Signs of the Day of Judgment

assalamu alaekum,i have read this article on http://english.islamway.com and i want to share with you people.
Bismillah

50 Signs of the Day of Judgment From the Words of Allah and His Messenger [sallallahu `alaihi wa sallam]
The Signs are listed in roughly chronological order, although the order is not necessarily precise, especially for those in the future.

This is a brief summary of the signs; there are many books, articles, cassettes etc. which discuss these in greater detail. May Allah enable us to recognise and heed the Signs, and strengthen us in the times of tribulation.

{Are they waiting for anything except the Hour, to come to them suddenly? But its Signs have already come!} [Muhammad:18]

{فَهَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا السَّاعَةَ أَن تَأْتِيَهُم بَغْتَةً ۖ فَقَدْ جَاءَ أَشْرَاطُهَا} [محمد:١٨]
Transliteration: Fahal Yanžurūna 'Illā As-Sā`ata 'An Ta'tiyahum Baghtatan Faqad Jā'a 'Ashrāţuhā 


Past

1. Splitting of the Moon.

2. Death of the Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.

3. A form of death which will kill thousands of Muslims. (Understood to refer to the plague of Amwas during the
caliphate of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab.)

4. A major fighting in Madinah (understood to refer to the battle of al-Harrah during the caliphate of Yazid, 63 AH).

5. The Muslim conquest of Jerusalem.

6. The Muslim conquest of Constantinople.

7. Two large groups of Muslims will fight in war.

8. A war between the Muslims and a reddish people with small eyes, wearing sandals made of hair (understood to refer to
the Mongol Tatar invasion of the Islamic lands.)

9. A peace agreement between the Muslims and non-Muslims from the yellow race (Chinese, Mongols, etc.)

10. Thirty impostors (dajjal) will appear, each thinking he is a prophet.


Present?

11. Naked, destitute, barefoot shepherds will compete in building tall buildings.

12. The slave-woman will give birth to her master or mistress.

13. A trial (fitnah) which will enter every Arab household.

14. Knowledge will be taken away (by the death of people of knowledge), and ignorance will prevail.

15. Wine (intoxicants, alcohol) will be drunk in great quantities.

16. Illegal sexual intercourse will become widespread.

17. Earthquakes will increase.

18. Time will pass more quickly.

19. Tribulations (fitan) will prevail.

20. Bloodshed will increase.

21. A man will pass by the grave of another and wish he was in the latter’s place.

22. Trustworthiness will be lost, i.e. when authority is given to those who do not deserve it.

23. People will gather for prayer, but will be unable to find an imam to lead them.


Future

24. The number of men will decrease, whilst the number of women will increase, until for every man there are 50 women.

25. The Euphrates will reveal a treasure of gold, and many will die fighting over it, each one hoping to be the one who gains
the treasure.

26. The Romans (Europeans) will come to a place called A’maq or Wabiq, and an army of the best people will go forth from Madinah to face them.

27. The Muslim conquest of Rome.

28. The Mahdi (guided one) will appear, and be the Imam of the Muslims.

29. Jesus Christ will descend in Damascus, and pray behind the Mahdi.

30. Jesus will break the cross and kill the swine, i.e. destroy the false christianity.

31. The Antichrist (al-masih al-dajjal, the false christ) will appear, with all his tools of deception, and be an immense trial. He will be followed by 70,000 Jews from Isfahan (present-day Iran).

32. The appearance of Ya’juj and Ma’juj (Gog and Magog), and the associated tribulations.

33. The emergence of the Beast from the Earth, carrying the Staff of Moses and the Seal of Solomon, who will speak to the people, telling them they did not believe with certainty in the Divine Signs.

34. A major war between the Muslims (including Jews and Christians who truly believe in Jesus after his return) led by the Imam Mahdi, and the Jews plus other non-Muslims led by the Antichrist.

35. Jesus will kill the Antichrist at the gate of Ludd (Lod in present-day Israel, site of an airport and a major Israeli military base).

36. A time of great peace and serenity during and after the remaining lifetime of Jesus.

37. Wealth will come so abundant that it will become difficult to find someone to accept charity.

38. Arabia will become a land of gardens and rivers.

39. Society will then decay.

40. The buttocks of the women of the tribe of Daws will again sway in circumambulation (tawaf) around the idol Dhul-Khulsah.

41. A great fire in the Hijaz, seen by the inhabitants of Busra.

42. Three major armies will sink into the earth: one in the east, one in the west, one in Arabia.

43. An Abyssinian leader with thin shins will destroy the Ka’bah.

44. The huge cloud of smoke.

45. The sun will rise from the west (its place of setting).

46. A gentle wind which will take the souls of the believers.

47. There is no-one left on the earth saying, "Allah, Allah" or "There is no god except Allah."

48. Eventually the Day of Judgment is established upon the worst of the people, who copulate like donkeys in public.

49. The blowing in the Trumpet by the Angel Israfil, upon which everyone will faint except as Allah wills.

50. The second blowing in the Trumpet, upon which everyone will be resurrected.


From a lecture titled (Signs of the Day of Judgment) at Cambridge University Islamic Society, Shawwal 1420/ January2000... 


by Suhaib Hasan AbdulGhaffar

Who was al-Ghazzaali?

