is somewhat disturbing to note that the U.S. Supreme Court today has not one Protestant justice. Currently the court consists of three Jews and six Catholics. One of whom (Antonin Scalia) is openly contemptuous of the principles of religious freedom guaranteed within the U.S. Constitution.
If today a new constitution were required for the U.S.A. it would bear no resemblance to the original grand document. In the current climate of fear and paranoia, combined with the apparent belief that "Manifest Destiny" should include the entire world, it would be a sorry and ignoble tome.

15 January 2011 at 16:44  
Blogger English Viking said...


I can assure you, I am perfectly sober.

I can and do blame your religion for the simply appalling levels of violence carried out in the name of your god. They have been motivated by their religion to commit these atrocities, because they think your god requires it of them. I know so because they invariably chant it's name before blowing up 'planes, beheading old men, burning down churches (usually with people inside), starting civil wars, etc, etc.

When a person who claims to be a Christian behaves in a manner which is prohibited by Christ, they cannot claim motivation from Him.

When a muslim carries out an attack on a Jew, or a Christian, or rapes a child, or any other number of wicked things, they are simply following the example set for them by Mo.

15 January 2011 at 18:31  
Anonymous len said...

I suppose you can only have'religious freedom'in this turbulent World if people are terrified of opposing you because of how you might react.

16 January 2011 at 08:49  
Blogger srizals said...

The Christian crusaders or holy warriors of Christianity, chants, Deus vult! or "God wills it" when they were killing Muslims and Jews in the Holy land in order to purify it with blood of the weak. And they were not slaughtering fighting combatants, mind you.

How can you blame a system because of the stubborn law breakers? Even if they chanted God's name when they were said to do all the hideous things, it doesn't mean that God was on their side.

Mark of Arethusa or Cyrill of Heliopolis were famous as "temple destroyer." Name one Muslim famous on the same field.

"The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a hysterical Christian mob led by a Christian minister named Peter, in a church, in 415".

16 January 2011 at 17:45  
Blogger srizals said...

A man named Bush, which is a very funny name for a man, led a crusade on the Islamic world for a dozen of dead terrorists, full of suspicion even by Americans themselves. And brought misery to us all until this very day! And another peaceful Christian supported him from Britain! And yes, he said god told him to do it.

Most Christians don't read the Bible, if they do, they disobey it completely.

"Thou shall not kill" was one of the ten commandments and yet Christians killed the most. And who is doing most of the killing now, Mr. E. Viking? The lifeless drones?

"Put up again thy sword into its place: for all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword" (Matthew 26:52).

"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." (Matthew 5:44).

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,' But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also" (Matthew 5:38-42).

And many more,

Len and E. Viking, don't say that you're not of them. You read almost the same Bible and adhere most of its principles. And you endorsed Nicaea. The only difference is, you have yet to kill humans in mass. Ops, your civilisation had done that too, to your own. Remember Dresden?

16 January 2011 at 17:46  
Blogger srizals said...

"The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. An evil soul producing holy witness Is like a villain with a smiling cheek."

William Shakespeare
(Merchant of Venice i. iii. 93)

Is it me, or you?

16 January 2011 at 17:51  
Blogger srizals said...

1'Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3'Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye. '"
Matthew 7:1-5

16 January 2011 at 18:07  
Blogger srizals said...

And last but not least,

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord".

[Adolf Hitler, from "Mein Kampf," translation by Ralph Mannheim.]

16 January 2011 at 18:12  
Anonymous len said...

How can you get everything so wrong so consistently?

You must be the worst advert for Islam possible.

You quote scripture, but you deny the authority of it(when it suits you).
You are clearly NOT interested in the truth only in defending the indefensible.

I am truly sorry for you,you have accepted lies as truth,and truth as lies.
It will take a miracle from God(the real One) to release you from the bondage you are in.

16 January 2011 at 18:18  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Srizals .... you're 'going off on one' again. I did try to 'rein you' in to a specific comparison, but you will insist on muddying the waters with pointless examples of Christian's getting it wrong.

When Christians 'get it wrong' are they following the tenets of the New Testament? No, clearly they are not.

When muslims are beastly, are they following the tenets of their Prophet Mohammed? Most probably!

It is as simple as that. We are not discussing human frailty, but the worth of Christ versus Mohammed.

16 January 2011 at 18:20  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Please forgive the typo's...

16 January 2011 at 18:22  
Blogger srizals said...

Forgot this one,

The Rwandan massacre,

"Anglican as well as Catholic priests and nuns are suspect of having actively participated in murders. Especially the conduct of a certain Catholic priest has been occupying the public mind in Rwanda's capital Kigali for months. He was minister of the church of the Holy Family and allegedly murdered Tutsis in the most brutal manner. He is reported to have accompanied marauding Hutu militia with a gun in his cowl".

I know Len, Jesus didn't tell them to be animals. What proof do you have that the prophet, Muhammad s.a.w. asked the Muslims to be one?

In order to survive a barbaric onslaught or to kill the helpless?

16 January 2011 at 18:26  
Blogger srizals said...

I quote the scripture to remind you, of your own faith! And hopefully the Christians here will actually read it, the whole of it, NT and OT. And hopefully the Koran too.

Ok, start your comparison Oswin, I'll try to address them like Len did, it's getting late. Good night.

Where's the Viking? Is he afraid to fight a little troll? He got an axe, is he afraid to use it?

