PDA

View Full Version : Islam has copied (say the Christians and the Jews)



Pages : [1] 2

h-n
07-20-2010, 11:56 PM
Islam the only religion

All the Prophets were Muslims,

they all worshipped the one God,

remembered the Day of Judgement, believed in Paradise and Hell,

Sacrificed animals

Fasted

Bowed down in prayer (which even Prophet Jesus peace be upon him had done).

AS stated in the "Collapse of these countries" thread

Allah always sends a Prophet to convey the message, all the messages are the same to worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement and in Paradise and Hell.

Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was sent, as obviously Christianity could not tell the Arabs to repent as they were committing idol worship and the Jews were not remembering the next world. Actually they were happy to live with idol worshippers, they did not tell idol worshippers to repent.

1. The Christians/Jews say that we have copied off their texts, when Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was illiterate, and NO ONE at the time accused him of copying off the Jews and the Christians.

2. Why shouldn't Allah tell us of the stories of the Prophets Ibrahim, Noah, Lut peace be upon them etc? They belong to him. Why are the Christians complaining anyway, they are committing idol worship. Even Allah has said the best people to lay clam to Prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him are the ones that follow after him more;-

-we worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement and Paradise and Hell (which the Christians are committing idol worship and the Jews are leaving out Hell)

-we sacrifice as he did,

-we fast,

- the Kaaba in Mecca is actually built by Prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him.

3. Also how did we get the story of King Solomon peace be upon him controlling the winds and the Jinn? As this was now recently found out to be left out of the bible.

4. Obviously if it was left to the Christians and the Jews, they would never have succeeded in finishing idol worship and lewd and drunk behaviour in the middle east. Actually they had plenty of time to prove themselves, so why did they not sort out idol worship before Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him had arrived? They cannot say that we copied off them, as we would never have been successful in sorting out idol worship.

5. Islam is doing what Christianity and Judaism could not do, tell people to worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement, in Paradise and Hell. They are not going to get a Prophet now, Prophet Jesus peace be upon him will only be coming AFTER these countries have finished (which even the Christians have agreed to).

Islam has been sufficient to teach the whole world, even the Christians have accepted that "God" has been talked about more because of Islam. They are responding back to Muslims as people used to do aforetime, by torturing, and even the masses at the time of Pharoah turned a blind eye, and even though the public knew that Bush supported torture, they still voted for him etc.

6. If Islam was not in this world, its not hard to see that the Christians and the Jews would have failed talking about Allah, remembering the Day of Judgement, Paradise and Hell. They would have just build more holiday resorts in the Middle East etc. So Islam is successful.

7. People can argue why Islam is successful is because we had supported the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. But the

- Christians failed to protect the Prophet Jesus peace be upon him when they tried to kill him. As they were more afraid of the authorities then Allah. Even though he did a lot for people, and created a bird out of clay and by Allah's permission it came alive. People were still more afraid of -the authorities.

At least if they Muslims were there, we would have fought for Prophet Jesus peace be upon him, and he will be having our support when he comes back.

-the Jews were treating the Prophets to help them live in this world, and did on their own records irritated the Prophet Moses peace be upon him. They even after all that Allah had done for them, took to worshipping the cow idol. They are blaming Prophet Aaron peace be upon him, just to try and make themselves look better. But the fact is he never told people to worship the cow idol, as stated in the Quran. Also there is no excuse to idol worship. It was a sinful act. They even told the Prophet Moses peace be upon him to fight for them so they could enter the town so he left them to wander. Even they treated King David peace be upon him poorly as they tried to oust him as leader.

8. All the Prophets submitted to Allah's will, they never changed the message of Allah. Which clearly the Christians and the Jews have done;-

-Why are not the Christians worshipping the one God? As did Prophet Noah, Lut, David, Jesus, Solomon peace be upon them etc

-Why are not the Jews mentioning Hell? As did Prophets Noah, Lut, David, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Solomon peace be upon them etc

-Why aren't they all sacrificing animals (the Jews say they will later on, but still it makes what they are eating today unlawful)

-The Jews said they are to test Prophets (which is a terrible thing to say as they are the best), who are they to test Prophets? If that is the case why don't they tell everyone how they tested Prophet Moses peace be upon him? How did they test King David peace be upon him etc

-the Jews are willing to accept females to be "Prophetesses" ie Sarah. But they have a hard time accepting Prophets Jesus and Muhammad peace be upon him? What did she do anyway preach the message? No.

9. We Muslims as above are following after the Prophets and the Jews and the Christians have corrupted themselves. We are closer to all the Prophets then they will ever be for their idol worship and rejecting Hell and holding on to the life of this world.

10. Miracles they ask for, they say they will only believe if a Prophet has performed a miracle, if that was the case then why are they corrupt??? Why are they not all believers then, and now?? If miracles truly worked, then why did they take the cow idol to worship when Prophet Moses peace be upon him was away? After the parting of the red sea, the plagues of Egypt??

The magicians at Pharoah's court did a better job then the Jews who took to cow idol worship. The magicians feared Allah and did not beg Pharaoh for leniency, they stood their ground and had their hands and feet chopped off from alternative sides, and made it to Paradise.

The Jews treat their test of endurance, when actually they were to repent as they had been clearly been treating Prophets poorly.

11. The Christians claim that the Prophets are Christians when;-

Prophet Noah peace be upon him would NOT be accepting the Christians for their idol worship,

Prophet Moses peace be upon him would NOT be accepting the Christians for their idol worship. etc

Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
h-n
09-18-2010, 06:46 PM
bump in reference to RIP thread.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 12:50 PM
Originally Posted by h-n
Islam the only religion

All the Prophets were Muslims,

they all worshipped the one God,

remembered the Day of Judgement, believed in Paradise and Hell,

Sacrificed animals

Fasted

Bowed down in prayer (which even Prophet Jesus peace be upon him had done).

AS stated in the "Collapse of these countries" thread

Allah always sends a Prophet to convey the message, all the messages are the same to worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement and in Paradise and Hell.

Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was sent, as obviously Christianity could not tell the Arabs to repent as they were committing idol worship and the Jews were not remembering the next world. Actually they were happy to live with idol worshippers, they did not tell idol worshippers to repent.

1. The Christians/Jews say that we have copied off their texts, when Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was illiterate, and NO ONE at the time accused him of copying off the Jews and the Christians.

2. Why shouldn't Allah tell us of the stories of the Prophets Ibrahim, Noah, Lut peace be upon them etc? They belong to him. Why are the Christians complaining anyway, they are committing idol worship. Even Allah has said the best people to lay clam to Prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him are the ones that follow after him more;-

-we worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement and Paradise and Hell (which the Christians are committing idol worship and the Jews are leaving out Hell)

-we sacrifice as he did,

-we fast,

- the Kaaba in Mecca is actually built by Prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him.

3. Also how did we get the story of King Solomon peace be upon him controlling the winds and the Jinn? As this was now recently found out to be left out of the bible.
Hello, h-n. Peace.

No one (as far as I know) claims that Muhammed could read and copied texts that he had read. Rather, it is believed that he came into contact with various stories by word of mouth.

There would be no serious problem if the Quranic stories matched those found in the Bible but of course they don't. Often there are conflicts and sometimes these concern major issues of doctrine where Islam and Christianity differ in their teachings.

The story of King Solomon controlling Jinn, etc. is not found in the Bible but a most similar story does appear in the Second Targum on Esther, which is printed in the Miqraoth Gedoloth. This story is, of course, considered to be no more than a fantasy legend concerning things that happened at the meeting of Solomon with the Queen of Sheba.


The account reads:
"Again, when King Solomon's heart was merry with his wine, he commanded to bring the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air and the creeping things of the earth and the jinns and the spirits and the night-goblins to dance before him, in order to show his greatness to all the kings who were prostrating themselves before him. And the king's scribes summoned them by their names, and they all assembled and came unto him, except the prisoners and except the captives and except the man who took charge of them. At that hour the cock of the desert was enjoying himself among the birds and was not found. And the king commanded concerning him that they should bring him by force, and wished to destroy him. The cock of the desert returned to King Solomon's presence and said to him, ‘Hearken, my lord the king of the earth, incline thine ear and hear my words. Is it not three months ago that I took counsel in my heart and formed a firm resolution with myself that I would not eat, and would not drink water, before I had seen the whole world and flown about in it? And I said, Which province or kingdom is there that is not obedient to my lord the king? I beheld and saw a fortified city, the name of which is Qitor, in an eastern land. The dust is heavy with gold, and silver is like dung in the streets, and trees have been planted there from the beginning; and from the Garden of Eden do they drink water. There are there great multitudes with garlands on their heads. From there are plants from the Garden of Eden, because it is near unto it. They know how to shoot with the bow, but cannot be slain with the bow. One woman rules over them all, and her name is the Queen of Sheba. Now if it please thee, my lord the king, I shall gird up my loins, and I shall rise up and go to the fortress of Qitor, to the city of Sheba; I shall "bind their kings with chains and their nobles with links of iron," and shall bring them unto my lord the King.’ And the saying was pleasing before the king, and the king's scribes were called, and they wrote a letter and fastened the letter to the wing of the cock of the desert. And he arose and went up high into the sky and bound on his tiara and grew strong, and flew among the birds. And they flew after him. And they went to the fortress of Qitor, to the city of Sheba. And it came to pass at morning time that the Queen of Sheba went forth by the sea to worship. And the birds darkened the sun; and she laid her hand upon her garments and rent them, and she became surprised and troubled. And when she was troubled, the cock of the desert came down to her, and she saw, and lo! a letter was fastened to his wing. She opened and read it. And this was what was written in it:— ‘From me, King Solomon. Peace be to thee, peace be to thy nobles! Forasmuch as thou knowest that the Holy One, blessed be He! has made me King over the beasts of the field, and over the fowls of the air, and over jinns and over spirits and over night-goblins, and all the kings of the East and the West and the South and the North come and inquire about my health (peace): now, if thou art willing and dost come and inquire after my health, well: I shall make thee greater than all the kings that bow down before me. And if thou art not willing and dost not come nor inquire after my health, I shall send against thee kings and legions and horsemen. And if thou sayest, ‘What kings and legions and horsemen has King Solomon?’ — the beasts of the field are kings and legions and horsemen. And if thou sayest, ‘What horsemen?’ — the fowls of the air are horsemen, my armies are spirits and jinns, and the night-goblins are legions that shall strangle you in your beds within your houses: the beasts of the field shall slay you in the field; the birds of the air shall eat your flesh from off you.’ And when the Queen of Sheba heard the words of the letter, again a second time she laid her hand upon her garments and rent them. She sent and called the elders and nobles, and said to them, ‘Do ye not know what King Solomon has sent to me?’ They answered and said, ‘We do not know King Solomon nor do we make any account of his kingdom.’ But she was not contented, nor did she hearken unto their words, but she sent and called all the ships of the sea and loaded them with offerings and jewels and precious stones. And she sent unto him six thousand boys and girls, and all of them were born in the same (one) year, and all of them were born in one month, and all of them were born in one day, and all of them were born in one hour, and all of them were of the same stature, and all of them were of the same figure, and all of them were clad in purple garments And she wrote a letter and sent it to King Solomon by their hands. ‘From the fortress of Qitor to the land of Israel is seven years journey. Now through thy prayers and through thy petitions which I entreat of thee, I shall come to thee at the end of three years.’ And it came to pass at the end of three years that the Queen of Sheba came to King Solomon. And when King Solomon heard that the Queen of Sheba had come, he sent unto her Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, who was like the dawn that rises at morning-time, and resembled the Star of Splendour (Venus) which shines and stands firm among the stars, and was similar to the lily which stands by the water-courses. And when the Queen of Sheba saw Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, she alighted from the chariot. Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, answered and said to her, ‘Why hast thou alighted from thy chariot?’ She answered and said to him, ‘Art not thou King Solomon?’ He answered and said to her, ‘I am not King Solomon, but one of his servants who stand before him.’ And forthwith she turned her face behind her and uttered a parable to the nobles, ‘If the lion has not appeared to you, ye have seen his offspring, and if ye have not seen King Solomon ye have seen the beauty of a man who stands before him.’ And Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, brought her before the king. And when the king heard that she had come to him, he arose and went and sat in a crystal house. And when the Queen of Sheba saw that the king sat in a crystal house, she considered in her heart and said that the king sat in water, and she gathered up her garment that she might cross over, and he saw that she had hair on her legs. The king answered and said unto her, ‘Thy beauty is the beauty of women, and thy hair is the hair of a man; and hair is beautiful for a man, but for a woman it is disgraceful.’ The Queen of Sheba answered and said to him, ‘My lord the king, I shall utter to thee three parables, which if thou explain to me, I shall know that thou art a wise man, and if not, thou art as the rest of men.’ (Solomon solved all three problems.) And she said, ‘Blessed be the Lord thy God who delighted in thee to seat thee upon the throne of the kingdom to do judgment and justice.’ And she gave unto the king good gold and silver. ... And the king gave her all that she desired."
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-20-2010, 12:55 PM
Aslaamu`Alaaykum

Quran corrects the bible!, it teaches the truth about the Prophets :Abraham, Jesus, Moses, Lutt, etc (May the blessings of Allaah be on them).

