Do you have something on your mind?  Do you need answers to lingering questions?  Or do you just need a place to engage with other people?  The new “Forum” page will serve as a place for visitors to make comments, start new discussions not related to any of the blog posts, make suggestions or just hang out.  If you want to participate, please abide by the following rules:   

  1. Respect the sacred.  No offensive comments about God, His prophets or His religion.
  2. No spam. All automated messages and advertisements will be deleted.
  3. Respect other users. No abusing of fellow forum members. While comments will not be moderated, continued abusive behavior will result in the deletion of comments or the commenter being banned from the blog.
  4. No threats or harassment of other users will be tolerated. Any instance of threatening or harassing behavior will result in being banned.
  5. No profanity or pornography is allowed. Posts containing such material will be deleted.
  6. Do not post copyrighted material.

4,676 thoughts on “OPEN FORUM

  1. Assalamuallaikum,

    What are your guys thoughts on this covenant between Mohamed PBUH and the monks of Sinai?

    There is some Muslim claiming that both of them were teaching each other the psalm and provided evidence from Surah 52 but Surah 52 predates this events by years, what are your thoughts?


    1. Here are my questions as well:

      1. Did this event happen after Surah al maidah and Surah maryiam was revealed?

      2. Is there any evidence of the conversations that Mohamed PBUH had with the monks of Sinai about Jesus and his miracles like making birds out of clay?


      1. stewjo004

        @ The Muslim

        I am not familiar with any narration saying heﷺ even went into Egypt let alone made treaties with monasteries. If I was guessing the document is more than likely a forgery or the monastery confused a treaty they made with a Caliph with the Prophetﷺ


    1. stewjo004

      @ Frieza

      Lot to unpack, let’s start with the facts:

      1. Most education are ideological propaganda centers (see Sajid and Abraham)

      2. With that said, the Taliban threw the baby out with the bath water (I’ll explain why in a sec)

      So this goes into one of my major gripes with ALL these various groups, they’re all so focused on fighting they have no idea how to build or run a nation/civilization. Regarding the secular education I agree its the number 1 way to push ideology however you don’t “ban” it because:

      A. It will create a brain drain because if I’m rich I’m not going to stay in this BS. I can go anywhere in the world why do I have to tolerate this

      B. If I remember Afghanistan is building internet infrastructure so boom now you have unfiltered online classes

      C. Its a losing battle women are going to get educated barring some major world catastrophe (sorry yall the days of sister Fatima be cool doing it a shack are gone) Couple of reasons for this BESIDES just education (even though its a factor) you have birth control and the fact that with modern medicine women live longer and now only a portion of their lives are dedicated to birth and child rearing (Pg 58-60)

      Click to access 715.2.pdf

      D. Even though Afghanis are praising how they “beat the US”, reality is they did not fight a “total war economy” US which is an entirely different animal (as a note most Americans forgot we were even at war) If fighting in total war ala WW2 you NEED educated women as they fulfill support and factory roles why men are fighting on the frontlines and those jobs in modern warfare require more education

      What SHOULD have been done is Islamizing the curriculum:

      1. What are the ideal Muslim men and women when they grow up? This will give the goals f the system and the idealogical foundation

      2. Take the best secular education systems (imo Finland for older with a Montessori base for younger grades) add our older education principles (example Montessori was chosen for younger because they emphasize manners and adab is typically the 1st thing we learn). later on we may refine some things from the tiger schools (example kids clean up the classroom to reduce payroll for janitors in order to reinvest into the education)

      Ina decade or 2 worth of investment, boom you now have the best of both worlds. But again goals and projects like this require vision and leadership which is not what these groups are doing

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Assalamuallaikum,

    I wanted to ask how we respond to this argument. So a Christian was critiquing Sheikh Ahmad deedat book and his arguments weren’t good but the thing that appealed to me was when the Christian’s said that Ahmed deedat wrote the book based on an article written by Jehovah witnesses and the Christian said that these Jehovah witnesses where not Christian’s just like how the Muslims considered the Shias to be imposters and then he proceeded to show a book which criticized Shias and there arguments against the preservation of the Quran, then said that he wrote the book based on a devious sect of Christianity.

    So how do we respond to this argument?

    Salam and thank you.


    1. stewjo004

      @ Muslim

      Just because something is written by JW doesn’t make the critique any less valid. The Shia (and note not all of them do this) who attack Quranic preservation is because:

      1. Their main belief of “Imamah” is no where to be found in the Quran
      2. All chains of the Quran are through Ahlul Sunnah (i.e. they can’t get the Quran without using Sunnis)
      3. The 12ver Rafida can’t stand that Uthman(ra) who they dislike is the one who standardized the Quran

      Liked by 2 people

    2. How does that undermine his arguments? If tomorrow a shia says that the moon rotates around the earth should I simply ignore his point because he’s a heretic?

      P.S I learned biblical grammar from both JWs and Trinitarians btw

      Liked by 1 person

    1. Liked by 1 person

      1. Mister Lover

        A Christian can reply against this argument by saying that this was only ment for jews and not for christians because Jesus spoke to Paul.
        A Christian can also say that Muslims don’t follow law of Moses because prophet Muhammad was given another law in the same way Paul was given another law.


  3. Assalamuallaikum,

    I am a little confused concerning the whole pharaoh and king arguments here is the articles can anyone please explain:

    Islamic awareness:

    Answering Islam:


      1. Than you for your response, here are some of my questions:

        1. It is said that Moses lived for 120 years but Ramses ruled for 66 years.

        2. Some say that follow the biblical account that Ramses II was the oppressor but the pharaoh of exodus is his son, but the Quran mentioned one ruler. Other scholars said that it was Ramses II and his predecessor who was Siti I.

        Here is Dr morese book trying to give evidence based on the Bible:

        What I find weird that most scholars date it to 1400 and the late date is 1290 or 1250.

        3. Here is the page concerning Haman:

        Note: I am aware that the sources in this article that they are addressing is not in the Islamic awareness article because it was updated and the arguments they used are somewhat refuted in the updated articles but I wanted to know your opinion.

        I also made a comment not too far back concerning the tower.

        Salam and thank you.


  4. Mark is often said to portray a human Jesus which is true, the gospels weren’t meant to be written in 4 or in a specific order of books as evidenced by the different levels of christology or chronography of each book or even the early fathers who spoke of John and Peter abstaining to write a gospel

    Let’s say hypothetically only Mark was written as a gospel (which was true for a long period of time) and only Mark was available to us today, would Trinitarianism even exist? Would the christian belief in the resurrection be a central doctrine? As a work of god which was initially meant to be a standalone book I must say his work is quite incomplete and imperfect from a christian pov which ofc is a logical conundrum

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Eddie Ed

      “Mark is often said to portray a human Jesus which is true”

      4 so John the baptizer appeared[e] in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 5 And the whole Judean region and all the people of Jerusalem were going out to him and were baptized by him in the River Jordan, confessing their sins.

      In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10 And just as he was coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens torn apart and the Spirit descending like a dove upon him. 11 And a voice came from the heavens,

      jesus confessed his sins. notice that heavens opened up as jesus was coming up out?

      mark has no problem with a sinful jesus who is purified from his crimes.


      1. Eddie Ed

        it looks like its going to be a wide scale division of spoils. this to me implies that its gonna be women, money, animals….

        xtian messiah is going to be counting his riches!

        Liked by 1 person

    1. Asslamuallaikum,

      I don’t want to post anti Islamic content or anything against Islam. I just want to get you opinions on a person called “The rationaliser” he is on YouTube what do you guys think about his interviews and his videos?

      Salam and thank you


      1. Walaikum as-salaam. You just answered your own question. If it’s “anti-islamic” content, then what other “opinions” would there be other than to say that it is garbage and people like you especially should not be watching it? I don’t understand why you keep looking at anti-Islamic content and then come here with questions because they create “doubts” in your mind. I see this behavior alot with younger people, especially teenagers. And then when you advise them to stop looking at such content, they still do and then come with more questions.


  5. Max

    One Person enters heaven and hell according to his Karma. When the result of the karma ends he will rebirth in the earth again.
    This is the Justice of Merciful God.
    This process repeats until the soul get Moksha…
    What Music and Dance is immoral?
    That’s only your opinion.
    The people whom do good deeds irrespective of any religion can enter Heaven and can attain Moksha. Because Sanatan Dharma talking about the God of all living beings

    I was discussing about justice of allah with a Hindu then he said these lines.

    Isn’t this guy contradicting himself when he says music and dance are immoral according to you and before that he days Hindu god decides heaven and hell based on good and bad deeds.
    Good and bad deeds are different in different religions.For example- Music and dance is allowed in Hinduism and not in Islam, if Hindu god is sending someone to heaven even if he danced and sang then this guys
    Comment falls apart because music is considered good in Hinduism and not in Islam.


  6. moooooot

    As salem waleykoum , I want your opinion on the monk bahira and the allegation that letters from him were found and it would contain the proof that it was Bahira who taught the prophets.


    1. stewjo004


      Sorry for the delay was stretched thin in real life and a lot of this stuff requires going through lots of scholarly works and technical stuff. InshaAllah I want to try and start up again, plan is(in no order)

      1. Islam and Early Christianity Connection
      2. CruciFICTION Series Pt 4.
      3. Corruption of the Scriptures Pt.2

      So just stay tuned

      Liked by 1 person

      1. stewjo004


        I think its because of the stereotype of dudes trying to slide into sister’s DMs. Granted he asked for the Wali info but I think the perception is still there.


  7. Assalamuallaikum,

    I have a few questions concerning Haman:

    1. Islamic awareness has said that Haman was the oversear of works but how can Haman manage military, priestly and construction duty?

    Some (anti Islamic) people have said that Haman was just giving orders to the construction companies and was not overseeing (they did not bring historical evidence).

    2. Was Hamans military duty given when pharaoh wanted to chase Moses?

    Salam and thank you



    1. stewjo004


      1. I don’t recall ever being drowned. I just checked the Quran and it doesn’t mention him but maybe there’s a hadith somewhere. If there’s not, Islamic Awareness just says he died the same year Ramses the 2nd did. If so that doesn’t mean he carried out military action. For example Abu Lahab died the same year as Abu Jahl. Haman could’ve just died a natural the death the same year Firawn died. If this Bakenkhons is him dude is 85+ by this time.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. 1. Bakenkhons died at the same time as Ramses the second both died in their 90s according to islamic awareness convincing arguments and it could be that they both drowned since it is not a coincidence that they both died at around the same time.

        2. To my knowledge pharaoh and Haman both died due to being drowned.

        3. @Frieza overseer of works means that this person controls the construction projects and in general controls everything that has to do with the construction.

        4. With all due respect brothers my question was he (Haman) always doing military duties from the time that Moses came from the 8-10 of running away from the pharaoh or was he giving military commands when they where going to chase Moses?

        5. @stewjo004 I don’t understand what you wrote.


      2. 6. Wasn’t Haman and pharaoh chasing Moses and then they both drowned?

        7. What I mean by military duty is Haman giving and controlling the army.

        8. I would like to also add that Haman is a arabization of the word Amun or Amana which was used to refer to the high priest of Amun.


      3. stewjo004

        @ Muslim

        Sorry i was typing fast because I was at work.

        1/2. Them both dying around the same time doesn’t mean Haman drowned. That’s why I used Abu Lahab and Abu Jahl as an example. Abu Lahab died of skin disease after Badr when Abu Jahl was KIA in the battle. So they’re both contemporaries and died around the same time but not from the same event. I double checked in the Quran for all references of Haman and nothing says he drowned he just disappears from the narrative. There might be a hadith somewhere but from my knowledge there’s not, if so Haman could’ve died before/after the drowning of Firawn which is likely if he wasn’t in charge of military duties

        Liked by 1 person

      4. stewjo004

        @ Muslim

        Just checked Bakenkhons died before Ramses the 2nd. From islamic Awareness:

        “Could it be possible that Haman died either by a wind storm or an earthquake? To this question there are no certain answers available in the Qur’an. However, in the case of Bakenkhons we know that he and Ramesses II died close to each other. Before his own death, Ramesses appointed Bakenkhons’ son Roma-Roy as High Priest in his place…”

        Liked by 1 person

    1. Eddie Ed

      Jackson Hinkle 🇺🇸
      Replying to
      Who thinks this is funny? They’re definitely getting enjoyment out of this, most British thing I’ve ever seen.


    1. stewjo004

      @ Muslim

      1. If Firawn is Ramses the 2nd, Haman had to have died first if Ramses appointed son to the new position

      2. So what? If I’m an Overseer people still report to me so idk what is being argued here. He’s basically the top priest/architect. This Bakenkhonsu is one of the head honchos (his sons are governors)

      His Wiki litery has him listed as one of the big officials for Ramses the 2nd:

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Assalamuallaikum,

    1. Thank you for you responses.

    2. My question is did Haman have military duty when Moses wanted to escape or did he have when Moses came from Midian because Katz argued that Haman can not be the overseer of works because he had priestly and army duty.

    3. However I think that Haman could do all three jobs since he does have to follow every order of pharaoh, we also have the evidence for someone in the time of Ramses the 2nd who has built the Longest structure and had the title of overseer of works.

    4. My second question is the death of Bokunsous and pharaoh and the timeline according to the Quran,

    Salam and thank you


  9. @stewjo004

    I just wanted to add that what jochen Katz was basically trying to argue is that Haman can not be the overseer of works because he has priestly and military duty however what I do know from the Quran that it never mentioned anything about Hamans military duty until Moses wanted to leave so that means that he did have time to be the overseer of works and do his priestly duty but what confuses me that bokunsour or the Haman that Islamic awareness chose died in 1222 and pharaoh died in 1213.


    1. stewjo004

      @The Muslim

      1. What’s his proof that Haman had “military duty” as that is not mentioned anywhere in the Quran? Again there ‘s NO MENTION of Haman drowning or being there at the event.

      2. As shown with are candidate Bakenkhonsu, he was both an architect and a priest

      3. It’s very possible that Haman died before Pharaoh and we have no information either way to determine the order. However is this Bakenkhonsu is him, that would explain why he wasn’t there as Allah ended his miserable life before the famous drowning of Firawn.


      1. stewjo004

        @ Muslim

        I think they’re just copying muffassiroon who just assumed Haman died because he wasn’t mentioned anymore


  10. Max

    Was Valmike a shudra(lower caste)?
    Did Rama kill shudra Shambuka because he was trying to become a deva or maybe trying to conquer heavens. Or was he killed because shudras aren’t allowed to become sages?


    1. “Was Valmike a shudra(lower caste)?”

      As per the skanda he was a brahmin

      “Did Rama kill shudra Shambuka because he was trying to become a deva or maybe trying to conquer heavens. Or was he killed because shudras aren’t allowed to become sages”

      Idk where you got that from I suspect it’s from an apologist but nowhere does he say he wanted to conquer the svargaloka, he simply wanted to become a deva but Rama beheaded him as soon as he stated his caste as penance wasn’t allowed for shudras

      “O Rama, I was born of a Shudra alliance and I am performing this rigorous penance in order to acquire the status of a God in this body. I am not telling a lie, O Rama, I wish to attain the Celestial Region. Know that I am a Shudra and my name is Shambuka.”

      As he was yet speaking, Raghava, drawing his brilliant and stainless sword from its scabbard, cut off his head. The Shudra being slain, all the Gods and their leaders with Agni’s followers, cried out, “Well done! Well done!” overwhelming Rama with praise, and a rain of celestial flowers of divine fragrance fell on all sides, scattered by Vayu. In their supreme satisfaction, the Gods said to that hero, Rama:—

      “You have protected the interests of the Gods, O Highly Intelligent Prince, now ask a boon, O Beloved Offspring of Raghu, Destroyer of Your Foes. By your grace, this Shudra will not be able to attain heaven!”


  11. Max

    Lord Krishna says in the Srimad Bhagavadgita:

    चातुर्वर्ण्यं मया सृष्टं गुणकर्मविभागशः। (first half of verse 4.13)

    The four varnas have been created by me, being divided based on attributes (guna) and occupation (karma)

    As per Yaska’s Nirukta 2.1.4 – the meaning of Varna is given as:

    वर्णो वृणोतेः। Varna is that which is chosen.

    The basic meaning of the word Varna stems from the Sanskrit root “वृ” which means ‘to choose’ and the word ‘Varna’ means that which is chosen. Thus that which was chosen (based on a person’s attributes/karma) was called Varna. A person could therefore be the son of a Brahmin but choose his Varna as a Vaishya, engaged in commerce, depending on his attributes. As the Manusmriti 10.65 states:

    The Śūdra attains the position of the Brāhmaṇa and the Brāhmaṇa sinks to the position of the Śūdra; the same should be understood to be the case with the offspring of the Kṣatriya or of the vaiśya.



    1. Before answering, you’ve asked that question multiple times over the years and multiple times I’ve answered differently….i want you to show to me what you’ve learned from my answers and how the post that quoted is more convincing compared to them, do that first and then i’ll answer


  12. [continuation]

    Here is the source:

    Judging by what he is writing he seems to be a Atheist and typically has no understanding of Islam except (judging by his arguments) information taken from anti Islamic video and websites.

    He provides just two sources to prove that Moses was being placed before the 13th century but both sources are basing there claims on the Torah which Islamic awareness already refuted down here:

    I also don’t think that the Muslim or the Atheist put good arguments for proving that the Pharaoh that they mentioned was the pharaoh of Moses.

    I also know that pharaoh was being used since 1550 to refer to the ruler by hieroglyphs and then it was referred to a ruler in 1330 and then started being used next to a name by 10 BCE.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s