Dr. Zakir Naik really fools the audience? (Part 2)

Monday, March 12, 2007
DOCTOR ZAKIR NAIK REALLY FOOLS THE AUDIENCE????(PART 2)
Is Islam for All Mankind?

Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As far as this statement of his is concerned, regarding the Bible, I do agree with it totally - Because the Bible was only meant for the children of Israel , for that time. It is mentioned in the Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 10, Verse No. 5 and 6, Jesus Christ peace be upon him tells his disciples… ‘Go ye not in the way of the Gentiles.’ Who are the Gentiles? The Non-Jews, the Hindus, the Muslims. ‘But rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel .’ Jesus Christ peace be upon him said in the Gospel of Mathew, Ch. No. 15, Verse No. 24… ‘I am not sent, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel .’ So Jesus Christ and the Bible were only meant for the children of Isreal. Since it was meant for them, to analyze the Bible, you have to use the meaning of the word, which was utilized at that time. But the Qur’an was not meant only for the Arabs of that time. Qur’an is not meant only for the Muslims. The Qur’an is meant for the whole of humanity, and it is meant to be for eternity.
(Ali Sina) Here again the Muslim audience broke in applause and the sign of joy was visible from their countenance. To them it was victory after victory. However, had Dr. Naik told them that the Quran says that Muhammad has come only for the Meccans alone and the people around it they would not have rejoiced that much.
006.092 And this is a Book which We have sent down, bringing blessings, and confirming (the revelations) which came before it: that thou mayest warn the mother of cities and all around her.
The mother of cities, Umul Qura, is Mecca. The same thing is confirmed in verse:
042.007 Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an Arabic Qur’an: that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities and all around her.
In other places Allah says to Muhammad that he has come for the people who did not receive guidance yet.
032.003 “Nay, it is the Truth from thy Lord, that thou mayest admonish a people to whom no warner has come before thee: in order that they may receive guidance.”
036.006 In order that thou mayest admonish a people, whose fathers had received no admonition, and who therefore remain heedless (of the Signs of Allah).


My Response:

Ali Sina here again quotes the verses and mispresents them. Both the verses 6:92 and 42:7 say "Mother of cities and All Around her"

ALL around her means the full world. Mecca is the centre of the world and ALL around it is the full world. The verses of the Quran do not prove that Islam is only for Arabs Alone.
And in other two verses Allah is saying that he has sent Muhammad (pbuh) to admonish the people to whom no guidance has come before. Does it say that "admonish only those people to whom no Warner had been sent"?? Definitely not !!! Allah (SWT) sends his final messenger which is for the whole of humanity from those people to whom a messenger had not been sent before.


Ali Sina Writes:
The people of the Book, i.e. the Jews, the Christians and perhaps the Zoroastrians had their own messengers and their guidance. The only people who had not received guidance were the Arabs, specifically the Arabs of Mecca and its surrounding. So, it is clear that Muhammad claimed that he had come only for the Quraish and not for the people of the Book and the rest of mankind. Of course, as he became powerful, his ambitions grew and he changed his mind later. Few Muslims know about these verses. What do they say about them? If they truly believe that the Quran is the word of God, they should stop their da'wa and Jihad. The people of Mecca and its surrounding have already converted to Islam. If Muslims believe that the Quran is the word of God, how do they dare to disobey Him and make da'wa elsewhere. Even if Muhammad said they should attack other countries and convert others into Islam, they should not listen to him but do what the Quran says. Whose word is more important? That of Allah or that of Muhammad? These verses should also convince the non-Arab Muslims, including the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Iraqis and all others now known as Arabs that Islam is not for them. Islam is only for the Meccans and its surrounding. They must leave Islam, if they truly believe that the Quran is the word of God.
(Dr. Naik) Qur’an says in Surah Ibrahim, Ch. 14, Verse. 52, in Surah Baqarah Ch. No. 2, Verse 185, and Surah Zumar Ch. 39, Verses. 41, that the Qur’an is meant for the whole of human kind. And Prophet Mohammed, may peace be upon him, was not sent only for the Muslims or the Arabs. Allah says in the Qur’an in Surah Ambiya Ch. No. 21, Verse No. 107------(Arabic)----That We have send thee as a mercy, as a guidance, to the whole of humankind.’
(Ali Sina) Verse 14:52 says “Hatha balaghun lilnnasi”. Nas is people – any number of people. It could be people gathered in a room. It could refer to the inhabitants of a village, a town, a country and not necessarily ALL Mankind. For example nas is used in verse 7.116 when talking about the magic performed by the magicians of Pharaoh who bewitched the eyes of the people ‘nas’. Are we supposed to understand that all mankind were bewitched? The same word is used in 2:185, 39:4 and 21:107. In all these verses Nas means "people" and not all mankind. If we assume that the word 'nas' used in these verses means all mankind then we have to admit that there is flagrant contradiction in the Quran for the verses 6:92, 42:7, 32:3 and 36:6 clearly state that the Quran is for the people of Mecca and its surrounding.