Bismillah,I have read this article and was good(praise be to Allah) and i want to share with you...

 Praise be to Allaah. Praise be to Allaah.

Al-Ghazzaali was Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Toosi, who was known as al-Ghazzaali. He was born in Toos in 450 AH. His father used to spin wool and sell it in his shop in Toos.

The life of al-Ghazzaali needs to be discussed at length because he went through a number of stages. He indulged in philosophy, then he recanted and rejected that. After that he indulged in what is known as ‘ilm al-kalaam (Islamic philosophy) and gained a sound grasp of its basic principles; then he rejected that after it became clear to him that it was corrupt and filled with contradictions. He was focusing on ‘ilm al-kalaam during the period when he refuted philosophy, and at that time he was given the title of Hujjat al-Islam, after he had refuted the arguments of the philosophers. Then he recanted ‘ilm al-kalaam and turned away from it. He followed the path of the Baatiniyyah (esotericists) and learned their knowledge, but then he rejected that and showed the beliefs of the Baatiniyyah to be false, and exposed the manner in which they tamper with the texts and rulings. Then he followed the path of Sufism. These are the four stages that al-Ghazzaali went through.Shaykh Abu ‘Umar ibn al-Salaah (may Allaah have mercy on him) spoke well of him when he said: “A lot has been said about Abu Haamid and a lot has been narrated from him. As for these books – meaning al-Ghazzaali’s books which contradict the truth – no attention should be paid to them. As for the man himself, we should keep quiet about him, and refer his case to Allaah.” See (Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali wa’l-Tasawwuf) by ‘Abd al-Rahmaan Dimashqiyyah.

No fair-minded person would deny the rare level of intelligence, ingenuity and cleverness that Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali attained. Al-Dhahabi said of him: “Al-Ghazzaali, the imaam and shaykh, the prominent scholar, Hujjat al-Islam, the wonder of his time, Zayn al-Deem Abu Haamid Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Toosi al-Shaafa’i al-Ghazzaali, the author of many books and one possessed of utter intelligence. He studied fiqh in his own town, then he moved to Nisapur in the company of a group of students. He stayed with the Imaam al-Haramayn and gained a deep knowledge of fiqh within a short period. He became well-versed in ‘ilm al-kalaam and debate, until he became the best of debaters…” (Siyar A’laam al-Nubala’, part 9, p. 323).

You will find that even though Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali had such a deep knowledge of fiqh, Sufism, ‘ilm al-kalaam, usool al-fiqh, etc., and even though he was such an ascetic and devoted worshipper, and had such a good intention and vast knowledge of Islamic sciences, he still had an inclination towards philosophy. But his philosophy emerged in the form of Sufism and was expressed through Islamic ideas. Hence the Muslim scholars, including his closest companion Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi, refuted his ideas. Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi said: "Our shaykh Abu Haamid went deep into philosophy, then he wanted to come out of it but he was unable to". There were narrated from him opinions which sound like the Baatini way of speaking, and that may be verified by looking in al-Ghazzaali’s books. See (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, part 4, p. 66).

Even though al-Ghazzaali was very advanced in knowledge, he had little knowledge of hadeeth and its sciences, and he could not distinguish between sound ahaadeeth and weak ones. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “If we assume that someone narrated the view of the salaf but what he narrated is far removed from what the view of the salaf actually is, then he has little knowledge of the view of the salaf, such as Abu’l-Ma’aali, Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali, Ibn al-Khateeb and the like, who did not have enough knowledge of hadeeth to qualify them as ordinary scholars of hadeeth, let alone as prominent scholars in that field. For none of these people had any knowledge of al-Bukhaari and Muslim and their ahaadeeth, apart from what they heard, which is similar to the situation of the ordinary Muslim, who cannot distinguish between a hadeeth which is regarded as saheeh and mutawaatir according to the scholars of hadeeth, and a hadeeth which is fabricated and false. Their books bear witness to that, for they contain strange things and most of these scholars of ‘ilm al-kalaam and Sufis who have drifted away from the path of the salaf admit that, either at the time of death or before death. There are many such well-known stories. This Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali, despite his brilliance, his devotion to Allaah, his knowledge of kalaam and philosophy, his asceticism and spiritual practices and his Sufism, ended up in a state of confusion and resorted to the path of those who claim to find out things through dreams and spiritual methods.(Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, part 4, p. 71).

