Month: October 2017

Christianity

Christianity

The Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan

Christian Bale to follow up “Exodus” movie with a movie about Muhammad

With the success of his biblically based, and thus accurate, rendering of the Christian Bale movie “Exodus,” Ridley Scott is setting his sights towards other religious text based movies with the movie; “Muhammad.”

Many Christians constantly play the woe is me martyr’s victim card in claiming that only their faith is mocked and wrongly depicted in media of various formats—see the mockingly titled webpage: Unbelievers Compliment Christianity.

Yet, while Ridley Scott made what is virtually a book, chapter and verse version of the biblical story of Moses and the Exodus—I mean, you could virtually take your Bible to the theater and follow along with the movie—his depiction of Muhammad, Islam, Allah and the Qur’an many raise a few Muslim eyebrows.

It appears that Scott decided to stray from historical facts and the text of the Qur’an and will have a little fun with this one. He has drafted a screen play which turns the life of Muhammad into a fantasy story, of sorts. Whether what ends up hitting the big screen is historically and Qur’anically accurate will have to be determined by historians and religious studies professors.

Scott has Muhammad expressing the view that the first impression of the revelations he began to receive was that it was demonic, that he was being manipulated by the jin/djinn and claims to be a victim of black magick. Thus, he attempts suicide on various occasions.

He delivers false prophecy and is made to claim that Allah is “the best of deceivers” in the screen play.

Muhammad ends up proclaiming revelation which turns out to be from satan and ends up taking it back (a unique form of replacement theology; just replace satanic verses which you previously claimed to be from Allah).

christian20bale20in20_muhammad20i20am_-7923658

He invents the law of abrogation whereby he can conveniently ignore earlier revelation by appeal to later revelation. Thus, he begins his prophetic career whilst still relatively unknown, not well off and with few followers by preaching kindness, but then preaches vengeance when he gains a popular following and wealth from embarking upon robbing raids.

Muhammad is depicted as having tortured a man, named Kinana in the script, for money. He is depicted as murdering those who criticize Islam and those who leave it, apostates.

Muhammad is portrayed as being misogynistic (even whilst he loooooves the ladies) referring to them as stupid, immoral and being a majority of hell’s population. He allows his followers to ravish their female captives. Muhammad allows for men to beat their wives. He marries the wife of his adopted son after receiving a conveniently self-serving revelation which allows for her divorce.

Muhammad has circa 9 wives (plus various friends with benefits) whilst claiming, via revelation, that only four are allowable to Muslims; one of his wives is portrayed as being 9 years old when they consummate their marriage.

Muhammad attempts to divorce his wife, which the script names Sauda, because he falls out of love with her, no longer finding her attractive. He cuts a deal with Allah which allows her to keep eating; to be fed and thus, be sustained as a dependent.

Muhammad allows Muslims to practice what is called mut’ah in the script, which basically allows husbands to pimp out their wives. He makes a vow to one of his wives that he would not have sex with a slave girl but, oopsy, he does so anyhow.

Muhammad describes heaven as a place wherein a man will have plenteous wine and women; women specifically designed to be pleasing to the, shall we say, superficial male. At one point, he preaches revelation about how adult women are to breastfeed adult me as a means to cool the jets, as it were, of a man who is attracted to them but to whom they are not attracted—the verse is written on a leaf which is subsequently eaten by a sheep. Perhaps as a shout out to the LGBT community; Ridley Scott portrays Muhammad as a cross dresser.

Muhammad endorses the Bible and affirms its authenticity and reliability even whilst contradicting it; such as claiming that Jesus was not crucified.

In an Islamic version of Star Wars; the movie will have Muhammad claim that Allah uses stars as “stellar missiles” which he shoots at demons when the try to sneak into heaven.

While on the subject of astronomy; Muhammad is made to claim that when the Sun sets, it sinks into a muddy pool of murky water.

Muhammad is made to claim that he cannot perform any miracles and that the ultimate proof of his revelation will be the literary excellence of the Qur’an. Yet, the first Caliph is named Uthman in the script; he is depicted as being so concerned for contradictory variety amongst the various different Qur’ans that he precedes to collect all Qur’anic manuscripts, complies an official version and burn the manuscripts.

