FrontPageMagazine.com
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Coptic priest Fr. Zakaria Botros, who al Qaeda has called "one of the most wanted infidels in the world," issuing a 60 million dollar bounty on his head. Popular Arabic magazines also call him "Islam's public enemy #1". He hosts a television program, “Truth Talk,” on Life TV. His two sites are Islam-Christianity.net and FatherZakaria.net.
FP: Fr. Zakaria Botros, welcome to Frontpage Interview.
FP: Fr. Botros, thank you for visiting us today.
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Coptic priest Fr. Zakaria Botros, who al Qaeda has called "one of the most wanted infidels in the world," issuing a 60 million dollar bounty on his head. Popular Arabic magazines also call him "Islam's public enemy #1". He hosts a television program, “Truth Talk,” on Life TV. His two sites are Islam-Christianity.net and FatherZakaria.net.
FP: Fr. Zakaria Botros, welcome to Frontpage Interview.
Botros: Thank you for inviting me.
FP: Let’s begin with your own personal story, in terms of Islam and Christianity.
Botros:
I am a Copt. In my early 20s, I became a priest. Of course, in
predominantly Muslim Egypt, Christians—priests or otherwise—do not talk
about religion with Muslims. My older brother, a passionate Christian
learned that lesson too late: after preaching to Muslims, he was
eventually ambushed by Muslims who cut out his tongue and murdered him.
Far from being deterred or hating Muslims, I eventually felt more
compelled to share the Good News with them. Naturally, this created many
problems: I was constantly harassed, threatened, and eventually
imprisoned and tortured for one year, simply for preaching to Muslims.
Egyptian officials charged me with abetting “apostasy,” that is, for
being responsible for the conversion of Muslims to Christianity.
Another time I was arrested while boarding a plane out of Egypt. Eventually, however, I managed to flee my native country and resided for a time in Australia and England. Anyway, my life-story with Christianity and Islam is very long and complicated. In fact, an entire book about it was recently published.
FP: I apologize for asking this, but what were some of the tortures you endured when you were imprisoned?
Botros: Due
to my preaching the Gospel, Egyptian soldiers broke into my home
putting their guns to my head. Without telling me why, they arrested me
and placed me in an extremely small prison cell (1.8x1.5x1.8 meters,
which was further problematic, since I am 1.83 meters tall), with other
inmates, and in well over 100 degree temperatures, with little
ventilation, no windows, and no light. No beds of course, we slept on the floor—in shifts, as there was not enough room for all of us to lie down. Due
to the lack of oxygen, we used to also take shifts lying with our noses
under the crack of the cell door to get air. As a result, I developed a
kidney infection (receiving, of course, no medical attention).
Mosquitoes plagued us. Food was delivered in buckets; we rarely even
knew what the gruel was. The prison guards would often spit in the
bucket in front of us, as well as fling their nose pickings in it.
FP: My heart goes out to you in terms of this terrible suffering you endured.
What is your primary purpose in what you do?
Botros: Simple:
the salvation of souls. As I always say, inasmuch as I may reject
Islam, I love Muslims. Thus, to save the latter, I have no choice but to
expose the former for the false religion it is. Christ commanded us to
spread the Good News. There is no rule that says Christians should
proselytize the world—except for Muslims! Of course, trying to convert
the latter is more dangerous. But we cannot forsake them. This is more
important considering that many Muslims are “religious” and truly seek
to please God; yet are they misdirected. So I want to take their
sincerity and piety and direct it to the True Light.
FP: In what way can you summarize for us why you think that Islam is a “false” religion?
Botros: Theologically,
as I am a Christian priest, I believe that only Christianity offers the
truth. Based on my faith in Christ, I reject all other religious
systems as man-made and thus not reflective of divine truths. Moreover,
one of the greatest crimes committed by Muhammad—a crime which he shall
surely never be forgiven for—is that he denied the grace and mercy that
Christ brought, and took humanity back to the age of the law.
But
faith aside, common sense alone makes it clear that, of all the world’s
major religions, Islam is most certainly false. After all, while I may
not believe in, say, Buddhism, still, it obviously offers a good
philosophical system and people follow it apparently for its own
intrinsic worth. The same cannot be said about Islam. Of all the
religions it is the only one that has to threaten its adherents with
death if they try to break away; that, from its inception, in order to
“buy” followers, has been dedicated to fulfilling some of the worst
impulses of man—for conquest, sex, plunder, pride. History
alone demonstrates all this: while Christianity was spread far and wide
by Christians who altruistically gave up their lives, simply because
they believed in Christ, Islam spread by force, by the edge of the
sword, by fear, threats, and lurid enticements to the basest desires of
man. Islam is by far the falsest religion—an assertion that is at once
theologically, philosophically, and historically demonstrable.
FP:
You always document your discussions with Islamic sources. Why do
Muslim clerics and imams have such a difficulty discussing what Islam
itself teaches and instead just attack you personally?
