Sunday, December 20, 2009

RELIGION: The Bible Denies the Divinity of Jesus

This article1 has been taken from the web site of Br. Shabir Ally, Islam Answers Back, with some editing. It contains the following seven arguments which prove that the Bible denies the divinity of Jesus:

1) None of the Bible’s Writers Believed That Jesus is God

2) Evidence From the Acts of the Apostles

3) Jesus is Not All-Powerful, and Not All-Knowing

4) The Greatest Commandment in the Bible and the Quran

5) Paul Believed That Jesus is not God

6) Evidence from the Gospel of John

7) God and Jesus Are Two Separate Beings

1) None of the Bible’s Writers Believed That Jesus is God:

Christians and Muslims both believe in Jesus, love him, and honor him. They are, however, divided over the question of his divinity.

Fortunately, this difference can be resolved if we refer the question to both the Bible and the Quran, because, both the Bible and the Quran teach that Jesus is not God.

It is clear enough to everyone that the Quran denies the divinity of Jesus, so we do not need to spend much time explaining that.

On the other hand, many people misunderstand the Bible; they feel that the belief in Jesus as God is so widespread that it must have come from the Bible. This article shows quite conclusively that the Bible does not teach that.

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is not God. In the Bible God is always someone else other than Jesus.

Some will say that something Jesus said or something he did while on the earth proves that he is God. We will show that the disciples never came to the conclusion that Jesus is God. And those are people who lived and walked with Jesus and thus knew first hand what he said and did. Furthermore, we are told in the Acts of the Apostles in the Bible that the disciples were being guided by the Holy Spirit. If Jesus is God, surely they should know it. But they did not. They kept worshipping the one true God who was worshipped by Abraham, Moses, and Jesus (see Acts 3:13).

All of the writers of the Bible believed that God was not Jesus. The idea that Jesus is God did not become part of Christian belief until after the Bible was written, and took many centuries to become part of the faith of Christians.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke, authors of the first three Gospels, believed that Jesus was not God (see Mark 10:18 and Matthew 19:17). They believed that he was the son of God in the sense of a righteous person. Many others too, are similarly called sons of God (see Matthew 23:1-9).

Paul, believed to be the author of some thirteen or fourteen letters in the Bible, also believed that Jesus is not God. For Paul, God first created Jesus, then used Jesus as the agent by which to create the rest of creation (see Colossians 1:15 and 1 Corinthians 8:6). Similar ideas are found in the letter to the Hebrews, and also in the Gospel and Letters of John composed some seventy years after Jesus. In all of these writings, however, Jesus is still a creature of God and is therefore forever subservient to God (see 1 Corinthians 15:28).

Now, because Paul, John, and the author of Hebrews believed that Jesus was God’s first creature, some of what they wrote clearly show that Jesus was a pre-existent powerful being. This is often misunderstood to mean that he must have been God. But to say that Jesus was God is to go against what these very authors wrote. Although these authors had this later belief that Jesus is greater than all creatures, they also believed that he was still lesser than God. In fact, John quotes Jesus as saying: “...the Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28). And Paul declares that the head of every woman is her husband, the head of every man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God (see 1 Corinthians 11:3).

Therefore, to find something in these writings and claim that these teach that Jesus is God is to misuse and misquote what those authors are saying. What they wrote must be understood in the context of their belief that Jesus is a creature of God as they have already clearly said.

So we see then, that some of the later writers had a higher view of Jesus, but none of the writers of the Bible believed that Jesus is God. The Bible clearly teaches that there is only one true God, the one whom Jesus worshipped (see John 17: 3).

In the rest of this article we will explore the Bible in more depth, and deal with the passages which are most often misquoted as proofs of Jesus’ divinity. We will show, with God’s help, that these do not mean what they are so often used to prove.
2) Evidence From the Acts of the Apostles:

Jesus performed many miraculous wonders, and he without doubt said a lot of wonderful things about himself. Some people use what he said and did as a proof that he was God. But his original disciples who lived and walked with him, and were eyewitnesses to what he said and did, never reached this conclusion.

The Acts of the Apostles in the Bible details the activity of the disciples over a period of thirty years after Jesus was lifted up to heaven. Throughout this period they never refer to Jesus as God. They continually and consistently use the title God to refer to someone else other than Jesus.

Peter stood up with the eleven disciples and addressed the crowd saying: “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” (Acts 2:22).

It was God, therefore, who did the miracles through Jesus to convince people that Jesus was backed by God. Peter did not see the miracles as proof that Jesus is God.

In fact, the way Peter refers to God and to Jesus makes it clear that Jesus is not God. For he always turns the title God away from Jesus. Take the following references for example:

“God has raised this Jesus...” (Acts 2:32)

“God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:36)

In both passages, the title God is turned away from Jesus. So why he did this, if Jesus was God?

For Peter, Jesus was a servant of God. Peter said: “God raised up his servant...” (Acts 3:26). The title servant refers to Jesus. This is clear from a previous passage where Peter declared: “The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus.” (Acts 3:13).

Peter must have known that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob never spoke of a Triune God. They always spoke of God as the only God. Here, as in Matthew 12:18, Jesus is the servant of God. Matthew tells us that Jesus was the same servant of God spoken of in Isaiah 42:1. So, according to Matthew and Peter, Jesus is not God, but God’s servant. The Old Testament repeatedly says that God is alone (e.g. Isaiah 45:5).

All of the disciples of Jesus held this view. In Acts 4:24 we are told that the believers prayed to God saying: “...they raised their voices together in prayer to God. ‘Sovereign Lord,’ they said, ‘you made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything in them.’” It is clear that the one they were praying to was not Jesus, because, two verses later, they referred to Jesus as “...your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed.” (Acts 4:27).

If Jesus was God, his disciples should have said this clearly. Instead, they kept preaching that Jesus was God’s Christ. We are told in Acts: “Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Christ.” (Acts 5:42).