Wa`Alaaykum Salaam
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 02:11 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
Quran corrects the bible!, it teaches the truth about the Prophets :Abraham, Jesus, Moses, Lutt, etc (May the blessings of Allaah be on them).
Peace, мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє.

How would you prove this?
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 02:27 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Peace, мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє.

How would you prove this?
One way is to wait till the Day of Judgement and let the prophets testify themselves against the false claims attributed to them. OR even see if you're alive when Jesus (pbuh) descends to earth near the end of time and testifies against false claims attributed to him.

the other is to simply see if it makes sense that a prophet of god eg; Lut (peace be upon him) could commit incest with his daughters, whether it makes sense that a 'servant' of god eg; Jesus (peace be upon him) could become god himself etc etc


Islam as a whole corrects Christianity and Judaism
Reply

Predator
09-20-2010, 02:35 PM
the other is to simply see if it makes sense that a prophet of god eg; Lut (peace be upon him) could commit incest with his daughters
There are 10 cases of incest in the bible and out of those 10 cases , Its amazing how Muhammad(PBUH) didnt "copy" a single one of them into the Quran.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 03:01 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
One way is to wait till the Day of Judgement and let the prophets testify themselves against the false claims attributed to them. OR even see if you're alive when Jesus (pbuh) descends to earth near the end of time and testifies against false claims attributed to him.
Be serious. It would be too late by then wouldn't it?
Originally Posted by aadil77
the other is to simply see if it makes sense that a prophet of god eg; Lut (peace be upon him) could commit incest with his daughters, whether it makes sense that a 'servant' of god eg; Jesus (peace be upon him) could become god himself etc etc
The Bible does not call Lut a prophet although the Qu'ran does. No blame is attached to Lot for what happened since his daughters deceived him. If you deny that the incident happened then you have the problem of explaining where the historical tribes the Ammonites and Moabites (descendants of Lut through his daughters) came from. Also, why does the name "Moab" mean "from the father"?

But I agree that it doesn't make sense to say that Jesus is God.
Reply

Zafran
09-20-2010, 03:08 PM
There would be no serious problem if the Quranic stories matched those found in the Bible but of course they don't. Often there are conflicts and sometimes these concern major issues of doctrine where Islam and Christianity differ in their teachings.
-
but there is also a disgareement on the pornographic and violent stuff - By the way doctrine come out of interpretation - The Jews and the christians themselves differ on the understanding of the OT and have very different doctrines. Even the teachings are different. The Jews believe that christians misrepresent the OT.

The bibles account of Solomon are seen to be fantasy and legends as well by many people so I'm not sure where your getting at.
Reply

Zafran
09-20-2010, 03:11 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Be serious. It would be too late by then wouldn't it?

The Bible does not call Lut a prophet although the Qu'ran does. No blame is attached to Lot for what happened since his daughters deceived him. If you deny that the incident happened then you have the problem of explaining where the historical tribes the Ammonites and Moabites (descendants of Lut through his daughters) came from. Also, why does the name "Moab" mean "from the father"?

But I agree that it doesn't make sense to say that Jesus is God.
Thats not true at all - the bible itself is not a reliable source for Muslims anyway and including many historians -
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 03:15 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Be serious. It would be too late by then wouldn't it?
Yep

The Bible does not call Lut a prophet although the Qu'ran does. No blame is attached to Lot for what happened since his daughters deceived him. If you deny that the incident happened then you have the problem of explaining where the historical tribes the Ammonites and Moabites (descendants of Lut through his daughters) came from. Also, why does the name "Moab" mean "from the father"?
But again how reliable is the bible?

No prophet can sink this low even by accident - that they could get drunk and commit incest with their own daughter, Allah protects them from such evils and humilation. And he was married, was he not?

He said: "I am indeed, of those who disapprove with severe anger and fury your (this evil) action (of sodomy). My Lord! Save me and my family from what they do."
So We saved him and his family, all except an old woman (his wife) among those who remained behind. (Ch 26:160-171 Qur'ân)


But I agree that it doesn't make sense to say that Jesus is God.
or that he is the son of god?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 03:21 PM
Originally Posted by Airforce
There are 10 cases of incest in the bible and out of those 10 cases , Its amazing how Muhammad(PBUH) didnt "copy" a single one of them into the Quran.
The Qur'an mentions Cain and Abel. Who did Cain marry?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 03:41 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
-
but there is also a disgareement on the pornographic and violent stuff - By the way doctrine come out of interpretation - The Jews and the christians themselves differ on the understanding of the OT and have very different doctrines. Even the teachings are different. The Jews believe that christians misrepresent the OT.

The bibles account of Solomon are seen to be fantasy and legends as well by many people so I'm not sure where your getting at.
It isn't reasonable to believe that Solomon never existed. But it does stretch credulity to imagine that he practiced magic on a grand scale and had armies of birds and spirit creatures in his court. Also the Israelites did not invade other nations just because they practiced idolatry (as Solomon is depicted as doing). They tended to keep within their own borders. And the description of the action of Solomon in sending a bird to make a declaration with threat of war, does not sound convincing. Nobody reading such a narrative today would take it seriously if it wasn't in the Qur'an.
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 03:43 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
The Qur'an mentions Cain and Abel. Who did Cain marry?
that was a permissable case, there were no other people available to marry from

you can read more here http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/255/
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 03:49 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
It isn't reasonable to believe that Solomon never existed. But it does stretch credulity to imagine that he practiced magic on a grand scale and had armies of birds and spirit creatures in his court. Also the Israelites did not invade other nations just because they practiced idolatry (as Solomon is depicted as doing). They tended to keep within their own borders. And the description of the action of Solomon in sending a bird to make a declaration with threat of war, does not sound convincing. Nobody reading such a narrative today would take it seriously if it wasn't in the Qur'an.
no body reading the 'narrative' of Nuh's (pbuh) Ark or of Musa's (pbuh) staff etc would take these events seriously either, would they?

there are many things which might not be taken 'seriously' but these are miracles given to each prophet and they are not hard to believe in

btw Suleiman (pbuh) never practiced magic, his abilities were miracles given to him
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 04:23 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
no body reading the 'narrative' of Nuh's (pbuh) Ark or of Musa's (pbuh) staff etc would take these events seriously either, would they?

there are many things which might not be taken 'seriously' but these are miracles given to each prophet and they are not hard to believe in

btw Suleiman (pbuh) never practiced magic, his abilities were miracles given to him
Speaking for myself, I believe in both Nuh's Ark and the miracle of Musa's staff because both are recorded in the Qur'an and in the Bible. (I believe that there is additional geological evidence for the flood but lets leave that for now.) But the story of Solomon having control of jinns and talking with birds is only found in the Qur'an and the targums. The targums contain all manner of weird accounts and stories from Jewish legends and commentary and much of it is nonsense. But these stories go back a long way, dating to times before the rise of Islam. And it is understandable that critics would claim that such stories were related verbally to Muhammed and that he mistook them for scriptural accounts and included them into the Qur'an.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 04:26 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
that was a permissable case, there were no other people available to marry from

you can read more here http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/255/
I guess then that Muslims don't believe that Abraham married his own half sister.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 04:47 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
But again how reliable is the bible?

No prophet can sink this low even by accident - that they could get drunk and commit incest with their own daughter, Allah protects them from such evils and humilation. And he was married, was he not?
Well, I have found the Bible to be very reliable. The fact that it sometimes records unpleasant details testifies to the Bible's honesty -- nothing is hidden. The account of Lut and his daughters is important because it shows the relationship of the Israelites to Lut's descendants, the Ammonites and Moabites, and explains God's dealings with these nations. Ruth was a Moabite her descendants included King David and Jesus. Lut's wife was, of course, dead when the incident happened. Turned into a pillar of salt.

What point are you making here? The Bible doesn't say that Lut was a prophet so I have no reason to believe that he was. And the Qur'an doesn't deny that incest took place anyway. Does any hadith comment on this matter?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 04:52 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77

or that he is the son of god?
The Bible calls Jesus, Adam, angels and others sons of God. It also says that Adam was created from the dust of the ground. So obviously these "sons" were not begotten in the manner that humans beget children. But they were given life by God so in that sense he is their Father.
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 04:56 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
I guess then that Muslims don't believe that Abraham married his own half sister.
obviously not, we don't believe that Sarah was his half sister
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 05:04 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Well, I have found the Bible to be very reliable. The fact that it sometimes records unpleasant details testifies to the Bible's honesty -- nothing is hidden. The account of Lut and his daughters is important because it shows the relationship of the Israelites to Lut's descendants, the Ammonites and Moabites, and explains God's dealings with these nations. Ruth was a Moabite her descendants included King David and Jesus. Lut's wife was, of course, dead when the incident happened. Turned into a pillar of salt.

What point are you making here? The Bible doesn't say that Lut was a prophet so I have no reason to believe that he was. And the Qur'an doesn't deny that incest took place anyway. Does any hadith comment on this matter?
'unpleasent details' only testify to its corruption and the fact that it is no longer the revelation of god, but a mixture with the word of man - the Quran or hadith do not need to deny that a Prophet of god could gett drunk and commit incest - its common sense.

The Quran is not all about denying various deviant beliefs introduced by man, the brief mentions of previous prophets are only there as examples to mankind, there is alot more that is revealed in the Quran than stories that are shared with the bible.
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 05:10 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
The Bible calls Jesus, Adam, angels and others sons of God. It also says that Adam was created from the dust of the ground. So obviously these "sons" were not begotten in the manner that humans beget children. But they were given life by God so in that sense he is their Father.
In this sense even Satan is the 'son' of god as he was not begotten

We are given life by god, it doesn't make us His literal 'sons' or Him our literal 'father', give up these fairytales
Reply

tango92
09-20-2010, 05:43 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Well, I have found the Bible to be very reliable.
account for the contradictions! you cannot reconcile this statement with mistakes admitted to by your own scholars.

The fact that it sometimes records unpleasant details testifies to the Bible's honesty -- nothing is hidden.
so u admit biblical stories go against your natural inclinations towards God? well done, its a start.

and your right, "nothing is hidden" God has not hidden any defect in your bible:statisfie
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-20-2010, 06:34 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
'unpleasent details' only testify to its corruption and the fact that it is no longer the revelation of god, but a mixture with the word of man - the Quran or hadith do not need to deny that a Prophet of god could gett drunk and commit incest - its common sense.
I disagree with Hiroshi on at least one major point of theology, but I do agree with his point on the "unpleasant details". I find life to be messy. I find that people live very convoluted lives. And I don't believe that God was restricted to using only perfect people with no "unpleasant details" to reveal himself to humankind. What you see as corruption being proved by the existence of "unpleasant details" in the lives of prophets, I see as honesty. And the lack of these things within Islamic tradition strikes me as a kind of whitewashing of the truth. Hence, to the lack of these details in Islam becomes evidence to me of corruption in the assimilation of Hebraic stories into Islam.
Reply

M.I.A.
09-20-2010, 06:45 PM
Originally Posted by h-n
Islam the only religion

All the Prophets were Muslims,

they all worshipped the one God,

remembered the Day of Judgement, believed in Paradise and Hell,

Sacrificed animals

Fasted

Bowed down in prayer (which even Prophet Jesus peace be upon him had done).

