I was disappointed when I read an article written by “Someone who witnessed it all”. Sadly, the author titled it, “On Firdaus, End of Discussion” and I wonder how someone will write gibberish then call it End of Discussion.
In the last article I wrote ( https://knowislam.com.ng/firdaus-crucified-for-our-redemption-by-bashir-lucas-samson-lukman/ ), I shared a screenshot of my chat with Albert Afeso Akanbi. He went on to insult sister Firdaus same way the author of this article being refuted did. Years of debate with Christians should make me think that Christians cannot have a debate without insults and curses if not for the Christians with common sense.
Meanwhile, I need to correct a misconception. Muslims are not shifting the blame on Christians. Christians are not responsible for the #Istandwithfirdaus saga but why should they not feel the heat when they are at the forefront when it comes to criticizing and insulting sister Firdaus. Theretofore, we are not shifting blame, we are only given response to anyone that deserves it.
The author who claimed to have been part of the officials that screened aspirants to the Bar consider sister Firdaus to be an extremist. unfortunately, people like this do not understand the concept of tolerance and extremism just because they are bigots blinded by prejudice. Their definition of tolerance when it comes to Muslims is when a Muslim do away with fundamental tenets of the religion. Now, President Buhari is a scholar and an example of a good Muslim while sister Firdaus is an extremist. The same man they accuse of being an extremist and working towards the Islamization of Nigeria.
The author should know that the president is not equal to scholars of this religion. Also, when it comes to Islam, if hundreds decide to ignore what is required in the religion, it does not make it right. In our world today, more attention is being given to extremism and the negative impact it has on the religion. However, a careful study of the lives of liberals and the extremists should bring anyone to the conclusion that “The liberals and extremists are brothers.” Distorting and negating fundamental teachings of the religion are required to be a liberal or extremist and anyone who studies the religion from the lives of a liberal and extremist misunderstands the religion.
Islam is a religion that understands and teaches respect of our religious differences. It is against hypocritical friendship/relationship. The verse “Lakum deenukum wa liya Deen” does not mean not saying the truth about your religion in the presence of other religions. If someone cannot tolerate the truth from your religion, his level of tolerance should be questioned not yours. The essence of the verse is understanding and respecting our differences not tolerance, compromise that breeds nothing but hypocrisy. The evils of liberals and extremists are much. In summary, when the religion asks you to leave people of other faiths to their religion, a liberal goes to practice their religion with them while the extremists would decide to harm them in the name of He that sent them not.
To a liberal, the one who practices Islam as it should be practiced is seen as an extremist while the extremist sees him as a liberal. Someone who studies Islam from a liberal sees the Muslim as an intolerant extremist. He sees the liberal as a perfect example of a “good Muslim” thus misunderstanding the religion. The liberal goes to celebrate the death of Jesus with a Christian to the joy of the Christian. Such Christian might know or not that the Qur’an says Jesus was not crucified; what a friendship based on lies, falsehood and hypocrisy!!! One who studies Islam using the extremists as a standard also misunderstands the religion because to him, the extremist justifies his actions with the Qur’an while he sees the liberal as a “moderate Muslim” that does not follow the “extreme” teachings of the Qur’an.
I wrote this article a year ago, “Our Tolerance Define Their Tolerance” ( https://knowislam.com.ng/our-tolerance-define-their-tolerance/ )
A Muslim does not raise an eyebrow when a Christian Evangelist takes to the street and start preaching Jesus is God, He is the son of God etc. A Christian sees no harm in sharing tracts to his/her Muslim neighbours telling them Jesus is their Lord and personal saviour and of course, there’s no harm after all.
If a Muslim decides to preach to a Christian neighbour telling him/her that Jesus is a Slave of God and no one is worthy of worship except God, the Christian begins to see the Muslim as a devil, an enemy not receiving the Muslim’s teaching with the same attitude the Muslim received his/her even though the Christian once saw the Muslim’s daughter in Hijab and لا إله إلا الله inscribed On the door still goes ahead to preach to the Muslim.
The Christian may begin to pray, “I bind all evil spirit in this vicinity with fire”, “Thunder fire devil”, “Enemy must fail” etc
Worthy to note, the Christian and the Muslim preached what is in their book, the Muslim becomes peaceful only if the Christian gets to preach unchallenged or the Muslim keeps quiet as regards his own faith.
A Christian Evangelist not minding the fact that there are people with different religious beliefs, state of health and mental stability on a commercial bus, he starts to preach even sometimes as far as the journey takes. He begins to say “Anyone who doesn’t accept Jesus shall perish” citing John 3:16 amidst other verses and this he does, with no harm.
If a Muslim gets on a commercial bus and seats near a Christian, and say “Bismillah AR-rahmani Ar-raheem”, the Christian may change seat or set a space between him and the Muslim.