The Greek word “Christ” is a human title. It means “Anointed.” If Jesus was God, why would the disciples continually refer to him with human titles like servant and Christ of God, and consistently use the title God for the one who raised Jesus? Did they fear men? No! They boldly preached the truth fearing neither imprisonment nor death. When they faced opposition from the authorities, Peter declared: “We must obey God rather than men! The God of our fathers raised Jesus...” (Acts 5:29-30).

Were they lacking the Holy Spirit? No! They were supported by the Holy Spirit (see Acts 2:3, 4:8, and 5:32). They were simply teaching what they had learnt from Jesus — that Jesus was not God but, rather, God’s servant and Christ.

The Quran confirms that Jesus was the Messiah (Christ), and that he was God’s servant (see the Holy Quran 3:45 and 19:30).
3) Jesus is Not All-Powerful, and Not All-Knowing:

Christians and Muslims agree that God is all-powerful and all-knowing. The Gospels show that Jesus was not all-powerful, and not all-knowing, since he had some limitations.

Mark tells us in his gospel that Jesus was unable to do any powerful work in his hometown except few things: “He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them.” (Mark 6:5). Mark also tells us that when Jesus tried to heal a certain blind man, the man was not healed after the first attempt, and Jesus had to try a second time (see Mark 8:22-26)
.

Therefore, although we hold a great love and respect for Jesus, we need to understand that he is not the all-powerful God.

Mark’s Gospel also reveals that Jesus had limitations in his knowledge. In Mark 13:32, Jesus declared that he himself does not know when the last day will occur, but the Father alone knows that (see also Matthew 24:36).

Therefore, Jesus could not have been the all-knowing God. Some will say that Jesus knew when the last day will occur, but he chose not to tell. But that complicates matters further. Jesus could have said that he knows but he does not wish to tell. Instead, he said that he does not know. We must believe him. Jesus does not lie at all.

The Gospel of Luke also reveals that Jesus had limited knowledge. Luke says that Jesus increased in wisdom (Luke 2:52). In Hebrews too (Hebrews 5:8) we read that Jesus learned obedience. But God’s knowledge and wisdom is always perfect, and God does not learn new things. He knows everything always. So, if Jesus learned something new, that proves that he did not know everything before that, and thus he was not God.

Another example for the limited knowledge of Jesus is the fig tree episode in the Gospels. Mark tells us as follows: “The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs.” (Mark 11:12-13).

It is clear from these verses that the knowledge of Jesus was limited on two counts. First, he did not know that the tree had no fruit until he came to it. Second, he did not know that it was not the right season to expect figs on trees.

Can he become God later? No! Because there is only one God, and He is God from everlasting to everlasting (see Psalms 90:2).

Someone may say that Jesus was God but he took the form of a servant and therefore became limited. Well, that would mean that God changed. But God does not change. God said so according to Malachi 3:6.

Jesus never was God, and never will be. In the Bible, God declares: “Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.” (Isaiah 43:10).

The Bible clearly shows that Jesus was not all-powerful and all-knowing as the true God should be.
4) The Greatest Commandment in the Bible and the Quran:

Some will say that this whole discussion over the divinity of Jesus is unnecessary. They say, the important thing is to accept Jesus as your personal savior. On the contrary, the Bible’s writers stressed that, in order to be saved, it is necessary to understand who exactly is God. Failure to understand this would be to violate the first and greatest of all the commandments in the Bible. This commandment was emphasized by Jesus, on whom be peace, when a teacher of the Law of Moses asked him: “‘Of all the commandments, which is the most important?’ ‘The most important one,’ answered Jesus, ‘is this: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’” (Mark 12:28-30).

Notice that Jesus was quoting the first commandment from the book of Deuteronomy 6:4-5. Jesus confirmed not only that this commandment is still valid, but also that it is the most important of all the commandments. If Jesus thought that he himself is God, why did not he say so? Instead, he stressed that God is one. The man who questioned Jesus understood this, and what the man says next makes it clear that God is not Jesus, for he said to Jesus: “‘Well said, teacher,’ the man replied. ‘You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him.’” (Mark 12:32).

Now if Jesus was God, he would have told the man so. Instead, he let the man refer to God as someone other than Jesus, and he even saw that the man had spoken wisely: “When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, ‘You are not far from the kingdom of God.’” (Mark 12:34). If Jesus knew that God is a trinity, why did not he say so? Why did not he say that God is one in three, or three in one? Instead, he declared that God is one. True imitators of Jesus will imitate him also in this declaration of God’s oneness. They will not add the word three where Jesus never said it.

Does salvation depend on this commandment? Yes, says the Bible! Jesus made this clear when another man approached Jesus to learn from him (see Mark 10:17-29). The man fell on his knees and said to Jesus: “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus replied: “Why do you call me good? No one is good — except God alone.” (Mark 10:17-18).

By so saying, Jesus made a clear distinction between himself and God. Then he proceeded with the answer to the man’s question about how to get salvation. Jesus told him: “If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.” (Matthew 19:17, also see Mark 10:19).

Remember that the most important of all the commandments, according to Jesus, is to know God as the only God. Jesus further emphasized this in the Gospel According to John. In John 17:1, Jesus lifted his eyes to heaven and prayed, addressing God as Father. Then in verse three, he said to God as follows: “Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” (John 17:3).

This proves beyond doubt that if people want to get eternal life they must know that the One, whom Jesus was praying to, is the only true God, and they must know that Jesus was sent by the true God. Some say that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. But Jesus said that the Father alone is the only true God. True followers of Jesus will follow him in this too. Jesus had said that his true followers are those who hold to his teachings. He said: “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples.” (John 8:31). His teaching is that people must continue to keep the commandments, especially the first commandment which emphasizes that God is alone, and that God should be loved with all our hearts and all our strengths.

We love Jesus, but we must not love him as God. Today many love Jesus more than they love God. This is because they see God as a vengeful person who wanted to exact a penalty from them, and they see Jesus as the savior who rescued them from the wrath of God. Yet God is our only savior. According to Isaiah 43:11, God said: “I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior.” Also God said according to Isaiah 45:21-22: “Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none but me. Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other.”