AS stated in the "Collapse of these countries" thread

Allah always sends a Prophet to convey the message, all the messages are the same to worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement and in Paradise and Hell.

Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was sent, as obviously Christianity could not tell the Arabs to repent as they were committing idol worship and the Jews were not remembering the next world. Actually they were happy to live with idol worshippers, they did not tell idol worshippers to repent.

1. The Christians/Jews say that we have copied off their texts, when Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was illiterate, and NO ONE at the time accused him of copying off the Jews and the Christians.

2. Why shouldn't Allah tell us of the stories of the Prophets Ibrahim, Noah, Lut peace be upon them etc? They belong to him. Why are the Christians complaining anyway, they are committing idol worship. Even Allah has said the best people to lay clam to Prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him are the ones that follow after him more;-

-we worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement and Paradise and Hell (which the Christians are committing idol worship and the Jews are leaving out Hell)

-we sacrifice as he did,

-we fast,

- the Kaaba in Mecca is actually built by Prophet Ibrahim peace be upon him.

3. Also how did we get the story of King Solomon peace be upon him controlling the winds and the Jinn? As this was now recently found out to be left out of the bible.

4. Obviously if it was left to the Christians and the Jews, they would never have succeeded in finishing idol worship and lewd and drunk behaviour in the middle east. Actually they had plenty of time to prove themselves, so why did they not sort out idol worship before Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him had arrived? They cannot say that we copied off them, as we would never have been successful in sorting out idol worship.

5. Islam is doing what Christianity and Judaism could not do, tell people to worship the one God, remember the Day of Judgement, in Paradise and Hell. They are not going to get a Prophet now, Prophet Jesus peace be upon him will only be coming AFTER these countries have finished (which even the Christians have agreed to).

Islam has been sufficient to teach the whole world, even the Christians have accepted that "God" has been talked about more because of Islam. They are responding back to Muslims as people used to do aforetime, by torturing, and even the masses at the time of Pharoah turned a blind eye, and even though the public knew that Bush supported torture, they still voted for him etc.

6. If Islam was not in this world, its not hard to see that the Christians and the Jews would have failed talking about Allah, remembering the Day of Judgement, Paradise and Hell. They would have just build more holiday resorts in the Middle East etc. So Islam is successful.

7. People can argue why Islam is successful is because we had supported the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. But the

- Christians failed to protect the Prophet Jesus peace be upon him when they tried to kill him. As they were more afraid of the authorities then Allah. Even though he did a lot for people, and created a bird out of clay and by Allah's permission it came alive. People were still more afraid of -the authorities.

At least if they Muslims were there, we would have fought for Prophet Jesus peace be upon him, and he will be having our support when he comes back.

-the Jews were treating the Prophets to help them live in this world, and did on their own records irritated the Prophet Moses peace be upon him. They even after all that Allah had done for them, took to worshipping the cow idol. They are blaming Prophet Aaron peace be upon him, just to try and make themselves look better. But the fact is he never told people to worship the cow idol, as stated in the Quran. Also there is no excuse to idol worship. It was a sinful act. They even told the Prophet Moses peace be upon him to fight for them so they could enter the town so he left them to wander. Even they treated King David peace be upon him poorly as they tried to oust him as leader.

8. All the Prophets submitted to Allah's will, they never changed the message of Allah. Which clearly the Christians and the Jews have done;-

-Why are not the Christians worshipping the one God? As did Prophet Noah, Lut, David, Jesus, Solomon peace be upon them etc

-Why are not the Jews mentioning Hell? As did Prophets Noah, Lut, David, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Solomon peace be upon them etc

-Why aren't they all sacrificing animals (the Jews say they will later on, but still it makes what they are eating today unlawful)

-The Jews said they are to test Prophets (which is a terrible thing to say as they are the best), who are they to test Prophets? If that is the case why don't they tell everyone how they tested Prophet Moses peace be upon him? How did they test King David peace be upon him etc

-the Jews are willing to accept females to be "Prophetesses" ie Sarah. But they have a hard time accepting Prophets Jesus and Muhammad peace be upon him? What did she do anyway preach the message? No.

9. We Muslims as above are following after the Prophets and the Jews and the Christians have corrupted themselves. We are closer to all the Prophets then they will ever be for their idol worship and rejecting Hell and holding on to the life of this world.

10. Miracles they ask for, they say they will only believe if a Prophet has performed a miracle, if that was the case then why are they corrupt??? Why are they not all believers then, and now?? If miracles truly worked, then why did they take the cow idol to worship when Prophet Moses peace be upon him was away? After the parting of the red sea, the plagues of Egypt??

The magicians at Pharoah's court did a better job then the Jews who took to cow idol worship. The magicians feared Allah and did not beg Pharaoh for leniency, they stood their ground and had their hands and feet chopped off from alternative sides, and made it to Paradise.

The Jews treat their test of endurance, when actually they were to repent as they had been clearly been treating Prophets poorly.

11. The Christians claim that the Prophets are Christians when;-

Prophet Noah peace be upon him would NOT be accepting the Christians for their idol worship,

Prophet Moses peace be upon him would NOT be accepting the Christians for their idol worship. etc
you had me until this point.
dont assume, the very fact that both those peoples are mentioned in the quran and are still present to this day is a sign. im sure there were people who were neither jew nor christian who apposed the prophet peace and blessings be upon him.
as for idol worship, idols come and go truth lasts longer. idols break themselves, at least thats how iv seen it.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-20-2010, 06:47 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
obviously not, we don't believe that Sarah was his half sister
It isn't very important but I found this curious hadith.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...i/034.sbt.html

Bukhari Volume 3, Book 34, Number 420 says:
So, the king sent for Abraham and asked, 'O Abraham! Who is this lady accompanying you?' Abraham replied, 'She is my sister (i.e. in religion).'

Do you believe that Abraham was stating that Sarah was his sister in religion?
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 06:55 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
It isn't very important but I found this curious hadith.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c...i/034.sbt.html

Bukhari Volume 3, Book 34, Number 420 says:
So, the king sent for Abraham and asked, 'O Abraham! Who is this lady accompanying you?' Abraham replied, 'She is my sister (i.e. in religion).'

Do you believe that Abraham was stating that Sarah was his sister in religion?
Ofcourse, I think by reading the whole hadith its fairly obvious:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "The Prophet Abraham emigrated with Sarah and entered a village where there was a king or a tyrant. (The king) was told that Abraham had entered (the village) accompanied by a woman who was one of the most charming women. So, the king sent for Abraham and asked, 'O Abraham! Who is this lady accompanying you?' Abraham replied, 'She is my sister (i.e. in religion).' Then Abraham returned to her and said, 'Do not contradict my statement, for I have informed them that you are my sister. By Allah, there are no true believers on this land except you and I.' Then Abraham sent her to the king. When the king got to her, she got up and performed ablution, prayed and said, 'O Allah! If I have believed in You and Your Apostle, and have saved my private parts from everybody except my husband, then please do not let this pagan overpower me.' On that the king fell in a mood of agitation and started moving his legs. Seeing the condition of the king, Sarah said, 'O Allah! If he should die, the people will say that I have killed him.' The king regained his power, and proceeded towards her but she got up again and performed ablution, prayed and said, 'O Allah! If I have believed in You and Your Apostle and have kept my private parts safe from all except my husband, then please do not let this pagan overpower me.' The king again fell in a mood of agitation and started moving his legs. On seeing that state of the king, Sarah said, 'O Allah! If he should die, the people will say that I have killed him.' The king got either two or three attacks, and after recovering from the last attack he said, 'By Allah! You have sent a satan to me. Take her to Abraham and give her Ajar.' So she came back to Abraham and said, 'Allah humiliated the pagan and gave us a slavegirl for service." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 420)

here's another hadith regarding this;

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Abraham did not tell a lie except on three occasions. Twice for the Sake of Allah when he said, "I am sick," and he said, "(I have not done this but) the big idol has done it." The (third was) that while Abraham and Sarah (his wife) were going (on a journey) they passed by (the territory of) a tyrant. Someone said to the tyrant, "This man (i.e. Abraham) is accompanied by a very charming lady." So, he sent for Abraham and asked him about Sarah saying, "Who is this lady?" Abraham said, "She is my sister." Abraham went to Sarah and said, "O Sarah! There are no believers on the surface of the earth except you and I. This man asked me about you and I have told him that you are my sister, so don't contradict my statement." The tyrant then called Sarah and when she went to him, he tried to take hold of her with his hand, but (his hand got stiff and) he was confounded. He asked Sarah. "Pray to Allah for me, and I shall not harm you." So Sarah asked Allah to cure him and he got cured. He tried to take hold of her for the second time, but (his hand got as stiff as or stiffer than before and) was more confounded. He again requested Sarah, "Pray to Allah for me, and I will not harm you." Sarah asked Allah again and he became all right. He then called one of his guards (who had brought her) and said, "You have not brought me a human being but have brought me a devil." The tyrant then gave Hajar as a girl-servant to Sarah. Sarah came back (to Abraham) while he was praying. Abraham, gesturing with his hand, asked, "What has happened?" She replied, "Allah has spoiled the evil plot of the infidel (or immoral person) and gave me Hajar for service." (Abu Huraira then addressed his listeners saying, "That (Hajar) was your mother, O Bani Ma-is-Sama (i.e. the Arabs, the descendants of Ishmael, Hajar's son)." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 578)
Reply

tango92
09-20-2010, 07:13 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I disagree with Hiroshi on at least one major point of theology, but I do agree with his point on the "unpleasant details". I find life to be messy. I find that people live very convoluted lives. And I don't believe that God was restricted to using only perfect people with no "unpleasant details" to reveal himself to humankind. What you see as corruption being proved by the existence of "unpleasant details" in the lives of prophets, I see as honesty. And the lack of these things within Islamic tradition strikes me as a kind of whitewashing of the truth. Hence, to the lack of these details in Islam becomes evidence to me of corruption in the assimilation of Hebraic stories into Islam.
if god is perfect his message is perfect, end of discussion.

i see now how you brainwash your followers into thinking its ok to commit sin and god will forgive them anyway. after all if the best of your people committed the worst crimes then an average joe can get away with pretty much whatever. he is only following the example that god gave right?
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-20-2010, 07:13 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
Ofcourse, I think by reading the whole hadith its fairly obvious:
What makes it obvious? The parenthetical comments?


And this leads me to ask something I've often wondered about the translations of the Qur'an I read. Are the parenthetical comments really a part of the translation of the verse or are they adding a human interpretation to that translation? Example:
And when We did appoint for Moses forty nights (of solitude), and then ye chose the calf, when he had gone from you, and were wrong-doers.

(Al-Baqara 2:51, Pickthal translation)
Why does Pickthal add the parenthetical comment "of solitude"? Does the Arabic really express that? If so, why not just write it in the translation without the use of parentheses? If not, why add the parenthetical comment at all?
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-20-2010, 07:16 PM
Originally Posted by tango92
if god is perfect his message is perfect, end of discussion.
I would agree with that. But it does not follow that God's servants would therefore be perfect. And if they are imperfect, their delivery of his perfect message may nonetheless also be imperfect.



Originally Posted by tango92
i see now how you brainwash your followers into thinking its ok to commit sin and god will forgive them anyway. after all if the best of your people committed the worst crimes then an average joe can get away with pretty much whatever. he is only following the example that god gave right?
No. Your view of Christian ethics is incorrect. We don't think it is OK to sin. We are called to do better than those who have gone before us. The example God gives us is the perfect life lived by Jesus. And he bids us to be perfect even as our Father in heaven is perfect.
Reply

tango92
09-20-2010, 07:33 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I would agree with that. But it does not follow that God's servants would therefore be perfect. And if they are imperfect, their delivery of his perfect message may nonetheless also be imperfect.


i agree Gods servants would not be perfect (but err i dont consider them to be the worst of people like the bible shows). yet if the message contains imperfections we contradict our starting premise which is "gods message is perfect". to me it seems God is disowning the bible. and if god is the inspiration of the message then the messenger becomes redundant.

