Wintery Knight

…integrating Christian faith and knowledge in the public square

Islamists kidnap 100 schoolgirls who face living hell as sex slaves

From the New York Post. (H/T Answering Muslims)

Excerpt:

Heavily armed Islamic extremists abducted at least 100 female students from a school in northeast Nigeria before dawn Tuesday, but some of the teens managed to escape from the back of an open truck, officials said.

The tragedy came one day after a bombing killed more than 70 people in the city of Abuja.

The girls were seized after midnight from a school in Chibok, on the edge of the Sambisa Forest, an insurgent hideout, said Borno state police commissioner Tanko Lawan.

Gunmen killed a soldier and police officer guarding the school, then took off with at least 100 students, a State Security Service official said.

Witnesses said the gunmen arrived in trucks and motorcycles and may have grabbed as many as 200 girls.

[...]Islamic extremists have been abducting girls to use as cooks and sex slaves.

Insurgents from the Boko Haram terrorist network are blamed for attacks that have killed more than 1,500 people this year.

[...]Boko Haram is also accused of Monday morning’s explosion at a busy bus station in Nigeria’s capital that killed at least 75 people and wounded 141.

Answering Muslims notes that the Qur’an allows Muslims to take captured women as sex slaves. It’s a far cry from the courtly love of Christians, isn’t it?

Boko Haram is, of course, an Islamic terrorist group. But don’t tell the Obama administration that, it’s “workplace violence caused by a Youtube video” if you ask them.

Filed under: News, , , , , ,

Does the Qur’an predict modern scientific discoveries?

Another great, original post from Jonathan McLatchie, posted on the Christian Apologetics Alliance blog. He surveys a number of passages from the Qur’an that are said to predict scientific discoveries.

Here’s one:

The Trajectory of the Sun and Moon

Dhul-Qarnain, traditionally identified by Qur’anic commentators as Alexander the Great, is spoken of in Surah Al-Kahf. In verses 83-86, we read,

They ask you about Dhul-Qarnain. Say, “I shall now recite to you an account of him. Surely, We gave him power on earth and gave him means to (have) everything (he needs). So he followed a course, until when he reached the point of sunset, he found it setting into a miry spring, and found a people near it. We said, “O Dhul-Qarnain, either punish them or adopt good behavior with them.”

Thus, according to the Qur’an, Alexander the Great traveled so far that he reached the place where the sun sets (a pool of water) and even found a people that lives nearby it! He was even able to reach the place of sunrise, according to verses 89 and 90 of the same chapter:

Thereafter he followed a course, until when he reached the point of sunrise, he found it rising over a people for whom We did not make any shelter against it.

Surah Ya-Seen 38-40 is even more clear:

And the sun is quickly proceeding towards its destination. That is the designing of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing. And for the moon We have appointed measured phases, until it turned (pale, curved and fine) like an old branch of date palm. Neither it is for the sun to overtake the moon, nor can the night outpace the day. Each one is floating in an orbit.

Am I misinterpreting? Surely Muhammad — the Messenger of the Almighty Allah — knew that the sun doesn’t actually move in relation to the earth, right? We need only go to the ahadith sources to find out. According to Sahih Bukhari vol.4 book 54 ch.4 no.421,

Narrated Abu Dhar: The Prophet asked me at sunset, “Do you know where the sun goes (at the time of sunset)? I replied, “Allah and His Apostle know better.” He said, “It goes (i.e. travels) till it prostrates itself underneath the Throne and takes the permission to rise again, and it is permitted and then (a time will come when) it will be about to prostrate itself but its prostration will not be accepted, and it will ask permission to go on its course but it will not be permitted, but it will be ordered to return when it has come and so it will rise in the west. And that is the interpretation of the Statement of Allah: “And the sun Runs its fixed course for a term (decreed). That is the Decree of (Allah) The Exalted in Might, The All-Knowing.” (36.38)

In Sunan Abu Dawud (3991), we also read,

Abu Dharr said: I was sitting behind the Apostle of Allah who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: Do you know where this sets? I replied: Allah and his Apostle know best. He said: It sets in a spring of warm water.