The Quran confirms the first commandment and addresses it to all humankind (see the Holy Quran 2:163). And God declares that true believers love Him more than anyone else or anything else (Quran 2:165).
5) Paul Believed That Jesus is not God:

Many people use Paul’s writings as proof that Jesus is God. But this is not fair to Paul, because Paul clearly believed that Jesus is not God. In his first letter to Timothy, Paul wrote: “I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, to keep these instructions...” (1 Timothy 5:21).

It is clear from this that the title God applies not to Christ Jesus, but to someone else. In the following chapter, he again differentiates between God and Jesus when he says: “In the sight of God, who gives life to everything, and of Christ Jesus, who while testifying before Pontius Pilate made the good confession...” (1 Timothy 6:13).

Paul then went on to speak of the second appearance of Jesus: “the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which God will bring about in his own time.” (1 Timothy 6:14-15).

Again, the title God is deliberately turned away from Jesus. Incidentally, many people think that when Jesus is called “Lord” in the Bible that this means “God.” But in the Bible this title means master or teacher, and it can be used for addressing humans (see 1 Peter 3:6).

What is more important, however, is to notice what Paul said about God in the following passage, which clearly shows that Jesus is not God: “God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever.” (1 Timothy 6:15-16).

Paul said that God alone is immortal. Immortal means he does not die. Check any dictionary. Now, anyone who believes that Jesus died cannot believe that Jesus is God. Such a belief would contradict what Paul said here. Furthermore, to say that God died is a blasphemy against God. Who would run the world if God died? Paul believed that God does not die.

Paul also said in that passage that God dwells in unapproachable light — that no one has seen God or can see him. Paul knew that many thousands of people had seen Jesus. Yet Paul said that no one has seen God, because Paul was sure that Jesus is not God. This is why Paul went on teaching that Jesus was not God, but that he was the Christ (see Acts 9:22 and 18:5).

When he was in Athens, Paul spoke of God as “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands.” (Acts 17:24). Then he identified Jesus as “the man he (i.e. God) has appointed.” (Acts 17:31).

Clearly, for Paul, Jesus was not God, and he would be shocked to see his writings used for proving the opposite of what he believed. Paul even testified in court saying: “I admit that I worship the God of our fathers...” (Acts 24:14).

He also said that Jesus is the servant of that God, for we read in Acts: “The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus.” (Acts 3:13).

For Paul, the Father alone is God. Paul said that there is “one God and Father of all...” (Ephesians 4:6). Paul said again: “...for us there is but one God, the Father . . . and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ...” (1 Corinthians 8:6).

Paul’s letter to the Philippians (Philippians 2:6-11) is often quoted as a proof that Jesus is God. But the very passage shows that Jesus is not God. This passage has to agree with Isaiah 45:22-24 where God said that every knee should bow to God, and every tongue should confess that righteousness and strength are in God alone. Paul was aware of this passage, for he quoted it in Romans 14:11. Knowing this, Paul declared: “I kneel before the Father.” (Ephesians 3:14).

The letter to the Hebrews (Hebrews 1:6) says that the angels of God should worship the Son. But this passage depends on Deuteronomy 32:43, in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. This phrase cannot be found in the Old Testament used by Christians today, and the Septuagint version is no longer considered valid by Christians. However, even the Septuagint version, does not say worship the Son. It says let the Angels of God worship God. The Bible insists that God alone is to be worshipped: “When the LORD made a covenant with the Israelites, he commanded them: ‘Do not worship any other gods or bow down to them, serve them or sacrifice to them. But the LORD, who brought you up out of Egypt with mighty power and outstretched arm, is the one you must worship. To him you shall bow down and to him offer sacrifices. You must always be careful to keep the decrees and ordinances, the laws and commands he wrote for you. Do not worship other gods. Do not forget the covenant I have made with you, and do not worship other gods. Rather, worship the LORD your God; it is he who will deliver you from the hand of all your enemies.’” (2 Kings 17:35-39).

Jesus, on whom be peace, believed in this, for he also stressed it in Luke 4:8. And Jesus too fell on his face and worshipped God (see Matthew 26:39). Paul knew that Jesus worshipped God (see Hebrews 5:7). Paul taught that Jesus will remain forever subservient to God (see 1 Corinthians 15:28).
6) Evidence from the Gospel of John:

The Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel, was completed to its present form some seventy years after Jesus was raised up to heaven. This Gospel in its final form says one more thing about Jesus that was unknown from the previous three Gospels — that Jesus was the Word of God. John means that Jesus was God’s agent through whom God created everything else. This is often misunderstood to mean that Jesus was God Himself. But John was saying, as Paul had already said, that Jesus was God’s first creature. In the Book of Revelation in the Bible, we find that Jesus is: “the beginning of God’s creation” (Revelation 3:14, also see 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Colossians 1:15).

Anyone who says that the Word of God is a person distinct from God must also admit that the Word was created, for the Word speaks in the Bible saying: “The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works...” (Proverbs 8:22).

This Gospel, nevertheless, clearly teaches that Jesus is not God. If it did not continue this teaching, then it would contradict the other three Gospels and also the letters of Paul from which it is clearly established that Jesus is not God. We find here that Jesus was not co-equal with the Father, for Jesus said: “...the Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28).

People forget this and they say that Jesus is equal to the Father. Whom should we believe — Jesus or the people? Muslims and Christians agree that God is self-existent. This means that He does not derive his existence from anyone. Yet John tells us that Jesus’ existence is caused by the Father. Jesus said in this Gospel: “...I live because of the Father...” (John 6:57).

John tells us that Jesus cannot do anything by his own when he quotes Jesus as saying: “By myself I can do nothing...” (John 5:30). This agrees with what we learn about Jesus from other Gospels. In Mark, for example, we learn that Jesus performed miracles by a power which was not within his control. This is especially clear from an episode in which a woman is healed of her incurable bleeding. The woman came up behind him and touched his cloak, and she was immediately healed. But Jesus had no idea who touched him. Mark describes Jesus’ actions thus: “At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, ‘Who touched my clothes?’” (Mark 5:30). His disciples could not provide a satisfactory answer, so Mark tells us: “Jesus kept looking around to see who had done it.” (Mark 5:32). This shows that the power that healed the woman was not within Jesus’ control. He knew that the power had gone out of him, but he did not know where it went. Some other intelligent being had to guide that power to the woman who needed to be healed. God was that intelligent being.