What a violent depiction of a peaceful believer. But, most Christians are. Sorry Oswin. And they were not just a plain puny nobody terrorist! They were somebody, not just anybody.

16 January 2011 at 18:34  
Blogger English Viking said...


The Crusades were a military response to the Islamic aggression towards believers in the Holy Land.

They were also hundreds of years ago. Christians are not sanctioned by The Bible, nor by its ministers, to commit murder. Muslims are sanctioned by the koran, and its ministers, to kill anyone they have taken a disliking to.

The biblical prohibition you misrepresent is on murder, btw, not killing.

16 January 2011 at 20:10  
Anonymous len said...

The claim is sometimes made that Hitler was a Christian - a Roman Catholic until the day he died. In fact,Hitler renounced religion. Quotes from Hitler himself (1941-44):

Night of 11th-12th July, 1941: "National Socialism and religion cannot exist together.... The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity.... Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things." (Bormann 1953, pp. 6-7)

Joseph Goebbels, 12/28/1939: "The Führer is deeply religious, though completely anti-Christian; he views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race. Both [Judaism and Christianity] have no point of contact to the animal element, and thus, in the end, they will be destroyed." (Boelcke 1970).

16 January 2011 at 22:28  
Anonymous len said...

How could Hitler, fiercely anti -Jewish embrace a religion started by Jesus Christ.........a Jew.

Think about it.

16 January 2011 at 22:48  
Blogger srizals said...

I don't know Len, I think maybe, being woken up from a lying sweet dream into a real-life nightmare made him raving mad at those who had deceived him, in faith and also economy, who knows?

Abraham wasn't a Jew either, but, many believed he was. As Moses and Jesus were Israelite, not Jewish, since they do not follow and believe the rabbi. Beware of the Sanhedrin and Pharisees. They are still here, more dominant than ever.

"Jesus Himself was not a Jew (Judean) or resident of Judea, He was a Galilean or resident of Galilee (Matthew 26:69; John 7:41), and a Judahite or descendent of the Tribe of Judah. The Judeans of prominence were not of the Tribe of Judah, but of Edomites".
- Jason Collett.

English Viking, Islam means submission or surrender to the Lord, the God or Allah in Arabic. Being submissive to God means that he is limited to goodness in all of his conduct and earthly affairs. The guidelines of having a life and the appropriate ways of ending it, legally, but most importantly morally.

By this, the separation of the good and the bad is clear. And so, the innocents and the good is spared from being humiliated and killed unjustly. Those who dare to cross the limit of humanity and chose the dark side of himself, by fulfilling his evil desires, would have to deal with the law, here and in the Hereafter. He won't escape justice.

The so-called violence you've claimed as sanctioned in the Koran are the nature of any living thing in self-defence. Go try and hit your Mongrel, and see what it will do to you. If a dog has the right to self-defence, what more an honourable man?

17 January 2011 at 14:35  
Blogger srizals said...

Funny, how a creed of a non-adherent of violence had shown more tendency of violence in the worst way ever known to man. The first nuclear bomb was said to be launched by man, I, as one of the creed of man totally reject this association.

English Viking, as a complete guide to man, the Koran states clearly that we have the right to defend against aggression of the aggressors.

Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight you, and do not transgress. Verily, Allah does not like the transgressors.

Kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from where they drove you out, as Fitnah (to create disorder) is more severe than killing. However, do not fight them near Al-Masjid-ul-Harām (the Sacred Mosque in Makkah) unless they fight you there. However, if they fight you (there) you may kill them. Such is the reward of the disbelievers.

But if they desist, then indeed, Allah is Most-Forgiving, Very- Merciful.

Fight them until there is no Fitnah any more, and obedience remains for Allah. But, if they desist, then aggression is not allowed except against the transgressors.

I'll repeat, "then aggression is not allowed except against the transgressors". And the whole concept of self-defence is thus set forth for Muslims to obey. Disobedience of this rule of war would mean that he has waived Paradise for Hell.

How about the Christians? What could they do to their enemies? Are there any limits for them in fighting for their lives?

Who is in this verse Len?

"“Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?” (Matthew 23:33)

'Jesus abhorred and denounced "Pharisaism"; hence the words, "Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, Hypocrites, Ye Serpents, Ye Generation of Vipers"'.

Funny how current Muslims were considered to be there with Jesus at that time.

17 January 2011 at 14:36  
Blogger srizals said...

This is my answer to you too, Johnny. How could Muslims killed those who do not threaten to destroy them all? Some of them were only tortured to death. Or are you oblivious of the early history of Muslims? Are you, Johnny? Sumayyah was killed with the rest of her family after being brutally tortured. They were slaves, Johnny. Islam sets them free. Changing the norm gradually until everyone was free.

And then, the pagan Arabs decided to finish the job by attacking Medina and kill 'em all! What would you do if you were in their shoes? Give your other cheek? Why don't you give your other cheek now to the Muslims, who do not even threaten any one of you? As for those who do, your own reply to me should be a reminder to yourself.

17 January 2011 at 14:50  
Blogger srizals said...

* The Indian chief Hatuey fled with his people but was captured and burned alive. As “they were tying him to the stake a Franciscan friar urged him to take Jesus to his heart so that his soul might go to heaven, rather than descend into hell. Hatuey replied that if heaven was where the Christians went, he would rather go to hell.” [SH70]

17 January 2011 at 16:34  
Anonymous len said...

Ok, I got it,Mohammed was a very nice fellow, preached love and peace, he really didn`t preach hate and violence.Mohammed was misunderstood he came to bring peace to the World.Suicide bombers have probably misunderstood the words of the prophet and are doing their 'own thing'.Jihad is misunderstood, it is the struggle of the individual Muslim with the evil West. Muslims wish the Jews well and will do all they can to help them resettle in Israel.
Islam is the most wonderful thing that ever happened to humanity.