No. Your view of Christian ethics is incorrect. We don't think it is OK to sin. We are called to do better than those who have gone before us. The example God gives us is the perfect life lived by Jesus. And he bids us to be perfect even as our Father in heaven is perfect.
i dont recall jesus worshipping himself, do you?
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 07:54 PM
Originally Posted by tango92
if god is perfect his message is perfect, end of discussion.
This might be true but to make it so requires that we look at his message and see its perfection. So can you explain what is perfect about Q9:5 with its command to slay the isolators and one assumes that you will follow this 'perfect' message and start slaying me and my family - end of discussion? I can see now how brainwashed you must be into thinking that killing is no sin and indeed God will reward you since you follow his perfect message.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-20-2010, 07:57 PM
The fact is a Prophet is meant to be an example for there people, My Q to a Christian would be do you believe Prophets existed, and if so could you mention names of prophets, and mention there jobs, what "Prophets" are exactly meant to do?
It would let one understand the truth about the faith more. . .

Insha`Allaah that could be a positive start. . . .
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 08:15 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
The fact is a Prophet is meant to be an example for there people, My Q to a Christian would be do you believe Prophets existed, and if so could you mention names of prophets, and mention there jobs, what "Prophets" are exactly meant to do?
You have invented a definition here but in Christian circles the terms is understood broadly in two ways. The first is a prophet my 'foretell' the future and in the Bible this is often expressed as warnings usually associated with falling away from the faith. Secondly, a prophet may simply explain or 'forth-tell' the message and therefore call people to God. So in the first sense we would think of someone like Isaiah or Jeremiah as prophets and in the second sense anyone can be a prophet. The requirements, if that is the right word, is that for His own best reasons God calls someone and usually they were men and fallible like any mean or women. No Christian would subscribe to the Muslim notion that prophets are in some way perfect and there is no evidence that they were from the Bible.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-20-2010, 08:32 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Peace, мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє.

How would you prove this?
Well Brother Aadill seems to have summed it for you inshaAllaah. . . .

Every Prophet is a example for every nation they were sent to, as a prophet is meant to convey the message of god to his people so in this case they were sent by God allmighty, but in the bible they do not seem to be good examples, and as you mentioned you dont even believe Lut/Lott was even a messenger as muslims do! But according to the bible he commited sins and what not, Quraan confirms he didnt commit such an act as already posted.

Jesus Pbuh was mistaken to be God when in truth he was not as Quraan corrects that he was not and nor was he crucified for Allaah protected him from such a death! Jesus also worships God according to many verses in the bible and calls upon God, God calling upon god?, he prays, he put his forehead on the ground, his mother Mary/Maryam (As) also worshipped God, since the main belief in christianity is that Jesus is god (May God forbid), then Mary/Maryam is worshipping her son?

Anyways the bible says Abraham (as) married his sister, where in the Quraan it corrects it that he did NOT.
It corrects the lies that have been made against the Prophets, to believe this the book must be with many proofs.

As mentioned by a "members" in this thread God doesnt need to make his message perfect" But it does not follow that God's servants would therefore be perfect. And if they are imperfect, their delivery of his perfect message may nonetheless also be imperfect."

That statement is very dangerous, if gods message isnt perfect, that makes God imperfect also? Are you saying God cannot send a "Perfect,crystal, clear" message? thats what you are saying, you seem to be placing God in a lower status. Doesnt really suprise me, coz God apparently Died for our sins anyway, therefore he can be imperfect (God Forbid), ive actually heard christians who say "well we can do whatever we like, coz "God" died for my sins, you can commit a sin, go kill people etc and your into heaven, you just need to love god. And no im not trying to offend nobody, but this is what your belief is! youve allready admitted Gods message is imperfect that itself proves the whole point and reason of Quraan correcting the bible. . .Uno like they say "Hate the sin and not the sinner" :-\

Again God is PERFECT, and he does what he wills but not what does not suit him, i mean the Lord where all he has to say is "Be" and it is, doesnt need to make himself a human and die doesnt make no sense, if you could try read up some of the attributes of God in Islaam maybe you shall realise what i mean when giving GOD Allmighty respect and honour him!

Allaah is All-Mercyful and All-Wise

Ps i apologise if i sounded a lil harsh, my intention is not to and nor have i been, i just may sound harsh, forgive me if do

Peace
Reply

M.I.A.
09-20-2010, 08:38 PM
gods plan is infallable, it is not reliant on anybody this is a concept that if understood can form a firm basis of belief.
also dissosiating importance from ones self can further allow for understanding of how things usually pan out. are the scriptures the truth? well if you understand the laws written within them then the signs are easily manifest. obviously there is a whole branch of orgonised science to do with patterns and human observation of patterns, i think they sum it up as just "you see what you want to see"
but what do you attribute to your god?
how much of life is under gods control?
we say that god is the creator of the heavens and the earth,
he is the creator and we serve, weather we choose to or not.
this might be a contradiction to the first line of the post but i guess if you think about it long enough and open mindedly there is only room to grow.

we can only do as we are allowed, as with the prophets peace and blessings be upon them. moses peace and blessings be upon him was commanded to strike his staff and he did.
jesus peace and blessings be upon him told of how he could only do what he was commanded too do.
as for the prophet solomon peace and blessings be upon him, i cant even imagine! how subservant he was to allah swt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
some things to think about i guess.
and our prophet muhammed peace and blessings be upon him, he brought the final revalation unto mankind that will hold untill the day of judgement.
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 08:46 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
Every Prophet is a example for every nation they were sent to, as a prophet is meant to convey the message of god to his people so in this case they were sent by God allmighty, but in the bible they do not seem to be good examples, and as you mentioned you dont even believe Lut/Lott was even a messenger as muslims do! But according to the bible he commited sins and what not, Quraan confirms he didnt commit such an act as already posted.
But all YOU are doing is INVENTING what a prophet does or is, so you are deciding what kind of person God can or cannot use and in so doing leaving God out of the equation. Lot is not regarded as a prophet and we have no writing from him and the Bible is very plain that his daughters God him drunk and they had sexual relations. If it is not true why would any one invent it and make their Holy book look a bit off and in any case we have manuscripts with this story that are at least 1,500 years older than any existing copy of the Qu'ran. If we consider the Qu'ran then there is only ONE witness to what it says so as a source its unreliable.

That statement is very dangerous, if gods message isnt perfect, that makes God imperfect also? Are you saying God cannot send a "Perfect,crystal, clear" message? thats what you are saying, you seem to be placing God in a lower status.
I think this does not make sense and as yet you have not explained how one can tell a perfect message from one that is not. You keep saying the Qu'ran corrects but logically there is no way to substantiate such a claim
Reply

tango92
09-20-2010, 08:55 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
This might be true but to make it so requires that we look at his message and see its perfection. So can you explain what is perfect about Q9:5 with its command to slay the isolators and one assumes that you will follow this 'perfect' message and start slaying me and my family - end of discussion? I can see now how brainwashed you must be into thinking that killing is no sin and indeed God will reward you since you follow his perfect message.
read the context, i can make anything say whatever i want to aswell. and believe me the muslims do not ignore any part of the scriture that makes them uncomfortable unlike u
Reply

tango92
09-20-2010, 08:57 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo


I think this does not make sense and as yet you have not explained how one can tell a perfect message from one that is not. You keep saying the Qu'ran corrects but logically there is no way to substantiate such a claim
well for a start an imperfect message has contradictions. just like the bible.

Originally Posted by Hugo
But all YOU are doing is INVENTING what a prophet does or is, so you are deciding what kind of person God can or cannot use and in so doing leaving God out of the equation. Lot is not regarded as a prophet and we have no writing from him and the Bible is very plain that his daughters God him drunk and they had sexual relations. If it is not true why would any one invent it and make their Holy book look a bit off and in any case we have manuscripts with this story that are at least 1,500 years older than any existing copy of the Qu'ran. If we consider the Qu'ran then there is only ONE witness to what it says so as a source its unreliable.
funny guy, we are just reading our (miraculous) scripture from which we know what a prophet does and does not do. now the christians have invented many things, trinity, mangods and dying gods to name a few. which is attested to historically.

not to mention youve left God out of the picture when you claim he sends guidance but care little wether it was actually form him or not. as long as someone somewhere milleniums ago testified it was from god then that is enough. which is rather amusing yet sad.
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 08:58 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
This might be true but to make it so requires that we look at his message and see its perfection. So can you explain what is perfect about Q9:5 with its command to slay the isolators and one assumes that you will follow this 'perfect' message and start slaying me and my family - end of discussion? I can see now how brainwashed you must be into thinking that killing is no sin and indeed God will reward you since you follow his perfect message.
hmm so you decided to refer to a verse then misinterperate it? two can play that game, except the verses in the bible are quite clear on the circumstances and the people that should be targetted

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...ses-bible.html

btw yes the message is perfect when we are told to fight against those who wage war on us, but I suppose to please you we should all become pacifists
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 09:06 PM
Originally Posted by tango92
read the context, i can make anything say whatever i want to aswell. and believe me the muslims do not ignore any part of the scriture that makes them uncomfortable unlike u
The context is if the title of the sura is anything to go by is about repentance but what is clear is the threat to those who don't believe, and make no mistake it is a threat so it is an intolerant position and I find that unacceptable and an encouragement to violence and all in the name of God - see 9:38 which is all about war.
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 09:06 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
What makes it obvious? The parenthetical comments?
what 'parenthetical comments' are you talking about? I highlighted the important parts in bold

regarding your question about the quran, I don't know much about arabic so can't answer - but if you read Pickthall's foreward at the start of the translation - I think he answers your question
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 09:10 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
No. Your view of Christian ethics is incorrect. We don't think it is OK to sin.
but its easy to get away with sin, right?: no consequences of sin = freedom to sin - to the average non religious person
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 09:14 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
hmm so you decided to refer to a verse then misinterperate it? two can play that game, except the verses in the bible are quite clear on the circumstances and the people that should be targetted.
Well you tell us what sura 9 is all about then and as you may know this sura is supposed to be a continuation of "The Spoils", sura 8 which begins with the 'spoils' belonging to God and Mohammed. So let's hear what it all means then because whatever it is its not a message of peace and selflessness is it?
Reply

M.I.A.
09-20-2010, 09:16 PM
i guess we could all become pacifists even if it is only for us to understand what pacifism is.
even in this state of mind one cannot understand what happens before and after one has left the company we were in. allah swt knows best and the quran has said that if you are two then he is a third and if you are three then he is a forth.
if we are told to slay then understand there losses will be comparable to ours and it is most definatly and eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. better for others to make those decisions and for allah swt to make judgement....and we do trust in allah swt's judgement.
if we are intent on making war then that is our decision if we are intent on fighting oppression and tyranny then there is always a way to do so without transgressing bounds, and if you are slayn then that is not in your control. but heaven awaits for those that did not transgress bounds, hopefully.
Reply

tango92
09-20-2010, 09:17 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
The context is if the title of the sura is anything to go by is about repentance but what is clear is the threat to those who don't believe, and make no mistake it is a threat so it is an intolerant position and I find that unacceptable and an encouragement to violence and all in the name of God - see 9:38 which is all about war.
this is a well researched and refuted point i dont think it necessary to explain anything here. u can use google.

but it is interesting how you happily ignore aadil77's link to the bible thread. deliberatley ignoring something is a powerful compensation mechanism when you simply cannot reconcile something isnt it?
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 09:19 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
but its easy to get away with sin, right?: no consequences of sin = freedom to sin - to the average non religious person
What you are missing is motivation. To the Christian it is NOT that the laws say this or that is a sin and we must not break the law but rather our love and devotion to God is such that to commit sin is to abuse his love for us and that is something we strive not ever to do. I don't cheat on my wife because its bad to do that, I don't cheat because I love her and cannot bare to think how much her love for me would be abused, hurt and humiliated by such an act.
Reply

M.I.A.
09-20-2010, 09:23 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
What you are missing is motivation. To the Christian it is NOT that the laws say this or that is a sin and we must not break the law but rather our love and devotion to God is such that to commit sin is to abuse his love for us and that is something we strive not ever to do. I don't cheat on my wife because its bad to do that, I don't cheat because I love her and cannot bare to think how much her love for me would be abused, hurt and humiliated by such an act.
yeah i guess if you are really about love then every time you make someone cry you have failed.
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 09:23 PM
Originally Posted by tango92
this is a well researched and refuted point i dont think it necessary to explain anything here. u can use google. but it is interesting how you happily ignore aadil77's link to the bible thread. deliberatley ignoring something is a powerful compensation mechanism when you simply cannot reconcile something isnt it?
I have written else where on the link given but if you want to raise one of those points again do so. But here I am asking what is your view on these Qu'ran verses, where do you stand on violent jihad, I cannot google that can I?
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-20-2010, 09:23 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
But all YOU are doing is INVENTING what a prophet does or is, so you are deciding what kind of person God can or cannot use and in so doing leaving God out of the equation. Lot is not regarded as a prophet and we have no writing from him and the Bible is very plain that his daughters God him drunk and they had sexual relations. If it is not true why would any one invent it and make their Holy book look a bit off and in any case we have manuscripts with this story that are at least 1,500 years older than any existing copy of the Qu'ran. If we consider the Qu'ran then there is only ONE witness to what it says so as a source its unreliable.