To a Christian, A Muslim is peaceful only when he honours the invite to celebrate Christmas with them to mark the birth of the supposed son of God and also Easter to commemorate the death of Jesus though these negate the Lam yalid, Walam yulad and also Qur’an 4:157-159 in the Muslim’s Qur’an.
Once a Muslim refuses, saying it is not part of his faith, he is being hated on while a Muslim has no ill thoughts to a Christian who doesn’t join in observing any of the Muslims’ festival.
They laugh outwards, yet they are devil inwards. Seeing Paul of the Bible as a mentor, they can do like a goat to catch a goat to worship the Jesus of the church different from Jesus of the Bible and they employ all acts of maliciousness and deceptiveness being desperate so far more sheep are being brought to church which means an increase in Tithe.
Having Sundays and Saturdays to themselves, with no complains from the Muslims, they will cry out their eyes at an attempt to declare Friday a no working day in favour of the Muslims. Worthy to note that, they have this Sunday and Saturday due to the fact that they don’t know when exactly should be their day of worship. Hence while some go to church on Sunday, the seventh day adventists go on Saturday, yet the Statement “go to church on Sunday or Saturday” cannot be found in the Bible.
To a Christian, a Muslim girl wearing hijab to school is his/her headache though the mother of his/her supposed Lord and Personal saviour was not reported to have exposed her hair.
If a Muslim grows beard, it becomes a problem, though the prophets in the supposed “HOLY BIBLE” were not reported to be clean shaven.
Their tolerance starts from where Muslims begin to tolerate them and stops when Muslims do what is theirs not affecting their religious beliefs or everyday life a bit.
You will only get to fully know what I mean by “our tolerance define their tolerance” when Muslims decide to start celebrating,
World Jesus did not die day, World no son of God day like the Christians celebrate Christmas and easter, the former being Bid’aah and should not be attempted.
When announcing the day of Eid-el-kabir is tagged as holiday and gives a religious body(CAN) headache, we might begin to wonder if they are doing God’s service or stomach and bank account service.
Special thanks to Christians who understand the meaning of humanity not bigots drunken with the opium of prejudice.
FALLACY OF FALSE EQUIVALENCE
Thanks to brother Yusuf Abila Ibrahim that made me remember this.
False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which two opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.
A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence , especially in order of magnitude , when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.  False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn’t bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors.
I accuse the author of committing this fallacy. Firstly, the author wrote, ” The attire is clearly spelt out in our code of conduct book, hijab is obviously not part of it”. Can the author show us where the code of conduct book forbids Hijab? Are pants and bra included in the code of conduct book?( using his explanation). Will they refuse to Call to Bar someone who wears or does not wear pants and bra? which part of the constitution forbids or states that it should or must be worn? If people do not buy rational explanations, maybe we can resort to their own thinking!
He wrote again, ” Law with its tradition is older than Christianity and Islam and should for no reason be made a slave to any of the two”. The question here is, “Why then should the constitution be a slave to a code of conduct?” We are not asking the constitution to be a slave to Islam, we are only asking for the freedom of religion it claims to have given us. If your code of conduct cannot be a slave to a religion, why should your code of conduct enslave the constitution?
The author wrote;
“In conclusion, if the lady should be donated the so much alarmed sympathy and condonation ,the following should also be considered in other to balance the equation:
Muslim lawyers should be allowed to wear hijabs.
Deeper life members shouldn’t be made to wear NYSC trousers.
Lords chosen lawyers can wear their bullet proof vests to call to bar auditorium.
Celestial lawyers should be allowed to wear their white garments.
Traditional Idol worshipers like witch or native doctors should be allowed to appear in their red wrappers, feathers of birds, chocks and beads/cowries to law school and call to bar auditorium.
Since we’re all mad right?”
This is the fallacy!!! How many of these people wear these attires to offices, banks, hospitals? These are more of ceremonial wears to them. They can wear whatever they want to wear, we will see the face of hypocrites. to counter Shari’ah courts, we read that CAN is working on Ecclesiastical Court yet we have not heard anything about it. Celestial Church members can walk without shoes for long, who cares? Students that wore choir gowns, sutana and traditional wears to school in Osun State, are they still wearing it?
We are not asking for what is preposterous rather we seek an end to laws that are obnoxious, irrational and illogical. According to the bible, Jesus knew they were selling and buying in the temple. I[why did he go to the temple when he knew he would see something displeasing? Why did Mary Slessor not go back to Scotland when she saw them killing twins in Calabar?
If Allah permits, pseudo-feminists and selective feminism would be addressed. We should also not forget sister Shariffah yunus whose niqob was yanked off.
Bashir Lucas Samson Lukman