To the friend who was kind enough to inform me that some children are born with genetic defects and suffer day and night until they die.

Who is any human to take life away?

God gives us life, and we attempt to preserve it as much as we can, not just for the Hippocratic Oath that we took, but also because Humans are created in the image of God.

Let me give you a hypothetic situation:
You are a young girl in Egypt, maybe 13 or 14 years of age. You are date-raped by a boy, and become pregnant.
You manage to hide this pregnancy from your family, until 9 months later, when you give birth to your child in the bathroom and are rushed to the ER to stop bleeding.
One of the attending ER’s is a fanatical Moslem, meaning he lives his faith and is not a sell-out “secular” Moslem.
He “Cleans” the girl, which means that he circumcises her, without her knowledge or consent, while she is under the bing.
When questioned, the doctor says “she was obviously a loose girl and needs to be saved from her immorality.”

Doesn’t she have the right to be immoral? While I disagree with the actions of the doctor, I cannot blame him for being concerned about the immorality. Having said that, I will never say I agree with his actions.

Did you know there’s a movie called “Asrar el Banat” (Girls’ Secrets) that had a doctor who did this same thing? Well, you do now. Watch it if you can find it. It caused a hubbub.

If you kill a child who is miserable because of his or her physical suffering, you are playing God in the same way that the doctor in the movie did. If everyone who had a problem that made them in pain 24/7, killed themself, we will lose 2/3 of the population, because people can also be in emotional torment.

I CATEGORICALLY DISAGREE with suicide, murder, and euthanasia.

I wrote a paper about it back in my med-school days, the pros and cons and why it is wrong. I may dig it out and print it here.

Finally, I would like to say to Luke.. how do you know that I do not have a genetic defect that makes my life and my being a doctor very difficult? What if I told you that I had severe arthritis and was allergic to the medication? What if I told you I was born without legs but became a doctor anyway? What if I told you that I had a physical handicap but also a disease that made my every waking moment a living hell, and that had since I was a young thing?

I will not tell you which one it is, but I do have a serious medical problem. I also have a colleague who finished medical school (in Egypt) and had to slither on the floor because she was a paraplegic; she attended every day of classes, and has never once wished for death.

LIFE SHOULD ALWAYS BE PRESERVED AND PROTECTED. IT IS A GIFT FROM GOD, NO MATTER HOW BAD OR HOPELESS IT MAY LOOK!

Blessings and love in Him who bestows blessings and love!

Camel Boy “Crucified”

March 30, 2006

Damare, a young slave boy, had his knees and feet nailed to a board and was left to die – just for attending a church service. Miraculously he survived and told The Voice of the Martyrs that he forgave his cruel tormenter, becuase Jesus was nailed and forgave him.

Learn the truth about Christian persecution! Subscribe now to The Voice of the Martyrs FREE award winning monthly newsletter. You will be moved and encouraged by testimonies like young Damare’s, and more importantly, you will learn how to pray effectively, and discover practical ways to get involved.

SAN DIEGO, March 28 /Christian Newswire/ —

This is a very special press release. Biblical Family Advocates (BFA) wants to bring attention to a very important, eye opening press release sent to Phil Magnan, Director of BFA from the organization Cry for Life in the Netherlands.

“We get an incredible eye witness testimony from the people who live in a country where widespread euthanasia has been in place for many years. ” so says Phil Magnan of Biblical Family Advocates.

“If one carefully reads the press release.. many will be shocked how far the Netherlands has gone into euthanasia. This should be a wake up call for America and its own slippery slope to forced euthanasia and the euthanizing of children.”

By Randall Terry

A mysterious world exists behind the “Crescent Curtain;” a world in which a Muslim’s conversion to Christianity is viewed as a treasonous act against God, the state, and the community – punishable by death.

Now that the potential death sentence of the Afghani — Mr. Abdul Rahman — is not imminent, the question we must ask is this: was the Afghani prosecutor’s goal of executing Mr. Rahman an accurate reflection of Islamic jurisprudence? Or to put the question in a historical context; “What would Mohammed do with those who forsake Islam?”

As horrifying as it is, Mohammed would have called for Mr. Rahman’s death. I will prove it shortly. But first let me explain the Islamic framework in which this makes sense – at least to the Islamic mind.

In order to understand Islam – and how Muslims treat hostages, or women, or Muslim’s who leave Islam for another religion, we must focus on four things:

1) The Koran; 2) The Hadith; 3) The Sunna; and 4) The Shari’a. Let us quickly define our terms.

The Koran (also transliterated into English as “Quran”) is the Islamic holy book, the rough equivalent of the Old Testament for Judaism, and the Bible for Christianity.

The Hadith and the Sunna are the sayings and deeds (respectively) of Mohammed that are not in the Koran. They are often called “The Traditions of the Prophet.” These are sacred writings, but they are not in the Koran.

The Shari’a is Islamic law. Islamic law touches on virtually every aspect of religious, political, criminal, military, familial and social life. Broadly speaking, the Shari’a is the sum total of the Koran, the Hadith and the Sunna. To develop Islamic Law, ancient Islamic scholars took the Koran — together with the sayings and deeds (the Hadith and the Sunna) of Mohammed; they then created a fairly airtight system of Islamic law that has existed for over 1000 years. For example — the Saudi Arabian Constitution actually says: “Government in Saudi Arabia derives power from the Holy Koran and the Prophet’s tradition.” (Article 7, Constitution of Saudi Arabia) Other Islamic nations have similar declarations in their Constitutions.

The Example of Mohammed

To understand Islam, we must understand the life and traditions of Mohammed. Obviously, the Koran is critical in the development of Islamic law. But in many ways – as the Saudi Constitution implies — it is “The Traditions of the Prophet” — the sayings and deeds of Mohammed — that provide the example of how the Koran is lived out and applied to culture and law. If the Koran provides the bricks, Mohammed’s sayings and deeds are the mortar for Islamic law.

Why? Because Muslims believe that Mohammed was the best example of a life totally surrendered to Allah. Hence, if one wants to be a good Muslim, he or she should mimic the life of Mohammed; if a ruler wants to rule a nation in a manner that pleases Allah, he should rule following the example of Islam’s first political, military, and religious ruler – Mohammed.

In that light, understanding the life of Mohammed – not merely reading the Koran — is the most important key to understanding the entire Islamic world; and it is precisely this key that has been entirely missed or ignored by the Western world.

There are literally thousands of Hadith and Sunna; little records and vignettes of things that Mohammed said or did while he was alive.

The Hadith and the Sunna form a completely different body of literature than the Koran. The Koran is the holy book of Islam; in the Islamic scheme, it contains nothing but the words of God. By contrast, the Hadith and the Sunna are not the words of God, but they are a record of the words and the deeds of Mohammed. Mohammed is heralded as God’s Prophet, His Apostle, His Messenger — the most noble soul that has ever graced the world. If you have read the Koran, good; but it is the Hadith and Sunna of Mohammed that give flesh and bone to the writings of the Koran.

And since Mohammed dealt with a multitude of political, criminal, religious, military, economic and familial issues during his life — and since there is a fairly extensive record of Mohammed’s sentiments on those issues – it is the Quran together with the words and deeds of Mohammed that provide the foundation for Islamic law and culture.

On Trial behind “The Crescent Curtain”

Let us fast-forward to today. Those who follow the news from persecuted Christians surviving behind the Crescent Curtain know the story all too well; if a Muslim converts to Christianity, he or she is risking their life. Many have stood trial; still more have simply been murdered by family members or zealots for leaving the Islamic faith.

As of today, 41 year old Afghani Abdul Rahman has escaped a trial for his life – surely due to international exposure and pressure. His celebrated crime was that he dared to forsake Islam, and embrace Christianity. Make no mistake — this type of injustice against “Muslims Apostates” (Muslims who convert to another religion) occurs throughout the Islamic world — as it has for hundreds of years.

Mr. Rahman is now free, hopefully in hiding; we pray he will escape the Mullahs and other devout Muslims that have vowed to kill him on sight, and that he can end his days peacefully in a nation that allows true freedom of religion. But the cases of many other Muslims turned Christian – or Muslims turned agnostic or atheist – do not have such an ending. Many are tried in court without the disdain and condemnation of the non-Muslim world; they are imprisoned or beaten or executed. Others simply become victims to “private proceedings” – resulting in tortures or murders or disappearances. Islamic prisons and shallow graves are littered with the ruined lives of ex-Muslims who dared to leave the peaceful fold of Islam.

Those of us who were born and raised in the Western democracies cannot conceive of such treatment due solely to someone’s religious convictions. The response from the judge and the prosecutor in the case are as bewildering as they are offensive to us.

The AP reported Judge Ansarullah Mawlavezada as saying: “We are not against any particular religion in the world. But in Afghanistan, this sort of thing is against the law…It is an attack on Islam.”

The prosecutor, Abdul Wasi, originally offered to drop the charges against Rahman if he would simply return to Islam. Mr. Rahman refused the offer, and courageously maintained his Christian faith. Before dropping the charges, the prosecutor said: “He would have been forgiven if he changed back. But he said he was a Christian and would always remain one…We are Muslims and becoming a Christian is against our laws. He must get the death penalty.” (Mar 19, 2006 Associated Press)

Why would the Judge say that Mr. Rahman becoming a Christian is an attack on Islam? Why does the prosecutor insist that he be put to death for his faith in Christ?

Mohammed Provides the Key

The judge and the prosecutor in Afghanistan are following the words of Mohammed himself. I know this is hard to believe — especially for those of us who have believed the mantra that “Islam is a religion of peace.”

Let us look at various Hadith — sayings of Mohammed – and then various Shari’a principles. Remember: the words of Mohammed form a foundational part of Islamic law. The Muslim mind believes that Mohammed’s example is stellar.

All of the following quotes come from the most respected selections of the hadith. The first narrative we will review deals with Mohammed’s fourth successor, Ali. Caliph Ali had executed some “apostates” and burnt them. The hadith says:

“Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn ‘Abbas, who said, “Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, ‘Don’t punish (anybody) with Allah’s Punishment.’ [i.e., only God can burn someone with fire in hell.] No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet [Mohammed] said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'” Volume 4, Book 52, Number 260

“I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'” Vol. 9, Book 84, Number 57

Why would other Muslims – strangers to Mr. Rahman – threaten to murder him? Because Mohammed ordered the death of “apostates,” and promised the killers a reward from God: “No doubt I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion [Islam] as an arrow goes out of the game. So, where-ever you find them, kill them, for who-ever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection.” Volume 9, Book 84, Number 64 Sahih Bukhari

Mohammed’s close friend and third successor, Uthman, gave this account of killing apostates (ironically when his own life was in danger.) “They are threatening to kill me now. We said: ‘Allah will be sufficient for you against them, Commander of the Faithful!’ He asked: ‘Why kill me? I heard the Apostle of Allah say: It is not lawful to kill a man who is a Muslim except for one of the three reasons: Kufr (disbelief) after accepting Islam, fornication after marriage, or wrongfully killing someone…’” Book 39, Number 4487 Sahih Muslim

Mohammed personally ordered the execution of a man who had once followed him, but then “apostatized.” He died by multiple sword gashes while he was clutching the curtain of the “sacred mosque” in Mecca. (See details in “The Life of the Prophet Mohammed” Ibn Kathir, Vol. III, Pages 402-403)

What follows next are quotations from the book, “The Penalties for Apostasy and Islam.” This book, written by a devout Muslim, gathers the delineated penalties for apostasy from all four major schools of the Shari’a.

“All four imams (the founders of the four schools of Islamic law) — may Allah have mercy upon them — agree that the apostate whose fall from Islam is beyond doubt — may Allah forbid it — must be killed, and his blood must be spilled without reservation. The hypocrite and heretic (zindiq) who poses as a Muslim but has secretly remained an unbeliever must also be killed.”

The book continues: “If the apostate repents, or utters the two main articles of faith (al-shahadatain), or confesses faith in the oneness of Allah [i.e., he must deny the Trinity] he will be released. But if he does not repent, he is to be killed by the sword immediately. This punishment cannot be evaded, because apostasy is the most atrocious and severe form of blasphemy, and it deserves the cruelest judgment, which invalidates all of a Muslim’s previous deeds. Allah says: “And for those among you who allow themselves to be led astray from their religion, and who die as unbelievers, their works are invalid now and in eternity” (Sura al-Baqara 2:217)

The Koran states that Christians are infidels deserving of hell: “Infidels now are they who say, ‘God is the Messiah, son of Mary… whosoever shall join other gods with God [i.e., the Trinity], God shall forbid him the garden, and his abode shall be the fire…“ (Koran 5: 76-78) Mr. Rahman’s conversion means he believes in the Trinity; that Christ is God incarnate; and therefore that Mohammed is not “The Apostle of God. All this is a capital offense, punishable by death.

Simply stated: Those who seek to kill former Muslims are following the dictates of Mohammed. Whether we understand it or not, and whether we like it or not, Mohammed, and hence Islam today, know nothing of religious freedom. Do some research with Amnesty International or The Voice of the Martyrs, and see what life is like for Christians in Saudi Arabia, or Egypt, or Pakistan — a life of fear, persecution, and even death.

At some point we are going to have to debate the question: How can we view them as allies? How can we be allies with dictators and despots that would imprison our grandmothers, ravage our sisters, and murder our fathers?

Randall Terry has a B.A. (with a concentration in communications) from the State University of New York; a B.A. from Whitfield College School of Religion; and a three-year degree from Elim Bible Institute, majoring in The Bible (Old and New Testament). His theological and communications background provide a unique vantage point from which to study and discuss the religion, history, and sociology of Islam.

Randall Terry has spent nearly two years immersed in a study of Islam and Mohammed. His studies have included: beginning his Arabic studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mt. Scopus Campus; college courses dealing with Islamic history and sociology; spending seven weeks studying historic sites in Jerusalem, Israel, Palestine, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, and Greece; doing extensive research in Islamic primary sources for a lengthy project comparing Christ and Mohamed. Mr. Terry is the author of five published books; he is currently the President of the Society for Truth and Justice.

For more information on Islam go to: RandalTerry.com and click on articles.

Salib on ANNAQED

March 29, 2006

This is an excellent site, I am honored to be part of it.

=======================
This weekend we saw something very disturbing. An illegal alien mob came out
of the shadows by the hundreds of thousands and descended on Phoenix, Denver
and Los Angeles.

Like an invading horde, they demanded US citizen rights, but without any
citizen duties, responsibilities, loyalties. Has our beloved America become
France?

Are riots in the streets and the burning of cars in Washington DC next?

READ THE ENTIRE COLUMN HERE

Anti-Moslems?

March 28, 2006

by J. Ahmed Salib

(To those who would like to reprint it, please only post 2-3 paragraphs and link back here, if you would.. I would like more and more people to visit me regularly! Thank you.)

The world was stunned as the courageous lady, Dr Wafaa Sultan, Los Angeles-based psychiatrist, attacked her own religion, Islam.

The world probably never heard about Kareem Amer, otherwise known as “Abdelkareem Nabil Soliman,” although his attacks against his own religion were far more explosive than Dr. Sultan’s.

For those who do not know, Abdelkareem is a 22-year old Egyptian Moslem who, until last week, attended Al Azhar University (an Islamic school) in pursuit of his law degree.

Unfortunately, the powers-that-be did not accept the fact that Abdelkareem had, in October of last year, written an article entitled “The Naked Truth About Islam That I Saw In Maharram Beh.”

This article (translated for the reader in an earlier article) condemned the actions of the perpetrators of the horrible Maharram Beh Riots, but also the motivating force behind these riots, which Soliman cited as being the religion he was born into, Islam.

For this reason, Soliman was kicked out of the Islamic university, after having been arrested just after the October pub-date of his article.

There are several differences and several similarities between the cases.

On the one hand, Dr Sultan is a woman, while Abdelkareem is a man. She is established in her practice and her family life, whereas Abdelkareem is just starting out in the world. She is in America, the place where free speech is allowed, and he is in Egypt, where freedom is a pipe dream.

On the other hand, both are Moslems who are disillusioned with the religion they were born into. They both suffered from going through the traumas of having seen violence perpetrated by rabid Moslem fundamentalists—arguably the truest and best Moslems; she suffered when gunmen broke into her class and killed her professor before her very eyes, and he suffered when his neighborhood erupted into violence over the “release” of an anti-Islamic play onto DVD, resulting in 3 confirmed deaths and rumors of 5 others.

In terms of their presentations, there are also disparities: Abdelkareem was addressing the reader, and had no idea whether he would be hitting 1 or 1 billion people with his message; Dr Sultan spoke on Al Jazeera, both times to Moslem clerics, and staring into the camera at all times.

Abdelkareem used the most inflammatory language possible, without breaking into curse words, whereas Dr. Wafaa wasn’t so up front about trying to gain the ire of her viewers.
For example, in both of her Jazeera debates, she was attired in relatively soft shades of blue. I do not think this was a function of the color being her favorite; rather, I think she chose these shades (consciously or subconsciously) to calm the viewer down.

For those unfamiliar with the theory of colors, blue is supposed to bring blood pressure down, while red is used to stimulate, and busy black-and-white patterns are excellent in getting an infant’s mind working.

Some of my readers seem to think that I am too fond of both of these heroes.

I disagree. And, to set the record straight, I am not happy with them because they trashed their own religion, but because they were fearless in presenting their version of the truth.

Both seem to have renounced Islam. But is this enough? No, it is not. Leaving a bad faith is nothing if you don’t fill in the space with something good, something that will keep the bad things away. Just like you will overeat if you quit smoking cold-turkey and didn’t start another good habit, like exercise, to replace it.

Of course, you must know that I DO agree with the things they have said about Islam, (not Moslems), but again, the battles in these cases are hardly won.

So what has happened to these paragons? I have neither read nor heard about Abdelkareem since the day his expulsion was announced. And I have not heard what Dr. Wafaa is up to, although I would like to wish either of them who might be reading this God’s peace, safety, and blessings.

Finally, praise be to Jesus that Abdul Rahman was finally set free! May God keep him safe during his re-entry into western society, and his adjustment to a new life.

May God protect all of His warriors and make every one of their efforts shine and bring the most blessed Godly glory to His present and future kingdom!

J. Ahmed Salib, M.D.
salib2000@hotmail.com
https://ahmedsalib.wordpress.com