He also said: "Hence, even though Abu Haamid refuted the philosophers and classed them as kaafirs, and expressed veneration of Prophethood [as opposed to philosophy], etc., and even though some of what he says is true and good, and indeed of great benefit, nevertheless some of his writings contain philosophical material and matters where he followed the corrupt principles of philosophy that contradict Prophethood and even contradict sound common sense. Hence a group of scholars from Khurasaan, Iraq and the Maghreb criticized him, such as his friend Abu Ishaaq al-Margheenaani, Abu’l-Wafa’ ibn ‘Aqeel, al-Qushayri, al-Tartooshi, Ibn Rushd, al-Maaziri and a group of earlier scholars. This was even mentioned by Shaykh Abu ‘Amr ibn al-Salaah in his book Tabaqaat Ashaab al-Shaafa’i, and was confirmed by Shaykh Abu Zakariya al-Nawawi, who said in his book: “Chapter explaining some important things for which Imaam al-Ghazzaali was denounced in his books which were unacceptable to the scholars of his madhhab and others, namely his odd statements such as what he said in (Muqaddimat al-Mantiq) at the beginning of al-Mustasfa: ‘This is the introduction to all knowledge, and whoever does not learn this, his knowledge cannot be trusted at all.’”

Shaykh Abu ‘Amr said: “I heard Shaykh al-‘Imaad ibn Yoonus narrating from Yoosuf al-Dimashqi, the teacher of al-Nizaamiyyah in Baghdad, who was one of the famous deans of the school, that he used to denounce these words and say, “Abu Bakr and ‘Umar and So-and-so and So-and-so…” meaning that these great leaders had a great deal of certainty and faith even though they had no knowledge of this Muqaddimah and of any of the ideas contained in it.” (al-‘Aqeedah al-Isfahaaniyyah, part 1, p. 169).

Al-Dhahabi narrated in his book (Siyar A’laam al-Nubala’) that Muhammad ibn al-Waleed al-Tartooshi said in a letter which he sent to Ibn Muzaffar: As for what you mentioned about Abu Haamid, I have seen him and spoken to him, and I think that he is a man of great knowledge, he is intelligent and capable, and has been studying all of his life, spending most of his time in study, but then he drifted away from the path of the scholars and entered the crowd of worshippers. Then he became a Sufi and forsook knowledge and its people, then he got involved with “inspiration”, those who claim to have spiritual knowledge, and the insinuating whispers of the Shaytaan. Then he mixed that with the views of the philosophers and the symbolic phrases of al-Hallaaj, and he started to criticize the fuqaha’ and the scholars of ‘ilm al-kalaam. He almost went astray from the religion altogether. When he wrote al-Ihya’ [i.e., Ihya’ ‘Uloom al-Deen], he started to speak of the inspiration and symbolic words of the Sufis, although he was not qualified to do that and had no deep knowledge of such matters. Hence he failed, and filled his book with fabricated reports.

I (al-Dhahabi) say: as for al-Ihya’, it contains many false ahaadeeth, and it contains much that is good. I wish that it did not contain etiquette, rituals and asceticism that are in accordance with the ways of the philosophers and deviant Sufis. We ask Allaah for beneficial knowledge. Do you know what is beneficial knowledge? It is that which Allaah revealed in the Qur’aan, which was explained by the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in word and deed, and the type of knowledge which we are not forbidden to acquire. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: «Whoever turns away from my Sunnah does not belong to me». So, my brother, you must ponder the words of Allaah and persist in studying al-Saheehayn, Sunan al-Nasaa’i, Riyaadh al-Nawawi and al-Adhkaar by al-Nawawi, then you will succeed and prosper.

Beware of the opinions of the philosophers, the practice of spiritual exercises, the starvation of monks, and the nonsense talk of those who stay alone for long periods in their monasteries. All goodness is to be found in following the pure and tolerant way of the haneefs. And seek the help of Allaah. O Allaah, guide us to Your straight path.

Al-Maaziri praised Abu Haamid with regard to fiqh, and said that he had more knowledge of fiqh than of usool al-fiqh (the basic principles of fiqh). With regard to ‘ilm al-kalaam which is usool al-deen, he wrote books in this field, but he did not have deep knowledge of it. I realized that he was lacking in experience in this field, because he studied the branches of philosophy before he studied usool al-fiqh, so philosophy made him audacious in criticizing ideas and attacking facts, because philosophy goes along with one’s train of thought, without any shar’i guidelines.

A friend of his told me that he spent a lot of time studying (Rasaa’il Ikhwaan al-Safa), which contains fifty-one essays. It was written by someone who has studied sharee’ah and philosophy, then had mixed the two. He was a man who was known as Ibn Seena, who filled the world with his books. He had a good knowledge of philosophy, which led him to try to refer all the basic principles of ‘aqeedah to philosophy. He strove hard and achieved what others had failed to do. I have seen some of his books and I noticed that Abu Haamid quotes him a great deal when he speaks of philosophy. With regard to Sufi views, I do not know where he got them from, but I have seen that some of his companions mention the books of Ibn Seena and their contents, and he also mentioned the books of Abu Hayyaan al-Tawheedi. As far as I am concerned, he picked up his Sufi ideas from him. I was told that Abu Hayyaan wrote a huge book about these Sufi ideas, and al-Ihya’ contains a lot of baseless ideas… then he said: In al-Ihya’ he mentioned ideas that have no basis, such as starting with the index finger when cutting the nails because it is superior to the other fingers, as it is the finger used in tasbeeh; then moving on to the middle finger because it is to the right of the index finger, and ending with the thumb of the right hand. He narrated a report concerning that.