An idolatrous structure is depicted as the focal point of Muslim pilgrimages wherein a black stone is placed and revered. Pagan rituals and folklore are incorporated into Islam.

Allah is portrayed as having no love for unbelievers, having created hell specifically for sinners and punishes Jews and Christians for the sins of Muslims.

Muhammad is portrayed as the greatest Muslim and the seal of, the final, prophet and yet, he does not know if he is saved. Finally, he states that if he is a false prophet he would die in a specific way, and that is the exact way in which he is portrayed as having died.

The movie is set to be released in 2016 AD and we will have to see how they whole thing plays out.

To learn more about Islam, see the webpage here and the following:

Misconceptions in Reason and History

Muhammad and Jesus

On the Qur’an’s Composition

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page. You can also use the “Share / Save” button below this post.

Abraham

Tradition

Religious Freedom Foundation

Isaac

The California Council of Churches and Military Religious Freedom Foundation team up

[FYI: I am reposting this as I am moving it from where it was originally posted]

You know that you are in trouble when you are a Christian and the blog God’s Own Party? endorses you; their motto is “ReBiblicans appeal to the hearts of the mindless; and the minds of the heartless.”

They also endorse groups such as Americans United Against Church & State, Freedom from Religion Foundation (find info on them here), Right Wing Watch. The blog is a member of Bloggers Against Theocracy and link to Military Religious Freedom Foundation, Liars for Jesus, Theocracy Watch and it goes on and on and on.
They are obsessed with Sarah Palin—and not in a good way and urge readers to “Help…Keep the Bible OFF Our Ballots! by DONATING…” Oh, by the way, the author of the blog, Leah L. Burton, claims to not be an anti-Christian—apparently, you just have to be a very, very, very liberal one; perhaps a CINO (Christian in name only).

This was mere an intro into just who is endorsing the California Council of Churches and California Church IMPACT. But why would a theophobe endorse churches? Well, for example, the California Council of Churches is the sort that oppose the biblical definition of marriage, so you get the idea.

God’s Own Party? endorses sung the praises of California Council of Churches IMPACT’s Director of Public Policy; Elizabeth Sholes because she spoke at an award ceremony for the Military Religious Freedom Foundation in Albuquerque.

Elizabeth Sholes noted, in part:

California Council of Churches IMPACT has made an alliance with the Military Religious Freedom Foundation that works to guarantee freedom of religion for the men and women in our military.
CCCI has long supported the separation of church and state as an essential guarantee that we all may worship as we choose. We also believe our government and our defense system have one goal – preserving our Constitution. It cannot be the promoter of any religious view at all. If America adopts a dominant theology, how can any of us be free?…

MRFF is strongly supportive of all faiths, including that of our diverse Christian member denominations…They oppose the presence, as sanctioned speakers, of those individuals who promulgate disrespect for religious diversity and especially those who preach hate toward another faith. To this end, they recently had gotten a prominent evangelist, whose radical anti-Muslim stance is well-known, dis-invited as the guest speaker for a national event at the Pentagon.

Why do such groups always feed upon the low hanging fruit?

The Declaration of Independence states that the “truths” that are “self-evident” is that our rights are given to us by our “Creator…Nature’s God,” “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
Why do they not take on and declare the Declaration of Independence unconstitutional?

Note also the intolerance of the pseudo-tolerant and the lack of diversity of the pseudo-diverse. They take pride in the fact that they succeeded in officially excluding Franklin Graham from the “national event at the Pentagon.” At least, they succeeded officially as Graham still showed up and prayed, albeit, outside of the Pentagon (yes, he too exercises freedom of religious expression).

Incidentally, just what did God’s Own Party?—you know, the member of “Bloggers Against Theocracy”—have to say about Nancy Pelosi prescribing to clergymen what they are to preach from their pulpits? Well, just like the Freedom From Religion Foundation, the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Theocracy Watch, Talk to Action, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, etc., they had absolutely nothing to say.

For details on this issue see Is Nancy Pelosi Anti-Antidisestablishmentarianism?

Note:
[1] Leah L. Burton, “California Council of Churches Weigh in on Dominionist Hate,” God’s Own Party?, May 17, 2010

Muslim terrorism