It is no wonder, then, that in Acts of the Apostles we read that it was God who did the miracles through Jesus (Acts 2:22).


God did extraordinary miracles through others too, but that does not make the others God (see Acts 19:11).
Why, then, is Jesus taken for God? Even when Jesus raised his friend Lazarus from the dead, he had to ask God to do it. Lazarus’ sister, Martha, knew this, for she said to Jesus: “I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask.” (John 11:22).

Martha knew that Jesus was not God, and John who reported this with approval knew it also. Jesus had a God, for when he was about to ascend to heaven, he said: “I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” (John 20:17).

John was sure that no one had seen God, although he knew that many people had seen Jesus (see John 1:18 and 1 John 4:12). In fact Jesus himself told the crowds, that they have never seen the Father, nor have they heard the Father’s voice (John 5:37). Notice that if Jesus was the Father, his statement here would be false. Who is the only God in John’s Gospel? The Father alone.

Jesus testified this when he declared that the God of the Jews is the Father (John 8:54). Jesus too confirmed that the Father alone is the only true God (see John 17:1-3). And Jesus said to his enemies: “...you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.” (John 8:40). According to John, therefore, Jesus was not God, and nothing John wrote should be taken as proof that he was God — unless one wishes to disagree with John.
7) God and Jesus Are Two Separate Beings:

Many people use certain verses of the Bible as proof that Jesus is God. However, all of these verses, when understood in context, prove the opposite!

For example, in Matthew 9:2, Jesus said to a certain man, “Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.” Because of this, some say that Jesus must be God since only God can forgive sins. However, if you are willing to read just a few verses further, you will find that the people “...praised God, who had given such authority to men.” (Matthew 9:8). This shows that the people knew, and Matthew agrees, that Jesus is not the only man to receive such authority from God.

Jesus himself emphasized that he does not speak on his own authority (John 14:10) and he does nothing on his own authority, but he speaks only what the Father has taught him (John 8:28). What Jesus did here was as follows. Jesus announced to the man the knowledge Jesus received from God that God had forgiven the man.

Notice that Jesus did not say, “I forgive your sins,” but rather, “your sins are forgiven,” implying, as this would to his Jewish listeners, that God had forgiven the man. Jesus, then, did not have the power to forgive sins, and in that very episode he called himself “the Son of Man” (Matthew 9:6).

John 10:30 is often used as proof that Jesus is God because Jesus said, “I and the father are one.” But, if you read the next six verses, you will find Jesus explaining that his enemies were wrong to think that he was claiming to be God. What Jesus obviously means here is that he is one with the Father in purpose. Jesus also prayed that his disciples should be one just as Jesus and the Father are one. Obviously, he was not praying that all his disciples should somehow merge into one individual (see John 17:11 and 22). And when Luke reports that the disciples were all one, Luke does not mean that they became one single human being, but that they shared a common purpose although they were separate beings (see Acts 4:32). In terms of essence, Jesus and the Father are two, for Jesus said they are two witnesses (John 8:14-18). They have to be two, since one is greater than the other (see John 14:28). When Jesus prayed to be saved from the cross, he said: “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.” (Luke 22:42).

This shows that they had two separate wills, although Jesus submitted his will to the will of the Father. Two wills mean two separate individuals.

Furthermore, Jesus is reported to have said: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46). If one of them forsook the other, then they must be two separate entities.

Again, Jesus is reported to have said: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” (Luke 23:46). If the spirit of one can be placed into the hands of another, they must be two separate beings.

In all of these instances, Jesus is clearly subordinate to the Father. When Jesus knelt down and prayed he obviously was not praying to himself (see Luke 22:41). He was praying to his God.

Throughout the New Testament, the Father alone is called God. In fact, the titles “Father” and “God” are used to designate one individual, not three, and never Jesus. This is also clear from the fact that Matthew substituted the title “Father” in the place of the title “God” in at least two places in his Gospel (compare Matthew 10:29 with Luke 12:6, and Matthew 12:50 with Mark 3:35). If Matthew is right in doing so, then the Father alone is God.


Was Jesus the Father? No! Because Jesus said: “And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.” (Matthew 23:9). So Jesus is not the Father, since Jesus was standing on the earth when he said this.

The Quran seeks to bring people back to the true faith that was taught by Jesus, and by his true disciples who continued in his teaching. That teaching emphasized a continued commitment to the first commandment that God is alone. In the Quran, God directs Muslims to call readers of the Bible back to that true faith. God have said in the Quran:

Say: “O people of the Book (Christians and Jews)! Come to a word that is just between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords beside God.” (Quran, 3:64)


*************************************************************************

RELIGION: Jesus - The Hidden Facts

And they say: "The Most Beneficent (Allâh) has begotten a son (or offspring or children) [as the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say that He has begotten a son 'Isa (Christ), and the pagan Arabs say that He has begotten daughters (angels)]."

Indeed you have brought forth (said) a terrible evil thing.

Whereby the heavens are almost torn, and the earth is split asunder, and the mountains fall in ruins,

That they ascribe a son (or offspring or children) to the Most Beneficent (Allâh).

But it is not suitable for (the Majesty of) the Most Beneficent (Allâh) that He should beget a son (or offspring or children).

There is none in the heavens and the earth but comes unto the Most Beneficent (Allâh) as a slave.

Chapter of Mary verses 88 - 94

**************************************************************************

RELIGION: Who Invented the Trinity? (part 1 of 2)

What is the source of the Christian concept of the Trinity?

