Nothing Suggests Armstrong Is A Muslim

"Splitting of the moon". Licensed under Public Domain via Wikipedia.

And he said, Oh my Lord, increase me in knowledge.

 

 

Lesson #1

 

It is normal for Muslims to see Allah in Arabic letters in the cloud formations (see the video) because they do resemble "Allah" in Arabic. It is similar to people seeing a face on the surface of the moon, or the "man in the moon".
And it is true that Muslims don't have scientific proof that is peer reviewed that shows the "moon splitting". Also there is no evidence that Neil Armstrong is a Muslim. If he had said it, that would be enough evidence, but he hasn't come out and said that.

He refuses to swear on the Bible, but that doesn't prove he is a Muslim.

 

+Lionheart1200 All they have to do is read the word "Allah" in the Arabic, it is like that. Good job for finding this video. And all those who posted it. And everyone should share it, it is amazing. Also share two more videos and
compare what's said in each; the one, "Neil Armstrong proves Mecca is the Centre". And the one by a Christian Arab, who says that Saudi Arabia is lying about what Neil Armstrong said.
There is a definite bias against anything that Muslims do, and Christian Arabs are notoriously on the offensive when it comes to anything Muslims do or say. Neil Armstrong does say that it is like the Earth was hung, and who hung it?
He would say "God" perhaps, and all Arabs say "Allah" even Christians. So, it is devious to say that the Muslims were exaggerating what Armstrong said, especially in the manner with which the Christian in the video does, laughing a lot.
Armstrong appears very emotional when talking about seeing the Earth from space, and it is how all astronauts and cosmonauts, or any man or woman looking at their home planet from the moon would feel, probably 100% of the time.

Then the Christian goes on to dispute that #Neil Armstrong could see Mecca from space, but I'm not sure if this is actual fact but the Saudi TV has a guest speaking about this, and the Christian accuses them of lying about the details.

Did Armstrong actually see Mecca, or did #NASA see it; the Muslims in question are speaking on a Saudi TV program about the radiation emitted by the planet, and that (when NASA, or the astronauts zoomed in on the radiation), it was emitted or emanating from Mecca.

And they go on to give an explanation about this. Which I can't prove or disprove, but maybe someone else knows more and can help. Obviously, to dispute this, one
needs also to give some credible proof; the Christian laughs and says, that at the time Armstrong was in space Arabia (or Mecca) wasn't facing the moon. But it is his word against their word. I just want to know if it was NASA that zoomed in on the earth, or was it Neil Armstrong.

 

Part of the problem is the title of the video, it suggests that Neil Armstrong proved that Mecca is the centre of the Earth. But maybe that's not what happened. I do know one thing how-
ever, that the astronauts are in contact with Earth, or NASA during their mission. Did NASA through satellite see the radiation being emitted and zoom in on Mecca? And not Neil Armstrong?

As for the famous American's Islamic conversion, the only sure thing is that Neil Armstrong never comes out and says that he is a Muslim.

If he is, we don't know about it.

This is something that many Muslims might like to believe, but the facts don't point to that. However, that doesn't mean he doesn't believe in God (Allah in Arabic).
Yes, Muslims sometimes get 'carried away' but I wouldn't call that 'lying', I think they are sometimes 'simple' in their understanding of reality. There are very uneducated simple people in many places and some are going to be Muslims.
This doesn't disprove anything Allah, SWT, says in His holy book. The burden of proof is on us, if we say something, so we should try our best when we invite others to discuss, debate or investigate the Quran. Together, it is much easier to find the resources to do a better job of 'Dawa',
so Muslims should help and encourage each other, so that Islam is better understood. There is conflict between science and Islam; Muslims have usually been progressive about studying
science. There might be a dark period, and still today, many Muslims are relying on heresay and conjecture to prove their arguments regarding miracles and so on. Maybe we have all been guilty of this, but anyway there are many resources
we can reference for our studies into questions about Islam or any other subjects.

 

Lesson #2

 

Did Muhammad, pbuh, split the moon by Allah's leave?
Here is a link for that discussion, with differing opinions and sources.

