Top Menu

The Mazal Holocaust Library: Features Fake Ex-Terrorist/Anti-Muslim Speaker Walid Shoebat

Walid_Shoebat

Walid Shoebat

Sadly Walid Shoebat is still duping and conning crowds across the USA while at the same time lining his pockets with their money.

There is no reason why organizations, churches, synagogues and Holocaust Museums should be inviting characters such as Walid Shoebat as “featured” speakers. Ignorance of the special kind of liar Shoebat is, is no longer a valid excuse as there has been a plethora of exposes on Shoebat, both in the blogosphere and  in the mainstream media. Even Islamophobes are repulsed by the snake-oil salesman technique Shoebat has been using to his advantage.

Now it seems the Mazal Holocaust Library has either willfully or ignorantly fallen for the “ex-Terrorist” bait:

Walid_Shoebat_Holocaust_Museum_Texas

Walid Shoebat to speak at Holocaust Museum

It is our duty as loonwatchers to make sure that people who are supposed to safeguard the memory of one of the most evil atrocities ever committed by man against man are not steered into the abyss of Islamophobia, xenophobia and hate represented by the likes of a Walid Shoebat.

I encourage you all to contact the Holocaust library and inform them of the grave mistake they are making.

Here I will reproduce JD’s comment which first alerted us to this travesty:

I think we all should Phone and email them and let them know what they did was a disgrace to the memory of the people who died in the Holocaust since Shoebat has said stuff like…

“many parallels between the Antichrist and Islam” and “Islam is not the religion of God — Islam is the devil”

According to an official who attended a similar Shoebat lecture at a conference in Las Vegas, the solution he offered for the threat of “militant Muslims” was to “Kill them…including the children.”

Sounds little bit like what they said 1930′s about another group right Texas Holocaust Library?

Please email them at :aimee@mazal-library.org
Phone:
Number on Flyer: (210)-392-5452
Mazal Holocaust Library -(210) 377-2742

Also see: Walid Shoebat Exposed.

, , , , , , , , ,

  • Géji

    Inspired says: – “Allah changed their bodies into those of monkeys and swines – So again as we see, this happened only to a specific group of Jews who had broken the Sabbath. Secondly, those Jews who were turned into swine’s and apes did not have any off-spring once they became turned into such animals”

    (lol), Inspired by, please don’t tell me you’re one of those “literalist” minded people? To tell you the truth, we Muslims sadly have enough of those, they come in the form of Salafists or Wahabists, and we’re preeety tried of them bunch. You seem to be reasonable enough, so I hope we haven’t lost you to their camp. — But in any case, “literally”, by definition, since Allah’s innocent and blissfully ignorant(jahil)creatures – swines and apes – are in no way servants of evil, and the Surah speaking of those individuals whom Allah is angry with, also states they’ve ended up being “more astray” and “servants of evil”, it becomes very strange when one takes those words, literally. It don’t think it takes an Albert Einstein to figure-out that He’s using such words to highlight how any one who dares disobeying Him by throwing away His commands, may as well be “turning” into Jahil-state, meaning “swines and apes”, thus not only throwing whatever animal-superior intelligence He gifted them, but the worst part of all, is throwing such after all He has taught them, with His generously sent and resent messages that were supposed to ameliorate and make them greater intellectuals than they previously were. Anyhow, the Surah speaking of “apes and swines and servants of evil”, are addressed to whosoever “go astray from the even path”, thus ending-up “in a worse position and more astray from the even path”-(i.e., lower intelligence of jahil-state, which then could make easier prey for evil to recruit). But there is no basis in this Surah for claiming that it refers exclusively or even primarily to Jews, the Surah speaks in general tone, and of course Jews who went, go, or will go, “astray”, are included in the narrative, but so are Christians, Muslims, and whosoever receives/d His message, to then goes “astray” from it. The Surah particularly addressing the violation of the Sabbath, says.

    — You have known those among you who violated the Sabbath, so we said to them: “Be despicable ape.” — (Qur’an 2:65).

    I’m sure anyone can see from this Surah, there nothing that indicates the word “ape” to be taking literally here, it explicitly comes with the word “be” and “despicable”, which clearly indicating “behave despicably” or “act despicably” as if you were a don’t-know-better jahil-(i.e., ape)

    — Say: “Shall I inform you of something worse in the sight of God: those whom God has cursed and with whom he is angry, and he has made some of them apes and swine and servants of evil. These are in a worse position and more astray from the even path.” — (Qur’an 5:60)

    And I repeat, there is absolutely nothing that indicates this Surah is specifically or primarily speaking of Jews, even of those Jews who “disobeyed”, they are of course included, but all can see the verse is speaking in general term.