The three monotheistic religions – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – all purport to share one fundamental concept: belief in God as the Supreme Being, the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe. Known as “tawhid” in Islam, this concept of the Oneness of God was stressed by Moses in a Biblical passage known as the “Shema”, or the Jewish creed of faith: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.” (Deuteronomy 6:4)

It was repeated word-for-word approximately 1500 years later by Jesus when he said “...The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord.” (Mark 12:29)

Muhammad came along approximately 600 years later, bringing the same message again:

“And your God is One God: there is no God but He...” (Quran 2:163)

Christianity has digressed from the concept of the Oneness of God, however, into a vague and mysterious doctrine that was formulated during the fourth century. This doctrine, which continues to be a source of controversy both within and outside the Christian religion, is known as the Doctrine of the Trinity. Simply put, the Christian doctrine of the Trinity states that God is the union of three divine persons – the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit – in one divine being.

If that concept, put in basic terms, sounds confusing, the flowery language in the actual text of the doctrine lends even more mystery to the matter:

“...we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity... for there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Ghost is all one... they are not three gods, but one God... the whole three persons are co-eternal and co-equal... he therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity...” (excerpts from the Athanasian Creed)


Let’s put this together in a different form: one person, God the Father, plus one person, God the Son, plus one person, God the Holy Ghost, equals one person, God the What? Is this English or is this gibberish?

It is said that Athanasius, the bishop who formulated this doctrine, confessed that the more he wrote on the matter, the less capable he was of clearly expressing his thoughts regarding it.

How did such a confusing doctrine get its start?

Trinity in the Bible

References in the Bible to a Trinity of divine beings are vague, at best.

In Matthew 28:19, we find Jesus telling his disciples to go out and preach to all nations. While this “Great Commission” does make mention of the three persons who later become components of the Trinity, the phrase “...baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”
is quite clearly an addition to Biblical text – that is, not the actual words of Jesus – as can be seen by two factors:

1) baptism in the early Church, as discussed by Paul in his letters, was done only in the name of Jesus; and

2) the “Great Commission” was found in the first gospel written, that of Mark, bears no mention of Father, Son and/or Holy Ghost – see Mark 16:15.

The only other reference in the Bible to a Trinity can be found in the Epistle of 1 John 5:7. Biblical scholars of today, however, have admitted that the phrase “... there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” is definitely a “later addition” to Biblical text, and it is not found in any of today’s versions of the Bible.

It can, therefore, be seen that the concept of a Trinity of divine beings was not an idea put forth by Jesus or any other prophet of God. This doctrine, now subscribed to by Christians all over the world, is entirely man-made in origin.

The Doctrine Takes Shape

While Paul of Tarsus, the man who could rightfully be considered the true founder of Christianity, did formulate many of its doctrines, that of the Trinity was not among them. He did, however, lay the groundwork for such when he put forth the idea of Jesus being a “divine Son”. After all, a Son does need a Father, and what about a vehicle for God’s revelations to man? In essence, Paul named the principal players, but it was the later Church people who put the matter together.

Tertullian, a lawyer and presbyter of the third-century Church in Carthage, was the first to use the word “Trinity” when he put forth the theory that the Son and the Spirit participate in the being of God, but all are of one being of substance with the Father.
*********************************************************************************

RELIGION: Who Invented the Trinity? (part 2 of 2)

A Formal Doctrine Is Drawn Up
When controversy over the matter of the Trinity blew up in 318 between two church men from Alexandria – Arius, the deacon, and Alexander, his bishop – Emperor Constantine stepped into the fray.

Although Christian dogma was a complete mystery to him, he did realize that a unified church was necessary for a strong kingdom. When negotiation failed to settle the dispute, Constantine called for the first ecumenical council in Church history in order to settle the matter once and for all.

Six weeks after the 300 bishops first gathered at Nicea in 325, the doctrine of the Trinity was hammered out. The God of the Christians was now seen as having three essences, or natures, in the form of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The Church Puts Its Foot Down

The matter was far from settled, however, despite high hopes for such on the part of Constantine. Arius and the new bishop of Alexandria, a man named Athanasius, began arguing over the matter even as the Nicene Creed was being signed; “Arianism” became a catch-word from that time onward for anyone who didn’t hold to the doctrine of the Trinity.

It wasn’t until 451, at the Council of Chalcedon that, with the approval of the Pope, the Nicene/Constantinople Creed was set as authoritative. Debate on the matter was no longer tolerated; to speak out against the Trinity was now considered blasphemy, and such earned stiff sentences that ranged from mutilation to death. Christians now turned on Christians, maiming and slaughtering thousands because of a difference of opinion.
Debate Continues

Brutal punishments and even death did not stop the controversy over the doctrine of the Trinity, however, and the said controversy continues even today.

The majority of Christians, when asked to explain this fundamental doctrine of their faith, can offer nothing more than “I believe it because I was told to do so.” It is explained away as “mystery” – yet the Bible says in 1 Corinthians 14:33 that “... God is not the author of confusion ...”

The Unitarian denomination of Christianity has kept alive the teachings of Arius in saying that God is one; they do not believe in the Trinity. As a result, mainstream Christians abhor them, and the National Council of Churches has refused their admittance. In Unitarianism, the hope is kept alive that Christians will someday return to the preachings of Jesus: “... Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.” (Luke 4:8)

Islam and the Matter of the Trinity

While Christianity may have a problem defining the essence of God, such is not the case in Islam:

“They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity, for there is no god except One God” (Quran 5:73)

It is worth noting that the Arabic language Bible uses the name “Allah” as the name of God.

Suzanne Haneef, in her book What Everyone Should Know About Islam and Muslims (Library of Islam, 1985), puts the matter quite succinctly when she says:

“But God is not like a pie or an apple which can be divided into three thirds which form one whole; if God is three persons or possesses three parts, He is assuredly not the Single, Unique, Indivisible Being which God is and which Christianity professes to believe in.”[1]

Looking at it from another angle, the Trinity designates God as being three separate entities – the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. If God is the Father and also the Son, He would then be the Father of Himself because He is His own Son. This is not exactly logical.