Not all Muslim scholars think the moon has already been split, but that maybe the reports or hadiths in question were 'marfoo', or 'daif' [weak], as you can read, if you go to the link above.

The link below is for #NASA and doesn't support the theory that the moon was split.

 

#IrishAtheist says on You Tube, that the moon splitting happened because Muhammad, pbuh, showed the non-believers (pagans) an eclipse. The problem with this is that Muhammad showed the splitting of the moon, not an eclipse, where the Moon travels through the Earth's shadow, so that it is 'blotted out'. The moon was bright and white, not 'blacked out' (This is revised, because initially I made the stupid mistake of saying an eclipse is daytime activity, whereas that is only the solar eclipse (I haven't been getting enough sleep, lol.) Nonetheless, the logic is that the Muslims pray whether the eclipse occurs in daytime or after sunset/nighttime. DD)  

If the moon had split during an eclipse (lunar eclipse) it would have been the cause for 'uneasiness' and an occasion for prayers; the Muslims would have been praying the 'eclipse' prayer not gazing an eclipse/the "miracle" with a group of idolaters.

 

More resources:

 

This link from Wikipedia will help answer some of our questions about the revelation, the context of the revelation, and what might be an explanation that is satisfactory from both the Islamic and scientific points of view.
For example, some Muslims believe that the verses could refer to an "optical illusion" and not an actual/literal splitting of the moon. Others will give proof, probably grammatical, that the moon has already been split in the past.
There are others also, who believe that the moon splitting hasn't yet occured but will occur as a sign of the "coming of the Hour" (Doomsday).
Thus, we are to be cautious about anything that doesn't have absolutely correct "textual" proof (Islamic sources that are reliable and not subject to disagreement).
Otherwise, we don't have to accept the 'splitting of the moon' said to have happened 1,430 yrs ago. It is possible it hasn't occurred yet.

The "optical illusion" which may have, I say this cautiously, been the 'splitting of the moon' which the Quran speaks about, should be explained with scientific proofs of some kind, otherwise it isn't worth mentioning.
The Christian mentioned before did show a video of what he says is how the moon was split, but it doesn't explain why some people thought the moon appeared to be in front of and behind the mountain, as some of the witnesses
said, according to some hadiths or athaar.

 

A file photo from NASA:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_of_the_moon#/media/File:Splitting_of_the_moon.jpg

 

Traditions transmitted on the authority of Abdullah bin Masud describe the incident as follows:[2][10]

We were along with God's Messenger at Mina, that moon was split up into two. One of its parts was behind the mountain and the other one was on this side of the mountain. God's Messenger said to us: Bear witness to this 039:6725

The narrative was used by some later Muslims to convince others of the prophethood of Muhammad. Annemarie Schimmel for example quotes the following from Muslim scholar Qadi Iyad who worked in the 12th century:[6]

 "Splitting of the moon". Licensed under Public Domain via Wikipedia.

It has not been said of any people on the earth that the moon was observed that night such that it could be stated that it was not split. Even if this had been reported from many different places, so that one would have to exclude the
possibility that all agreed upon a lie, yet, we would not accept this as proof to the contrary, for the moon is not seen in the same way by different people... An eclipse is visible in one country but not in the other one; in one place
it is total, in the other one only partial. [This proof would appear to outrule what was said by IrishInfidel on his You Tube channel].

 

Other perspectives (from Wikipedia)

 

Al-Zamakhshari, a famous commentator of the Qur'an, acknowledged the splitting of the moon as one of Muhammad's miracles. But he also suggested that the splitting might take place only on the day of judgment.[4] The Muslim scholar Yusuf Ali
provides three different interpretations of the verse. He holds that perhaps all three are applicable to the verse: Moon once appeared cleft asunder at the time of Muhammad in order to convince the unbelievers. It will split again when the
day of judgment approaches (here the prophetic past tense is taken to indicate the future). Yusuf Ali connects this incident with the disruption of the solar system mentioned in 75:8-9. Lastly, he says that the verses can be metaphorical,
meaning that the matter has become clear as the moon.[11]

 

The occasion or circumstances:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbab_al-nuzul

Lesson #3

 

Non Muslims only accept their own word for anything, e.g. what is peer reviewed evidence.
If Muslims produce their own scientific evidence, which can be peered reviewed too, then that might be better for eliciting a positive response and/or acceptance of Muslims' ideas/beliefs/or theories.