I think this does not make sense and as yet you have not explained how one can tell a perfect message from one that is not. You keep saying the Qu'ran corrects but logically there is no way to substantiate such a claim
And all your doing is arguing with me! I am not "Inventing" anything, i am trying to prove a point, that a prophet can never be a sinner hence the Quraan mentions all those. Im not deciding what god can do or what he cannot, im saying what he mentions about the Prophets, Since he is all seeying and All knowing he knows very well what happened at the times of these prophets, thats what he mentions in the Quraan so that we may realise the truth of what really happened. The Proof is that the Quraan comes with many proofs.

A perfect message exists as in Gods word has evidence to back it up, and yes the Quraan does correct its just you who has a problem with that! Yes that statement is dangerous because your saying God is imperfect! To know the perfect message, since your on the topic of the Quraan, i suggest you read the Quraan first! Also a message is perfect, when the teachings are perfect, the one who sent the message is perfect etc. Also if you follow the correct teachings of the message then its also classed as "perfect". As a muslim i follow the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (saw) meaning the way of all the prophets (PBUT), you as a christian,do you follow every teaching of Jesus (pbuh)?
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 09:24 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Well you tell us what sura 9 is all about then and as you may know this sura is supposed to be a continuation of "The Spoils", sura 8 which begins with the 'spoils' belonging to God and Mohammed. So let's hear what it all means then because whatever it is its not a message of peace and selflessness is it?
go read and find out for yourself http://quran.com/9, I'm not gonna summarise a whole a chapter of the quran in one post

yh islam is definately not all about this fake eutopia of 'peace and selflessness' that christians like to misrepresent about their own religion, if you're a pacifist (coward) then islam is not for you, we do believe in the right to our own sovereignty - if you don't like reading Quranic verses regarding that then stop reading
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 09:34 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
What you are missing is motivation. To the Christian it is NOT that the laws say this or that is a sin and we must not break the law but rather our love and devotion to God is such that to commit sin is to abuse his love for us and that is something we strive not ever to do. I don't cheat on my wife because its bad to do that, I don't cheat because I love her and cannot bare to think how much her love for me would be abused, hurt and humiliated by such an act.
yh well that 'love and devotion' doesn't seem to work does it? at this point in time christians are THE most sinful people on earth - seems to me an abuse of god's love and mercy

like I said: no concept of punishment = freedom to sin

In islam we have a balance of this love of god stuff, its balanced with FEAR of god, we have both which is why generally muslims are nowhere near are indulgent in sin and evil as our fellow christians are
Reply

M.I.A.
09-20-2010, 09:43 PM
sorry to derail but me and the mrs just had a conversation as muslims about the different sects and how we are split into so many different sects and schools of thought and it occured to us that if we were to walk backwards where would we ultimately end up?
the only criterion for judgement is the quran as it is written.
we could debate on the sunnah but as the posts earlier in the thread were not fully expanded upon ie the phrophets and there ways, were they sin free etc etc

anyway i guess its time to call it a night
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 09:48 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
And all your doing is arguing with me! I am not "Inventing" anything, i am trying to prove a point, that a prophet can never be a sinner hence the Quraan mentions all those. Im not deciding what god can do or what he cannot, im saying what he mentions about the Prophets, Since he is all seeying and All knowing he knows very well what happened at the times of these prophets, thats we he mentions in the Quraan to let us realise the truth of what really happened. The Proof is that the Quraan comes with many proofes.
How can you prove such a point and where in the Qu'ran or Bible does it say that a prophet can never be be sinner?

A perfect message exists as in Gods word has evidence to back it up, and yes the Quraan does correct its just you who has a problem with that! Yes that statement is dangerous because your saying God is imperfect! To know the perfect message, since your on the topic of the Quraan, i suggest you read the Quraan first! Also a message is perfect, when the teachings are perfect, the one who sent the message is perfect etc. Also if you follow the correct teachings of the message then its also classed as "perfect". As a muslim i follow the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (saw) meaning the way of all the prophets (PBUT), you as a christian,do you follow every teaching of Jesus (pbuh)?
I have read the Qu'ran many times though not in Arabic. Its not just me that has a problem there are 2 billions Christians and I don't know how many atheists would laugh at both of us. The point I suppose is that because YOU believe it is a perfect message does not make it so does it?

I don't quite know how one would define a perfect message and if we could it would only be our definition so I don't see much of a way forward there and no doubt we would define it in a way that suited out own preconceptions. For example, the Qu'ran says a man can have 4 wives and sexual relations with his slave girls in Q4:3 - well for the life of me I cannot see why that is a perfect message - can you explain it? Or why in Q33:37 we have this teaching about marriage to ones adopted sons ex wife - why is this perfect?

To me these 'oddities' seem proof of other than divine authorship, do they not look like that to you or perhaps you have other 'proofs'
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-20-2010, 09:56 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
You have invented a definition here but in Christian circles the terms is understood broadly in two ways. The first is a prophet my 'foretell' the future and in the Bible this is often expressed as warnings usually associated with falling away from the faith. Secondly, a prophet may simply explain or 'forth-tell' the message and therefore call people to God. So in the first sense we would think of someone like Isaiah or Jeremiah as prophets and in the second sense anyone can be a prophet. The requirements, if that is the right word, is that for His own best reasons God calls someone and usually they were men and fallible like any mean or women. No Christian would subscribe to the Muslim notion that prophets are in some way perfect and there is no evidence that they were from the Bible.
You didnt answer my Qs, and all i said is that a prophet is meant to be an example and perfect at that, and no not everyone can be as perfect as a prophet! Insha`Allaah if you could answer those Qs maybe i could understand your view more on this. . . .

peace
Reply

جوري
09-20-2010, 09:57 PM
Hugo
How can you prove such a point and where in the Qu'ran or Bible does it say that a prophet can never be be sinner?
Given that you have asked this question before and before you were answered, it makes me wonder how many times you have in fact read the Quran as you allege?!
We all know where you get your knowledge of the Quran, given your previous mishap of a direct misquote, misnumbered verse from one of your orientalist website.. why do you pose as a scholar when you are a clean impostor?


I have read the Qu'ran many times though not in Arabic. Its not just me that has a problem there are 2 billions Christians and I don't know how many atheists would laugh at both of us. The point I suppose is that because YOU believe it is a perfect message does not make it so does it?
'Two billion christians?' lol I love your optimism.. take a look at the stats before stating your grievances!

as for the rest.. pls. do us all a favor and just take a hike if you are unwilling or unable to reflect over what has been, repeatedly answered, and repeatedly denied by your person!

a man worshiping fool is really in no position to question other scriptures, especially when again you have been repeatedly told, that there is no such thing as adoption in Islam, there is however sponsorship...

to the mods.

Has this fellow not broken one too many forum rules up to an including posing questions which he himself has already posed and been answered?

:w:
Reply

M.I.A.
09-20-2010, 09:58 PM
fine il bite again but this is the last time,
it says dont cheat on your wives as you pointed out in your post.
it also says that those that your right hands possess are lawful unto you.

the "right" and "lawful" are the only points of contention here as i do not know the arabic meanings.

anyway you can interpret it in another way more suitable for the argument.
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 10:01 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
yh well that 'love and devotion' doesn't seem to work does it? at this point in time christians are THE most sinful people on earth - seems to me an abuse of god's love and mercy.
Here every Christian would agree with you and it is our daily lament that we continually fall short of what God's love demands. Indeed this is a lament of every Bible characters and Job summarised how we will feel when we come into God's Holy presence - we will have NOTHING to say Job 42:6 (NIV) "Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes." We then are like Job only too aware of the weight of our sins and our total unworthiness, so if there is fear, its a fear that by out sin we abuse his compassion and the worst of this is what you describe for Muslims - self-righteousness.
Reply

Hugo
09-20-2010, 10:04 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
You didnt answer my Qs, and all i said is that a prophet is meant to be an example and perfect at that, and no not everyone can be as perfect as a prophet! Insha`Allaah if you could answer those Qs maybe i could understand your view more on this. . . .
I am sorry if I missed the questions can you just remind me by telling me the post number and I will offer a response (tomorrow). Blessings
Reply

جوري
09-20-2010, 10:06 PM
according to Grace seeker, job is fable from the bible.. how much of your bible is fable and how much is true? can you tell the difference? what is your criteria when you worship a self-immolating mangod from whom you expect salvation yet he was unable to salvage his own self, was ineffectual to carry out his message or choosing proper apostles who wouldn't turn him in so he abrogated it through a charlatan.. I mean do you actually have criteria or just spew utter fabled nonsense while making up crap about other people's religions?
Reply

aadil77
09-20-2010, 10:11 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
worst of this is what you describe for Muslims - self-righteousness.
I only describe fact, muslims are far from perfect - but a heck of a lot better than christians in adhering to the commands of their own scriptures and prophets from god

self-righteousness is when you claim you are 'saved' and free from sin just because you accept a fallacy that Jesus (peace be upon him) died for your sins - a fallacy that he himself will testify against
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-20-2010, 10:13 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
How can you prove such a point and where in the Qu'ran or Bible does it say that a prophet can never be be sinner?



I have read the Qu'ran many times though not in Arabic. Its not just me that has a problem there are 2 billions Christians and I don't know how many atheists would laugh at both of us. The point I suppose is that because YOU believe it is a perfect message does not make it so does it?

I don't quite know how one would define a perfect message and if we could it would only be our definition so I don't see much of a way forward there and no doubt we would define it in a way that suited out own preconceptions. For example, the Qu'ran says a man can have 4 wives and sexual relations with his slave girls in Q4:3 - well for the life of me I cannot see why that is a perfect message - can you explain it? Or why in Q33:37 we have this teaching about marriage to ones adopted sons ex wife - why is this perfect?

To me these 'oddities' seem proof of other than divine authorship, do they not look like that to you or perhaps you have other 'proofs'
lol i should have mentioned "christians" or "athiests" then silly me :-\, would that be fine with you?

Actually im not going to sit and explain anything else, yes a man can have 4 wives, comparing your bible where prophets had "many" wives, can you explain that to me?

See Genesis 4:19, as far as i remember Solomon had 700 wives see Kings chapter 11 verse 3, many more which im not gonna mention right now.

This is what the Noble Quraan says: 'Marry woman of your choice in twos' threes' or fours' but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly, (with them), then only one' [Al-Qur'an 4:3]


And to your Q about marriage to ones adopted sons ex wife, theres a thread regarding that, where it can explain in detail to you!