Botros: I
think the answer is obvious. The Islamic sources, the texts, speak for
themselves. Muslims have no greater enemy than their own
scriptures—particularly the Hadith and Sira—which constantly scandalize
and embarrass Muslims. To date, I have done well over 500 different
episodes dedicated to various topics regarding Islam. And for every one
of these episodes, all my material comes directly from Islam’s
textual sources, particularly usul al-fiqh—the Koran, hadith, and ijma
of the ulema as found in their tafsirs.
So
what can the sheikhs of Islam do? If they try to address the issue I
raise based on Islam’s texts and sharia, they will have no choice but to
agree—for instance that concubinage is legal, or that drinking camel
urine is advocated. The only strategy left them, then, is to ignore all
that I present and attack my person, instead.
And
when well-meaning Muslims ask their leaders to respond to these
charges, one of their favorite responses is to quote the Koran, where it
says “Do not ask questions of things that will hurt you.”
FP:
So what does it say about a religion whose religious teachers and
members have to ignore their own theological texts because they cannot
endure what those texts really say? What sense does any of this make?
Botros: Again,
this is a reflection of the fact that Islam is less a faith, more a
vehicle for empowerment. As you say, what is the point for a person to
closely guard and follow a religion that he himself has to rationalize,
ignore, minimize, constantly reinterpret, dissemble over, and so forth?
The fact is, most Muslims do not know what is in their own texts; at
best, they know, and here and there try to follow, the Five Pillars. This is why the issues I broach often traumatize Muslims—like a freshening slap across the face: a short, sharp, shock. The
stubborn, who take it as an attack of “us versus them,” irrespective of
truths, just fume and plot to kill me; the other, more reasonable
Muslims, who are really searching for the truth, end up waking up to the
biggest hoax perpetrated on the human race in 1400 years, and many come
to the ultimate Truth.
A
better question is why do the ulema hide these issues from both infidel
scrutiny as well as the eyes of the average Muslim? One would think
that if anyone is dedicated to the truth it would be the ulema; yet
their deceptive tactics reveal the opposite. For instance, it is often
the case that, after I quote problematic passages from certain Islamic
books, they have a strange tendency of disappearing from the book
shelves of the Arabic world.
The
bottom line is, many Muslims think of Islam less as a spiritual system
dedicated to ascertaining and putting one on the course of the truth,
and more a way of life—first and foremost not to be questioned—that if
followed closely, will result, not only in future paradise, but earthly
success, honor, and power.
FP: You have pointed to a hadith that instructs women to breastfeed men. What exactly is going on here and what do the ulema (prominent Muslim theologians past and present) have to say?
Botros: This
is a perfect example of what I just said. After I made popular the
Islamic notion of rida‘ al-kabir—wherein women must “breastfeed” strange
men in order to be in their presence—instead of confronting their own
hadiths which documented this, the ulema attacked me. Why? Because they
have no answer. Much easier to turn it around and slander me, instead of
simply addressing their own texts.
Past
and present, the ulema have by and large supported this shameful
practice—including Ibn Taymiyya, “sheikh al-Islam.” Moreover, sometime
after I publicly documented rida‘ al-kabir, a top Islamic scholar in
al-Azhar—the most authoritative institution in Sunni Islam—actually
issued a fatwa authorizing Muslim women to “breastfeed” strange men, to
which the Egyptian populace (happily) revolted. Yet when I alone
mentioned it earlier, I was accused of “distorting” Islam.
FP:
So Islamic texts command that women must breastfeed strange men. Ok, so
who would create such an instruction? For what purpose? Who even wrote
this down and thought of it? What purpose does it serve? Let’s even say
that I am being open-minded and am ready to accept this as an
understandable teaching. What’s the rationale here? Yes, women should
breastfeed strange men because. . . .?
Botros: Because
Muhammad—“Allah’s prayers and blessings be upon him”—said so. Period.
Who created such a practice? Muhammad. Why? Who knows; the texts say he
laughed after commanding the woman to breastfeed that man. Maybe he was
joking around, trying to see how far people will believe in him as a
prophet? The top hadith compilers wrote it down, preserving it for later
generations. As for what purpose does it serve, one can ask that
question about any number of things Muhammad said: what purpose does
drinking camel urine serve? What purpose does commanding men to wear
only silver as opposed to gold serve? What purpose does banning music
serve? What purpose does anathematizing dogs serve? What purpose does
commanding people to eat only with their right hands, never their left,
serve? What purpose does commanding Muslims to lick all their fingers
after eating serve? Simple: sharia law’s totalitarian approach serves to
brainwash Muslims, making them automatons that never question their
religion, or, in the words of their own Koran, “Do not ask questions
that may prove harmful to them.”
FP: Tell us a bit about Muhammed’s sex life as documented by Islamic sources.