In a TV interview with the Egyptian Geologist Dr. Zaghloul Annajar, the anchor asked him about the verse:

"The Hour has drawn near, and the Moon has been cleft asunder (the people of Makkah requested Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] to show them a miracle, so he showed them the splitting of the moon)." (Quran 54:1) whether it contains any Quranic scientific astounding facts?

 

Lesson #4

 

Non Muslims have spent huge sums of money on space research etc. Muslims could do the same, and do their own scientific researches into the origin of the Universe, our solar system and the origin of life on Earth. And many other studies.

 

Differences between rocks on Earth and rocks on the Moon:

http://sservi.nasa.gov/articles/scientists-explain-why-moon-rocks-contain-fewer-volatiles-than-earth-rocks/

 

Will the Moon's visibility change over time?

http://sservi.nasa.gov/ask-a-scientist/

There is a chance that the Moon will not be as visible, due to atmospheric pollution. It is suggested by Muslims that the Moon's phases will be affected by something in the future; the New Moon will appear twice as large as it does in the
present day. And God knows best.

Earth Rocks to Mars, and other Planetary rocks to Earth:

Is it possible that rocks came from Mars to Earth, in fact, yes it's happened. Did some rocks also go from Earth to Mars. It is less likely but also can have happened.

http://sservi.nasa.gov/?question=interplanetary-exchange-of-rocks

Where did the Black Stone (which used to be white long ago) really come from?
The Black Stone was placed in one corner of the Ka'aba, and is a famous object in Islamic teachings, said to have been sent from Paradise when Adam was building the Ka'aba (check reference for exactness).

Some earth rocks may have gone to Mars during impacts 65 million years ago.
The earth is only 4.6 billion years old as compared to the Universe which is 14 billion years old.

The earth was created during the creation of our solar system, when the planets and stars, etc. were "cleft asunder". Or separated. The Big Bang that created the Universe happened long before that, or maybe it was the Big Bang that
led to the formation of the solar system, and perhaps the Universe was created some other way. God knows best.

Some Muslim scholars have argued that the Ka'aba is 2,000 years older than the Earth! They say, it is possible that Allah created the Ka'aba before the Earth and that the Ka'aba was "on the water" and that the Earth came later, from
that area beneath the Ka'aba(revising).(I'm presuming it was a land mass beneath the Ka'aba, or land that emerged from "the water".

What Does Quran say about Time Travel? Angels Travelling at the Speed of Light?

See the link, or URL for this webpage, which I quote briefly below "Relativity in Quran (Islam)"

http://www.speed-light.info/miracles_of_quran/age_of_universe.htm

"[Quran 32.5]  (Allah) Rules the cosmic affair from the heavens to the Earth. Then this affair travels to Him a distance in one day, at a measure of one thousand years of what you count.

It is the angels who carry out these orders (see Arabic wording at footnote [1]). Those people back then measured the distances neither in kilometers nor in miles but rather by how much time they needed to walk. For example, a village
two days away meant a distance equivalent to walking for two days; ten days away meant a distance equivalent to walking for ten days... However in this verse the Quran specifies 1000 years of what they counted (not what they walked)
... However in this verse the Quran specifies 1000 years of what they counted (not what they walked). Those people back then followed the lunar calendar and counted 12 lunar months each year. These months are related to the moon and
not related to the sun. Hence in 1 day the angels will travel a distance of 1000 years of what they counted (the moon). Since this verse is referring to distance, then God is saying that angels travel in one day the same distance that
the moon travels in 12000 lunar orbits.  12000 Lunar Orbits/Earth Day = distance/time = rate of motion (speed). However this speed depends on the frame of reference, that is, you could define million different frames and get million
different results. But if you want to compare it with the speed of light in local inertial frames then you need to make the comparison in a local inertial frame."

