The Bible is the term, which refers to the revelations, which should be held sacred by all Christians. It includes the Old Testament, or the Torah, which was revealed to Prophet Moses, and the New Testament, or the Gospel, (or the Injeel, to use Islamic terminology), which was revealed to Prophet Jesus, peace be upon them both. Christians normally concentrate on the Gospel with particular emphasis on the four books known as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. These books were either written or dictated by those people to whom they are attributed as they learned the teachings of Jesus Christ from his followers. They were not the exact words taught by Jesus himself.

The Qur’an is the book that includes the revelations of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, as he received them from on high. It is written in the exact words of God taught to Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, by the Angel Gabriel. Moreover, it is guaranteed to remain intact, free from distortion. That guarantee is given by no one other than God Himself. You will find no differences among copies of the Qur’an printed today or those written by scribes in any period of history, ever since it was revealed. God tells His messenger that He will guarantee that book will always remain intact, and will be available to people in its original form. The Qur’an is God’s final message to mankind. Hence it is important that it remains available to all people, as indeed it has been ever since its first revelation.

God tells us in the Qur’an that earlier books revealed from on high were distorted by priests and rabbis and also by other people. The starkest example of such distortion is the claim that God has a son, or that His son is Jesus. This is a wild claim for which there is no proof whatsoever, either in the teachings by Jesus, or indeed from any other source. We believe what God says of Himself in the Qur’an, His final message which will always remain true and free from distortion, that God has not begotten a son and will never have one. Hence, we reject that claim altogether without need to go into its details. Moreover, we accept that the Bible, in its Old and New Testaments, is true in its original form. Since we have no access to that form, we say that whatever in the Torah and the Gospel does not contradict any statement in the Qur’an is true, and whatever contradicts the Qur’an is false, as it is the result of distortion. Hence, the Bible is not obligatory for Muslims to read.

The concept of the Trinity is based on the belief in the union of three personalities (the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost) in one Godhead, or the threefold personality of the Divine Being. This is an essential concept of today’s Christianity which emphasizes that Jesus was son of God and that he and the Angel Gabriel were in union with God who is claimed to be the Father. This is a polytheist concept, which could have never been preached by Jesus Christ, who was a noble prophet and a messenger of God ranked among the messengers of the firmest resolve, which is the highest rank among prophets.

Since God has sent His final message to mankind, in the form of Qur’an, all people are required to believe in Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, as God’s final messenger and to accept the Qur’an as God’s final message. They are required to implement it in their lives. Those who do not, are not believers in the true sense of the word. They may believe in God, but they do not formulate the true concept of faith which He requires people to have. What He does with them on the Day of Judgment is His own business.

As far as we are concerned, we say that such people have not believed in what God wants us to believe. Hence, we cannot include them among true believers, because they do not believe in the message of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

I am not particularly familiar with this theory, or its details. I have watched a television program about it and read an article, but I am not in a position to speak about it in any depth. What I would like to say about it, however, is that whether it is proved to be true or false, it should not affect our view of religion in any way. Allah could have brought about such a "Big Bang" to create the universe, if He wanted to do so. He could certainly have created the universe in some other manner. Whichever way He adopted to create the universe testifies to His limitless ability and overall control of the universe and everything in it.

Where scientists reach the limits of their research, they are seen making attempt to make such a theory a basis to negate or cast suspicion on what Islam says about creation. If the universe came into being as a result of a Big Bang, does that mean that the bang happened by itself, without any cause? Or does it mean that Allah caused it? If the latter, well and good. If they opt for the first answer, saying that the bang just happened by itself without a cause, we will ask for a proof. We will say: Was there anything before the bang took place? Did it happen by a collision of physical entities, electric charges or other sources of energy? If so, where did these come from? Who gave them their existence? Such a line of questioning will inevitably lead us to decide our starting point.