Christianity claims to be a monotheistic religion. Monotheism, however, has as its fundamental belief that God is One; the Christian doctrine of the Trinity – God being Three-in-One – is seen by Islam as a form of polytheism. Christians don’t revere just One God, they revere three.

This is a charge not taken lightly by Christians, however. They, in turn, accuse the Muslims of not even knowing what the Trinity is, pointing out that the Quran sets it up as Allah the Father, Jesus the Son, and Mary his mother. While veneration of Mary has been a figment of the Catholic Church since 431 when she was given the title “Mother of God” by the Council of Ephesus, a closer examination of the verses in the Quran most often cited by Christians in support of their accusation, shows that the designation of Mary by the Quran as a “member” of the Trinity, is simply not true.

While the Quran does condemn both trinitarianism (the Quran 4:171; 5:73)[2] and the worship of Jesus and his mother Mary (the Quran 5:116)[3], nowhere does it identify the actual three components of the Christian Trinity. The position of the Quran is that WHO or WHAT comprises this doctrine is not important; what is important is that the very notion of a Trinity is an affront against the concept of One God.

In conclusion, we see that the doctrine of the Trinity is a concept conceived entirely by man; there is no sanction whatsoever from God to be found regarding the matter simply because the whole idea of a Trinity of divine beings has no place in monotheism. In the Quran, God’s Final Revelation to mankind, we find His stand quite clearly stated in a number of eloquent passages:

“... your God is One God: whoever expects to meet his Lord, let him work righteousness, and, in the worship of his Lord, admit no one as partner.” (Quran 18:110)

“... take not, with God, another object of worship, lest you should be thrown into Hell, blameworthy and rejected.” (Quran 17:39)

– because, as God tells us over and over again in a Message that is echoed throughout ALL His Revealed Scriptures:

“... I am your Lord and Cherisher: therefore, serve Me (and no other) ...” (Quran 21:92)
***********************************************************************

SOFTWARE: Advanced SystemCare PRO V3.0.0.586 incl.working.serial

click here2Download Advanced SystemCare PRO

plz activate the license key in the software after disconnecting ur internet.

************************************************************************************

Wednesday, December 09, 2009

COMPUTER: A new and v high step in the field of computers.a revolution

friends watch it for sure




************************************************************************************

Tuesday, December 08, 2009

RELIGION: Read a Dua the Prophet (peace be upon him) made to Allah!

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:

The Prophet used to invoke Allah at night, saying, “O Allah: All the Praises are for You: You are the Lord of the Heavens and the Earth. All the Praises are for You; You are the Maintainer of the Heaven and the Earth and whatever is in them. All the Praises are for You; You are the Light of the Heavens and the Earth. Your Word is the Truth, and Your Promise is the Truth, and the Meeting with You is the Truth, and Paradise is the Truth, and the (Hell) Fire is the Truth, and the Hour is the Truth. O Allah! I surrender myself to You, and I believe in You and I depend upon You, and I repent to You and with You (Your evidences) I stand against my opponents, and to you I leave the judgment (for those who refuse my message). O Allah! Forgive me my sins that I did in the past or will do in the future, and also the sins I did in secret or in public. You are my only God (Whom I worship) and there is no other God for me (i.e. I worship none but You).”

************************************************************************************

Monday, December 07, 2009

INDIA: Part of muslim contributions to indian freedom was not as it is addressed today .

List of Freedom Fighters Deported to Andamans

List of Muslims is here, for a complete list please follow this link:
list of fighters



In Connection With First War of Independence, 1857
1 Allama Fazal Haque Khairabadi U.P. : died in prison
2 Gulab Khan M.P.
3 Liaqat Ali U.P.
4 Maulvi Syed Aluddin Hyderabad
5 Mahibullah M.P.
6 Mir Jafar Ali Thanesari
7 Noora M.P.
8 Qaim Khan M.P.
9 Sirajuddin M.P.
10 Seikh Formud Ali Assam
11 Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorwi ( ref. Muslims in India by Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi)
12 Mufti Mazhar Karim Daryabadi ( ref. Muslims in India by Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi)

Wahabi Rabels Deported to Andamans (1860 - 1870)
1 Maulana Ahmadulla Patan Trial, 1865 : died in prison
2 Amiruddin Maldah Trial, 1870
3 Ibrahim Mandal Rajmahal Trial, 1870
4 Md. Sher Ali : Sher Ali was given life imprisonment during the Wahabi movement against the British Raj. He assassinated Lord Mayo, Viceroy of India with a knife on 8th February, 1872. He was hanged on Viper Island.
5 Yahya Ali Ambala Trial, 1864 : died in prison.
6 Mohammad Shafi Lahori ( ref. Muslims in India by Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi)
7 Molvi Abdul Rahim Sadiqpuri ( ref. Muslims in India by Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi)

Moplah Rebels Deported to Andamans (1922 - 1924)
1 Neliiparamban Alavi Haji
2 Kolaparamban Kunjalavi
3 Kozhisseri Koya Kutty
4 Ambattuparamban Saidalippa
5 Kayakkatiparambil Kunjeni
6 Machingal Rayin
7 Kuthukallan Kunjara
8 Chungath Athan
9 Variyath Valappil Ahammed Kutty
10 Mattummal Ahammed Kutty
11 Pooyikunnan Marakkar
12 Machincheri Alavi
13 Pokat Koyami
14 Puthampeedikayil Kunjikader Molla
15 Mukri Kunjayammu
16 Poolakuyyil Kunhi Moideen Kutty
17 Poovakundil Alavi
18 Neehiyil Kunjeedu
19 Aripra Pocker
20 Mattummal Marakkar
21 Chakkupurakkal Kutty Hasan

FREEDOM FIGHTERS INCARCERATED IN CELLULAR JAIL (1909-1921)
1 Ali Ahmed Siddiqui Punjab
2 Mujtaba Husain United Province

FEEDOM FIGHTERS INCARCERATED IN (CELLUALR JAIL 1932-1938)
1 Md. Ibrahim Alias Tarapada Bengal
2 Sarajul Huque Bengal

************************************************************************************

RELIGION: allah is all knowing,most merciful



Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "Angels come to you in succession by night and day and all of them get together at the time of the Fajr and 'Asr prayers. Those who have passed the night with you (or stayed with you) ascend (to the Heaven) and Allah asks them, though He knows everything about you, well, "In what state did you leave my slaves?" The angels reply: "When we left them they were praying and when we reached them, they were praying." (Book #10, Hadith #530)
**************************************************************************************

RELIGION: love the prophet (PBUH)

Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle said, "By Him in Whose Hands my life is, none of you will have faith till he loves me more than his father and his children." (Book #2, Hadith #13)


**************************************************************************************

RELIGION: ask for health& forgiveness

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Ask God for forgiveness and health, for after being granted certainty, one is given nothing better than (good) health." - Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 780
**************************************************************************************

RELIGION: What's in a word?