The Confusion of the Confusion

Remembering  days in history when ppl loved discourse more than the air that they breathed; in memory of the Muslim philosophers, whom all contemplated the great questions of their time, the nature of God, the nature of the soul, whether they were right or wrong, Muslim or Kafir, all studied and learned in Cordoba and pondered the great mysteries. I dedicate this post to modern day scholars who care about truth. DD

                                                                    *******
I wanted to call this "the Refutation of the Refutation" but that's already been taken. #Ghazali #Ibn Sina #Ibn Rushd #Cordoba #The Refutation of the Refutation are more labels ppl could try searching.

I wrote and posted three posts yesterday in response to comments I had entertained. So today, I’m posting this explanation of who are the true Muslims, vis a vis a discussion about the meaning of the word Salafist, “Salafi” in Arabic, or the word “Wahhabi” and what it really means. This is an issue which is of paramount concern to me; because it is something I consider a part of the propaganda against Islam and Muslims, particularly Sunni Islam and its adherents, especially those in the Arabian Peninsula.

Just a brief description of both words, the way that Sunni Muslims generally think of the words in the original Arabic – this doesn’t include the opinion of many people who believe wrongly that Salafi is a “bad word”. It is a word we often use so it is important to explain what it does mean.

Salafi – someone who follows the original teachings of Muhammad, pbuh, the Holy Prophet of Islam, and which the following three or four generations of Muslims also followed or preached. The Sahabi (companions of Muhammad, May Allah grant them peace and blessings, and the Tabai’i, the following generation of Muslims who never met the holy Prophet, but had met the Sahabi, and so on). These we consider the proper examples of pious and good people of their day, who we try to emulate in word and deed.

Wahhabi – this is a new label, used very recently, beginning a few years back, which non-Muslims use to mean the Sunnis in Saudi Arabia whom they believe are preaching hate. I’d like to note that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, was a scholar who preached Islamic monotheism and was largely concerned with teaching the people in his generation in the place he practiced, not to worship the Taghut (idols) or to do unislamic things, such as following the traditions of other people or religions in their country, which were not sanctioned by Islamic teachings and traditions. He was sometimes opposed by the rulers or other people who didn’t want him to preach, this is why some even called him a “kafir”. His little book Kitab atTauhid is one of the best written on the subject of Islamic monotheism, which contains advice about avoiding shirk (polytheism) and disbelief. He was the most concerned about teaching the common and ignorant people about their religion because many evils had entered into the people’s religious practices or had become a part of their daily lives. The book is a collection of the important hadiths, which are taught in all Islamic studies courses at University level in the past AND even up until today but is very simple and straightforward so that anyone can grasp the concepts and meanings easily. It is one of the easiest and best books recommended for a basic understanding of Islamic creed or monotheism.

Question –

Are Muslims now supposed to change their usage of the word “salafi” to match the current and very negative interpretation, just to avoid being labeled “evil”? Shouldn’t it be the non-Muslims who learn the Arabic meaning of “salafi” and stop using that when they are referring to “extremists”?? Even the word “fundamentalist” has been engineered to be a bad thing. So, we don’t use that word much to refer to “pious” and “good” people, or “believers” of a faith, because it now usually is used in the most negative way to mean someone “extremist”. In the past “fundamentalist” only was a word to mean a person who is adhering to the basics of his religion.

One asks, why is this need for “labeling” others with names they don’t approve? There is no Muslim on earth who calls himself/herself a “Wahhabi” > this word is a new label we don’t accept. And the word “salafi” is still commonly used by Muslims, it is an Islamic terminology. It isn’t right for others to usurp the word for their own purposes; which has always meant someone who follows the original teachings of Muhammad, pbuh. (I already gave a more comprehensive definition above.)