My Response:

Most of the Translations translate the word 'nas' as 'mankind' in the verses which Dr.Zakir Naik quoted. But even if Ali Sina doesn't agree. Still other verses prove that Quran is for entire humanity. Nowhere does the Quran say that it is only for the Arabs. He deliberately mispresented the verses he quoted to prove that.

More verses confirming Quran to be for entire humanity

"Blessed be He Who sent down the criterion (of right and wrong, i.e. this Quran) to His slave (Muhammad SAW) that he may be a warner to the Alameen (mankind and jinns)." (Quran 25:1)

"But it is nothing less than a Message to all the worlds." (Quran 68:52)

"Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds:" (Quran 81:27)

"And no reward you (O Muhammad SAW) ask of them (those who deny your Prophethood) for it, it(the Quran) is no less than a Reminder and an advice unto the Alameen (men and jinns)." (Quran 12:104)

The word used in the above 4 verses is "Alameen" meaning "worlds".

Ali Sina Writes:

However, Muhammad also claimed to have been sent to "creatures of both worlds". lilAAalameen. means everything in both worlds. (That includes dogs and pigs.) That is because he was a megalomaniac narcissist and narcissists talk big. He even claimed to have come as guidance for Jinns, which are mythical beings.

My Response:

He considers Jinns to be mythical beings. They are mythical for him not for us. Its the matter of belief. Science has not proven Jinns mythical. They may assume them to be but there are no proves at all. He again insults our beloved Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and calls him narcissists (someone who is fascinated with himself). Brother Umar has responded to this false charge. I too will deal with it in the next para.

Ali Sina Writes:

"Narcissists have grandiose ideas about themselves. In a Hadith Muhammad makes his Allah say to him: “Were it not for you, I would not have created the universe.” [3]

Muhammad ibn Ali has narrated that Muhammad said: "Among all the people of the world God chose the Arabs; from among the Arabs he chose the Kinana; from Kinana he chose the Quraish; from the Quraish he chose Bani Hashim; from Bani Hashim he chose Me. [Tabaqat V. 1 p. 2] This man was full of himself - a true narcissist. So much for the alleged equality in Islam. Arabs are the chosen race. Arabs have known that always and they treat non Arab Muslims with disdain. If you are a non-Arab Muslim, you are accepting to be inferior. "

The source of it is given in the footnote

As-Saghaanee (d.650) said, this hadith is "maudu (fabricated)" ['al-Ahaadeeth al-Mawdoo'aat' of as-Saghaanee (pg. 7)] and likewise al-Albaanee ['Silsilah ad-Da'eefah' (1/450 no.282)] ash-Shaykh Mulla Alee Qaaree (d.1014) said, "maudu, but it's meaning is correct."

My Response:

All Ali Sina can do is quote fabricated hadith. This hadith is a fabricated one according to scholars. But even if we assume it is correct. Still it doesn't prove that he is narcissist. Reasons :

1. Muhammad (pbuh) was considered an honest and Truthful man even by the pagan Arabs before his prophethood.

He spoke whatever God Almighty commanded him.