"And (remember) when you said to him (Zaid bin Harithah) the freedslave of the Prophet SAW) on whom Allah has bestowed Grace (by guiding him to Islam) and you (O Muhammad SAW too) have done favour (by manumitting him) \"Keep your wife to yourself, and fear Allah.\" But you did hide in yourself (i.e. what Allah has already made known to you that He will give her to you in marriage) that which Allah will make manifest, you did fear the people (i.e., Muhammad SAW married the divorced wife of his manumitted slave) whereas Allah had a better right that you should fear Him. So when Zaid had accomplished his desire from her (i.e. divorced her), We gave her to you in marriage, so that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the believers in respect of (the marriage of) the wives of their adopted sons when the latter have no desire to keep them (i.e. they have divorced them). And Allah\'s Command must be fulfilled. "

This is the verse you mentioned. . . . .

Edit: I shall try find that thread Insha`Allaah. . . . . . .
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-20-2010, 10:16 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I am sorry if I missed the questions can you just remind me by telling me the post number and I will offer a response (tomorrow). Blessings
No worries, this is the post "The fact is a Prophet is meant to be an example for there people, My Q to a Christian would be do you believe Prophets existed, and if so could you mention names of prophets, and mention there jobs, what "Prophets" are exactly meant to do?
It would let one understand the truth about the faith more. . .

Insha`Allaah that could be a positive start. . . . " If you miss this, its on "page 3"
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-20-2010, 11:05 PM
I know you all have gone on to other things, but I really was curious about the questions I asked in this earlier post. I didn't ask them to debate, just to be educated. Can anyone help me to understand the use of (parenthetical) commentary in the translations of the Qur'an and hadith?


Muslimah 4 Life, Hugo provided the same answer I would have to your question already:
Originally Posted by Hugo
in Christian circles the term [prophet] is understood broadly in two ways. The first is a prophet m[a]y 'foretell' the future and in the Bible this is often expressed as warnings usually associated with falling away from the faith. Secondly, a prophet may simply explain or 'forth-tell' the message and therefore call people to God. So in the first sense we would think of someone like Isaiah or Jeremiah as prophets and in the second sense anyone can be a prophet.
Reply

Zafran
09-20-2010, 11:43 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
It isn't reasonable to believe that Solomon never existed. But it does stretch credulity to imagine that he practiced magic on a grand scale and had armies of birds and spirit creatures in his court. Also the Israelites did not invade other nations just because they practiced idolatry (as Solomon is depicted as doing). They tended to keep within their own borders. And the description of the action of Solomon in sending a bird to make a declaration with threat of war, does not sound convincing. Nobody reading such a narrative today would take it seriously if it wasn't in the Qur'an.
I'm not sure where your coming from here - you'll have to show me where solomon uses the bird to declare war? You do know the use of birds to send messeges.

I find it hypocritical coming from a christian that TODAY people find it hard to believe so it must be false idea - as Jesus pbuh was born from a virgin, was God and died according to christians - people have problems with these today as well so they must be false?

Solomon (pbuh) practiced magic where in Islam does it say that as well?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-21-2010, 06:46 AM
Originally Posted by aadil77
Ofcourse, I think by reading the whole hadith its fairly obvious:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "The Prophet Abraham emigrated with Sarah and entered a village where there was a king or a tyrant. (The king) was told that Abraham had entered (the village) accompanied by a woman who was one of the most charming women. So, the king sent for Abraham and asked, 'O Abraham! Who is this lady accompanying you?' Abraham replied, 'She is my sister (i.e. in religion).' Then Abraham returned to her and said, 'Do not contradict my statement, for I have informed them that you are my sister. By Allah, there are no true believers on this land except you and I.' Then Abraham sent her to the king. When the king got to her, she got up and performed ablution, prayed and said, 'O Allah! If I have believed in You and Your Apostle, and have saved my private parts from everybody except my husband, then please do not let this pagan overpower me.' On that the king fell in a mood of agitation and started moving his legs. Seeing the condition of the king, Sarah said, 'O Allah! If he should die, the people will say that I have killed him.' The king regained his power, and proceeded towards her but she got up again and performed ablution, prayed and said, 'O Allah! If I have believed in You and Your Apostle and have kept my private parts safe from all except my husband, then please do not let this pagan overpower me.' The king again fell in a mood of agitation and started moving his legs. On seeing that state of the king, Sarah said, 'O Allah! If he should die, the people will say that I have killed him.' The king got either two or three attacks, and after recovering from the last attack he said, 'By Allah! You have sent a satan to me. Take her to Abraham and give her Ajar.' So she came back to Abraham and said, 'Allah humiliated the pagan and gave us a slavegirl for service." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 420)

here's another hadith regarding this;

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Abraham did not tell a lie except on three occasions. Twice for the Sake of Allah when he said, "I am sick," and he said, "(I have not done this but) the big idol has done it." The (third was) that while Abraham and Sarah (his wife) were going (on a journey) they passed by (the territory of) a tyrant. Someone said to the tyrant, "This man (i.e. Abraham) is accompanied by a very charming lady." So, he sent for Abraham and asked him about Sarah saying, "Who is this lady?" Abraham said, "She is my sister." Abraham went to Sarah and said, "O Sarah! There are no believers on the surface of the earth except you and I. This man asked me about you and I have told him that you are my sister, so don't contradict my statement." The tyrant then called Sarah and when she went to him, he tried to take hold of her with his hand, but (his hand got stiff and) he was confounded. He asked Sarah. "Pray to Allah for me, and I shall not harm you." So Sarah asked Allah to cure him and he got cured. He tried to take hold of her for the second time, but (his hand got as stiff as or stiffer than before and) was more confounded. He again requested Sarah, "Pray to Allah for me, and I will not harm you." Sarah asked Allah again and he became all right. He then called one of his guards (who had brought her) and said, "You have not brought me a human being but have brought me a devil." The tyrant then gave Hajar as a girl-servant to Sarah. Sarah came back (to Abraham) while he was praying. Abraham, gesturing with his hand, asked, "What has happened?" She replied, "Allah has spoiled the evil plot of the infidel (or immoral person) and gave me Hajar for service." (Abu Huraira then addressed his listeners saying, "That (Hajar) was your mother, O Bani Ma-is-Sama (i.e. the Arabs, the descendants of Ishmael, Hajar's son)." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 578)
The account shows that when Abraham said "She is my sister" he was telling his third lie. So if it wasn't a true statement anyway why is there the need to take this to mean his "figurative" sister?

According to the hadith, when Abraham then reported to Sarah: "I have told him that you are my sister" he was only informing her of the lie that he had told. He wasn't telling Sarah that she was his sister.
Reply

aadil77
09-21-2010, 07:52 AM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
The account shows that when Abraham said "She is my sister" he was telling his third lie. So if it wasn't a true statement anyway why is there the need to take this to mean his "figurative" sister?

According to the hadith, when Abraham then reported to Sarah: "I have told him that you are my sister" he was only informing her of the lie that he had told. He wasn't telling Sarah that she was his sister.

why? because in his wisdom he was protecting his wife

and yes he informed her of what he told them, he wasn't stating the obvious when he told her she was his sister
Reply

Hiroshi
09-21-2010, 11:19 AM
Originally Posted by aadil77
why? because in his wisdom he was protecting his wife

and yes he informed her of what he told them, he wasn't stating the obvious when he told her she was his sister
Okay, I guess.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-21-2010, 11:48 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
I'm not sure where your coming from here - you'll have to show me where solomon uses the bird to declare war? You do know the use of birds to send messeges.
Muhammed invited the pagan Arab tribes to Islam but then warred with them if they refused (but he always sent his men rather than a bird). In Surah 27:30-31 Solomon makes the same demand. Then in verses 33-34 the queen and her chiefs discuss the option of war.
Reply

Hugo
09-21-2010, 12:41 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
I only describe fact, muslims are far from perfect - but a heck of a lot better than christians in adhering to the commands of their own scriptures and prophets from god.
You are deluded and arrogant. You simply mistake ritual for striving after holiness and assume that washing in the right way or saying your prayers make you 'good' but the Bible makes it very plain that what God wants is as Jesus put it "to love God with all your heart, and soul and mind and your neighbour as yourself. Yours is a self-righteousness and it is obvious you have no concept of sin and how it afflicts us because you see yourself as better than others and that to God is an abomination. Just read this story and perhaps your will see what a debt you owe to God not on any supposed righteousness of your own.
Luke 18:8-15 (NIV) - To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.' "But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.' "I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted".

I accept that Jesus died for my sins and so God in some inexplicable way conveys his righteousness to us and we accept it because we know we can never be good enough no matter what we do and we spend our whole life seeking after God and righteousness. Your fallacy is that you pretend that as long as you follow certain rules and rituals that somehow God will owe you salvation.In Isaiah 1:11-15 (NIV) we read how God feels about the self-righteous

"The multitude of your sacrifices— what are they to me?" says the LORD. "I have more than enough of burnt offerings, of rams and the fat of fattened animals; I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats. When you come to appear before me, who has asked this of you, this trampling of my courts? Stop bringing meaningless offerings! Your incense is detestable to me. New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations— I cannot bear your evil assemblies. Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts my soul hates. They have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them. When you spread out your hands in prayer, I will hide my eyes from you; even if you offer many prayers, I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood
Reply

GreyKode
09-21-2010, 12:51 PM
This is your unbeleivable delusion hugo,
Originally Posted by Hugo
Your fallacy is that you pretend that as long as you follow certain rules and rituals that somehow God will owe you salvation.
Why do you, as well as other christians insist that muslims "pretend" on following rituals to fool themselves into feeling that they are saved?. Prayer in Islam is the BEST means of "getting closer to GOD and developing GOD consciousness", a constant link with ALLAH(swt) with an energy boost 5 times a day, I think it is the exact manifestation of loving your GOD with all your heart and soul, believe me it works.
Reply

Hugo
09-21-2010, 01:04 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
No worries, this is the post "The fact is a Prophet is meant to be an example for there people, My Q to a Christian would be do you believe Prophets existed, and if so could you mention names of prophets, and mention there jobs, what "Prophets" are exactly meant to do?
It would let one understand the truth about the faith more. . .
1. My view would be that a prophet is meant to bring a message from God, that is his or her primary duty. It may be that their life is an examples to others but their example is NOT the same as saying that God wants you to do as they do or did. Biblically speaking we know very little about what say Jesus did but we do know what he taught and that for me is what is important. Any prophet would be set in a time so what he did would in some way be constrained by it so it does not follow that his or her example is set in stone for all time. Mohammed as you will know consummated his marriage to Aeshia when she was 9 years old and one can hardly consider that an act to be emulated? So biblically the only call is to follow the teaching and emulate faith and in general nothing else.

2. Yes prophets existed and still exist and I said in an earlier post they may be of the foretelling (speaking of the future) or forth-telling (teaching or explaining)kinds. Notable Biblical examples are Isaiah and Jeremiah and in the Bible their prophesies cover 123 chapters.
Reply

GreyKode
09-21-2010, 01:15 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
1. My view would be that a prophet is meant to bring a message from God, that is his or her primary duty. It may be that their life is an examples to others but their example is NOT the same as saying that God wants you to do as they do or did. Biblically speaking we know very little about what say Jesus did but we do know what he taught and that for me is what is important. Any prophet would be set in a time so what he did would in some way be constrained by it so it does not follow that his or her example is set in stone for all time. Mohammed as you will know consummated his marriage to Aeshia when she was 9 years old and one can hardly consider that an act to be emulated? So biblically the only call is to follow the teaching and emulate faith and in general nothing else.