I ask all honest people to not use “salafi” or “Wahhabi” to refer to Muslims or Saudi Arabian people in a negative way. Wahhabi itself is wrong, and a misnomer. Muslims never use it to refer to themselves, and it is a label used “against” them. And “salafi” should be used by English speakers to mean someone who is “Sunni”, as that is what it intends, really. While Sufi Muslims accept the word “sufi” general Muslims don’t accept the word “Wahhabi” and they DO NOT use “Salafi” to mean a person who is an “extremist” in any way, who is not following his religion properly but has extremist views. Likewise, the word “Salafist” is another label, from the same root, but a NEW word in the vocabulary of non-Muslims who use it to mean an extremist from Saudi Arabia or an extremist who follows the path of extremism which they believe (wrongly) is a way of life for many in Saudi Arabia – the only Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia (not speaking of Shias, who also live in Arabia and are a small minority in Saudi Arabia) is mainstream Islam. It means they also abide by the Sharia in their own country. There is no imposing their religion or culture on others, except if one is in the kingdom, then one must abide by the sharia, in his dress or outward appearances and worship (if he is a Muslim in Mecca, for example)and not to do or say things which contravene the Sharia. For example, there is a blasphemy law in Saudi Arabia, much as there are laws against treason in America, or something equivalent.

The rest of the post is a repeat of what I had posted previously, last week.

There is a common misconception today, that Muslims are not also Salafis. This labeling the majority of Sunnis as "Salafists" or "Wahhabis" is starting to border on hate speech, so I have to clear something up now. Firstly, Sunnis and Sufis all call themselves Muslims, and hardly do they get into discussions about their differences, except as an educational exercise. We are very united in our views and aspirations, but appear to be disunited; the media perpetrates the appearance of great schisms, which don't really exist (or result in disunity) among Muslims in their daily relationships with each other.

Secondly, just as people find Sufis loveable, so are the general Muslims loveable. They are not murderers, bigots, rapists, haters; they are people with religious convictions and beliefs, which reflect their upbringing and also their love of God Almighty and Muhammad, and Islam. Their goal in life isn’t to cause others pain and suffering. They are just as kind and compassionate as anybody else. I really resent these labels, which America and the media are attaching to Sunni Muslims.

All Muslims call themselves Muslims, and don’t believe they need any labels apart from that to be counted among the true believers. Some words, such as “Hanbali” or “Maaliki” denote the school of thought a person might adhere to in his daily practice and way of worship, such that his hands are placed a certain way, or he makes certain specific actions in the prayer, which other Sunnis who are not from the same school, or raised in the same country or region where he would have learned the same traditions don’t do, but which are all based on Islamic traditions found in the books, such as Sahih Bukhari or Sahih Muslim, and others. When someone has studied under a scholar he may change the way he practices in some small ways, which might reflect more closely how the Prophet did things, compared to many others who have learned Islam from their parents or an older sibling or their cousins. None of this is dangerous or removes one out of the fold of Islam. Most common people don’t know about the finer points or the discussions which are held in classrooms as intellectual exercises, or to discover which traditions match more closely with what the early Muslims did, who we call in Islamic terminology, “the salaf”. (If you understand what “the salaf” means, then you should be careful of using the term “salafi” to refer to bad or evil Muslims who you fear are the enemy, because they don’t exist~!! There is no evil “salafi” because a “salafi” person is one who tries his best to be a Muslim in the tradition of the earliest Muslims, who are all our best examples.

Non-Muslims and especially the media want to “label” many of the Muslims as terrorists, and using the label Salafi for Muslims as though they are evil, and as though the word “Salafi” means something which it doesn’t - or a bad person, or a bad “cult” (which it really doesn’t in the original usage) Salafi is just another way to say a person who follows the way of the Prophet Muhammad and the early generations of Muslims.

If someone is afraid of Muslims in general, without good reason, then he is an Islamophobe, and there is little hope he will learn the truth of Islam and what Muslims really believe. But if someone is just confused by labels, they should try to discover the truth about Islam and Muslims by reading or going to proper Islamic websites, and ask a Muslim about their concerns. I for one am willing to entertain anyone who is sincere about learning more about any issue related to Islam and Muslims. If I can give evidence or at least tell my personal beliefs, which I can say are the mainstream, then I’m happy to oblige. I don’t insist someone has to become a Muslim. I am not preaching Islam to convert people, though that would please me, but I am really more interested in explaining the true meaning of Islam and teaching others about what I really believe. Islam is not “of the devil” or a strange “cult”; it is a “religion” in the truest and best sense of the word.