I (al-Dhahabi) say: this is a fabricated report. Abu’l-Faraj al-Jawzi said: Abu Haamid wrote al-Ihya’ and filled it with fabricated ahaadeeth which he did not know were fabricated. He spoke of inspiration and deviated from the framework of fiqh. He said that what is meant by the stars, moon and sun that Ibraaheem saw was the barriers of light that keep a person from Allaah, not the things that are well known. This is like the words of the Baatiniyyah. (Siyar A’laam al-Nubala’, part 19, p. 340).

Then at the end of his life, al-Ghazzaali (may Allaah have mercy on him) came back to the belief of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah. He focused on the Qur’aan and Sunnah and condemned ‘ilm al-kalaam and its proponents. He advised the ummah to come back to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and to act in accordance with them, as was the way of the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them and those who follow them in truth until the Day of Judgement). Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: After that he came back to the path of the scholars of hadeeth, and wrote Iljaam al-‘Awwaam ‘an ‘Ilm al-Kalaam.(Majmoo Fataawa, part 4, p. 72)

A glance at Iljaam al-‘Awwaam ‘an ‘Ilm al-Kalaam will prove to us that he had indeed changed in many ways:

1 – In this book he advocated the belief of the salaf, and pointed out that the way of the salaf was the truth, and that whoever went against them was an innovator or follower of bid’ah.

2 – He emphatically denounced ta’weel (interpretation of the attributes of Allaah in a manner that differs from their apparent meaning). He advocated affirming the attributes of Allaah and not misinterpreting them in a manner that would lead to denying the attributes of Allaah.

3 – He emphatically denounced the scholars of ‘ilm al-kalaam and described all their principles and standards as “reprehensible innovations” which had harmed a great number of people and created trouble for the Muslims. He said: “The harm caused to a great number of people is something that has been seen, witnessed and experienced. The evil that has resulted since ‘ilm al-kalaam began has become widespread even though people at the time of the Sahaabah forbade that. This is also indicated by the fact that the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the Sahaabah, by consensus, did not follow the way of the scholars of ‘ilm al-kalaam when they produced arguments and evidence and analysis. That was not because they were incapable of doing so; if they had thought that was something good, they would have done it in the best manner, and they would have studied the matter hard, more than they did with regard to the division of the estate among the heirs (al-faraa’id).”

He also said: “The Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) needed to prove the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to the Jews and Christians, but they did not add anything to the evidence of the Qur’aan; they did not resort to arguments or lay down philosophical principles. That was because they knew that doing so would provoke trouble and cause confusion. Whoever is not convinced by the evidence of the Qur’aan will not be convinced by anything other than the sword, for there is no proof after the proof of Allaah.” See (Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali wa’l-Tasawwuf).

These are a few of the comments that trustworthy scholars have made about al-Ghazzaali (may Allaah have mercy on him). Perhaps this is enough for those who wish to be guided. And Allaah is the Guide to the straight path.


Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

Where is the “Christ” in “Christianity?”