A surprising number of English words are derived from Arabic including algebra - a branch of mathematics developed by the Arabs whose contribution to our civilisation is Often overlooked. Middle East

editor Brian Whitaker reports
Friday August 25, 2000 The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/)

Here is a word game. Spot the odd one out:

admiral, alchemy, alcohol, alcove, algebra, algorithm, alkali,almanac, amalgam, aniline, apricot, arsenal, arsenic, artichoke,assassin, aubergine, azure, borax, cable, calibre, camphor, candy,cannabis, carafe, carat, caraway, checkmate, cipher, coffee, cotton,crimson, crocus, cumin, damask, elixir, gauze, gazelle, ghoul,giraffe, guitar, gypsum, hashish, hazard, jar, jasmine, lacquer,lemon, lilac, lime, lute, magazine, marzipan, massage, mattress,muslin, myrrh, nadir, orange, safari, saffron, samizdat, sash, sequin,serif, sesame, shackle, sherbet, shrub, sofa, spinach, sugar, sultana,syrup, talc, tamarind, tambourine, tariff, tarragon, zenith, zero
In case you're stuck, I'll give you a clue. All the words, except one,are of Arabic origin. In fact, there are probably several hundred Arabic words in English, though dictionaries don't always make the derivation clear: many have entered the language through Spanish or French.

Most of the words came to Europe during the seven centuries of Muslim rule which began in 711 AD when an army led by Tariq ibn Ziyad landed at what we now know as Gibraltar - a mispronunciation of Jabal Tariq ("Tariq's mountain"). The Arabs rapidly conquered Spain, Portugal and parts of Italy, and ventured as far north as Poitiers in France.

The contribution that the Arabs made to our civilisation during this period is often overlooked today - though anyone who visits Granada,Cordova or Seville in southern Spain cannot fail to be reminded of it,and impressed.

The Arabs of those days were great seekers of knowledge, collecting and translating books from all over the known world. Much of ancient Greek literature - including works by Aristotle, Euclid, Galen and Hippocrates - first reached western Europe through Arabic translations.

But it was in the early development of sciences - medicine, chemistry,astronomy and mathematics - that the Arabs really excelled. None more so than mathematics. They gave us our numbering system (much more efficient than the Roman system, though the Arabs themselves later adopted Indian numerals).

They also developed algebra and improved on ancient Greek geometry. But perhaps their biggest contribution in mathematics is nothing at all: they discovered the concept of zero, without which most modern technology would not work.

Muslim rule in Europe ended in 1492 which, by coincidence, was the year that Christopher Columbus set foot in America. I was intrigued the other day to read an article on the internet (http://users.erols.com/gmqm/columbus.html) suggesting that he probably baffled the inhabitants of the New World by greeting them in Arabic: as-salaamu alaykum ("peace be upon you").

This is not as improbable as it sounds. In those days Arabic was very much an international language, and Columbus had been looking for a new route to the East Indies - an area which he knew the Arabs had explored before him. So he took with him Luis de Torres, an Arabic-speaking Spaniard, as his interpreter.

Today, the tables are turned. Arabs usually resort to English when encountering a foreigner. Indeed, they say "aloo" (hello) when answering the phone, even if the caller is likely to be another Arab.

A few years ago I went on an Arabic language course in Jordan. One day, for comprehension practice, we were taken to the university's engineering department for a talk about some solar-powered street lights they were developing.

After a few moments our teacher interrupted. "The students are here to learn Arabic. Please don't speak in English."
"It's very difficult," said the engineer. "I don't have the words in Arabic."

Many Arabs worry about this, believing that their language is losing its purity in the face of an onslaught of foreign vocabulary. Some would like to see an Arabic Academy, along the lines of the French Academy, discouraging the use of foreign words and promoting alternatives derived from Arabic roots.

Sometimes the Arabic words do exist. Sayyara ("a thing that moves about") is widely used for "car", but Moroccans prefer tumubeel (a corruption of "automobile").

Recently, I had a meeting with an Arab ambassador in London who is also a rather fine poet. We had intended to talk about politics but spent half an hour discussing language, which was much more interesting.

He told me he had done something very radical and, to some Arabs, horrifying, in one of his poems. He had used al-talafoon - the everyday word for telephone - instead al-hatif, a classical word meaning, literally, "the invisible caller".

The argument over linguistic immigration is not just a literary one: it has political and religious dimensions. Arab nationalists see it as another example of overbearing western influence, while devout Muslims believe that God chose to reveal His message - the Koran - in Arabic because of the superior qualities of the language.

Arabic is certainly a wonderfully expressive language, and I have met Arabs with little education whose feel for its words and their capabilities is absolutely astonishing. But all languages have some weaknesses and, by interchange, can enrich each other.

The Algerians are famous - or notorious - for mixing Arabic and French, often in the same sentence, and occasionally even in the same word. One of these hybrids is "haytiste" which combines the Arabic word hayt ("wall") with the French -iste (as in "artiste"). It describes the sort of young Algerian man - unemployed, bored and, in all probability, up to no good - who hangs around the streets leaning against walls.

You won't find it in the dictionary, but you'd be hard pressed find an eight-letter word in any language more replete with colourful social imagery.

* And the odd word out? Samizdat is Russian.