As any astronomer will tell you, this is a point on which Muhammad was dead wrong. Such an error may have been excusable for a seventh century Arab, but it certainly doesn’t bode well for the Qur’an being the revealed word of God.

This is a good post to store away in case you get asked about this topic. I’m sure that Muslims can be nice people, but that doesn’t mean that their religion is true. We have to settle that question by comparing the claims of their holy book with what we know from science. You can affirm the goodness of a person while still recognizing that their beliefs are false, as a matter of fact. And you can still treat a person nicely even though they have false beliefs. Tolerance for people, but not for false ideas.

Filed under: Polemics, , , , , ,

Is the Qur’an the Word of God?

Jonathan McLatchie writes about it at the Christian Apologetics Alliance blog.

Here is his argument:

  • Premise 1: Either the Bible is the Word of God or it is not.
  • Premise 2: If the Bible is the Word of God, the Qur’an is not.
  • Premise 3: If the Bible is not the Word of God, the Qur’an is not.
  • Conclusion: Therefore, the Qur’an is not the Word of God.

Premise 3 is the one that needs to be defended. Jonathan argues:

The Qur’an, over and over again, affirms the Christian Scriptures, claiming consistency with them, and asserting that the Torah and the Gospel (the “Injil”), and also the Psalms, are previous revelations from Allah.

He offers some quotations from the Qur’an to substantiate that claim, then he looks at the most common proof texts offered by Muslim apologists to show that the Christian documents do have something to say about Muhammad.

Here is one of the passages quoted by Muslim apologists, along with Jonathan’s response.

Another favorite is the Advocate or Helper promised by Jesus to the disciples in John 14 and 16. In John 14:15-16, we read the following words of Jesus:

If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.

It is extremely difficult to read Muhammad into this text, since the promised Helper is said to be with Jesus’ followers forever and in them, something not accomplished by Muhammad. The Muslim interpretation also utterly ignores the overall context of the text. Jesus here is speaking to his disciples. If the promise refers to Muhammad, then it was fulfilled six hundred years later. Thus, everything said by Jesus to the disciples would not be relevant to them.

In John 15:26-27, we read more about this coming Helper:

But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning.

Was Muhammad sent by Jesus? Does he proceed from the Father? Moreover, the disciples bearing witness is directly linked to the coming of the promised Helper, and thus the fulfillment of this promise must be found in the disciples to whom the promise was made. John 16:7-14 provides yet further difficulties:

Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

This text makes it even more clear that the Helper is sent by Jesus and comes to these specific disciples to whom Jesus is speaking. Muhammad did not come for a further six centuries. We are also told that the Helper will glorify Jesus. Muhammad certainly did not glorify Jesus.

Jonathan then addresses the idea that the text of the Bible was corrupted or lost, which some Muslim apologists assert. But the problem is that the Qur’an assumes that the texts used by Jews and Christians around 600 A.D. were reliable.

Here’s one quote:

  • Surah Al-Maeda 68: “Say, “O people of the Book, you have nothing to stand on, unless you uphold the Torah and the Injil and what has been sent down to you from your Lord.” What has been sent down to you from your Lord will certainly make many of the most persistent in rebellion and disbelief. So, do not grieve over the disbelieving people.”

So the Qur’an assumes that the text of these rival religions was reliable and consistent with the message of Islam.

There’s more in the article, and I found it just fascinating because of the quotations from the Qur’an itself. Definitely a post worth reading, and not something you would find anywhere else.

Filed under: News, , , , , , ,

Benghazi hearings: CIA director altered talking points from “attack” to “demonstration”

From the Wall Street Journal, a summary on the Benghazi congressional hearings.