Bismillah

Religious scholars have long attributed the tenets of Christian faith more to Paul’s teachings than to those of Jesus.  But as much as I would like to jump into that subject, I think it best to back up and take a quick, speculative look at the Old Testament. The Old Testament teaches that Jacob wrestled with God.  In fact, the Old Testament records that Jacob not only wrestled with God, but that Jacob prevailed (Genesis 32:24-30).  Now, bear in mind, we’re talking about a tiny blob of protoplasm wrestling the Creator of a universe 240,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 miles in diameter, containing over a billion galaxies of which ours—the Milky Way Galaxy—is just one (and a small one, at that), and prevailing?  I’m sorry, but someone was a couple pages short of a codex when they scribed that passage.  The point is, however, that this passage leaves us in a quandary.  We either have to question the Jewish concept of God or accept their explanation that “God” does not mean “God” in the above verses, but rather it means either an angel or a man (which, in essence, means the Old Testament is not to be trusted).  In fact, this textual difficulty has become so problematic that more recent Bibles have tried to cover it up by changing the translation from “God” to “man.”  What they cannot change, however, is the foundational scripture from which the Jewish Bible is translated, and this continues to read “God.” Unreliability is a recurring problem in the Old Testament, the most prominent example being the confusion between God and Satan!  II Samuel 24:1 reads: “Again the anger of the LORD was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, ‘Go, number Israel and Judah.’” However, I Chronicles 21:1 states: “Now Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel.” Uhhh, which was it?  The Lord, or Satan?  Both verses describe the same event in history, but one speaks of God and the other of Satan.  There is a slight (like, total) difference. Christians would like to believe that the New Testament is free of such difficulties, but they are sadly deceived.  In fact, there are so many contradictions that authors have devoted books to this subject.  For example, Matthew 2:14 and Luke 2:39 differ over whether Jesus’ family fled to Egypt or Nazareth.  Matthew 6:9-13 and Luke 11:2-4 differ over the wording of the “Lord’s Prayer.”  Matthew 11:13-14, 17:11-13 and John 1:21 disagree over whether or not John the Baptist was Elijah. Things get worse when we enter the arena of the alleged crucifixion: Who carried the cross—Simon (Luke 23:26, Matthew 27:32, Mark 15:21) or Jesus (John 19:17)?  Was Jesus dressed in a scarlet robe (Matthew 27:28) or a purple robe (John 19:2)?  Did the Roman soldiers put gall (Matthew 27:34) or myrrh (Mark 15:23) in his wine?  Was Jesus crucified before the third hour (Mark 15:25) or after the sixth hour (John 19:14-15)?  Did Jesus ascend the first day (Luke 23:43) or not (John 20:17)?  Were Jesus’ last words, “Father, ‘into Your hands I commit my spirit’” (Luke 23:46), or were they “It is finished” (John 19:30)? These are only a few of a long list of scriptural inconsistencies, and they underscore the difficulty in trusting the New Testament as scripture.  Nonetheless, there are those who do trust their salvation to the New Testament, and it is these Christians who need to answer the question, “Where is the ‘Christ’ in ‘Christianity?’  “This, in fact, is a supremely fair question.  On one hand we have a religion named after Jesus Christ, but on the other hand the tenets of orthodox Christianity, which is to say Trinitarian Christianity, contradict virtually everything he taught. I know, I know—those of you who aren’t screaming “Heretic!”  are gathering firewood and planting a stake.  But wait.  Put down the high-powered rifle and listen.  Trinitarian Christianity claims to base its doctrines on a combination of Jesus’ and Paul’s teachings.  The problem is, these teachings are anything but complementary.  In fact, they contradict one another. Take some examples: Jesus taught Old Testament Law; Paul negated it.  Jesus preached orthodox Jewish creed; Paul preached mysteries of faith.  Jesus spoke of accountability; Paul proposed justification by faith.  Jesus described himself as an ethnic prophet; Paul defined him as a universal prophet.[1]  Jesus taught prayer to God, Paul set Jesus up as intercessor.  Jesus taught divine unity, Pauline theologians constructed the Trinity. For these reasons, many scholars consider Paul the main corrupter of Apostolic Christianity and Jesus’ teachings.  Many early Christian sects held this view as well, including the second-century Christian sects known as “adoptionists”– “In particular, they considered Paul, one of the most prominent authors of our New Testament, to be an arch-heretic rather than an apostle.”[2] Lehmann contributes: “What Paul proclaimed as ‘Christianity’ was sheer heresy which could not be based on the Jewish or Essene faith, or on the teaching of Rabbi Jesus.  But, as Schonfield says, ‘The Pauline heresy became the foundation of Christian orthodoxy and the legitimate church was disowned as heretical.’ … Paul did something that Rabbi Jesus never did and refused to do.  He extended God’s promise of salvation to the Gentiles; he abolished the law of Moses, and he prevented direct access to God by introducing an intermediary.”[3] Bart D. Ehrman, perhaps the most authoritative living scholar of textual criticism, comments: “Paul’s view was not universally accepted or, one might argue, even widely accepted …. Even more striking, Paul’s own letters indicate that there were outspoken, sincere, and active Christian leaders who vehemently disagreed with him on this score and considered Paul’s views to be a corruption of the true message of Christ ….  One should always bear in mind that in this very letter of Galatians Paul indicates that he confronted Peter over just such issues (Gal. 2:11-14).  He disagreed, that is, even with Jesus’ closest disciple on the matter.”[4] Commenting on the views of some early Christians in the Pseudo-Clementine literature, Ehrman wrote: “Paul has corrupted the true faith based on a brief vision, which he has doubtless misconstrued.  Paul is thus the enemy of the apostles, not the chief of them.  He is outside the true faith, a heretic to be banned, not an apostle to be followed.”[5] Others elevate Paul to sainthood.  Joel Carmichael very clearly is not one of them: “We are a universe away from Jesus.  If Jesus came “only to fulfill” the Law and the Prophets; If he thought that “not an iota, not a dot” would“pass from the Law,” that the cardinal commandment was “Hear, O Israel, the Lord Our God, the Lord is one,” and that “no one was good but God”….What would he have thought of Paul’s handiwork! Paul’s triumph meant the final obliteration of the historic Jesus; he comes to us embalmed in Christianity like a fly in amber.”[6] Dr. Johannes Weiss contributes: “Hence the faith in Christ as held by the primitive churches and by Paul was something new in comparison with the preaching of Jesus; it was a new type of religion.”[7] A new type of religion, indeed.  And hence the question, “Where is the ‘Christ’ in ‘Christianity?’  “If Christianity is the religion of Jesus Christ, where are the Old Testament laws and strict monotheism of the Rabbi Jesus’ Orthodox Judaism?  Why does Christianity teach that Jesus is the son of God when Jesus called himself the “son of Man” eighty-eight times, and not once the “son of God?”  Why does Christianity endorse confession to priests and prayers to saints, Mary and Jesus when Jesus taught his followers: “In this manner, therefore, pray: ‘Our Father …’” (Matthew 6:9)? And who appointed a pope?  Certainly not Jesus.  True, he may have called Peter the rock upon which he would build his church (Matthew 16:18-19).  However, a scant five verses later, he called Peter “Satan” and “an offense.”  And let us not forget that this “rock” thrice denied Jesus after Jesus’ arrest—poor testimony of Peter’s commitment to the new church. Is it possible that Christians have been denying Jesus ever since?  Transforming Jesus’ strict monotheism to the Pauline theologians’ Trinity, replacing Rabbi Jesus’ Old Testament law with Paul’s “justification by faith,” substituting the concept of Jesus having atoned for the sins of mankind for the direct accountability Jesus taught, discarding Jesus’ claim to humanity for Paul’s concept of Jesus having been divine, we have to question in exactly what manner Christianity respects the teachings of its prophet. A parallel issue is to define which religion does respect Jesus’ teachings.  So let’s see: Which religion honors Jesus Christ as a prophet but a man?  Which religion adheres to strict monotheism, God’s laws, and the concept of direct accountability to God?  Which religion denies intermediaries between man and God? If you answered, “Islam,” you would be right.  And in this manner, we find the teachings of Jesus Christ better exemplified in the religion of Islam than in Christianity.  This suggestion, however, is not meant to be a conclusion, but rather an introduction.  Those who find their interest peaked by the above discussion need to take the issue seriously, open their minds and then … read on! Copyright © 2007 Laurence B. Brown. About the author: Laurence B. Brown, MD, can be contacted at BrownL38@yahoo.com.  He is the author of The First and Final Commandment (Amana Publications) and Bearing True Witness (Dar-us-Salam).  Forthcoming books are a historical thriller, The Eighth Scroll, and a second edition of The First and Final Commandment, rewritten and divided into MisGod'ed and its sequel, God’ed. Footnotes: [1] Jesus Christ was one more prophet in the long line of prophets sent to the astray Israelites. As he so clearly affirmed, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24) When Jesus sent the disciples out in the path of God, he instructed them, “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 10:5-6) Throughout his ministry, Jesus was never recorded as having converted a Gentile, and in fact is recorded as having initially rebuked a Gentile for seeking his favors, likening her to a dog (Matthew 15:22-28 and Mark 7:25-30). Jesus was himself a Jew, his disciples were Jews, and both he and they directed their ministries to the Jews. One wonders what this means to us now, for most of those who have taken Jesus as their ‘personal savior’ are Gentiles, and not of the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” to whom he was sent. [2] Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. 2004. Oxford University Press. P. 3. [3] Lehmann, Johannes. 1972. The Jesus Report. Translated by Michael Heron. London: Souvenir Press. pp. 128, 134. [4] Ehrman, Bart D. 2003. Lost Christianities. Oxford University Press. Pp. 97-98. [5] Ehrman, Bart D. 2003. Lost Christianities. Oxford University Press. P. 184. [6] Carmichael, Joel, M.A. 1962. The Death of Jesus. New York: The Macmillan Company. p. 270. [7] Weiss, Johannes. 1909. Paul and Jesus. (Translated by Rev. H. J. Chaytor). London and New York: Harper and Brothers. p. 130.