*******************************************************************

The Guardian, Friday August 18, 2000

Why the 'rules' of racism are different for Arabs

Arabs are the only really vicious racial stereotypes still considered acceptable in Hollywood, writes Middle East editor Brian Whitaker
Brian Whitaker Friday August 18, 2000 The Guardian

"Stop it, you dirty little Arab!" My grandmother always used to say that when I did something disgusting, like picking my nose or flicking food at my younger brother.

It was a long time ago, of course. In those days children were taught rhymes like "Ten Little Nigger Boys" and recited them to admiring aunties.

We have certainly come a long way since then. Oddly, though - and I have noticed this particularly since starting to write about the Middle East for the Guardian - there are people who seem happy to talk about Arabs in terms that they would never use when talking about black people. It doesn't occur to them that this is racist.

Last week, Rules of Engagement, a film about a siege at the American embassy in Yemen, arrived in Britain after earning millions of dollars in the United States. It has been described as the most racist film ever made against Arabs by Hollywood.

The Arab characters - in this case, Yemenis - are, without exception, portrayed as deceitful, bloodthirsty fanatics. The "hero", an American Marines colonel, massacres 83 of them, and the film suggests that this sort of thing is justified for the greater good of America.

Interestingly, though, the heroic colonel is played by a black actor (Samuel L Jackson) who appears totally integrated into American society. Nobody mentions his colour or appears to treat him differently because of it. In that respect only, the film is less
racist than many others. Since Rules of Engagement was released, several critics have observed that Arabs are the only really vicious racial stereotypes still considered acceptable in Hollywood.Possibly these complaints are an over-reaction to what, after all, is a film-maker's fantasy rather than the reality. But perhaps not.On the day that Rules of Engagement arrived in Britain, the National Transportation Safety Board in Washington issued its first report on the crash of EgyptAir flight 990 off Nantucket last October.

What should have been a methodical, scientific, investigation has turned into a highly charged clash of cultures between Egypt and the USA.

As the plane fell from the sky, the co-pilot repeated an Arabic phrase, "tawakilt 'ala Allah" (I rely on God). This phrase, picked up by the cockpit voice recorder, was leaked to the American media, who variously described it as "a prayer" or a "chant", fuelling the theory that the co-pilot was an Islamic fundamentalist who had deliberately crashed the plane. The Egyptians were furious and pointed out that the phrase is routinely used by Muslims, not just fundamentalists, when facing difficult situations. They accused the American investigators of making the co-pilot a scapegoat, and being reluctant to explore the possibility of a mechanical failure in the American-built Boeing 767. It certainly looked like an attempt to fit the co-pilot into Hollywood's current stereotype of the fanatical Arab, but it didn't wash. When the suicide theory began to look improbable, the investigators re-moulded the co-pilot to fit a much earlier Hollywood stereotype played by Rudolph Valentino in the 1920s - the over-sexed Arab.

The FBI came up with statements from staff at the hotel used by EgyptAir crews in New York saying that the co-pilot was noted for sexually harassing chambermaids and had once exposed himself through the hotel window. Again, these allegations were leaked to the press.

This, apparently, was meant to imply that the co-pilot had an unstable personality and should not have been allowed to fly. Questioning the relevance of the FBI statements at a Washington press conference last week, an Egyptian journalist asked whether, if that kind of behaviour made someone unfit to control a plane, it did not also make the US president Bill Clinton unfit to control nuclear weapons.
Nobody seems quite sure why anti-Arab racism is considered acceptable when other forms of racism aren't. Some suggest that the political role played by the west in the Middle East helps to legitimise the stereotypes of popular culture, which in turn reinforce government policies.

But I think attitudes to Islam may also be part of the problem. People in the west often assume that Arabs are Muslims (and sometimes vice versa). Hostility towards Islam - mostly based on ignorance - can mean hostility towards Arabs. So perhaps anti-Arabism is not rooted in racial prejudice but religious prejudice. Either way, it's still prejudice.

**************************************************************************************

DUA = PRAYERS

رَّبَّنَا عَلَيْكَ تَوَكَّلْنَا وَإِلَيْكَ أَنَبْنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ
[الممتحنة :4]
TRANSLITERATION:
Rabbana 'alayka tawakkalna wa-ilayka anabna wa-ilaykal masir


TRANSLATION:Our Lord! In Thee do we trust, and to Thee do we turn in repentance: to Thee is (our) Final Goal
[60:4]
**************************************************************************************

DUA = PRAYERS


رَبَّنَا وَلاَ تُحَمِّلْنَا مَا لاَ طَاقَةَ لَنَا بِهِ وَاعْفُ عَنَّا وَاغْفِرْ لَنَا وَارْحَمْنَا أَنتَ مَوْلاَنَا فَانصُرْنَا عَلَى الْقَوْمِ الْكَافِرِينَ
[البقرة :286]

TRANSLITERATION:
Rabbana wala tuhammilna ma la taqata lana bihi wa'fu anna waghfir lana wairhamna anta mawlana fansurna 'alal-qawmil kafireen


TRANSLATION:
Our Lord! Lay not on us a burden greater than we have strength to bear. Blot out our sins, and grant us forgiveness. Have mercy on us. Thou art our Protector; Help us against those who stand against faith
[2:286]
**************************************************************************************

DUA = PRAYERS

رَبَّنَا وَلاَ تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْنَا إِصْرًا كَمَا حَمَلْتَهُ عَلَى الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِنَا

[البقرة :286]
transliteration :Rabbana wala tahmil alayna isran kama hamaltahu 'alal-ladheena min qablina
meaning : Our Lord! Lay not on us a burden Like that which Thou didst lay on those before us
[2:286]
**************************************************************************************

DUA = PRAYERS

رَبَّنَا لاَ تُؤَاخِذْنَا إِن نَّسِينَا أَوْ أَخْطَأْنَا
transliteration : Rabbana la tu'akhidhna in-nasina aw akhta'na
meaning : Our Lord! Condemn us not if we forget or fall into error
[2:286]

**************************************************************************************