Botros: This
is a very embarrassing topic for me to discuss; and I only do so out of
my love for Muslims—though I know it is painful for them to hear. Yet
such is how healing begins, through initial pain and suffering. In
short, according to Islam’s scriptures, Muhammad was, well, a pervert:
he used to suck on the tongues of young boys and girls; he dressed in
women’s clothing (and received “revelations” in this state); he had at
least 66 “wives”; Allah supposedly sent him special “revelations”
allowing him to have sex with his step-daughter-in-law, Zainab, and to
have more wives than the rest of Muslims; he constantly dwelt and
obsessed over sex—his first question to a “talking donkey” was if the
latter “liked sex”—and he painted a very lurid and lusty picture of
paradise, where, according to some top Muslim interpreters, Muslims will
be “busy deflowering virgins” all day; and he had sex with a dead
woman. There is more, but why dwell on such shameful things? Again, I
stress, it is not I who maintains this but rather Islam’s own
books—much, of course, not known to non-Arabic readers, as they have
never been translated (except, as I understand, by some heroes at a
website called Jihad Watch).
FP: Yes, that’s our friend Robert Spencer’s website.
But
wait, here’s the key. Many people right now will point at you and make
accusations against you for saying these supposedly horrible things. But
again, the issue is not that you are making these allegations. The
issue is that Islamic scriptures themselves say it. So if Muslims are
offended or shocked by these realities then they must confront their own
scriptures and deal with them. They need to confront who wrote them and
why, and either accept them or categorically reject them as lies, etc.
For
the record, pinpoint some Islamic scriptures for us that detail these
ingredients of Muhammad’s sex life so that, once again, we crystallize
that the issue is not you making accusations, but simply revealing what
Islamic scriptures themselves say.
Botros: Where
does one start? According to the Koran alone (33:37), Allah made it
legitimate for Muhammad to marry his own daughter-in-law, whom he lusted
after. A few verses later (33:50), Allah made it legitimate for
Muhammad to have sex with any woman who “offered” herself to him—a
privilege which was allowed for Muhammad alone. Indeed, these
“revelations” which granted Muhammad all his sexual desires were so
frequent that his child-wife, Aisha, would often say to Muhammad, “My,
your Lord is always quick to fulfill your desires!” And to his faithful
followers, Muhammad permitted all the infidel woman that they could
capture, as concubines (Koran 4:3). All this is
from the Koran alone; it would take several hours just to go over the
hadiths and sira accounts dealing with the sexual perversions of
Muhammad. In fact, I have devoted numerous episodes dealing specifically
with Muhammad’s sexual depravities—including his sleeping with a dead
woman, have a fetish for the smell of menstruation blood, dressing in
women’s clothing, and so forth. (Jihad Watch has translated many of these.)
FP: What has the impact been of your ministry?
Botros: It
has been glorious—praise be to God alone, whose instrument I am. Haya
TV (“Life TV”) and I receive daily countless e-mails from Muslim
converts to Christianity. Our programs reach millions of Arabic
speaking viewers around the world. It is even banned in certain
countries, such as Saudi Arabia, even though people from there still manage to access our programs.
FP: How about the feedback you receive?
Botros: Mostly
positive; mostly from those who have, as I call it, “crossed over,”
that is, converts to Christianity. And of course some are angry and
full of hate. But like I said, it is not feedback—positive or
negative—that motivates me, but rather unconditional love for those
sincere souls living in bondage.
FP: You’ve obviously been instrumental in Muslims coming to Christ, yes?
Botros: That’s
what they tell me. In fact, many of them tell me I am like a father to
them, which I am honored to be called, though I remind all we have but
One Father. For instance, one man recently contacted me, in tears,
telling me how, when he was a Muslim, he wanted to kill me—to cut off my
head! He spent much time and effort plotting how he can find me so he
can kill me (and “please” Allah and his prophet). So he kept watching
my shows, hoping somehow to find a clue that would help him locate me.
Instead, a miracle occurred: over time, he realized I wasn’t making
things up, that everything I said was in fact in Islam’s books. He
stopped hating me. And in time, he came to Christ. It is stories like
these that keep me going.
FP: In your view, who was Muhammad?
Botros: Well,
I have received the answer from Islam’s own books. Ironically, Ibn
Taymiyya, who happens to be the hero of the modern mujahid movement,
explained the prerequisites of prophet-hood very well. One of the
things he stressed is that, in order to know if a prophet is in fact
from God, we must study his sira, or his biography, much like the
Christ’s statement that “You shall know them from their fruits.” So,
taking Ibn Taymiyya’s advice, I recently devoted a number of episodes
analyzing the biography of Muhammad, which unequivocally proves that he
was not a prophet, that his only “fruits” were death, destruction, and
lust. Indeed, he himself confessed and believed that he was being
visited and tormented by a “jinn,” or basically a demon, until his wife
Khadija convinced him that it was the angel Gabriel—which, of course is
ironic, since Muhammad himself later went on to say that the testimony
of a woman is half that of a man: maybe over time he realized she was
wrong, and that his first assumption was right.
FP: Fr. Botros, thank you for visiting us today.
Botros: Thank you, and may the true God richly bless you.
No comments:
Post a Comment