PDF Format of this article from islamreligion.com

The History of Christmas

Bismillah
In ancient pagan times, the last day of winter in the Northern Hemisphere was celebrated as the night that the Great Mother Goddess gives birth to the baby Sun God. It is also called Yule, the day a huge log is added to a bonfire, around which everyone would dance and sing to awaken the sun from its long winter sleep.

In Roman times, it became the celebrations honouring Saturnus (the harvest god) and Mithras (the ancient god of light), a form of sun worship that had come to Rome from Syria a century before with the cult of Sol Invictus. It announced that winter is not forever, that life continues, and an invitation to stay in good spirit.

The last day of winter in the Northern Hemisphere occurs between the 20th and 22 December. The Roman celebrated Saturnalia between 17 and 24 December.

The Early Christians
To avoid persecution during the Roman pagan festival, early Christians decked their homes with Saturnalia holly. As Christian numbers increased and their customs prevailed, the celebrations took on a Christian observance. But the early church actually did not celebrate the birth of Christ in December until Telesphorus, who was the second Bishop of Rome from 125 to 136AD, declared that Church services should be held during this time to celebrate "The Nativity of our Lord and Saviour." However, since no-one was quite sure in which month Christ was born, Nativity was often held in September, which was during the Jewish Feast of Trumpets (modern-day Rosh Hashanah). In fact, for more than 300 years, people observed the birth of Jesus on various dates.

In the year 274AD, solstice fell on 25th December. Roman Emperor Aurelian proclaimed the date as "Natalis Solis Invicti," the festival of the birth of the invincible sun. In 320 AD, Pope Julius I specified the 25th of December as the official date of the birth of Jesus Christ.

Christmas official, but not generally observed

In 325AD, Constantine the Great, the first Christian Roman emperor, introduced Christmas as an immovable feast on 25 December. He also introduced Sunday as a holy day in a new 7-day week, and introduced movable feasts (Easter). In 354AD, Bishop Liberius of Rome officially ordered his members to celebrate the birth of Jesus on 25 December.