Are we seeking an explanation for the existence of the universe in total isolation of the concept of Allah's existence? In other words, does scientific research want to prove that life could have come about without any need for a creator? If so, then we are simply not interested in such an endeavor. Let scientists do what they like, they will never be able to come up with any logical explanation that can be proven to be true and at the same time negate Allah's role altogether. If Muslim scientists find enough evidence to suggest that the Big Bang Theory explains how the universe came into existence, they would relate that to Allah and His power. They would say that Allah has created the universe by causing a big bang to take place and they would then carry on with their investigations. Their research may lead them to great discoveries, but that does not negate Allah's role.

The problem with scientists' research in the West is that it seeks to provide a theory which can be used as an alternative to the fact that the universe is Allah's creation. As a result, scientists go far astray. Moreover, they can produce no theory which can stand the test of time. Take for example the theory of Charles Darwin on the origin of species. There is nothing that an Islamic scholar or a man of religion can find wrong with the observations about the gradation of species and that one species leads to the next which is slightly higher. They noted that the gradation is observable in the plant kingdom as well as in the animal kingdom. They have also mentioned that there seems to be two un-bridgeable gaps, one between the highest plant species and the lowest animal type of life and the other between the highest animals which are closest to man and man himself. Their view is that it is Allah who has willed the system of creation to be such. Such a gradation proves His great ability to anyone who reflects on what Allah has placed in the universe. Muslim scientists have also spoken about the fine balance which we find in nature and how no species is allowed to multiply in great numbers so as to swarm the planet or dominate the universe. They attributed all that to the great hand of the Supreme Lord. This is the logical explanation which uses natural phenomena as a proof of the greatest fact of all, namely, Allah's existence, His Godhood and Lordship.

What the West did with Darwin's theory was something different. Scientists tried to show that the great observations of Darwin indicate that there is a process of natural selection which is set in motion and continues to operate forever. Hence, that process provided for them a platform to announce their atheism and agnosticism and reject Allah's role altogether. They could not explain how the process of natural selection operates. Is it subject to the physical phenomena that exists in the universe? What made all species acquire the ability to adapt themselves to such phenomena? As for the two gaps, Western scientists who took over from Darwin tried to explain them away by saying that these were two missing links. They have not come up with any explanation why these links have been and continue to be missing? If the process of natural selection is self-supporting and ensures its own continuity, why has it not tried to bridge these two gaps? Whey does the missing link continue to be missing at those particular two points? In all this, we find an arbitrary attempt to replace religion with science, making of it a new god to which submission is required, even though it involves believing in some inexplicable phenomena. Such scientists say that their alternative is more logical and reasonable, but they cannot use it to explain everything that needs explanation. If scientists want to carry their research a step further than studying what is available in the universe so as to explain its existence, they must come up with a complete explanation that can be proved throughout with facts that cannot be challenged. If science is to replace religion, it should offer something which is complete, true, verifiable, unchangeable and absolute.

The general rule which governs the use of such material is that everything is lawful unless pronounced otherwise. There may be some rules which restrict the use of certain items and these rules may apply to other items by analogy. It is forbidden for a Muslim, for example, to wear clothes or to have an article of equipment which bears a distinctive mark of unbelievers. I am not sure what this bindi looks like, but I can say that it is permissible in the first instance. However, if it is distinctive of women who follow some other religion like Buddhists or Hindus, it becomes forbidden. The prohibition does not come as a result of anything inherent in the article itself, but as a result of its being distinctive of non-Muslim women. [Added: If you are living in a society where there are both Muslim and non-Muslim women living and those non-Muslim women use 'bindi', then it will be forbidden for the Muslim women to wear 'bindi'. However, in a purely Muslim society, where a women is accepted and treated as a Muslim unless established otherwise, there should be no restriction on its use. However, one may still say that it is strongly discouraged.]

On the other hand, if this adhesive sticker or enamel is waterproof, then a Muslim woman who wears it cannot have a proper ablution. It prevents the water from reaching a part of her face which should be washed. Since her ablution is incomplete, her prayer will be invalid. In this case, the prohibition is a consequence of its effect on prayer.

To sum up, if this enamel or sticker is not distinctive of non-Muslim women, a Muslim woman may wear it provided she removes it when she wants to have ablution for prayer.