For 'Abd al-Rahman: "covering up the truth?" And Muslim logic!!

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Jul 23, 2006 at 18:46

So how do you propose that let us say Christians and Jews "cover up the truth"? And what on earth is the truth? And why would anyone covers up the truth?

Well, you will agree with me that Christians and Jews do believe in the same God as Muslims, if you believe what Muslims say. The "sin" of Christians and Jews in the eyes of the author(s) of the Qur'an is that they did not believe Muhammad or that Muhammad was a prophet of their God!!! And you know what"? I think that they are right on the mark.

Now Let me repeat what I wrote before one more time:

1. Your Allah declares that the ultimate sin is shirk and this is the ultimate kufr! Nothing about covering up the truth that is.

2. Then your Allah tells Muslims that they should kill al-mushrikeen (Q 9:5) for no reason what so ever. Nothing about covering up the truth that is.

3. Then your Allah tells Muslims that because Christians believe in the Trinity and the jews believe that 'Uzair is the son of God (Q 9:30 and this one is a joke), therefore Christians and Jews must be mushrikeen, and because they are mushrikeen they are kuffar. Nothing about covering the truth that is.

4. Now we have your Allah's dispensation: Q9:29 where your Allah declares a war against both Jews and Christians for not believing not that his is the real one God, but because they do not believe that Muhammad is a real prophet!!! Nothing about covering up the truth.

5. Now because of the doctrine of al-nasikh wa al-mansukh (which means Allah is changing his mind) where a later dispensation will abrogate an earlier dispensation of the same subject matter.

6. And because sura 9 is the last revealed sura dispensations in 9:5, 9:29, 9:30 will abrogate any previous dispensations as in the case: "there is no compulsion is religion"!! Nothing about covering up the truth.

7. Therefore Jews, Christians, Hindus and Buddhists are kuffar because they are mushrikken period. Nothing about covering up the truth that is.

Now do you get it? If you do not get it this time, you are really beyond help.

May be you can read Arabic... ( I can read Italian, it does not mean that I understand it) but I do not think that you understand it.

How many times do I have to tell you this? As for the word: kafara or to cover it has nothing to do with the word kafir, or for this matter the word kafr or village. They have the same root, but what makes the difference in Semitic and Arabic grammar is the application of Sibawayhe's F3L (or feh 'Ayn lam) or the so called From II-VI verb system.

Hint: Kafara or fa3ala, Yakfur Yaf3ul, and kafr or village. And even the word: kaffaara (expiations distributed to the poor at a funeral, penance) would be Sibawayhe's Fa33aala and a very different Form verb.

As for your friend: invite him to participate in this discussion. Is this asking for too much? It is very clear to me that you know no Arabic, cannot properly read Arabic or Arabic language sources, and you are clueless about Arabic grammar.... And you know what? Chritians and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists care less if you call them kuffar or not, and they know that Muhammad was no messenger of God.

PS: So would you also propose that a kafir is also a village? Do you see how silly you are?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".