However, even though Constantine officiated 25 December as the birthday of Christ, Christians, recognising the date as a pagan festival, did not share in the emperor's good meaning. Christmas failed to gain universal recognition among Christians until quite recently. In England, Oliver Cromwell banned Christmas festivities between 1649 and 1660 through the so-called Blue Laws, believing that Christmas should be a solemn day.

When many Protestants escaped persecution by fleeing to the colonies all over the world, interest in joyous Christmas celebrations was rekindled there. Still, Christmas was not even a legal holiday until the 1800s. And, keep in mind, there was no Father Christmas (Santa Claus) figure at that time.

Christmas becomes popular

The popularity of Christmas was spurred on in 1820 by Washington Irving's book The Keeping of Christmas at Bracebridge Hall. In 1834, Britain's Queen Victoria brought her German husband, Prince Albert, into Windsor Castle, introducing the tradition of the Christmas tree and carols that were held in Europe to the British Empire. A week before Christmas in 1834, Charles Dickens published A Christmas Carol (in which he wrote that Scrooge required Cratchit to work, and that the US Congress met on Christmas Day). It was so popular that neither the churches nor the governments could not ignore the importance of Christmas celebrations. In 1836, Alabama became the first state in the US to declare Christmas a legal holiday. In 1837, T.H. Hervey's The Book of Christmas also became a best seller. In 1860, American illustrator Thomas Nast borrowed from the European stories about Saint Nicholas, the patron saint of children, to createFather Christmas (Santa Claus). In 1907, Oklahoma became the last US state to declare Christmas a legal holiday. Year by year, countries all over the world started to recognise Christmas as the day for celebrating the birth of Jesus.

Have a merry Christmas

Today, many of the pagan uses are reflected in Christmas. Jesus was born in March, yet his birth is celebrated on 25 December, the time of solstice. The Christmas celebrations end the 12th day of Christmas (6 January), the same amount of days that the return of the sun was celebrated by ancient and Roman pagans. It thus is no surprise that Christian puritans - or even conservative Christians - often are upset that Christmas "is not as religious as it was meant to be,"forgetting that Christmas was not celebrated at all until fairly recently.

DUTIFULNESS TO PARENTS

Bismillah
Don't forget to share this article after reading

Being kind and dutiful to parents means to obey one’s parents, show them love and respect, and help them with whatever means available such as exerting effort or spending money.

It also means talking to them in the most polite and grateful manner, listening to them when they talk, and never show dissatisfaction or resentment towards them.

Indeed Islam advocates us to be kind and dutiful to our parents and deal with them in the best manner. Allaah Says (which means):"And your Lord has commanded that you worship none but Him. And that you be dutiful to your parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them uff (a word of disrespect), nor shout at them but address them in terms of honour. And lower unto them the wing of submission and humility through mercy, and say: "My Lord! Bestow on them Your Mercy as they did bring me up when I was small."[Quran 17:23-24].

Islam regards being kind and dutiful towards parents as one of the best acts of worship which a Muslim performs in order to get closer to Allaah, because parents are the direct reason for the existence and happiness of the children. On one hand, the mother spends many nights awake bringing up her children and taking care of them. She spends long nights taking care of her young child who is unable to manage any of his affairs. On the other hand, a father does his best to earn a living to support his children with food, clothing and education, and help them realize their dreams. That is why we notice that Allaah mentioned obedience to parents as being next to worshipping Him. Allaah Says (which means):

"And your Lord has commanded that you worship none but Him. And that you be dutiful to your parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them uff (a word of disrespect), nor shout at them but address them in terms of honour."[Quran 17:23].

Allaah even commanded children to be kind and dutiful to their parents even if they are polytheists. Allaah Says (which means):

"But if they (both) strive with you to make you join in worship with Me others that of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not, but behave with them in the world kindly, and follow the path of him who turns to Me in repentance and obedience. Then to Me will be your return, and I shall tell you what you used to do."[Quran 31:15].

Parents' Rights

If it is normal to be grateful to any person who offers you help, then parents are the worthiest of all as they deserve thankfulness and appreciation because of the help, support and love they show towards their children without even expecting any recompose in return. The happiest moments in a parents' life is when they see their children in the best possible condition and the greatest of positions.

Such great parental sacrifices must be rewarded by the children by fulfilling the rights and duties of parents. Some of these rights which are mentioned in the Quran are:

• Obeying them and fulfilling their requests.
• Being humble towards them and dealing with them leniently and gently.
• Lowering one's voice when talking to them.
• Using the best and most beautiful words when talking to them.
• Being dutiful to them when they are old and never show dissatisfaction for their requests, however frequent they might be.
• Invoking Allaah to bestow mercy and forgiveness on them.

The People Who Most Deserve Good Company:

The people who most deserve good company are one's parents. Through good company, one pleases his Lord and hopes for an excellent reward in the Hereafter. Good company means that one should be grateful to his parents and take care of them especially when they are old and need help.

Once, a person came to the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, and asked: "Who among the people is the most worthy of my good company?" He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said: "Your mother." He again, asked: "Who comes next?" He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, answered: "Your mother." He asked once more: "Who comes next?" He (the noble Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: "Your mother." He finally asked: "Who comes next?" Thereupon he, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, replied:  "Your father." [Al-Bukhaari and Muslim]

The Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, also said: "Allaah enjoins you to keep good relations with your mothers (he repeated it three times). Allaah enjoins you to keep good relations with the nearest of kin then the next nearest of kin and so on." [Ibn Maajah]

Being Kind and Dutiful to Parents Precedes Jihaad

Islam urges us to take care of our parents and it considers this as being equal to Jihaad in the Cause of Allaah. No one is allowed to march for Jihaad while his parents or one of them needs his assistance.

the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, and said:  "I pledge allegiance for Jihaad seeking Allaah's reward." He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, asked: "Are either of your parents alive?" He said: "Yes, both of them." He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, asked: "Do you seek reward from Allaah?" He said: "Yes." The Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, then said: "Go back to your parents and treat them kindly." [Al-Bukhaari and Muslim]

Another narration reads:  A man emigrated to the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, from Yemen to take his permission to participate in Jihaad. He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, asked (him): "Have you left any (of your relatives) in Yemen?" He replied: "My parents." He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, asked: "Did they permit you to participate?" He replied: "No." He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said: "Go back to them and ask for their permission. If they permit you, then fight (in the cause of Allaah), otherwise keep yourself devoted to them." [Abu Daawood]

Being Kind And Dutiful To Parents After Their Death

Being kind and dutiful to parents does not stop once one or both of them dies. This continues even after their death.

A man came to the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, and asked: "O Messenger of Allaah! Is there any kindness or dutifulness that I can show to my parents after their death?" He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, replied: "Yes. To supplicate for them, seek Allaah's forgiveness for them, fulfil their will and pledges after their death, keep on good terms with those who are not connected with you but through them, and show reverence to their friends." [Ahmad]

The above narration urges a Muslim to be kind to his parents whether they are dead or alive. Such obedience occurs by invoking Allaah's forgiveness for them, fulfilling any covenants they made when they were alive, showing homage to their friends and keeping good relations with their relatives.

Being Kind And Dutiful To Parents Even If They Are Non-Muslims

No matter how different the religion of parents is from that of their children, they still love them (children) and the blood relation between them is never ignored. Muslims are commended to adhere to these Islamic instructions, and are also instructed to show gratitude to non-Muslim parents as long as they do not ask them to leave Islam or disobey Allaah, Allaah Says (which means):

"But if they (both) strive with you to make you join in worship with Me others that of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not, but behave with them in the world kindly, and follow the path of him who turns to Me in repentance and obedience. Then to Me will be your return, and I shall tell you what you used to do."[Quran 31:15].

Moreover, the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, instructed his companions to be dutiful to their non-Muslim parents.  Asmaa' Bint Abi Bakr, may Allaah be pleased with her, narrated:

"During the period of the peace treaty between Quraysh and Allaah's Messenger, my mother came to visit me, and she was a pagan. I consulted Allaah's Messenger, "O Allaah's Messenger! My mother has come to me and she desires to receive a reward from me, shall I keep good relations with her?" He, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said, "Yes, keep good relations with her." [Al-Bukhaari and Muslim]

The following are some Prophetic narrations that encourage a Muslim to be dutiful to his parents and warn then against disobeying them:

Allaah's pleasure is attained by pleasing parents, and Allaah's wrath is ensued by angering parents."

2) The Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, further said: "Shall I not inform you about the greatest major sin?" We (companions) replied: "Yes, O, Messenger of Allaah." The Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam said: "Allaah has forbidden you to be undutiful to your mothers and to bury your daughters alive." [Al-Bukhaari]

Examples of Being Dutiful to Parents:

The companions of the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, and our pious predecessors, may Allaah have mercy on them, were the best examples in being kind and dutiful to their parents. For example, Usaamah Ibn Zayd, may Allaah be pleased with him, had a piece of land cultivated with palm trees. Back then, the price of a palm tree was one thousand Deenaars (a golden currency). One day, his mother wanted to eat the core of a palm tree which is the wet part in the centre. Usaamah, may Allaah be pleased with him, cut a fruit-bearing tree to feed his mother its core. When some people asked him about what he had done, he said: "If my mother asks for anything in the whole world and I can give it to her, I will do it."

'Ali Ibn Al-Husseyn, may Allaah have mercy upon him, was very dutiful to his mother, but he would never eat from the same dish that she was eating from.

Someone asked him: "You are one of the most dutiful people to their mothers. Why don’t you eat with her from the same dish?" He said: "I am afraid that my hand might take a certain piece of food that my mother wanted to eat, and in this way I would have been undutiful to her."

It is also reported that one night, a woman asked her son to bring her a cup of water. When he went to fetch the water and came back, she had fallen asleep. He was afraid that she might get up and not find him, and at the same time, he did not like to wake her up. Thus, he stayed near her holding the water until the morning.