  • Géji

    @Inspired says: < "Reading comprehension problems. Did you read what I wrote above? They were not following the Quran and doesn’t the Old Testament (as you call it) state that false Prophets are to be put to death,"

    And then bring: "Deuteronomy 13:1-5
    If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams says: Let us go after other gods, that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death."

    @Inspired by, I think you're misunderstanding Stephen Parker viewpoint, and I'm afraid other things too. In order maybe to "win" the little dispute with Mr Parker, you're neither realizing you're accusing Jesus-(a.s) of preaching "let us go after other gods", nor the extend you're going in your attempt to defend your position on the wrongdoers of the time who've tried to kill God's messenger on the sole basis of their own blindness and jahil. — Jesus-(a.s) never proclaimed in the message he preached to his people at the time, to follow other "gods" beside the One God, and nor did his immediate followers "deified" him, so I don't see how the verse you brought from the Old-Testament is being in line with what Jesus preached. And we all know for fact that many Prophets armed with God's original chief message were sent to the children of Israel in different periods, to first correct what has been corrupted, and confirmed what has been kept right, and then reinstalled and solidified in it's previous natural state. If you're a Muslim, then you must also know that the Qur'an state every prophet of Allah came with clear proofs and signs any person with slight knowledge could see, and most definitely Jesus had more proofs and signs than any other prophet in history, but yet his opponents while claiming to be followers of the One God and recipients of God's laws, acted with the same spirit of jahiliyya and cruelty known to pharaohs, accusing him of magic and sorcellerie when he presented them the proofs and signs, and requiring his head precisely for showing them, the exact same way Pharaoh acted during Prophet Moses(a.s) prophecy in Egypt. Thus if you're Muslim and knowing what took place because the Qur'an does shed light on this whole episode, you cannot defend the undefendable, and bring passages that are not in line with God's mercy and justice. And as Muslims, since the Bible itself claims that the "lying pen" has changed some things, it's better for us to examine the passages of the Bible as same way we do with those of the Hadith, and keep things in checked in accordance with the Qur'an, of course people who are not following the Kitab can see it however they wish to, but as Muslims we can only go with what we know to be certain for us, which is so far the Qur'an.

  • @ [Pretends to be] “Inspired by Mohammad” – Your continued rants and attacks against me just continue to show your own fixations and blindness.

    Jesus Christ, as you yourself say you believe, was NOT a false prophet; and it was only gross spiritual blindness and obtuseness which caused people to think he was. That you could attempt to excuse those spiritually blind Jews who sought to kill God’s anointed one proves you don’t have Islam in your heart.

    The very idea that because God did not guide them to the Truth means that God considered it okay to murder His anointed (or at least attempt to do so) is beyond absurd. And to say that those who continue to try to justify the wickedness of their ‘forefathers’ are not equally as guilty is also beyond absurd.

    But as both the Bible and the Qur’an testify, the Jews are not “all alike”. There were Jewish people in the time of Jesus (peace be with him) who either did not reject him, or later repented of their rejection. And there are Jewish people today also who renounce the rejection of their “fathers” and accept Jesus in pretty much the same way as Muslims do. In one of my blog posts ( http://mystic444.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/the-olivet-discourse-further-thoughts/ ) – beginning about half way down the page – I give a number of quotations from Jewish people speaking highly of Jesus as an outstanding spiritual teacher, Jewish Prophet, and even Christ. These Jews were not “Messianic Jews” either – that is, “evangelical” Christians thinly disguised as Jews.

    But I am by no means ‘fixated’ on either past or present sins of Jewish people. It has become the chief subject of the interchanges between you and me just because you are a knee-jerk Zionist who comes down with ‘tunnel vision’ whenever anyone criticizes any Jewish people. You can’t seem to grasp that Jewish people are capable of doing any wrong. So you yourself ‘fixate’ on the subject whenever the least criticism arises.

    Over and over in the Qur’an, the Prophet is led to call the People of the Book to embrace the message he brought. It is said that it would be “better” for them if they believe his message; and that those of the People of the Book who have knowledge DO recognize and believe in the Arabian Prophet. They are still permitted to follow the Torah where it differs from the “Muhammadan” revelation; but they are not condoned in “disbelieving” and rejecting his message – and neither are they condoned in “disbelieving” and rejecting the message of Jesus Christ. God’s leaving some to “stray” and continue in rejection is not His APPROVAL of their rejection. They simply can’t be defended on the basis that God did not will to guide them to the Truth.

    I have, in plenty of other comments, made clear my opposition to those who engage in Islamophobic activity, whether they are Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, or what have you. I acknowledge the justice and correctness of Muhammad and his followers fighting against those who attacked him; and I criticize those today who justify the antagonism to God’s Prophet Muhammad (peace be with him and his family) of Jews, Christians, and Pagans among his contemporaries. These present day justifiers of the “sins of their fathers” are just as guilty as their fathers were – as well as being guilty of their own sin of rejection and antagonism.

    But for those today who renounce the sins of their fathers (whether they’re Jews, Christians, Muslims, Pagans, or any other religion) there is forgiveness and acceptance by God.

    Concerning Jesus (peace be with him) and the Torah, you have yourself quoted and highlighted a passage from the Qur’an that says clearly that Jesus came to attest the Law, “AND TO MAKE LAWFUL TO YOU PART OF WHAT WAS (BEFORE) FORBIDDEN TO YOU”. (I don’t know how to highlight with bold type in these comments, so I have to use capitals for emphasis). Yet you are continually castigating Christians for the very reason that they maintain that Jesus made lawful certain things that used to be forbidden! (Of course, you are not alone in doing that). Both Jesus and Muhammad ‘abrogated’ certain parts of the former Revelation, and made lawful things previously forbidden. Neither Christians nor Muslims are obligated to keep all the laws of the Torah.

    And you keep bringing up the Trinitarian heresy as if I either promote it, or at least don’t openly repudiate it. Anyone who reads my comments and/or blog articles knows that I have devoted quite a bit of space to denouncing Trinitarianism and affirming pure unitarianism. The difference between you and me in that regard is that you seem to accept the Trinitarian assertion that the ‘New Testament’ writers actually taught this heresy; whereas I constantly seek to show that they did NOT. Trintarianism was a perversion of the ‘New Testament’ writers’ teaching (including Paul’s teaching), developed over several centuries and made ‘official’ in 325 C.E. at the Council of Nicaea. Even in my comments to ‘Peter’ on this very thread I repudiated the “Jesus is God” and Trinitarian ideas, and showed that the apostle Paul also repudiated those ideas. My opposition is plain for anyone with eyes to see.

    And that you consider me to be fixated on “last days” and eschatological events is simply hilarious. On at least one comment in a fairly recent thread I spoke of a previous time in my life (30 or more years ago) when I was deeply involved in Christian “last days” theology. But I escaped that first by becoming a “Postmillenialist” and then by coming to believe in “fulfilled eschatology” – it’s all “past tense” to us today (at least as concerns BIBLICAL eschatology). The only Biblical predictions which I do not see as ‘fulfilled’ are those that speak of the complete victory of the Kingdom of God, when “righteousness shall cover the earth as the waters cover the sea”. But you won’t find me going wild over “end times prophecies”.

    Now I don’t believe I’m going to carry on this two-way conversation any longer. If it keeps going, probably Garibaldi will close the comments. If you wish to comment further, go ahead. I think by this time every one who “has eyes to see” realizes what I believe, and can see your distortions.

  • Let’s take a look at Stephen Parker’s ‘Spirit of Islam’ soul. Parker says:

    If you for one moment side with the Jewish leaders of Jesus’ time in their opposition to him and attempts to murder him, you are far from being a Muslim.

    Reading comprehension problems. Did you read what I wrote above? They were not following the Quran and doesn’t the Old Testament (as you call it) state that false Prophets are to be put to death,

    Deuteronomy 13:1-5
    If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams says: Let us go after other gods, that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death.

    So according to their beliefs they were doing the right thing. According to our beliefs they were not. The Quran also states that God did not want his creation to follow one religion. If God did not want Jews to follow Christianity, it stands to reason God would ensure that some Jews would reject Jesus, just like they rejected 50 or so false Messiah’s.

    If God did not want all to follow Islam, it stands to reason that God would ensure Mohammed would be rejected by some. The Christians in Mecca rejected Mohammed, yet you do not fixate on that. You do not fixate on the Meccan pagans who wanted to kill Prophet Mohammed. Your so called ‘Islam soul’ only fixates on the Messiah and eschatology which contradicts Islamic beliefs anyway. Being a Muslim does not mean end times, eschatology, focusing on Jesus, the Messiah. No. being a Muslim means living a decent moral life following the laws that God gave us. THE MESSIAH DOES NOT SAVE ANYONE. We save ourselves. Each person saves him or herself. That is the Muslim belief.

    The Qur’an affirms that the Jewish leaders (indeed MOST of the Jews) wrongfully attacked and sought to kill that holy one, Jesus God’s anointed; but God vindicated him.

    The Quran also affirms that Christians turned Jesus into a deity AND rejected the very laws Jesus was sent to confirm,

    Surah Al Maidah

    5:72
    They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

    Yet you fixate on the sins of those Jews who themselves are guilty not their progeny or fellow believers. What is your point here? That those few in number Jews who no longer exist and who failed to murder Jesus pose a threat to Monotheism? Or those who deified Jesus AND reject the laws Jesus was sent to confirm, AND who actively persist in this today number in the billions? Jesus in the Quran, affirms the laws as binding, that was his mission. What don’t you understand about collective guilt not existing in Islam? Do you find Muslims fixated on pagans worldwide because some pagans rejected Mohammed and wanted to kill him? By the way, you say you don’t regard the laws as binding, but a ‘Spirit of Islam’ soul wouldn’t believe that, because the Quran affirms that Jesus came to affirm ot reject those laws:

    Quran 003.050
    “‘(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.

    003.051
    “‘It is Allah Who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a Way that is straight.'”

    You make it pretty clear that you’re not Muslim at all. You think Muslims have to keep the Torah?

    More absurdities.

    Your ‘spirit of Islam’ doesn’t extend to understanding what a Muslim says, if you understood the Quran you would have know what I meant. I would not have to spoon feed you word by word.

    That you made this riduculous statement, just shows how totally clueless you are. What do you think Sharia law is? Islam is not a new religion, it’s an affirmation of the laws of old. The Quran is the confirmation of the previous Books when those laws became tampered with. All the Prophets including Jesus brought the same message. In Muslim belief, Christians did wrong by doing away with the law, which is what all the Prophets (including Jesus) adhered to and lived by, with some different practices and abrogations. However all of them wihtout fail, intended their followers to worship the Creator in pure Monotheism, and live by the laws. There is no Prophet who will ‘save’ souls, . Nobody. You save yourself, and by God’s grace alone is forgiveness merited, and God sent his messengers to teach their followers that route.

    Quran 5:75
    Christ the son of Mary was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him.

  • @ “Just Stopping By” – Thanks for your response. However my point is that if the word is translated “it”, the antecedent is in verse 123: the message of Abraham concerning worship of God alone and turning away from all falsehood. The “it” is the message, or the faith, of Abraham.

    If you ignore the interpolations of Yusuf Ali, you can see the same thing. The 2 verses then read: “So We have taught thee the inspired (message), ‘Follow the ways of Abraham the true in faith, and he joined not gods with God.’ The Sabbath was only made for those who disagree…” The Sabbath was made for those who disagree about Abraham’s “ways”.

    In fact, If Yusuf Ali’s version is correct (minus the interpolations), the word “it” or “he” is not itself in the text; it is a non-indicated interpolation. But, like you, I don’t know Arabic – so I’m unable to determine if the word “it/he” is in the text, and if it is, which is the more accurate translation.

  • Kaylin

    ah, i see I’m not the only one. they also said it’s been postponed on their facebook. and their site is down, it seems. ignore me!

  • Kaylin

    Ola, I emailed them several long emails and sent links, I got a reply, they said ‘this event is being postponed’ (email came from “Aimee M. Skillin,
    Executive Director”) Anybody else??

  • Just Stopping By

    @Stephen G. Parker: I understand that you believe the context is clear, but on quran.com, every translation (Mr. Asad’s is not listed) uses “it” and not “him” and seems closer to Mr. Ali’s translation. I can come up with various contexts that make either interpretation plausible, depending on what words such as “ordain” and “differ” mean. Since I don’t speak Arabic, the best I can say is that I know when I am out of my league in deciding which is the best explanation of the original meaning.

  • @ “Just Stopping By” – I am not an Arabic speaker; but I suspect you are correct that the word could be either “it” or “him”. That is where context comes to our aid. The Sabbath could not have been ordained for those who disagreed about the Sabbath – how can one disagree about something before it was ordained?

    The context is pretty clear that God’s Revelation is saying either that the Jews to whom the Sabbath was given had disagreed about Abraham, or they disagreed about the message given to and through him: to turn away from all that is false, and not ascribe deity to anyone or anything other than God.

    Clearly Muslims do not believe that the Sabbath is incumbent upon them, because they DON’T PRACTICE IT. At least the majority don’t; I guess I can’t speak absolutely for everyone calling him/herself a Muslim. And this is clear in Yusuf Ali’s note, as he says the Jews of Muhammad’s time would taunt him and his followers, asking them why they don’t observe the Sabbath if they believed the faith of Abraham was correct.

  • Peter;

    You may contact me via my blog address at the.strangers.blog@gmail.com . I get a lot of emails these days so you will have to excuse me if I don’t reply for some time. I’d advise against ‘evangelical’ emails as well, I get a little bored of them bombarding my inbox and tend to ignore them after a while. I stand happy and content with my faith, have had it bashed for many years and it has made me somewhat immune to it all. Polite discussion and suchlike in the name of bringing a little peace to the world is however most welcomed.

    Jack

  • @ “Believing Atheist” – My saying that I consider myself muslim/jewish/christian/buddhist/hindu would, I think, clearly indicate that I am eclectic in my beliefs. I recognize that all major religions have something of the Truth in them, and at least in their origins were sent by God. It certainly does not indicate that I accept everything those religions teach – and especially everything which any individual representative of the religion teaches.

    The Qur’an affirms that God has sent witnesses and Prophets to every “community” and that “the East and the West” belong to God. In Sura 24:35-38 there is a beautiful metaphor given about God’s Light. It is said that God is the Light of the heavens and the earth; and the illustration is given of an Olive Tree which is neither of the East nor the West; but its oil flows to lamps in God’s houses of worship in both the East and the West.

    I take it that the “Buddha” was one of those Prophets, and God’s Light shines in Buddhist houses of worship also. God is so vastly beyond human comprehension that His revelation through various witnesses and Prophets in various cultures can seem contradictory. God will clear up the differences at “the Day of Judgment”.

    Like other religions, Buddhists are not all alike. There are various ‘schools’ of Buddhism. Some are perhaps more ‘atheistic’ sounding than others, and some seem to be ‘polytheistic’. From my reading something like 20 years ago, I came to the conclusion that the Buddha himself was not ‘atheistic’; but he was convinced that the One is so far beyond human comprehension that its useless to spend time arguing theology. We would do better to meditate on our ‘Self’; in this way we will best come to understand the Deity. Those who come to enlightenment will realize what he called “no Self”; but understanding and explaining what he meant by that is recognized to be somewhat difficult to say the least.

    If I’m not ‘misremembering’, Buddhists love to speak in riddles and paradoxes (particularly the Zen Buddhists). So in Buddhism the Deity might be considered the Unmanifest from which all that is manifest is derived. ‘He’ is the Motionless from which all movement springs. ‘He’ is the ‘Chaos’ from which all order comes. ‘He’ is the Incomprehensible whom we strive to comprehend, though ultimately in vain.

    At least some Buddhists may not like to conceive of the Ultimate in terms of a “Creator” and “Manipulator”; this can sound too ‘anthropomorphic’ perhaps. From what reading I did in Buddhist literature lo these many years ago, I came to the conclusion that the Buddha mainly repudiated the anthropomorphic and polytheistic deities of paganism – and particularly the Hinduism which he sought to reform. The original monistic Hinduism had become so distorted in popular thinking that it had become polytheistic; and the Buddha rebelled against that.

    I suspect that the Buddha was a pure Monist, who believed that the Ultimate and Unseen is Limitless in His Being; ‘He’ cannot be conceived of as having ‘boundaries’ outside of which exists His creation. God is All and in All. If one conceives of God as literally “outside of” His ‘creation’, one has distorted the idea of God. It may be okay to use such language metaphorically (perhaps the only way we can communicate any useful truth about the Incomprehensible); but we need to always keep in mind that such figures of speech ARE metaphorical and not literal.

    Anyhow, while I claim to be “buddhist” I do not claim to accept everything Buddhism teaches. While I claim to be “jewish”, I obviously don’t accept everything which goes by that name (for instance, I plainly believe that Jesus is the Christ prophesied in Hebrew Scriptures, and that the Jewish leaders wrongfully sought to kill him as they did other Prophets). While I say I am “christian”, I obviously do not believe much of what currently goes by that name. And while I claim to be “hindu”, again I obviously do not accept everything which goes by that name. I do claim to believe that there is Truth in each of those religions, and I seek to affirm that Truth. I believe that Muhammad (peace be with him and his family) is the “Seal” of the Prophets, and that the revelation of God through him is infallible Truth (as long as one recognizes the use of metaphor and imagery, rather than accepting everything in a strictly literal manner).

    You may judge for yourself whether or not I am truly “muslim in spirit”; but ultimately your judgment of me (or my judgment of you) is meaningless. God knows those whom He guides, and those whom He leaves to stray. And He is the Best of Judges. 🙂

  • Just Stopping By

    I need help from an Arabic speaker here, but when Mr. Asad translates the Qur’an as saying, “and know that the observance of the Sabbath was ordained only for those who came to hold divergent views about him,” wouldn’t that likely be an interpretation if sabbath is male (is it?) and, as far as I know, the words “it” and “him” would be the same for the same gender?

  • Well somehow I managed to post that message before it was complete. To continue:

    Yusuf Ali altered the verse from saying that the Sabbath was made for those who disagreed about following the faith of Abraham who did not ascribe divinity to anyone besides God, to the Sabbath was made STRICT for those who disagreed ABOUT ITS OBSERVANCE. Mr. Ali has clearly distorted the Qur’an by his interpolations in this case; while Mr. Asad’s interpolations did not distort the meaning.

    Yet despite his interpolations, Yusuf Ali had this to say in his note on verse 124:

    “If Abraham’s way was the right way, the Jews were ready with the taunt, ‘Why don’t you then observe the Sabbath?’ The answer was twofold. (1) The Sabbath has nothing to do with Abraham. It was instituted with the Law of Moses because of Israel’s hardness of heart (2.74); for they constantly disputed with the Prophet Moses (3.108) and there were constantly among them afterwards men who broke the Sabbath (2.65 and n. 79)…

    The second point in his note concerns the differences among Christians and Jews about which day is the Sabbath.

    Here is Muhammad Asad’s comment on verse 124:

    “v.124 : I.e., about Abraham. The implication is that the majority of the Jews had deviated from the true creed of Abraham (which is the meaning of the phrase, “those who came to hold divergent views about him”) inasmuch as most of them became convinced that they were “God’s chosen people” simply because of their physical descent from that great Prophet: an assumption which obviously runs counter to every truly religious principle. As the Qur’ān repeatedly points out, this spiritual arrogance was punished by God’s imposition on the children of Israel – and on them alone – of all manner of severe restrictions and rituals, of which the obligation to refrain from all work and even travel on the Sabbath was one. In its widest implication, this passage is meant to stress the fact that all God-imposed rituals are only a means towards the achievement of spiritual discipline, and never a religious goal in themselves.”

    So “Inspired by Mohammad” only displays her own ignorance of the Qur’an which she accuses me of distorting. And her quotation of the tasfeer on God’s punishment of those who disobeyed the Sabbath only proves how impossible it is to claim that tasfeer make the Qur’an clear (despite the constant claim of the Qur’an that it is, by itself, clear guidance and wisdom). The author of the tasfeer she quoted is a strict literalist in his interpretation; so he asserts that those who disobeyed were very literally turned into apes and swine. Yet many another commentator on the Qur’an has pointed out that this is metaphorical language: the disobedient became as spiritually obtuse as apes and swine.

    And though “Inspired by Muhammad” hates it when I quote former revelation, this metaphorical usage is precisely how the Christian Scriptures use such language. Jesus is said to have told his hearers not to cast their “pearls” before swine, or give what is holy to dogs. He and his cousin John the Baptist are said to have called the Jewish leaders vipers. And Peter (2 Peter 2:12) refers to men who have become like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and killed. In verse 22, he says that the proverb which says “the dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is washed only to wallow in the mire” has been fulfilled in such men.

    Sorry, “Inspired by Mohammad”, it is you who are displaying ignorance; and you make yourself look like a fool to anyone with knowledge who uses his/her reason.

Powered by Loon Watchers