Excerpt:

Last week’s encounter between former acting CIA Director Michael Morell and the House Permanent Subcommittee on Intelligence may have brought us a bit closer to the truth of how four Americans came to be killed at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012, and how their countrymen came to be lied to about it. But the progress toward truth was probably not made in a way that Mr. Morell intended. The encounter on Capitol Hill also made clear that the forum that will take us all the way to the truth must be something other than a congressional hearing.

[...]Critics of the government’s performance on Benghazi have charged that Mr. Morell’s revisions principally although not exclusively involved changing the description of the violence and its perpetrators, and removing the suggestion that they might have had ties to a terrorist organization. These changes, it is argued, enabled Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations at the time, to promote the discredited and since abandoned narrative that the violence was a reaction to an anti-Muslim YouTube video produced by a probationer in Los Angeles.

The acting CIA director’s changes to the talking points did indeed enable the blame-it-on-the-video fiction, which served the interest of a president seeking re-election based in part on having put al Qaeda on the run, although in fairness it is not clear that was Mr. Morell’s motive. Thus he edited out a description of the warnings that the CIA had provided to the State Department of earlier terrorist attacks on the British embassy and on the Red Cross that caused them to withdraw their personnel, and a description of an attack that blew a hole in the U.S.’s own installation—events that might have suggested that Sept. 11, 2012, was not an isolated event.

Morell believed “analysts” who are desk employees, and disregarded statements of the station chief, who was on the scene, and in contact with the eyewitnesses:

He substituted “demonstration” for “attack” despite the direct statement by the CIA’s Libya station chief in Tripoli that there was no demonstration; Mr. Morell changed “terrorist” to “extremist.” His explanation is that he relied on the CIA’s analysts, who he said had comprehensive information available to them, rather than on the CIA’s station chief, who relied on the testimony of eyewitnesses who arrived soon after the attack started. 

The directorate of intelligence functions according to a protocol whose rigidity we more often associate with the military. So analysts whose deductions put them at odds with those on the scene wouldn’t have considered, and apparently didn’t consider, simply ringing up those on the scene and getting their input. To the contrary, analysts deal only with information that comes in the prescribed way. The CIA station chief’s communication to headquarters came in an email and did not get circulated within the intelligence community as it would have if it had been contained in a cable.

There was plenty of information disconfirming his “demonstration” lie:

There was, as it happens, other information available. A private company, Agincourt Solutions, had followed the Twitter, Facebook and other social media in the vicinity of the U.S. installation attacked in Benghazi. The company found no evidence of a “demonstration.” There were video cameras trained on the front gate of the consulate that showed no demonstration. Days before the attack, al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri had been calling for an attack to avenge the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi, a senior al Qaeda member who was, as his name suggests, a Libyan. And Sept. 11 is a date of highly symbolic value to people who set great store by symbols.

The last two data points were certainly available to the CIA analysts, and the camera feed should have been. But all this was discounted, apparently in favor of their consensus view that the attack at Benghazi had started with a demonstration that drew inspiration from violence inflicted on the U.S. Embassy in Cairo—allegedly as part of a protest against the video.

Both Obama and Clinton blamed the Youtube video for a “demonstration”, and denied that there was a terrorist attack:

Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton told the grieving families that the producer of the video would feel the weight of the law. It was one promise they kept: Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was arrested in the middle of the night in the glare of TV lights for a probation violation—the only arrest thus far growing out of the Benghazi attack, even though the identity and whereabouts of the principal suspects, one of whom is an alumnus of Guantanamo Bay, have long been known.

The Obama administration blamed the Youtube video in order to win the 2012 election. They were afraid if the real story came out, people would know that they had screwed by underestimating the threat and ignoring the warning signs and the requests for additional security. Democrats can’t do national security – they just give speeches about spending taxpayer money.