(Well you seem to like 'fairy tales' so I though I would give you one.)

Myself I prefer reality!

17 January 2011 at 17:52  
Blogger srizals said...

Len said in an annoying manner, "he really didn`t preach hate and violence."

Len, again and again you state your case through the eyes of the beholder. Why can't you provide proof from his teaching, in hadith for example, that he actually preached hate and violence? That he oppressed the weak and the innocents?

Are you saying that you should love evil and those who try to kill you and the innocents? What if murder is their favourite past time?
You seem to hold a grudge against suicide bomber anyway. I don't understand it. How could you demand someone to do something that you can't even try and hate him for that?

What 'fairy tales' are you referring to Len? The Christian atrocities upon mankind? You should really at least, read the links Len. History cannot be altered. It is the ultimate witness to man's deeds or misdeeds. And I don't think you can find any books daring to tell about the dark side of history in your civilised world. People might get upset! Especially Non Mouse.

17 January 2011 at 22:25  
Blogger English Viking said...


Yes, I see you point about self defense.

Probably best if you don't come round my house then.

17 January 2011 at 23:49  
Blogger srizals said...

Not even for a cup of tea? Where's your viking hospitality? In Valhalla? Let someone slain you and send you to the Hall of The Slain, instead of being proud slayers of the weak!

Come on, die a warrior's death in the hands of mighty out-gunned warriors, instead of weaklings and babies. And be accompanied by non-virgin bride, defiled and torn by sadistic men! It was your culture. Or are you completely oblivious of your own Viking heritage?

Now do you know what filth is?

18 January 2011 at 01:29  
Blogger English Viking said...


I do indeed know my culture; I know where I came from, and where I'm going.

I also know that child-rape is filthy. So is FGM, so is executing people for their religious beliefs (rather than their religious actions, should those actions include terrorism, pimping, beheading of hostages, stoning of 'infidels', etc, etc).

Blowing up 'planes is filthy. Hating Jews and Israel (PBOHer) is filthy, everything about Islam, is, in my opinion, filthy.

Including its apologists.

18 January 2011 at 01:49  
Blogger English Viking said...


No answer to the 'Abdullah' question in the previous post then?

18 January 2011 at 01:51  
Blogger srizals said...

Who did all those things, Mr. Viking? Any references that we can share? You have opened the Pandora's box. Be prepared to submit your proof here and the said culprits. For I will.

18 January 2011 at 01:56  
Blogger srizals said...

About Abdulah, please have patience, we have all the time in our hands. In the virtual world, we are Neo, remember? But you talk and look more like a Smith to me. Have you watched the Matrix, Mr. E.Viking?

18 January 2011 at 02:01  
Blogger English Viking said...


I leave this link for others, not for you, because I know you are not interested in the truth.

A catalogue of abomination is available to be viewed here:

No, I have not watched 'The Matrix'. I have better things to do with my time than spend it watching twaddle.

18 January 2011 at 02:06  
Blogger srizals said...

That's it? I knew a lot more credible and far more hideous than them. But at least, you have a source. Congratulation!

18 January 2011 at 02:13  
Blogger srizals said...

I have a better link for you and others,

A man came to Tawus and said, “Advise me."
Tawus said:

I advise you to love God so deeply that nothing is more beloved to you than Him; that you fear Him until there is nothing more feared by you than Him; that you long for His mercy so intensely that it prevents that fear from overwhelming you; and that you love for other people what you love for yourself. Now stand up and leave for I have summarized for you the knowledge of the Torah, the Gospels, the Psalms and the Qur’an.”

Quoted in Zaid Shakir, Treatise for The Seekers of Guidance. P. 223

If you think that I have deep hatred towards the Jews. You are so dead wrong!

My resting hour is up. Got to go and make a living. Till then. Insya Allah.

18 January 2011 at 02:28  
Blogger English Viking said...

Don't quote your dirty sayings to me.

"Is that it?"

A site which catalogues and sources over 16,000 terror attacks since 9/11, ALL carried out by moon-worshippers.

Yes, that's it.

BTW You love Jews really, don't you? Tell you what, make a nice big sign saying how much you love them and carry it above your head, in Islamabad (sound familiar?). You would be dead in a minute, at the hands of your own men.

18 January 2011 at 02:37  
Blogger srizals said...

I won't do that, I would look stupid carrying a banner of sissy love this and that, don't you think so?

16k terror attacks and you still survived?? Are you a man or a man god or a god man, Mr. E.V.?

The 16k terror attacks, do they include this one,
"British mercenary firm exposed in civilian shooting incident in Iraq
Indiscriminate Killings of Civilians"
By Wayne Madsen

"Women in the second car immediately jumped out waving their scarves, trying desperately to communicate that they were civilians. The U.S. helicopter gunships continued firing on the now unshielded women. 21 people were killed and 13 were wounded."

As for Abdullah, thanks for bringing it up, like you said, the meaning is absolutely not, the slave/the servant of the moon god!

Allah is the God, the Lord, Mr. E.V. The same message was brought by the prophets and the messengers of God since the first man, not the first ape. These chosen ones were not in their way of persecuting anyone and witnessed a stoning ritual of someone because they have a different idea of faith, and you claimed Muslim did that? You forgot St. Paul. Was St. Paul a nobody like a terrorist, Mr. English Viking?

Planes bombers,etc. are terrorists! Not some charasmatic leaders, worshipped by the nations! Supporting their leaders based on lies and hate! These terrorists are just the same advocates of terror.

Funny how the likes of you are so quick in associating the Muslims with the terrorists! You're quick too in detaching yourselves from atrocities committed by your nation against the world until now. How sad.

18 January 2011 at 14:31  
Blogger srizals said...

Allah was not something new brought up by Muhammad s.a.w. Everyone knew about Him since the beginning of time, hopefully we will too, in the end of time or our time on this short lives of ours. Even Avenzoar knew about Him, and he was an Andalusian Spanish! He didn't won any Nobel Prize of course.

Allah was known by all before Muhammad. It is only envy and proudness that made them blind.

And among men there are some who say, “We believe in Allah and in the Last Day”, yet they are not believers.

They try to deceive Allah and those who believe, while they are not deceiving anyone except themselves, although they are unaware of it.

In their hearts there is a malady, so Allah has made them grow in their malady; and for them there is a grievous punishment, because they have been lying.

When it is said to them, “Do not spread disorder on the earth”, they say, “We are but reformers.”

Beware, it is, in fact, they who spread disorder, but they do not appreciate.

Allah was and is the God of Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. They all carried the same message, the oneness of God.

18 January 2011 at 14:33  
Blogger srizals said...

So, when Mūsā completed the term and set forth with his wife, he noticed a fire from the direction of (the mount) Tūr, he said to his wife, “Stay here; I have noticed a fire. May be I bring to you some information or an ember from the fire, so that you may warm yourself.”

So when he came to it, he was called by a voice coming from a side of the right valley in the blessed ground, from the tree, saying, “O Mūsā, I AM ALLAH, the Lord of the worlds,”

In the Bible,

"I am the Lord that maketh all things;
that stretcheth forth the heavens alone,
that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself" (Isaiah 44:24).

Where was Jesus and the Holy Spirit?

"Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any," (Isaiah 44:8b). "I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God," (Isaiah 44:6b).

Prophet Moses said,
Deuteronomy 6,
3 Hear, Israel, and be careful to obey so that it may go well with you and that you may increase greatly in a land flowing with milk and honey, just as the LORD, the God of your ancestors, promised you.

4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.

Even the Jews knew Allah. Are you denying the origin of Christianity?

18 January 2011 at 14:34  
Blogger English Viking said...


Why don't you ever answer the question?

The attacks by my country (I think you mean USA, but never mind) are not motivated by religion, nor committed by Christians.

You are a liar.

PS The origin if Christianity is Christ, not your dirty moon-god.

18 January 2011 at 22:50  
Blogger srizals said...

My God, English Viking! You don't even know the divine revelation made to Bush? Where were you all this while? Stuck in somewhere without Internet connection?

"God told me"

"Doing god's work"

"May god bless our country and all who defend her."

And don' forget this one,
"Inside Abu Ghraib"

"Religion also surfaced as an issue when Mr Bush and Tony Blair were reported to have prayed together in 2002 at his ranch at Crawford, Texas - the summit at which the invasion of Iraq was agreed in principle. Mr Blair has consistently refused to admit or deny the claim".

And you are more oblivious about the bible inscriptions ingrained on guns, invented to kill. I'm sure there's no Christianity involved.

"The inscription JN8:12 on the Army's new gunsights is a reference to John, chapter 8, verse 12, which says: 'When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life"

"One of the citations on the gun sights, 2COR4:6, is an apparent reference to Second Corinthians 4:6 of the New Testament, which reads: "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."

Who are you E.V.? What Christian are you? The one that believe in the trinity or the one that do not? The one that believe the divinity of Mary or the one who do not? Which bible do you read?

19 January 2011 at 11:15  
Blogger srizals said...

And about the feared al-Muhajiroun in Luton, Old Grumpy,

Some interesting question about Mecca according to the Bible,

About Abdullah, Allah was not invented by Muhammad, you proved it yourself, Muhammad only correct the wrong understanding of the pagans and the people about Allah, that's all. Unless you have proof to state otherwise with your point "Abdullah".

My faith doesn't require the blood of the innocents to be spilled. Yours seem to be relying on it, heavily.

If Allah was a moon god, why didn't the Muslims faced the moon itself during prayers? Can you answer that Len? The Japanese bow to the morning sun. Find at least one Muslim that bow to the moon.

Refute this Len,
In Isaiah, it was prophesied that the revelation of God will be revealed to the one who cannot read. Only Muhammad matched this description.

Isaiah 19:11-13
King James Bible
'And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which [men] deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it [is] sealed':

'And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned'.

'The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men'.

Remember Nicaea?

Mr. Bush said,
"I'm surely not going to justify war based upon God. Understand that. Nevertheless, in my case, I pray that I will be as good a messenger of His will as possible. And then of course, I pray for forgiveness."

'Another telling sign of Mr Bush's religion was his answer to Mr Woodward's question on whether he had asked his father - the former president who refused to launch a full-scale invasion of Iraq after driving Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991 - for advice on what to do'.

One more about your President and nothing about Christianity.

"The current President replied that his earthly father was "the wrong father to appeal to for advice ... there is a higher father that I appeal to".

Who's the liar now, Mr. E.Viking?

19 January 2011 at 12:23  
Blogger srizals said...

And a lovely comic for Kiwi,

'Captain Israel, a kosher superman, is holding a Menorah torch. He is there to set the entire region on fire'.

19 January 2011 at 12:49  
Blogger srizals said...

And also a good article about Dr. Morey and his theory of the moon god.

"Among His Signs are the Night and the Day and the Sun and Moon. Prostrate (adore) not to the Sun and the Moon but prostrate to Allah, Who created them, if it is Him ye wish to serve."
Holy Qur'an 41:37

'Finally, Jesus Christ and many of his disciples spoke Aramaic. In the Aramaic language the word for the Almighty God is ‘Allaha’ and the name of Jesus is 'Iessa'. There are records of Jesus praying in Aramaic to his God 'Allaha". Was Christ also misguided by the Pagan Arabs?'

Please desist from using the moongod theory, guys. It is embarrassing.

Dr. Morey and the moon. Hmm..

19 January 2011 at 13:05  
Blogger srizals said...

'Mirza cites the Muslim’s use of the lunar calendar to point at the significance of the moon, if Mirza had studied further he would have realized that many Eastern societies use(d) the moon for marking time, it is not only the Muslims, the Chinese, the Jews and Hindu communities have also used the moon for this purpose too'

19 January 2011 at 13:17  
Blogger srizals said...

Mr. E.Viking asked,
"How can his father have been a servant of a god whose name was not revealed until his son was a full grown man?"

I have answered your question, could you please answer mine,

The trinity consists of the father, the son and the holy ghost. How can a son also be the father? Could he fathered himself? And could a son being born to a mother invented by him? Who exist first?

19 January 2011 at 13:50  
Blogger English Viking said...


Blair and Bush are not Christians. That is obvious, they are not following Christ. Various terrorists around the world, on a daily basis, are, however, following the bloody and gruesome example of Mo.

The Son is most certainly not the Father.

Google 'Orthodox Reformed Theology'.

The one in Isaiah 19 speaks, who was unable to read the book, was unable to do so because it was sealed, not because he was an illiterate-warlord rapist.

20 January 2011 at 00:56  
Blogger English Viking said...


Typo. replace 'in Isaiah 19 speaks' with 'of whom Isaiah 19 speaks'.

Thank you.

20 January 2011 at 00:58  
Blogger srizals said...

You said, 'following the bloody and gruesome example of Mo'. You even claimed that he was a rapist!

Could you please list them here, with proof, specifically so that I can understand how you have come to those conclusions and compare them with my knowledge. Please state them based on your understanding, not resources from websites, which I'm sure is aplenty, but I can't refute them directly. They don't have any comment-enabled gadget!

Isaiah 29:12
''And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned'.

No seal mentioned here.

'Muhammad (s) was forty when, during his one of many retreats to Mount Hira for meditation during the month of Ramadan, he received the first revelation from the Archangel Jibril (Gabriel). On this first appearance, Gabriel (as) said to Muhammad: "Iqraa," meaning Read or Recite. Muhammad replied, "I cannot read," as he had not received any formal education and did not know how to read or write. The Angel Gabriel then embraced him until he reached the limit of his endurance and after releasing said: "Iqraa." Muhammad’s answer was the same as before. Gabriel repeated the embrace for the third time, asked him to repeat after him and said:

"Recite in the name of your Lord who created! He created man from that which clings. Recite; and thy Lord is most Bountiful, He who has taught by the pen, taught man what he knew not."

The Spider
With the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Very-Merciful.
Recite (O Prophet) what is revealed to you of the Book, and establish Salāh . Surely Salāh restrains one from shameful and evil acts. Indeed remembrance of Allah is the greatest of all things. Allah knows what you do.
Do not debate with the people of the Book unless it is in the best manner, except with those of them who commit injustice. And say, “We believe in what is sent down to us and sent down to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him we submit (ourselves).”
Thus We have sent down the Book to you. So those to whom We have given the Book believe in it. And from these (the people of Makkah) there are ones who believe in it, and no one rejects Our verses except the infidels.
You (O Prophet,) have never been reciting any book before this, nor have you been writing it with your right hand; had it been so, the adherents of falsehood would have raised doubts.

Mr. English Viking,
You yourself know that Muhammad s.a.w. was an illiterate, and you know how much writing of Christianity in the OT and the NT, not to mentioned the perished ones after Nicaea. Can an illiterate memorised them all so well and present it anew in a more beautiful way? Yes or no? If he had a helper, wouldn't it be wiser for the helper to declare himself as a prophet in the middle of the hostile and barbaric, powerful pagans?

And as for Aisyah r.a., maybe this piece of writing would make you understand her importance. Who could argue with a man's wife that he knew him better than her? In this way, his hadith/sayings were preserved decades after his return to the Lord's mercy, to more Muslims and scholars.

'Later, Muhammad married additional wives, nine of whom survived him.[48] Aisha, who became known as Muhammad's favourite wife in Sunni tradition, survived him by many decades and was instrumental in helping to bring together the scattered sayings of Muhammad that would form the Hadith literature for the Sunni branch of Islam'.[53]

53. ^ a b c d e Watt, Aisha, Encyclopedia of Islam

I have my own Islamic sources, in Arabic, English and Malay, but I'll provide non-Islamic sources here to avoid being biased. The azan for the evening prayer is calling me. I'll be back.

20 January 2011 at 08:48  
Blogger srizals said...

The complete story is narrated by Aisha (peace be upon her) in Sahih Al-Bukhari:

"The commencement of the Divine Inspiration of Allah's Apostle was in the form of good dreams which came true like bright daylight, and then the love of seclusion was bestowed upon him. He used to go in seclusion in the cave of Hira where he used to worship (Allah alone) continually for many days before wishing to see his family. He used to take with him provisions for the stay and then come back to (his wife) Khadeejah to eat his food again as before.

One day suddenly the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied, "I do not know how to read." The Prophet (peace be upon him) added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, "I do not know how to read." Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time until I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, "I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?" Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said, "Read in the name of your Lord, who has created (all that exists), created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous.'"(96):1-3.

Then Allah's Apostle (peace be upon him) returned with the Inspiration and with his heart trembling. He went to Khadeejah the daughter of Khuwaylid (his wife) and said, "Cover me!" She covered him until his fear subsided. After that he told her everything that had happened and said, "I fear that something may happen to me." Khadeejah replied, "Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your kith and kin, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guests generously and assist the deserving people afflicted with calamities."

Khadeejah then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqah ibn Nawfal ibn Asad ibn AbdulUzza, who, during the pre-Islamic period became a Christian and used to write in the Hebrew alphabet. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight.

Khadeejah said to Waraqah, "Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!" Waraqah asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?" Allah's Apostle described that which he had seen. Waraqah said, "This is the one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live until the time when your people will turn you out." Allah's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?" Waraqah replied in the affirmative and said, "Anyone (man) who came with something similar to that which you have brought was greeted with hostility; and if I remain alive until the day when you will be turned out then I should support you strongly."

20 January 2011 at 10:54  
Blogger srizals said...

Mr. E.Viking, you said you were allowed to consume alcohol, what about these verses?

I Corinthians 5:11-13
'But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person'.

Galatians 5:19-21
'Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God'.

Isaiah 28:7
'But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment'.

Proverbs 23:29-35
'Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause? who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine. Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his color in the cup, when it moveth itself aright. At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder. Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things. Yea, thou shalt be as he that lieth down in the midst of the sea, or as he that lieth upon the top of a mast. They have stricken me, shalt thou say, and I was not sick; they have beaten me, and I felt it not: when shall I awake? I will seek it yet again'.

Can something unclean and declared unlawful be considered lawful once more? What kind of law is that? Without consistency that is.

Leviticus 11:7-8 (New International Version)

11:7) 'And the pig, though it has a split hoof completely divided, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you'.

11:8) 'You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you'.

Deuteronomy 14:8 (New International Version)

14:8) 'The pig is also unclean; although it has a split hoof, it does not chew the cud. You are not to eat their meat or touch their carcasses'.

Some say somehow that with the coming of the NT, all that were forbidden, are now allowed for Christians, but I'm confused with this verse,

Jesus said,
Matthew 5:17 (New International Version)

5:17) 'Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them'.

So, my question to you Mr. E. Viking, between Muslims and Christians, who had adhered fully to the filth concept in the Bible? And who had not considered the filth in the Bible as filth. Thanks.

20 January 2011 at 12:08  
Blogger srizals said...

Hurry up Mr. E.Viking, before his grace puts us on 'upon administrator approval.'

21 January 2011 at 00:59  
Blogger English Viking said...

Srizals the liar,

Christianity concerns itself with the teachings contained in the NT, so quoting OT to try and damage Christianity is a sad, old, useless trick. Great wisdom is in the OT, a shadow of things to come, such as Psalm 104 v 15. Who made wine? Answer.

The biblical restriction is on drunkeness, not drinking, else why would Paul tell Timothy to take a little wine for his stomach? 1 Tim 5, 23. Else Why would Christ turn water into wine? John 2.

We are not concerning ourselves with the 29th book of Isaiah, but the 19th, the one you misquoted. Answer the question, troll.

Having sex with 9 year old children is commonly known (under the law of the kuffar) as rape. Therefore Mo was a kiddie-fiddler, a rapist, a pervert. So are those that follow him. Have you got a 9 year old girlfriend, Srizals? Have you 'thighed' her? (google 'thighing' if you dare.)

If you want filth, google 'honour killings'.

How many Christians 'honour kill' their children? Oh sorry, I forgot, it is the honour of the muslim to slaughter his own daughter and bury her in the back garden for 'inappropriate dress'.

I hope one day to meet you. Really.

I'm sometimes out your way, you know?

BTW, Don't 'hurry me up'.

21 January 2011 at 02:57  
Blogger srizals said...

English Viking, the handsome contradictor?

"Having sex with 9 year old children is commonly known (under the law of the kuffar) as rape". Well, not in Thailand. A kuffar state!

Since when I must ask? Since the great Christian Byzantium? Since the 100 years war between France and Britain?

Since the paedophile priests taboo broke out? Since sex revolution started in the West? Since when? Do you know that current law do not bind happenings that exist before it? What more a thousand years ago? But interestingly, do you know how old a woman can conceived a child in her womb?

Is marriage the same as rape? Then I'm also a rapist, maybe even your father, and you are a result of a sadistic rape! Make up your mind, Viking! Who made those law? Puny humans or based on the Bible? I thought nowadays Christians have a Judeo-Christian heritage, why are you abandoning your Judeo heritage of the Old Testament? Was St. Paul a cancellation of Christ and Moses? Then he must have been a son of god too, since he can cancel the two great prophets! Could he be the Saint god himself??

Is a girl that have the ability of a woman, be considered as a baby? What if she herself have a baby?

You're out my way? Aren't you afraid of the terrorists? I thought you said all Muslims are blood thirsty, crazy terrorists? Why aren't you dead yet? Or are you wearing a burqa in our midst? Could you give me a hint so that I could be where you are when you're visiting my domain?

You keep on insisting the criminals as the representatives of all Muslims, 1.5 billion of them who do not copy the few criminals nor vote for them, definitely not supporting them blindly, as many Christians did! The terrorists are nobody, Mr. Viking! Your terrorists are millionaires, if not powerful billionaires! At least Muslim terrorists are honest. The Christian terrorists hide behind their terror and concealed their cross! Only the Klu Klux Klan was brave enough to use the burning cross as their symbol/identification before terrorising the poor Christian blacks!

Paul is a nobody in Islamic view! He's not a prophet nor the disciples of Christ nor a holy man. He was a tool of the Romans, and torturing was his business. So your point is?
As for Jesus made wine out of water, I definitely reject it, the Bible was corrupted remember, this is one example of it! Or one more proof of biblical contradiction!

(Leviticus 10)
10:8 And Jehovah spoke to Aaron, saying,

10:9 Thou shalt not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, and thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tent of meeting, lest ye die -- [it is] an everlasting statute throughout your generations,

10:10 that ye may put difference between the holy and the unholy, and between unclean and clean,

10:11 and that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which Jehovah hath spoken to them by the hand of Moses.

(Proverbs 20:1)
Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.

(Proverbs 4: 17)
For they eat the bread of wickedness, and drink the wine of violence.

(Joel 1:5)
Awake, ye drunkards, and weep; and howl, all ye drinkers of wine, because of the new wine; for it is cut off from your mouth.

In the Gospel of Luke, a description about John the Baptist:

(Luke 1:15)
For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. So many verses condemning alcoholic intoxicating drinks, and yet in John 2:1-10, that tell your Jesus, which was not a prophet to you, changed his mind and decided to bless a cursed drink!

21 January 2011 at 05:07  
Blogger srizals said...

As for the quotation I've mentioned earlier, Isaiah 19:12, it's just to check whether you really read the Bible, and obviously you don't, for you would have known Isaiah 19:11-13 was not the same with Isaiah 29:11-13. It's my way of checking those who claimed they read the Bible actually read them, or just small talk.

Isaiah 19:12
King James Bible
'Where [are] they? where [are] thy wise [men]? and let them tell thee now, and let them know what the LORD of hosts hath purposed upon Egypt'.

You don't read nor understand the Bible!

Who is greater Mr. E.V.? St. Paul or Jesus? Why didn't Jesus have any Saint in front of his name?

Strong drink effect,

In 2003, 43,220 people died on the highways due to alcohol.
403,795 people were admitted to hospitals in 2003 because of alcohol related accidents and problems.
More people were killed by alcohol drinking on Super Bowl Day then any other day of the year.
149,000 children injured in 2003 in alcohol related accidents.
There were over 5,500 deaths of children in 2003 caused by alcohol.
Alcohol consumption in the USA was 7 liters per person or approximately 2 1/2 large bottles of Coke or Pepsi (2 Liter bottles). This amounts to approximately 2.450 billion liters per year total consumption.
Over 5,000 babies are born each year with severe birth defects because of the mother being an alcoholic.
The majority of divorces in the USA are because of adultery; the second most reason is alcohol and drug abuse.
Every year, doctors, lawyers, educators, and airplane pilots, lose jobs and their professional lives destroyed by alcohol addiction.
There are thousands of suicides each year caused by alcohol abuse.

How can anyone distinguish the fine line of drinking and drunkenness? Self control?

Okay, fine, you have done well with wine, what about pigs and free sex outside marriage? Most Christians are okay with it, so, would it be presenting Christianity? Or like wine, it is bad then, and it's okay now. We have to amend to change right? Nothing is consistent!

For you Mr. E.V.
(Proverbs 4)
4:18 But the path of the righteous is as the shining light, going on and brightening until the day be fully come.

4:19 The way of the wicked is as darkness: they know not at what they stumble.

A repetition for a greater emphasis,

10:8 And Jehovah spoke to Aaron, saying,

10:9 Thou shalt not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, and thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tent of meeting, lest ye die -- [it is] an everlasting statute throughout your generations,

10:10 'that ye may put difference between the holy and the unholy, and between unclean and clean'

' everlasting statute throughout your generations', my emphasis.

Ps, do read your Bible before conversing with a lying little troll like me. If you don't, you'll proved that you are as what you have accused me of. Just thought I should help you out. I'm not a bully.

This time, take your time. Not too long I hope, lest we forget.

21 January 2011 at 05:08  
Blogger srizals said...

A Christian view point,

"Some, though, insist: "It says Jesus made wine out of water." Beloved, the word wine is oinos. The Greek word oinos is generic and does not necessarily mean fermented juice (see Bible Wines, by William Patton, pg. 89). It must also be remembered that even fermented wine in Bible days does not compare to our strong drink in alcoholic content. Again, I stress: If the wine Jesus made had been fermented, he would have not simply been engaging in what some call the temperate and social use of alcohol, but he would have been involved in providing more liquor to people who had already had "too much to drink." They would have the sinless Son of God participating and providing for a drunken orgy!"

21 January 2011 at 06:45  
Blogger srizals said...

'Distillation was not discovered until about 1500 A.D. Strong drink and unmixed wine in Bible times was from 3% to 11% alcohol. Dr. John MacArthur says "...since anybody in biblical times who drank unmixed wine (9-11% alcohol) was definitely considered a barbarian, then we dont even need to discuss whether a Christian should drink hard liquor--that is apparent!"

Listen to your co-religionist. They meant well. Not unless you prefer Valhalla then the kingdom of God. Should we really gamble our fate in the afterlife?

Len has chosen to be on the safe side and become a silent spectator. Is the truth too hard to swallow than a fairy tale of the evil Islam?

21 January 2011 at 07:01  
Blogger English Viking said...


There is no point continuing this discussion if you continue to lie, misrepresent, misquote and consistently fail to answer questions.

Your answer to scriptures which prove my point is that they have been corrupted, but quote others which you falsely claim to prove yours. The scriptures you quote prove my point entirely, the biblical prohibition is on drunkeness, not on drinking.

Answer this: why will rivers of alcohol be available to muslim men in the afterlife, served to him by 'boys of perpetual youth'? Answer. You have failed to do so already, so again I say answer.

Thailand is not a kuffar nation.

aside from numerous other proofs of an earlier date, it is certain that the Greeks knew how to distill liquor in the 1st Century AD (Anno Domini, you know?)

It was only a few posts ago you were trying to claim the glory for the invention of distillation for the muslim, now you appear to have changed you mind (again).

I will, of course, be more than happy to let you know the next time I'm in Erdington.

21 January 2011 at 22:36  
Blogger srizals said...

Well, it's a very, very tricky job of identifying the verses in the Bible, Mr. English Viking, thanks to the meddling of men who thought they were gods, if not the sons of gods, not forgetting council chaired by a pagan!
I try to identify those which correspond with the Koran, the Torah and the Psalms, but the damage was done. For example, the Lord in the Old Testament were pictured like a blood thirsty pagan lords, that would kill and destroy without limits! Of course this would not be accepted by me and Muslims as the true word of God. Messengers of God were pictured as no different than common criminals, drunkards and adulterer! Dirty hands and ill intentions have distorted it, severely.

But remembering this verse in the Koran, soothes my anguish soul,

Those who disbelieve from among the people of the Book and the idolaters do not like that any good should come to you from your Lord. But Allah chooses for His grace whomsoever He wills, and Allah is the Lord of great bounty.

Whenever We abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or one equal to it. Do you not know that Allah is powerful over everything?

Do you not know that to Allah alone belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth? Other than Allah, you have neither a patron, nor a helper.

Or, do you rather want to question your Prophet as Mūsā was questioned earlier? And whoever takes infidelity in exchange for faith has certainly missed the straight path.

(O Muslims,) many among the people of the Book desire to turn you, after your accepting the faith, back into disbelievers - all out of envy on their part, even after the truth has become clear to them. So, forgive and overlook till Allah brings out His command. Certainly, Allah is powerful over everything.

And be steadfast in Salāh (prayer), and give Zakāh. Whatever good you send forth for yourselves, you will find it with Allah. Certainly, Allah is watchful of what you do.

They say that no one shall ever enter Paradise unless he is a Jew, or a Christian. These are their fancies. Say, “Bring your proof, if you are truthful.”

Of course, whosoever submits his face to Allah, and is good in deeds, will have his reward with his Lord, and there shall be no fear for such people, nor shall they grieve.

22 January 2011 at 00:46  
Blogger srizals said...

Paradise is not a testing ground as our earthly lives, Mr. English Viking; don't you get it by now?

The servants are boys who died in infant-hood or those who died before puberty reached them. They are sinless since they carry no burden of seeking the truth and abide by it. They got to live forever by the side of those who had passed this bitter test of life to prove himself to God. The ability to remain good, in spite of the overwhelming temptation of evil. Enduring immense hardship to remain pure. Constantly cleansing his mind and soul, should they become corrupt with time.

Have you forgotten how wonderful your life was being a boy? The adventure and the never ever tire strength of a boy? And I don't think the servants of paradise are the same with earthly servants, unless you think that there's no difference between Paradise and this life. What's the point?

As for the river of wine, do you really think that a river such as that, could really damage the mind and soul of the dwellers of paradise? There are no evil whisperers in Paradise, Mr. E.V. All evil are in a place where they belong. Burning for eternity, unless there's a slight grain of faith in their heart, they would be free, after they have done burning all their sins. And I'm not even comparing our earthly fire with it. What more the pleasures of paradise!

The dwellers of paradise do not have to compete nor strive nor suffer anything like we do. They don't even excrete, grow old and die. They have won their ultimate prize. As I hope we all will too. Insya Allah.

22 January 2011 at 01:16  
Anonymous len said...

I only hope you see the light of the gospel of Jesus Christ before you meet Him in person Srizels, you either meet Jesus as saviour or Judge!
Don`t leave it too late!

23 January 2011 at 10:55  
Blogger srizals said...

But I do see the light of the gospel of Jesus Christ, Len. I believe in him with all my heart, if not, I won't be a Muslim! He was a holy beloved prophet of God! It's the deceptions of the pagan Romans that I can't accept. An enemy within is what it takes. It doesn't have to destroy the truth, a corruption would be enough.
My hope is the same with you, Len. I'm not giving up.

Where is the Viking, I wonder?

23 January 2011 at 12:26  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older