2. It is not only mentioned in the Hadith but it is also said by God Almighty to Adam (pbuh) in the Gospel of Barnabas. Chapter 39. It reads

"'Adam, having sprung up upon his feet, saw in the air a writing that shone like the sun, which said: "There is only one God, and Mohammed is the messenger of God." Whereupon Adam opened his mouth and said: "I thank thee, O Lord my God, that thou hast deigned to create me; but tell me. I pray thee, what meaneth the message of these words: "Mohammed is messenger of God. Have there been other men before me?"

'Then said God: "Be thou welcome, O my servant Adam. I tell thee that thou art the first man whom I have created And he whom thou hast seen [mentioned] is thy son, who shall come into the world many years hence, and shall be my messenger, for whom I have created all things; who shall give light to the world when he shall come;"

http://www.barnabas.net/barnabasP39.html

Christians deny the Gospel of Barnabas. The Historians do not deny it. For the authenticity of Gospel of Barnabas refer to :

http://www.natheal.com/NaturalHealingMethodologies/WorldReligions/history_of_the_gospel_of_bar.htm

http://www.barnabas.net/

Paul said about Barnabas.

"If he comes unto you, receive him. (Colossians 4:10)"

Muhammad (pbuh) is not narcissist. But its again allegations and lies by Ali Sina. Refer to Brother Umar article for responses to all the charges against Muhammad (pbuh) by Ali Sina

http://www.answering-christianity.com/umar/true_face_of_ali_sina_2.htm

Embryology continuation

Ali Sina again claims that Dr.Zakir Naik fooled the audience. According to him Dr.Keith Moore and Dr.Bucaille fooled the Muslims.

Ali Sina Writes:

(Ali Sina) Are we supposed to believe that Dr. Keith Moore, who was the chairman and the head of the department of Anatomy, of a major university did not know how human embryo looks? The truth is that Dr. Moore and Dr. Bucaille fooled Muslims by telling them what they wanted to hear and in this way they ingratiated the Saudi King who in turn lavished them with a lot of petrodollars

My Response:

Now this is turning out to be funny. In Brief, I will tell you the sick mentality of Ali Sina.

If a Muslim scientist writes something about Science that matches the Quran then he is a liar and a deceiver. If a non-Muslim scientist does it then he is doing it for the sake of petrodollars. This is turning out to be more and more stupid from Ali Sina.

Ali Sina believes Dr.William Campbell spoke the Truth. Why? Because he opposed the Quran. The reason is obvious.


Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) What Dr. William Campbell showed you is the other perspective of it. If I show this book - it looks like a rectangle - If I show you like that, it is a different perspective. That diagram is given in the book - The diagram which you saw on the slide is even there - And I’ll deal with it InshaAllah.
(Ali Sina) Here again the gullible audience became euphoric and clapped without realizing that Dr. Naik is engaging in the fallacy of suppressing the evidence. Dr. Campbell showed the picture of the embryo from the front and from the side. Dr. Naik wants to convince his audience that they should look at it from one angle only – the angle that it most resembles a leech. Of course one who is determined to be fooled would be willing to look at things by standing on his head, if that helps him to see them from the exact angle that would reconfirm his unreasoned faith. That is why Muslims are unable to see the truth. Their tunnel vision does not allow them to see things from all angles. If only they changed their perspective a little, they would see that Islam is nothing but a big lie.
My Response:

I told you people its turning out to be more and more funny. This is the photograph, which Dr.Zakir Naik showed.

http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-a.htm

Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore, after about 80 questions were asked to him, he said… ‘If you would have asked me these 80 questions, 30 years ago, I would not have been able to answer more than 50 percent - Because embryology has developed recently in the past 30 years.’ He said this in the eighties.
Now, do we believe Dr. Keith Moore whose statement is available outside in the foyer - his videocassette is available… ‘This is the truth’...’Anna-ul-Haq’... recorded statement. So will you believe Dr. William Campbell’s personal conversation with Professor Keith Moore, or the one mentioned in this book, with Islamic edition as well as the photograph that I had shown to you? And in the videocassette available outside you can see it - He makes those statements. So you have to choose which is more logical - Personal discussion with Dr. William Campbell or his statement on Video. Like how Dr. William Campbell showed my video - 100 percent proof what I said…
(Ali Sina) This is again a false reasoning. What Dr. Moore said to Dr. Campbell and what he said in the videos intended to be sold to Muslims could be two different things.
My Response:

If Dr.Keith Moore had done such a thing. If someone had caught him then it will completely ruin his reputation and no more "petrodollars.” Furthermore, his book is used more by non-Muslims than Muslims. More non-Muslim medical colleges use this book than Muslim medical colleges. Dr.Keith Moore wasn’t an Arab Muslim. Therefore, we have no reason to doubt him. Since more Non-Muslims refer to his book, he would NEVER write in favor of the Quran if he was really greedy of “petrodollars.”

Ali Sina Writes:

. He would have made a fool of himself telling Dr. Campbell what he says for Muslim consumption. We are not here to probe whether Dr. Moore is a liar or Dr. Campbell is reporting him erroneously. We must look at the medical science. We don't need the opinions of the experts when we can easily find the facts on our own. Appealing to authority is called argumentum ad verecundiam and this is another logical fallacy. We must see whether what the Quran says is supported by science or not. We must not accept the words of anyone just because they are authorities. They could have some ulterior motives. They might have lied and misrepresented the truth for some personal gain. The ultimate authority is science, not Dr. Moore, Dr. Bucaille or Dr. Campbell. Dr. Campbell has proved his case backing his argument with pictures. Unless someone can produce pictures that tell a different story, the claims of this doctor or that doctor are irrelevant. Once things are demonstrated to us, we can dispense with the opinions of authorities.

My Response:

We actually do not need experts to tell us about science but we need Scientists like Ali Sina to tell us that. Dr.William Campbell showed the slides and Dr.Zakir Naik convincingly answered to them. He did it from the medical book written by a well-reputed scientist Dr.Keith Moore.

Ali Sina tells us that scientific data is available and we do not need experts to tell us.

Wait a minute, which scientific data? The scientific discoveries done by the world’s greatest scientist Ali Sina?? Which science is he talking about? Who writes the books of science if not the great scientists?? Are they written in heavens and thrown down to us from there? As I proved above. Dr.Moore was not a Muslim either and he has no ulterior motives. If he lies then it can simply ruin his reputation. Moreover, he will have no more "petrodollars.”

Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) ‘Moon is reflected light’ - I’ll come to it later on.
And whatever additional information he got from Qur’an and Hadith, it was incorporated later into this book…‘The Developing Human’ - the 3rd edition and this book got an award for the best medical book written by a single author in that year.
(Ali Sina) Is Dr. Naik telling us that Dr. Moore got an award for the book he wrote claiming the ridiculous Quran is scientific? Who gave that award? Al Azhar University or the Grand Mosque in Medina? What is the name of that award?
My Response:

This is turning to be more and more funny every time. Al-Azhar University and Grand Mosque don't go around giving awards. It definitely got the award from medical authorities. He considers the Qur'an ridiculous. Thats what ALL islamophobists do.

Dr. Keith Moore had earlier authored the book, 'The Developing Human'.After acquiring new knowledge from the QUR'AN, he wrote, in 1982, the 3rd edition of the same book, 'The Developing Human'. The book was the recipient of an award for the best medical book written by a single author. This book has been translated into several major languages of the world and is used as a textbook of embryology in the first year of medical studies. In 1981, during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, Dr. Moore said, "It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the QUR'AN about human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam--- from GOD or ALLAH, because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me that MUHAMMAD---sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam--- must have been a messenger of GOD or ALLAH{The reference for this statement is the video tape titled 'This is the Truth'.For a copy of this video tape contact the Islamic Research Foundation}

Ali Sina then goes on to tell us about the scientific discoveries done by him. He keeps making a joke and a fool of himself. He did not give any source of all his crap. Ali Sina always says "this is not true" and "that is not true" without giving us any source from any medical book.

After explaining all the embryological stages, When Dr.Zakir Naik mentioned that the Quranic stages on embryology are based on appearance.

Ali Sina writes:

(Ali Sina) Here our good doctor is making a major shift of strategy. Now, he is no longer insisting that the Quranic description of the embryo is scientific. He says that the Quran talks about the “appearance” that exist between a clot, a leech and the embryo in its different stages of growth. If so, why claim that the Quran is scientific and miraculous? In the past, women had miscarriage way more than today. The fetus was aborted and they could see that it remotely resembled, first to a clot of blood and then to a leech. In the absence of a microscope this is all they could see. So, where is the miracle? Why make so much ado about it saying “how could Muhammad have known this 1400 years ago?” when such a prosaic knowledge was available to anyone for eons? In fact as Dr. Campbell noted, Hippocrates described the embryonic growth much more accurately.

My Response:

When did Dr.Zakir Naik ever insist that all the stages are based on function? He always insisted that stages are based on appearance. The appearance of the embryo in all the stages was not known at that time. How did Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) know that embryo looks like a leech? (Which I proved above with a photograph which was shown by Dr.Zakir Naik from the book of Dr.Keith Moore)

Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) Professor Keith Moore took plastic seal, and bit between his teeth to make it look like a ‘Mutga’- The teeth marks resembled the ‘somites.’ Dr. William Campbell said… ‘When the ‘Alaqa’ becomes a ‘Mutga’ the clinging is yet there - It is there till 8 and a half months- So… the Qur’an is wrong.’ I told you in the beginning, the Qur’an is describing the appearance. ‘The leech like’ appearance and the ‘clot like’ appearance, is changed to the ‘chewed’ like appearance. It yet continues to cling till the end - There is no problem. But the stages are divided on appearance - Not on the function.
(Ali Sina) Alaqa either means something that clings or clot of blood. One word in one sentence cannot have two different meanings. If alaqa is something that clings, then the fetus should be called alaqa during all its gestation. Why then the Quran says it becomes mutga? If it’s only the appearance to the clot, then we should discard Dr. Bucaille’s suggestion who says this word should be translated as “something that clings”. If the Quran is clear, then why this much confusion?
My Response:

The Quran is speaking about the embryological stages based on appearance. When it describes Alaqa , Also the function befits here. But even if you ignore the function here. Still the embryo looks like a clot as well like the leech as Dr.Zakir Naik proved in his talk and Ali Sina agrees that embryo does look like a clot. The Qur'an is not confusing. The Islamophobists will find it confusing irrespective how clear it is. The translation may be confusing. But the Arabic text is very clear.

Dr.Zakir Naik then spoke about Mudga and formation of muscles and bones. To that Ali Sina writes :

Ali Sina:

(Ali Sina) This description is wrong no matter how many times it is repeated. I quote again what Dr. Campbell said in the conclusion of his talk on embryo: “There is no time when calcified bones have been formed, and then the muscles are placed around them. The muscles are there, several weeks before there are calcified bones, rather than being added around previously formed bones, as the Qur’an states.” This statement is scientific. The Quran is not.

My Response:

Wrong according to who? Scientific discoveries done by Ali Sina? Dr.Zakir Naik responded very convincingly to Dr.Campbell and Dr.Campbell did not say anything against it.

Ali Sina writes:
(Dr. Naik) As Professor Keith Moore said that… ‘The stages - that how it is described in modern embryology… stage 1,2,3,4,5, is so confusing, The Qur’anic stage on embryology describing on the base of appearance, and the shape, is far more superior.’ Alhamdulillah.
(Ali Sina) This is ludicrous. How can the Quran be superior when it is all wrong? Josef Goebbel, Hitler's minister for propaganda said: "If you tell a big enough lie, frequently enough, it becomes the truth." This is what Dr. Naik wants to achieve. He wants to repeat a lie frequently enough, until it becomes true. I am sorry. It does not work in this case. The description of the embryo in the Quran is all wrong. It won’t become true even if it is repeated a billion times. Bones are not created first to be covered with flesh later. Period!
My Response:

The Qur'an may be all wrong according to the scientific knowledge and discoveries done by Ali Sina. Let me remind you he has NOT given any source from where he got his information. Now shall we agree with Dr.Keith Moore who is a reputed scientist or Islamophobists like Ali Sina?? He goes on to quote minister of Hitler. Dr.Zakir Naik didn’t lie frequently. He quoted all from great scientists like Dr.Keith Moore etc.

Note:
Up till now, Ali Sina has not quoted a single medical book to back any of his claims!


Ali Sina Writes:
(Dr. Naik) Therefore he said… therefore he said that… ‘I have no objection in accepting that Prophet Muhammed is the messenger of God and that this Glorious Qur’an has to be a Divine Revelation, from Almighty God.’
(Ali Sina) If Dr. Naik is speaking of Dr. Moore, it should be noted that he did not convert to Islam. This tells us that his interests were this-worldly. He did not see any miracles in the Quran. He simply fooled the Muslims and laughed his way to the bank.
My Response:
What bank? What Money?? Ali Sina has not provided any proof whatsoever. The Quran says

"Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful." (Quran 2:111)

Dr.Moore did not accept Islam because of other reasons. If he had accepted Islam then Ali Sina would have called him a liar. Ali Sina considers Muslims to be liars by nature

Source

If he didn’t accept then he fooled the Muslims. In either way, he'll be spoken against. Why?? Because he wrote something good about the Qur'an.

Did Ali Sina forget about other scientists and learned men who have embraced Islam?? Like Professor Thagada Shaun , Jeffery Lang and others.

Ali Sina further goes on to call Allah (SWT) a saddist. He comes up with a ludicruous example of a cat. He is comparing cats with human beings. He says that he wouldn't do such a merciless thing to a cat. But he wants worse to be done to Muslims. He says "As long as Muslims are Muslims they do not deserve to be treated in accordance to the Universal Declaration of Human Right." (Source:)

He further says “They must be colonized and ruled with iron fist” (Source:)

According to Ali Sina "Muslims are not humans" (Source:)

For more insults, refer to

Ali Sina’s foul mouth exposed

He forgot that we human beings are not allowed to do such a thing to any other human being.. Human beings are responsible for their own actions. The Qur'an says

"...it is not God that hath wronged them, but they wrong themselves." (Quran 3:117)

If Allah (SWT) starts punishing us for good deeds, he will not leave a single of us on earth. On the day of judgement no human being can claim that he is treated against the mercy of Allah. Allah (SWT) besides being merciful is also just. He will treat everyone in a just way. Suppose that today someone catches Hitler. What punishment can one give him for the incineration of 6 million Jews?? and indirectly his life caused death of 30-60 million human beings. Maximum we can do is kill him and burn him once. But who will compensate for 5,999,999 other lives?? That is why we must also conclude that this life is not complete. A person may be punished and may not get punished. Allah will even forgive blasphemous people like Ali Sina, Sam Shamoun etc. if they repent. The Qur'an says :

"Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (Qur'an 39:53)
Our good deeds are multiplied by Allah (SWT) by 10 and our bad deeds are not multiplied even twice. The Qur'an says

"He that doeth good shall have ten times as much to his credit: He that doeth evil shall only be recompensed according to his evil: no wrong shall be done unto (any of) them" (Quran 6:160)
The Holy Quran says :

"....but if any does evil, the doers of evil are only punished (to the extent) of their deeds."(Quran 28:84)

This had nothing to do with the debate between Dr.Zakir Naik and Dr.William Campbell. Therefore, I won’t go into the detail of it. Lets continue with the main point of it.
PART 3 TO COME INSHA ALLAH AFTER MY EXAMS.
12:18:21 PM
Posted By Ajmal Rashid Comments (0) Uncategorized