Related posts

Filed under: News, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A closer look at the Islamization of schools in the UK

Here is a story from the UK Telegraph that should concern us all. (H/T Dennis Prager)

The news story:

The Birmingham school at the centre of an alleged campaign of “Islamisation” by Muslim radicals is to be placed in “special measures” by the Government’s education watchdog in a move that could see its head teacher and governors removed.

Park View, previously rated “outstanding” by Ofsted, will be downgraded to “inadequate”, the lowest possible score, in the category of leadership and management, senior education sources said.

This enables Ofsted to place the school in special measures, allowing the watchdog, if it wishes, to remove the school’s entire leadership.

The move, described as “seismic” by senior educational sources, follows a highly unusual two Ofsted inspections in the past three weeks at the school, the alleged victim of a campaign by Islamists called a “Trojan Horse” to remove secular head teachers and install Islamic practices in Birmingham state schools.

So why does the government have to step in?

Here’s why:

The disclosure comes as parents and school governors and staff describe in detail how the campaign has destabilised and undermined successful schools.

In extensive interviews with The Sunday Telegraph, more than a dozen sources disclosed how children at one supposedly non-religious primary school, Oldknow, were led in anti-Christian chanting by one of their teachers at assembly.

The school also conducts weekly Friday prayers, has organised at least three school trips to Mecca subsidised from public funds, and requires all pupils to learn Arabic — almost unheard of at a primary school.

It also runs its own madrassah, or religious school. Oldknow’s highly successful non-Muslim head teacher has been driven from her post for resisting this “Islamising agenda”, this newspaper has learnt.

The head of another successful primary school, Springfield, received death threats, had his car tyres slashed and is under “non-stop attack” by radical governors, according to parents, other governors and staff at the school.

And more:

Last year Mr da Costa recruited a new deputy head, Jahangir Akbar, from a Muslim faith school in Leicester. Soon afterwards, Jahangir’s younger brother, Khalil, was recruited as assistant head. No other candidates were interviewed for either position and the assistant headship was not even advertised, staff said. Jahangir Akbar is another colleague of Tahir Alam’s and has worked with him in the Association of Muslim Schools, of which Mr Alam is vice-chairman.

“Oldknow’s pupils are mostly but not entirely Muslim and it was always an equal-opportunity school,” said one former member of staff. “But then all of a sudden there were Jummah [Friday] prayers, and going to Saudi Arabia on government money, and the Arabic, and blatant belittling of Christianity.”

Hardline teachers were recruited who would “sow the seed of religion in every lesson,” said one source. “Some of the teachers told pupils that music was sinful in Islam and the children started to refuse to do music, even though it is compulsory in the National Curriculum. It is incredibly difficult when your own colleagues undermine your efforts to give the children a balanced education.”

Matters came to a head, three separate sources said, last December when all the normal Christmas activity, including a tree, cards and the pantomime, was cancelled because it was considered un-Islamic, and the school’s Arabic teacher, Asif Khan, delivered an assembly “ridiculing” Christian beliefs. “It was like a rally,” said one person present. “He was leading them in chants of, ‘Do we believe in Christmas? No! Do we give out Christmas cards? No! The seven days of Christmas, they [Christians] can’t even count!’

The UK was under Labour Party rule for a long time, and under the Labour Party, huge numbers of unskilled immigrants from Muslim countries were let into the country in the name of multiculturalism. The Labour Party is gone from office now, but the damage is still being felt today. Under Labour rule, the country seems to have taken a turn towards moral relativism and radical feminism, so that people seem to be terrified of making moral judgments or standing up to a centralized, powerful government. Even many Christians in the UK seem to struggle with holding to conservative morality and theology, and they even vote for the Labour Party and worse, the Liberal Democrats. There just seems to be a suspicion of individual liberty and personal responsibility that has weakened the country so that it is a shadow of its former self.

Filed under: News, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wintery Tweets

Click to see recent visitors

  Visitors Online Now

Page views since 1/30/09

  • 3,956,405 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,746 other followers

Archives

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,746 other followers

%d bloggers like this: