THE PINNACLE OF JAHILIYYAH

I. The Crux of The Matter

The road commencing a spiritual journey comes down to asking one simple question, “what is the purpose of life?” The search for a universal bona fide answer during such a journey will require your surrendering from worldly affairs. Such an expedition must take precedence over everything else. The only thing stopping you is foolishness, as common sense tells us that such a pursuit cannot be taken after one reaches the grave.

II. On the Surface

Overconfidence clouds your intellect, narrowing your once broadened vision. The arrogant individual cannot see past this life, except that which appears (physically) before them. They will invest countless years in order to chase a fictional lifestyle, rather than seek the answer to the more apparent, more obvious question in life. Regrettably, how many people will seek to determine the reason they set foot on this earth before they leave this world?

The ‘overconfident’ characteristic and its dangers are overlooked. As you become overconfident in your individual views, you become oblivious to alternative ones. The outcome is that your God-given empathetic and observant qualities are eaten away by ignorance itself. When you’re ready to leave this world without knowing why you ever stepped into it, you’ve reached the height of foolishness. Your entire life, you invented your own answers based on doubt, instead of asking questions based on sincerity and conviction. So what should your end be?

What should be the end of someone who purposely, conceitedly avoids seeking life’s deeper meaning, who shuns the thought of having any responsibility towards humanity, let alone their own soul, who denies the infinite blessings they were given? What end does such an individual deserve when they had their entire lives to contemplate?

Go and interrogate your soul and fear what is to come after death.

Atheists are Polytheists by Dr. Jaafar Idris

Atheists are Polytheists by Dr. Jaafar Idris

An atheist is said to be someone who denies the existence of the Creator. This is a good definition, provided that we mean by it that the creator whose existence they deny is the only God of religion, the one true Creator. Otherwise, atheists do believe in creators, albeit they do not recognize them under that appellation. This is so because atheists, in their endeavor to find alternatives to God for explaining the existence of the temporal things we see around us, invent some imaginary entities and give them some of the essential attributes of God.

Thus materialistic atheists used to believe in matter as such a god. But this matter-god of theirs is not the matter with which we are familiar in our daily life; it is something that is eternal and everlasting, hence the statement, which used to masquerade as a scientific fact, “matter is neither created nor destroyed.” But when you ask them to point this eternal and everlasting matter you discover that they are only chasing a will-o’-the-wisp. The matter that we can recognize and to which we can point is matter in the form of the large heavenly bodies, in the form of earthly physical things, and in the form of the constituents of these things: molecules, atoms, subatomic particles, photons, etc., none of which is eternal. Atheistic materialists used to believe in an eternal matter behind all such material things which come and go, but the advent of the “big bang” theory shattered all hopes in the existence of such matter. Scientists now believe that everything—matter, energy, even space and time—had a beginning. In fact they speak about a moment of creation of all these things.

Another such imaginary god is Nature (with a capital N). The nature with which we are familiar is the totality of natural things. But when we are told that Nature does this or that, as atheists are prone to say, we find ourselves at a loss. What is this Nature? If it be the one we know, how can it cause or create itself? But if it is something else, then we want to have proof of its existence.

The same applies to Evolution. Now evolution, scientifically speaking, is “[t]he gradual process by which the present diversity of plant and animal life arose from the earliest and most primary organisms…” (Concise Science Dictionary) But the Evolution of the atheists is not this process; rather it is the agent which brings about the process. Only in this unscientific and imaginary sense can evolution take the place of God; otherwise, a believer who accepts the theory of evolution can easily reconcile it with his belief in God, by saying that that process is itself the work of the Creator.

There are, on the other hand, atheists who say in a misleading way that they believe in God; but on inspection, their god turns out to be the god of the atheists. I am referring here to people like Einstein, who is said by some to have been a believer, but whose god was in fact not God the Creator in whom we all believe. Einstein declared that he believed in “Spinoza’s god,” i.e. in a god that is identical with the universe, and who does not thus interfere from outside in its working. “The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation, “says Einstein, “cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events.” [Quoted by Hans Kung, Does God Exist? Vantage Books, 1981, p. 629]

Thus all atheists are in fact polytheists, or mushriks. A mushrik, according to Islam, is one who believes in a god or gods besides, or to the exclusion of, the one true God, or who worships such gods, even if he also worships the true God. That perhaps is the reason why the Qur’an never talks about atheists, but only about mushriks (or polytheists).

The Qur’an (Koran) recited aloud

A Dawah book for non-Muslims

Book Title: “History of Truth, The Truth about God and Religions” By Dr. Adel Elsaie,

http://www.usislam.org/00toc.htm

You can buy it from www.islamicbookstore.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Dedications & Al-Azhar Approval

Preface

Numbering System

1. My Defense, What is Yours?

1.1 The Law of Repetition

2. The Universe

2.1 Models and Mathematics

2.2 Creating the Universe

2.3 Understanding the Known Universe

2.4 Searching the Missing Universe

2.5 Applications of the Law of Repetition

3. Life

3.1 Facts and Assumptions

3.2 History of Evolution

3.3 Discrediting Evolution: Origin of Life

3.4 Discrediting Evolution: The Fossil Record

3.5 Discrediting Evolution: Humans or Apes?

3.6 Discrediting Evolution: Comparative Anatomy

3.7 Discrediting Evolution: Mutation

3.8 The Creation Model

3.9 Law of Cause and Effect

4. God

4.1 Homo Arrogans

4.2 God and Science

4.3 Polytheism

4.4 Monotheism

4.5 God in the Bible

4.6 His Name is Allah

4.7 The Religion Criteria

5. Setting the Stage for Christianity

5.1 The Old Testament

5.2 Contradictions in the Old Testament

5.3 The Prophets in the Old Testament

5.4 The Axial Age

5.5 The Hellenistic Age

5.6 Greek Philosophy

5.7 Jewish Religious Groups

6. Evolution of Christianity – Four Phases Theory

6.1 Versions of the New Testament

6.2 The Gospels

6.3 Other Gospels

6.4 Sources of the Gospels

6.5 Contradictions in the New Testament

6.6 Paul and the Judeo-Christianity

6.7 Gnosticism

6.8 The Fathers of the Church

6.9 The Ecumenical Councils of Church

7. Islam and Christianity

7.1 The Doctrine of Trinity

7.2 The Doctrine of the Son of God

7.3 The Doctrine of Original Sin and Atonement

7.4 The Crucifixion and the Resurrection

7.5 Jesus Christ (Pbuh)

7.6 Muhammad (Pbuh) in the Bible

8. Islam

8.1 Islamic Sources

8.2 The Five Pillars of Islam

8.3 Articles of Faith in Islam

8.4 The Prophet (Pbuh)

8.5 Islam and Community

8.6 The Divine Standard

8.7 The Fastest Growing Religion

8.8 The Process of Elimination

9. The Scientific Miracle

9.1 The Divine Big Bang

9.2 The Existing Universe in the Quran

9.3 The End of the Universe in the Quran

9.4 Solar System in the Quran

9.5 The Earth in the Quran

9.6 Life and Death in the Quran

9.7 Embryology in the Quran

9.8 Physics in the Quran

10 Conclusions

10.1 The Religion Criteria

References

Websites

Glossary

Index

The False Creed Diagram

This may help out some Da’ees…

A Dawah Idea

Dear Da’ee:

Imagine if non-Muslims had the chance to hear and understand the Qur’an before they leave this world.

This is my goal with the “Ponder Death” Dawah project: to produce a mass audio pamphlet which contains the recitation and translation of the Holy Qur’an — basically an Audio CD. However, before I can do that, I would like to record an introduction to the Qur’an, so that the Qur’an is not taken lightly as gesture or harmonic singing, but taken seriously or as a warning. Without delay, the next step would be to make available all recordings downloadable for free in MP3 format (selected Sura’s and introduction) onto a website backed by a massive marketing campaign. Furthermore, it will be recorded on a CD which will be used by MSA’s across North America during Islamic Awareness Week. Our small team in Canada is determined and excited to execute this project with sincerity and devotion, Insh’Allah.

We need to find a well-spoken da’ee who would be suitable to record a 5-10 minute introduction to the Qur’an for a mature non-Muslim audience. There is no concern if you exceed the allotted time as I have a professional audio editing software. Once the recording is complete, feel free to send it by any means and in whichever format is convenient for you. Upon completion of the website, I will send you the link with the full CD available for download, Insh’Allah.

I have taken the initiate below to list a few suggestions for the recording. Regardless of whether you consider them, I am confident you will do a fantastic job, Insh’Allah.

·         Begin with an attention-grabber, story, or question

·         Introduce yourself (optional)

·         Acknowledge in one or two sentences the negative image of Islam in the media. For example “Since the beginning to time, Islam has been the subject of controversy and criticism. But does that mean it is not the truth?”

·         Humour (a joke or two) (optional)

·         Keep in mind our target is a +18 non-Muslim audience, male & female, the majority of them being college students, professionals, intellectuals

·         Discuss how the Qur’an asks mankind to reflect. The themes in the Qur’an regarding reflection, “who Created the heavens and earth? Were they Created out of nothing?” The origin of man, destination, purpose of life, reason for our existence, death, the state of the soul in the grave, the Hereafter, and what is life? Is life just a game, a time for enjoyment, or a test? Tell the audience the importance of reflecting, don’t keep busy with the distractions of this world. To reflect is to answer the most important question in your life. Are we here by accident or is there a purpose for our existence?

·         Answer the question “What is the Qur’an?”

·         Discuss “subjective speech” as in your Divine Speech video

·         How our beloved Rasul (Salalahu Alahi Wasalaam) was unlettered

·         Discuss how their wasn’t an abundance of Arabic bibles around during that time and even if there was the Qur’an cannot be plagiarized because…

·         The Qur’an is neither poetry or magic. The Arabs at the time were mesmerized by the Qur’an

·         Is the Qur’an in chronological order? Why not?

·         Qur’an literary devices (i.e. repetition) and entire sentences that are palindromes!

·         The consistency of monotheism throughout the Qur’an as in the previous scriptures

·         How was the Qur’an composed and how is it maintained until this very day

·         The author is Allah (Arabic word for God)

·         Why does the Qur’an use “We” and “He”?

·         Please attempt to build-up suspense, so that towards the end the listener is eager to listen to this amazing Qur’an which you just described. It is also crucial that you remind the listener that the Qur’an is speaking to them personally as an individual, almost like a 1-on-1 conversation

·         Please speak slowly and you may choose to be redundant on key points

·         Please consider closing with “With no further adieu, the Qur’an, followed by its English translation….”

At the end of the day, these are just some suggestions. I am confident that any input you choose will be a vital asset to carrying out the message and purpose of this audio CD, Insh’Allah.

I ask Allah (SWT) to purify our intentions, protect us all from all evil, bless our efforts, and grant us and our families Jannat al firdous.

Jazakum’Allah Khair.

How to downplay the death of 27 Afghan civilians

“No sympathy for the occupied, all the sympathy for the occupiers”

“The greatest myth concerning American foreign policies is the deeply-held belief that no matter what the United States does abroad, no matter how bad it may look, no matter what horror may result, the American government means well. American leaders may make mistakes, they may blunder, they may even on the odd occasion cause more harm than good, but they do mean well.” – author William Blum

_______________________________________

We should honor those who show respect, tolerance, and mercy towards others, especially when they are in a position of power and authority, because that’s when it counts most. But America spares no mercy towards its militarily inferior opposites; thus, should expect none in return. I’m referring to Gen. McChrystal’s worthless apology, as he described NATO’s airstrike that killed 27 Afghan civilians on February 22 as merely “unfortunate.” In response, I felt obliged to ask my fellow Canadians an important question: As we continue to occupy Afghanistan and respond to civilian deaths with words like “unfortunate,” and “accident,” would it be equally acceptable to us if our attackers described the deaths of our civilians as merely “unfortunate?”

This was not the first “accident” that’s been brushed off by Western politicians and media outlets. I can give you countless examples of when we didn’t consider such events “newsworthy,” such as the killing of 8 Afghan children on December 28, 2009 by NATO’s ISAF. At most, Afghan casualties are dehumanized statistics, showing up in a side-column on page 6 of our newspapers only later to be forgotten.

It is ironic that the casualties belonging to the country in occupation are downplayed, while we know the names and stories of the casualties amongst the occupying forces, forces who flew halfway across the world to occupy a people who had nothing to do with 9/11. How can we continue to say “we’re there for the Afghan people”? Our army refuses to do civilian body counts! If we really did care, let us give as much attention to their casualties as we do ours, so that we can detect reality from prejudice. Biased reporting evidently seeks to alter public opinion and establish nationalistic support for war. A good friend of mine once said “the ability to empathize with others is the prevailing quality which makes us human.”

I agree, it is important to stay committed to a just cause. But this is not one of them. The theory of escalation of commitment refers to the tendency of an organization to continue on a path which poses a losing proposition simply because of time and money already invested. Sound familiar? The number of Afghan civilians NATO has killed is more than quadruple the amount of those killed in 9/11. Where is their memorial?

The acceptable and moral choice is a complete withdrawl, leaving the Afghans to choose their own government. What’s that? You say there would be much civil chaos if we did that? Then tell me, what third party interfered in the American Civil War? The American Civil War, which is often attributed as being the war that “made” America, left 600,000 dead.

I suggest we look to Afghanistan’s neighbouring states like Uzbekistan and Pakistan for a moment. They portray a real life example of what happens when democracy is thrust upon a people in Western interest. We need to remember that Afghanistan is not Japan. Afghans are Muslims and hence have their own political system, whether we approve of it or not. The Japanese on the other hand were Buddhist. Being open to different political ideologies, they accepted democracy for themselves. The Afghans will not — they realize that the version of democracy planned for Afghanistan will most likely result in the installation of a puppet, a human rights violator and dictator who will remain in power for the next 30 years. With this realization has come an awakening, we see the Afghan civilian population rising up—and according to a recent US report, the insurgency has in fact “quadrupled” in the last four years. Their position has been made clear to us: They are a people who would rather die standing than live on their knees.

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/10/100111_were_afghan_children.php

Pity the nation that is full of beliefs and empty of religion.
Pity the nation that wears a cloth it does not weave, eats a bread it does not harves…
Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero, and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful.
Pity the nation whose statesman is a fox, whose philosopher is a juggler, and whose art is the art of patching and mimicking…”

- Christian-Lebanese poet Khalil Gibran

Manners: The Art of Listening and Debating

Source (Gems of Self-purication):

http://www.islaam.com/Section.aspx?id=9

The Art of Listening

If a person starts telling you, whether in private or public, something that you already knew very well, you should pretend as if you do not know it. Do not rush to reveal your knowledge or to interfere with the speech. Instead, show your attention and concentration. The honorable tab’i Imam Ata ibn Abi Rabah said: “A young man would tell me something that I may have heard before he was born. Nevertheless, I would listen to him as if I had never heard it before.”

Khalid ibn Safwan al-Tamimi, who frequented the courts of two Khalifahs: Umar ibn Abdul Aziz and Hisham ibn Abdul Malik, said: “If a person tells you something you have heard before, or news that you already learned, do not interrupt him to exhibit your knowledge to those present. This is rude and ill mannered.” The honorable Imam Abdullah ibn Wahab al-Qurashi al-Masri, a companion of Imam Malik, Al-Laith ibn Sad and Al-Thawri, said: “Sometimes a person would tell me a story that I have heard before his parents had wed. Yet, I listened as if I have never heard it before.” Ibrahim ibn al-Junaid said: “A wise man said to his son: ‘Learn the art of listening as you learn the art of speaking.’” Listening well means maintaining eye contact, allowing the speaker to finish the spech, and restraining your urge to interrupt his speech. Al-Hafiz al-Khatib al-Baghdadi said in a poem: “Never interrupt a talk, Though you know it inside out”

————————–

———–

Discussions and Debates

If you have trouble understanding some of what has been said in meeting, hold your questions until the speaker has finished. Gently, politely, and with proper introduction, ask for clarification. Do not interrupt a person’s speech. Never raise your voice with the question, or be blunt to draw attention to yourself. This is contrary to the proper manner of listening, and stirs up contempt. However, this is not the rule if the meeting is for studying and learning. In such a case, asking questions and initiating a discussion is desirable if conducted respectfully and tactfully and only after the speaker finishes. The Khalifah Al-Ma’mun said: “Discussion entrenches knowledge much more than mere agreement.”

Al-Haitham ibn Adi, a known scholar, historian, and a member of the court of four Khalifahs: Abu Ja`far al-Mansur, Al-Mahdi, Al-Hadi and Al-Rashid, said: “It is an ill manner to overwhelm someone while speaking and to interrupt them before they end their talk.”

If a colleague did not understand an issue and asked a scholar or an elder to explain, you should listen to what is being said. The repeated explanation may give you additional insights to what you already know. Never utter any word belittling your colleague, nor allow your face to betray such an attitude.
When an elder or a scholar speaks, listen attentively. Never busy yourself with a talk or discussion with other colleagues. Do not let your mind wander elsewhere; keep it focused on what is being said.
Never interrupt a speaker. Never rush to answer if you are not very confident of your answer. Never argue about something you do not know. Never argue for the sake of argument. Never show arrogance with your counterparts especially if they hold a different opinion. Do not switch the argument to belittle your opponent’s views. If their misunderstanding becomes evident, do not rebuke or scold them. Be modest and kind. A poet once said:

“Who could get me a friend, Who if I offend will remain calm, Who would listen intently to what I have to say, When he knows it better than I do”

As salamu alaykum

Everyone Worships Something

Every able mind & body worships something. You may worship a statue, animals, a hobby, friends, family, fame, wealth, power, or anything revered with the highest importance. You may worship yourself, another human being, a prophet, or a spirit which you’ve given anthropomorphic qualities, a semi-god dependent on things like human beings. All are unworthy of worship and can do nothing for you. The only thing people don’t worship is God Alone. So for that, The One you set up rivals to or denied will be the One to throw you in hell. Makes sense right? After all, He gave you life and everything else, not those useless objects.

————————-

Life is a test, so study for it. A teacher doesn’t give you the same test twice. And God won’t give you the same life twice.

————————-

“Praying to” and “praying for” are two different things. People often confuse the two. You can pray for creation but you can’t pray to creation. You only pray to God, but you can’t pray for God. You can ask God to bless your parents but you can’t ask your parents to bless God. You can ask God for help but you can’t help God, because God is not in need of your help, because if he was, He wouldn’t be God. Make sense?

————————

The purpose of life is simple: what message did the pious, the prophets, and the messengers call to since the inception of time?

Adem (Adam), Idris (Enoch), Nuh (Noah), Hud (Eber), Saleh (Salih), Ibrahim (Abraham), Lut (Lot), Isma’il (Ishmael), Is’haq (Isaac), Yaqub (Jacob), Yusuf (Joseph), Ayyub (Job), Shu’ayb (Jethro), Musa (Moses), Harun (Aaron), Dawud (David), Sulayman (Solomon), Ilyas (Elijah), Al-Yasa (Elisha), Yunus (Jonah), Dhul-Kifl (Ezekiel), Zakariyya (Zechariah), Yahya (John the Baptist), Isa (Jesus), Muhammad (Mohammad)

Now say it with your heart and tongue and do not die upon anything except that.

————————

Arabic: Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji’oon
Translation: To Allah We Belong and To Him We Will Return

This life is but a short journey, and at the end of this journey is a certain end that every soul will face. So prepare for death as much as we you prepare for life. We go to our graves with nothing except our deeds and our creed.

The Evolutionary Model of Religion

The Evolutionary Model of Religion:

Under the influence of Darwin’s theory of evolution, most social scientists and anthropologists have concluded that religion began with early man’s pantheistic deification of the forces of nature. According to them, early early man was amazed by the more cataclysmic and devastating forces of nature, like lightning, thunder, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc., which they supposedly conceived of as supernatural beings.

Consequently, they sought ways and means of appeasing them, much in the same way that they sought the aid of their leaders or more powerful tribes. In this way, early rites of worship, like prayer and sacrifice, were supposed to have developed. The North American Indians [Native Americans], who believe in spirits of the river, forests, etc., are used as examples of this early state in the evolution of religion known as animism.

At the animistic stage, the evolutionists claim, every individual had a personal set of gods. As families developed, family gods replaced personal gods. The polytheistic situation among the Hindus of India, where every family has its own personal god, is cited as an example of this stage.
Economic necessity and the struggle for survival eventually caused family links to expand, and thus tribes evolved. Tribal gods, in turn, gradually replaced the old family gods, and with each successive generation, tribes became larger and larger, with the result that the number of idols got fewer and fewer.

Eventually ditheism [belief in two gods] emerged in which all of the supernatural powers were confined to two main gods, a god of good and a god of evil. According to evolutionists, an example of this stage can be seen in the religion of the Zoroastrians of Persia. Prior to the appearance of the Persian reformer, Zarathustra [Zoroaster], Persians were thought to have believed in nature spirits, clan gods and family gods. According to the evidence gathered and interpreted by anthropologists, during Zoroaster’s time, tribal gods were reduced to two: Ahura Maza who, according to them, created all good in the world, and Angra Manyu who created all evil.

When tribes gave way to nations, tribal gods in turn gave way to the national God and monotheism was supposedly born. The God of Israel, as portrayed in the Old Testament, is a national entity, fighting on their behalf against their foes. The Israelites in turn are referred to as His chosen children…
Thus, according to social scientists and anthropologists, religion has no divine origin. It is merely a by-product of the evolution of early man’s superstitions based on his lack of scientific knowledge.
Atheists claim that primitive man used to worship everything, from the winds, stars, sun, and moon, to the rest of creation. Slowly, they evolved to totem-worship, then progressed to the worship of celestial bodies, until finally mankind evolved into monotheism. This theory is agreed upon by most non-religious researchers in religion–those specialized in the science of the Anthropology of Religion.

The Degeneration Model of Religion:

The Islamic concept of religion and its development is exactly the opposite of the previous view. It is one of a process degeneration…and not one of evolution. Man began as a monotheist, but in time strayed into various forms of polytheism…

Prophets were sent by God to all the nations and tribes of the earth to guide them back to the straight path of monotheism. But with the passage of time, people went astray and the teachings of the prophets were either changed or lost.

The proof of this reality [i.e. that tawheed (monotheism) preceded shirk (polytheism)] lies in the fact that all the so-called primitive tribes which have been found have the belief in a Supreme Being. No matter what their stage of religious development may have been according to the evolutionary theory, most believe in a Supreme God over all the other gods or spirits.

[Indeed]—from Itzmna, the creator-god of the the Central American Mayans, to Ngewo, creator of the universe and spirits of the Sierra Leone Mende, and from Hinduism’s Brahma, the impersonal Absolute, to Marduk, the ancient city deity of Babylon and Supreme God of the pantheon—the Supreme Being can be clearly seen…

According to the evolutionary model, this should not be the case, as the belief in One Supreme God supposedly grew out of limited polytheism and could not co-exist with animism. However, the concept of a single Supreme Being remains in most religions as evidence that the masses strayed away from the monotheistic teaching of the prophets [sent to them] by giving some of God’s attributes to other aspects of creation, which came to be regarded as lesser gods.

Another proof of the correction of this degeneration model [of religion] can be found in the historical transition of monotheistic Judaism and polytheistic Christianity. Monotheism taught by Prophet Jesus first degenerated into ditheism [i.e. God and His divine son]…Later it further degenerated into tritheism among the Romans who officially sanctioned the trinitarian concept. Finally, it degenerated into full-fledged polytheism in the Roman Catholic Church, where Mary and a series of so-called saints were given the powers of intercession and protection.

Similarly, if we look at the pure and final message of Islam as brought by the last Prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him), and compare it with the present day beliefs among many Muslims, we find that a degeneration of beliefs and practices has also occurred. The pure monotheism of early Islam has degenerated over the ages. Among the various sects which have arisen, God’s attributes have (wrongfully) been given to the Prophet, his descendants, as well as to pious and impious individuals designated as saints among later generations.

Today, we find that a portion of those who call themselves Muslims have indeed become polytheists. Muslims believe that Allah (God) has protected the final message of Islam by ensuring that another portion of the ummah (Muslim community) would remain steadfast upon tawheed (monotheism). It is an obvious matter to see which portion of Muslims today have respected tawheed, and which have neglected it.

Footnotes:
Return to text. Footnote 1: Here, we use the word “Islam” in its specific sense: the perfected religion as conveyed to us through Prophet Muhammad (salalahu alayhi wasalam) . Of course, Islam in the general sense of the word (i.e. submission to Allah ) has existed since the time of the first man, Prophet Adam.

Source: http://www.ahlalbaytpubs.com/archives/category/tawheed

Refuting atheism, evolution, etc.: http://forums.almaghrib.org/search.php?searchid=1692939&pp=25&page=1

“So what made the first monkey?”