2. Yes prophets existed and still exist and I said in an earlier post they may be of the foretelling (speaking of the future) or forth-telling (teaching or explaining)kinds. Notable Biblical examples are Isaiah and Jeremiah and in the Bible their prophesies cover 123 chapters.
prophets still exist? do you know any?
Reply

Hugo
09-21-2010, 01:17 PM
Originally Posted by GreyKode
This is your unbeleivable delusion hugo. Why do you, as well as other christians insist that muslims "pretend" on following rituals to fool themselves into feeling that they are saved?. Prayer in Islam is the BEST means of "getting closer to GOD and developing GOD consciousness", a constant link with ALLAH(swt) with an energy boost 5 times a day, I think it is the exact manifestation of loving your GOD with all your heart and soul, believe me it works.
I think you are not really listening and it is such a common position to take by Muslims that everyone is deluded but them - so I might be deluded by your have paranoia. My quotations to you show that there is more to it than mere ritual, do you think that just saying the very same prayers over and over again have the power to make you right with God? Would it be sufficient for me to say 5 times a day to my wife that I love her, would that make it true, would that alone make our relationship blossom and make our lives fulfilled and spill over into blessings for others?
Reply

Hugo
09-21-2010, 01:18 PM
Originally Posted by GreyKode
prophets still exist? do you know any?
Is it possible for someone to look at the Bible or Qu'ran and explain what it means? Go and look again at what I actually wrote.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-21-2010, 01:50 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
1. My view would be that a prophet is meant to bring a message from God, that is his or her primary duty. It may be that their life is an examples to others but their example is NOT the same as saying that God wants you to do as they do or did. Biblically speaking we know very little about what say Jesus did but we do know what he taught and that for me is what is important. Any prophet would be set in a time so what he did would in some way be constrained by it so it does not follow that his or her example is set in stone for all time. Mohammed as you will know consummated his marriage to Aeshia when she was 9 years old and one can hardly consider that an act to be emulated? So biblically the only call is to follow the teaching and emulate faith and in general nothing else.

2. Yes prophets existed and still exist and I said in an earlier post they may be of the foretelling (speaking of the future) or forth-telling (teaching or explaining)kinds. Notable Biblical examples are Isaiah and Jeremiah and in the Bible their prophesies cover 123 chapters.
Actually i disagree here, " It may be that their life is an examples to others but their example is NOT the same as saying that God wants you to do as they do or did. God sent the messenger so he could do what God commands him to do, hence "The Commandmants" and the followeres of the commandmants, what are they meant to be?

You seem to be talking about Muhammad (SAW) and his marriages, whereas Aisha (ra) had no problem against the marriage, so what exactly is your point and your problem? Also Mary (as) was very young when she married Joseph,and you dont consider than an act to be "emulated" lol, and also it was quite normal back then for marriage to be at such a young age.
Im not gonna give no evidence, since you`ve read about the Quraan and seem to know "everything" about Islaam, i cant really say you wont know anything about your own faith then.

"So biblically the only call is to follow the teaching and emulate faith and in general nothing else." you can say that again, coz you made no point!

And no prophets dont exist today, if so do you have any evidence?
Seriously why are you on this forum? If you are here to learn about Islaam then do so, but if not, why are you here? Coz i dont see anyway your learning about Islaam here yet so far.

The geekyness :-\
Peace
Reply

Amat Allah
09-21-2010, 01:53 PM
you reminded me of this verse in Qur`aan my respected brother:

"Have you not seen those who claim sanctity for themselves. Nay - but Allah sanctifies whom He pleases, and they will not be dealt with injustice even equal to the extent of a Fatila (A scalish thread in the long slit of a date-stone). (49)"

Surat Anisaa

it is right that Allah says:

"And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers. (85) " Surat Aal Imraan

and Islam means; the complete surrendering and submision only to Allah and to have peace whith whatsoever Allah wills and worshipping Him alone whith no partners ; believing that there is no god but Allah Who deserves to be worshipped alone...(this is the meaning of Islam)...

but it is really wrong to tell others that they are not good or bad (good and bad are everywhere, we are all sining and seeking Allah`s forgiveness , May Allah forgive us Ameen)...

we are not here to talk about people them selves but to teach them whats wrong and whats right according Allah`s commandments religion and Islmaic moralism...By Allah`s willing...

I have read all the posts and it is really clear that some of our respected Christian brothers not understanding the verses of the Qur`aan...

all the followers of the three divine religions know that Allah Is The Most Just , The Source of Justice and Allah Has forbidden injustice to himself...so, it is impossible for Allah to order His slaves to be unjust with others...

Allah says in Qur`aan:

"Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion and did not drive you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal with equity. (8)"

Surat Al Mumtahanh

as Muslims it is forbidden for us to kill innocent people but only to fight in combat with who fights against us and thats it...all the verses in Qur`aan which are talking about fight have their stories and if you read in Sunnah you will find those stories and everything will be clear...by Allah`s willing...

and about the prohets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all) we as Muslims believe that those whom Allah has chose to be His Messengers and prophets who Allah sent to teach His slaves and servants how to worship Him right and ordered us to follow their steps in everything He had taught to them ...are impossible to commit such ugly crimes and guilts...

Allah gave them the Books and Hikmah ( the understanding of Allah`s law) and Allah had taken the covenant of the prophets to hold and carry out everything in what he had given to them :

" And (remember) when Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets, saying: "Take whatever I gave you from the Book and Hikmah (understanding of the Laws of Allah, etc.), and afterwards there will come to you a Messenger (Muhammad SAW) confirming what is with you; you must, then, believe in him and help him." Allah said: "Do you agree (to it) and will you take up My Covenant (which I conclude with you)?" They said: "We agree." He said: "Then bear witness; and I am with you among the witnesses (for this)." (81) Then whoever turns away after this, they are the Fasiqun (rebellious: those who turn away from Allah's Obedience). (82) Do they seek other than the religion of Allah (the true Islamic Monotheism worshipping none but Allah Alone), while to Him submitted all creatures in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly. And to Him shall they all be returned. (83)

Surat Aal Imraan

Then how to disobey Allah with such things? They are The Most Pure amongst people they know Allah more than us and know how painful the punishment of Allah more than any living and non they are the chosen people Who The Most Perfect chose... I don`t know what to say more to make you understand...but Allah Is The One Who Guides and Misguides ,it is not in my hand to make you understand but in Allah`s...Laa ilaha illa Allah...

we don`t want to be enemy for anyone we only want to teach the message of Allah which we believe in and know that it is the divine truth from our Lord above all skies...

we don`t want to misguide you ,no I swear by The One Who Has our souls in His Hand but we are following the teachings of Allah which came to us thro His Messengers and Prophets ( peace and blessings of Allah be upon them) and one of those teachings is to love for others what we love for our selves and we believe that the true happiness won`t be but by surrendering and submitting for The Lord of the world thats why we want you to understand Islam , not to be called Muslims but to be happy and to be real slaves and servants of Allah as we believe...

I am sad because some of my brothers and sisters in Islam sometimes let their anger answers instead of the wisdom of Islam...and that ruins everything and make others confused filling their hearts with hate and anger too...

May Allah guide us all to him before standing for reckoning in the day of Judgement Ameeeeeeen

and I know that when our brothers and sisters from other beliefs talk with us about their religions , they want us to be guided as they believe... I know this and I respect it...

May Allah give you the good of this life and of the hereafter Ameeeeeeeen

please, try to talk about the things our religions share and how to benefit us in this life and herefater... not to fight and be upset of eachother...

take care brothers and sisters no matter who you are where you are and what you are...
Reply

Amat Allah
09-21-2010, 04:05 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Can anyone help me to understand the use of (parenthetical) commentary in the translations of the Qur'an and hadith?

I am so sorry my respected and noble brother, I forgot to answer you...please forgive me...

commentary in the translations of the Qur'an and hadith used to make you understand the meaning of the verses, in Arabic there are many words which we can not find the exact meaning for it in English or any other langauge... and these (parenthetical) commentary are not existed in the original Arabic Qur`aan...

may Allah open for you the door of success in this life and in the hereafter and lead your way to the path of the endless happiness my respected brother...Ameeeen

leaving you under Allah`s sight and care...
Reply

Hugo
09-21-2010, 04:22 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
You seem to be talking about Muhammad (SAW) and his marriages, whereas Aisha (ra) had no problem against the marriage, so what exactly is your point and your problem? Also Mary (as) was very young when she married Joseph,and you dont consider than an act to be "emulated" lol, and also it was quite normal back then for marriage to be at such a young age.
The point being made was that no matter how honoured a prophet or any one is there is no command to do as they did. Aisha has been discussed elsewhere but a nine year old girl could hardly "have no problem" and although there is some value in contextualizing something there is always the danger that in doing so we gloss over gross wrongdoings. In terms of Mary the mother of Jesus we don't know for sure how old she was but most think her age would be in the range 12 - 17. It is true that marriage at this age was allowed but what was forbidden by Jewish law was a wide age range difference between the parties
"So biblically the only call is to follow the teaching and emulate faith and in general nothing else." you can say that again, coz you made no point!
What else can there be but to follow God's teachings which include commands and offer him our prayers and praise - should we follow men or God?
Originally Posted by black
And no prophets dont exist today, if so do you have any evidence?
I gave two definitions and today it is quite possible that we have an unusually gifted teacher who can explain, interpret and apply what God has said and we might, though it would be unusual, call them prophets. Your definition if I read it rightly simply says there were sent to help so that might apply to almost anyone. If I have this wrong then explain your definition
Seriously why are you on this forum? If you are here to learn about Islaam then do so, but if not, why are you here? Coz i dont see anyway your learning about Islaam here yet so far.
The forum is open to all as far as I know - why are you here? How does one learn anything but by a process of reading and critical questioning - perhaps you think Islam should not be subject to questions?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-21-2010, 04:35 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє

Well Brother Aadill seems to have summed it for you inshaAllaah. . . .

Every Prophet is a example for every nation they were sent to, as a prophet is meant to convey the message of god to his people so in this case they were sent by God allmighty, but in the bible they do not seem to be good examples, and as you mentioned you dont even believe Lut/Lott was even a messenger as muslims do! But according to the bible he commited sins and what not, Quraan confirms he didnt commit such an act as already posted.

Jesus Pbuh was mistaken to be God when in truth he was not as Quraan corrects that he was not and nor was he crucified for Allaah protected him from such a death! Jesus also worships God according to many verses in the bible and calls upon God, God calling upon god?, he prays, he put his forehead on the ground, his mother Mary/Maryam (As) also worshipped God, since the main belief in christianity is that Jesus is god (May God forbid), then Mary/Maryam is worshipping her son?

Anyways the bible says Abraham (as) married his sister, where in the Quraan it corrects it that he did NOT.
It corrects the lies that have been made against the Prophets, to believe this the book must be with many proofs.
Thanks мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє.

I know that these things that you have mentioned are controversial matters that Muslims feel strongly about. But it doesn't prove that the Qur'an is correcting the Bible.

As far as I know, the Qur'an does not deny the incident of incest between Lot and his daughters. Nor does it deny that Abraham married his half sister. And the Bible does not state that God is a trinity.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-21-2010, 04:50 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
The point being made was that no matter how honoured a prophet or any one is there is no command to do as they did. Aisha has been discussed elsewhere but a nine year old girl could hardly "have no problem" and although there is some value in contextualizing something there is always the danger that in doing so we gloss over gross wrongdoings. In terms of Mary the mother of Jesus we don't know for sure how old she was but most think her age would be in the range 12 - 17. It is true that marriage at this age was allowed but what was forbidden by Jewish law was a wide age range difference between the parties

What else can there be but to follow God's teachings which include commands and offer him our prayers and praise - should we follow men or God?

I gave two definitions and today it is quite possible that we have an unusually gifted teacher who can explain, interpret and apply what God has said and we might, though it would be unusual, call them prophets. Your definition if I read it rightly simply says there were sent to help so that might apply to almost anyone. If I have this wrong then explain your definition

The forum is open to all as far as I know - why are you here? How does one learn anything but by a process of reading and critical questioning - perhaps you think Islam should not be subject to questions?
Actually i wasnt referring to you but Hugo but thank you. One learns by respecting the other and trying to respect the others views. And no i did not say Islaam should not be the subject to any Questions, ofcourse Questions are to be asked and also to be answered.

We should follow God and one God sent as guidance to mankind for example the messengers of God. The Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) said :"If you love God, follow me", as christians believe Jesus (pbuh) is the way, the light etc., If you love him, follow him i.e.correct teachings.

peace.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-21-2010, 04:56 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Thanks мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє.

I know that these things that you have mentioned are controversial matters that Muslims feel strongly about. But it doesn't prove that the Qur'an is correcting the Bible.

As far as I know, the Qur'an does not deny the incident of incest between Lot and his daughters. Nor does it deny that Abraham married his half sister. And the Bible does not state that God is a trinity.
By correcting ,the Quraan is correcting the misconceptions, actually you are wrong there so i disagree, the Quraan never accepted Abraham (pbuh) married his sister, nor Lott and his daughters, the Quraan spoke of what really happened . How could a prophet could do such things? In truth your actually saying God cannot even send perfect message to guide people to him, but rather confuse people.
Reply

aadil77
09-21-2010, 05:39 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
You are deluded and arrogant. [/I][/INDENT]
The only one deluded here is you, you and your fellow christians

You continuously delude yourself into believing a man died for your sins, no one died for your sins - trust me you will held accountable for every single one of your actions - you're not gonna get away with anything on the Day

you have no concept of sin and how it afflicts us
God Al-Mighty the drama you find amongst christians, go on tell us how it afflicts you. Sin does not exist in christianity because your mangod is so Just that he's already forgiven your sins before you even commit them.

We don't claim self-righteousness, like I said we're far from perfect, we don't even know for certain wether we'll even enter heaven. Self-righteousness to me is when you claim you're already 'saved', you've got your ticket to heaven and have nothing to worry about. Self-righteousness is when you claim that 'god' has spoken to you and performed miracles on you.
Reply

aadil77
09-21-2010, 05:42 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
As far as I know, the Qur'an does not deny the incident of incest between Lot and his daughters. Nor does it deny that Abraham married his half sister. And the Bible does not state that God is a trinity.
The Quran says that incest is forbidden, theres no way prophets of god would go against that even by accident
Reply

GreyKode
09-21-2010, 05:58 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Thanks мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє.

I know that these things that you have mentioned are controversial matters that Muslims feel strongly about. But it doesn't prove that the Qur'an is correcting the Bible.

As far as I know, the Qur'an does not deny the incident of incest between Lot and his daughters. Nor does it deny that Abraham married his half sister. And the Bible does not state that God is a trinity.
What does the bible say about the story of Yusuf(as)?
Reply

M.I.A.
09-21-2010, 07:27 PM
the more i stay in the company of those people that believe the more i realise it is a case of the blind leading the blind. we are not constant, even if we know our scriptures if we can not put them into context and understand the deception of this world we will never win and we will never grow.
and at this moment in time its all about the winning, isnt that success? isnt that why we pray? isnt that why hours upon hours are spent here refuting and bringing counter allegations against each others all powerful god? our piety is only a skin deep.
mankind is nothing but competition and insolence, by are very nature this is the case and no amount of ablution, prayer, baptism and congregation can cure this unless allah swt wills it.
why would anybody even speak if they saw the world this way?

youre asking if there are prophets still about, no there are none.
you represent the entireity of youre faith if it propergates good on you, but mostly you will be fake because by our very nature WE ARE THE OPPOSITE OF THE SCRIPTURE! it say so within the first few paragraphs of the quran and it holds true of my life...im as fake as you are.
if we each had to list the bad things we'd done in our signetures then maybe we would be less likely to hurt each other so readily....or do you enjoy this?

the concept is do any of you actually believe in a life after death? if you do then what is this life, absolution, prayer, baptism and congregation?
metaphorically iv died tens of deaths so far so im thinking this place is hell on earth and yet so many can make it heaven. its easy to say this is a test but the rewards you seek are given through victory over opponents and if you do not fight in this world well... this world has destroyed much better people.
in all my belief in god i can honestly say the only thing i am sceptical about is the life after death.

you can probably guess its a rant after another day at work... got sacked yesterday, back on the horse today. dont ask me how that works its like they build you up just to knock you down.

the above few paragraphs are full of contradictions but that does not make any of it untrue.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-22-2010, 11:18 AM
Originally Posted by GreyKode
What does the bible say about the story of Yusuf(as)?
Reasonably consistent with the account given in the Qur'an, so I thought. But Surah 12:69 has Yusuf revealing his identity to his brother Benjamin before the cup-in-the-saddlebag incident. This didn't happen in the Bible's account. Also, in Surah 12:100 it says that Yusuf's parents came to him in Egypt. It isn't made clear here that Yusuf's mother was in fact dead at that time. She had died long ago giving birth to Benjamin. Perhaps "parents" here meant Jacob and his other living wife.
Reply

جوري
09-22-2010, 12:18 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi


I know that these things that you have mentioned are controversial matters that Muslims feel strongly about. But it doesn't prove that the Qur'an is correcting the Bible.

As far as I know, the Qur'an does not deny the incident of incest between Lot and his daughters. Nor does it deny that Abraham married his half sister.
It doesn't need to deny something that has never happened. It is like me saying your mother is a wh ore, when she isn't, do you usually take the time to dignify abominable accusations?
And the Bible does not state that God is a trinity
Again simple, God isn't the trinity, you have the lying hands of scribes and saul to thank for that!

all the best
Reply

Hiroshi
09-22-2010, 02:07 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
Also Mary (as) was very young when she married Joseph,and you dont consider than an act to be "emulated" lol, and also it was quite normal back then for marriage to be at such a young age.
I've heard of this. Muslims often say that in reply to the accusation that Muhammed had a child wife.

Where can we find the documented evidence for Mary's age at the time of her marriage?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-22-2010, 02:12 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

Again simple, God isn't the trinity, you have the lying hands of scribes and saul to thank for that!
Who are these scribes and Saul? Do you mean Paul the apostle? He never called God a trinity.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-22-2010, 02:18 PM
Originally Posted by M.I.A.
the concept is do any of you actually believe in a life after death?
Not the way Islam describes it where you have conscious existence while waiting in your grave for centuries until the resurrection. The Bible says that the dead are conscious of nothing until they are resurrected.
Reply

جوري
09-22-2010, 02:29 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Who are these scribes and Saul? Do you mean Paul the apostle? He never called God a trinity.
people like Athanasius, your council of nicea where they take a vote on deification of men, saul had a large hand to play with the corruption of your religion (even if you as a Mormon/a heretical sect by christian account) don't believe he had much a role to play!


Barnabas was a Jew born in Cyrus. His name was Joses, and due to his devotion to the cause of Jesus, the other apostles had given him the surname of Barnabas; this term is variously translated as "Son of Consolation" or "Son of Exhortation".
He was a successful preacher with a magnetic personality. Any one tormented by the clash of creeds found solace and peace in his company. His eminence as a man who had been close to Jesus had made him a prominent member of the small group of disciples in Jerusalem who had gathered together after the disappearance of Jesus. They observed the Law of the Prophets, which Jesus had come, "not to destroy but, to fulfil" (Matthew 5:17). They continued to live as Jews and practiced what Jesus had taught them. That Christianity could ever be regarded as a new religion did not occur to any of them. They were devout and practicing Jews distinguished from their neighbours only by their faith in the message of Jesus.
In the beginning they did not organise themselves as a separate sect and did not have a synagogue of their own. There was nothing in the message of Jesus, as understood by them, to necessitate a break with Judaism. However, they incurred the enmity of the vested interests among the Jewish higher echelon. The conflict between the Jews and the followers of Jesus was started by the Jews because they felt that the Christians would undermine their authority.
ACTS 12: 25
"And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled their ministry, and took with them John, whose surname was Mark."

ACTS 13: 1 and 2
"Now there was in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers, as Barnabas, and Simeon, that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrach, and Saul. "As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said: Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

ACTS 14:11 to 15
"And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia. The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. "And they called Barnabas Jupiter, and Paul Mercurius. "Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people.

"Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out.
"And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are thereon."
The gulf progressively began to widen. During the siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., the Christians left the city; and refused to take part in the Bar Coachaba rebellion in 132 A.D. These two events brought to the surface the difference between the Christians and the Jews.
The question of the origin of Jesus, his nature and relation to God, which later became so important, was not raised among these early disciples. That Jesus was a man supernaturally endowed by God was accepted without question. Nothing in the words of Jesus or the events in his life led them to modify this view. According to Aristides, one of the earliest apologists, the worship of the early Christians was more purely monotheistic even than of the Jews.
With the conversion of Paul a new period opened in Christian Theology. Paul's theology was based on his personal experience interpreted in the light of contemporary Greek thought. The theory of redemption was the child of his brain, a belief entirely unknown to the disciples of Jesus. Paul's theory involved the deification of Jesus.
The Pauline period in the history of the Christian Church saw a change of scene and principles. In place of the disciples, who had sat at the feet of Jesus, a new figure, who had not known Jesus, had come to the forefront. In place of Palestine, the Roman Empire became the scene of Christian activity. Instead of being a mere sect of Judaism, Christianity not only became independent of Judaism but also became independent of Jesus himself.
Paul was a Jewish inhabitant of Tarsus. He had spent a long time in Rome and was a Roman citizen. He realised the strong hold which the Roman religion had on the masses. The intellectuals were under the influence of Plato and Aristotle. Paul seems to have felt that it would not be possible to convert the masses in the Roman Empire without making mutual adjustments. But his practical wisdom was not acceptable to those who had seen and heard Jesus. However, in spite of their difference, they decided to work together for the common cause.
As recorded in the Acts, Barnabas represented those who had become personal disciples of Jesus, and Paul co-operated with them for some time. But finally they fell out. Paul wanted to give up the Commandments given through Moses about things to eat; he wanted to give up the Commandment given through Abraham regarding circumcision. Barnabas and the other personal disciples disagreed. The following sentences in the Acts give a hint of the rift:
"And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, "Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved." "When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputations with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question" (Acts 14:1 and 2).
After this rift, there was a parting of the ways. In the Acts, Barnabas disappears after the rift, because the recording of the acts of the Apostles was done by the followers of Paul. Because of Paul's compromise with Roman beliefs and legends, Pauline Christians grew in number and grew in strength. A stage was later reached when kings were used as pawns to further the ends of the Church.
The followers of Barnabas never developed a central organization. Yet due to the devotion of their leaders their number increased very fast. These Christians incurred the wrath of the Church and systematic effort was made to destroy them and to obliterate all traces of their existence including books and churches. The lesson of history, however, is that it is very difficult to destroy faith by force. Their lack of organization became a source of strength because it was not so easy to pick them up one by one.
Modern research has brought to light odd facts about these Christians. They are like the crests of waves and looking at them one can visualise a whole body of ocean not yet visible.
We notice that up to the 4th century A.D. there existed a sect known as Hypisistarians who refused to worship God as father. They revered Him as an All Mighty Ruler of the world, He was the Highest of all and no one was equal to Him. Paul of Samasata was a Bishop of Antioch. He was of the view that Christ was not God but a man and a prophet. He differed only in degree from prophets who came before him and that God could not have become man substantially.
Then we come across another Bishop of Antioch viz Lucian. As a Bishop his reputation for sanctity was not less than his fame as a scholar. He came down strongly against the belief of Trinity. He deleted all mention of Trinity from the Bible as he believed it to be a later interpolation not found in the earlier Gospels. He was martyred in 312 A.D.
Next we come to the famous disciple of Lucian viz Arius (250-336 A.D.) He was a Libyan by birth. Peter Bishop of Alexandria ordained him a Deacon but later excommunicated him. Achilles the successor of Peter again ordained Arius as priest. Alexander the next Bishop of Alexandria once again excommunicated him. Arius however had gathered such a large following that he became a headache for the Church. If kept out of Church he could be a great danger to her but he could not be accommodated within the Church as he wanted to establish the unity and simplicity of the Eternal God. He believed that how so ever much Christ may surpass other created beings he himself was not of the same substance as God. He was as human being as any other man. The teaching of Arius spread like wild fire and shook the very foundation of the Pauline Church. The controversy that was simmering for three hundred years suddenly became a conflagration. No man dared to oppose the organized Church but Arius did, and remained a headache for her whether he was ordained a priest or was excommunicated. During this time two events changed the history of Europe.
Emperor Constantine brought a greater part of Europe under his rule and secondly he began to support the Christians without accepting Christianity. To the soldier prince the different creeds within the Christian faith were very confusing. In the Imperial Palace itself the controversy was raging not less fiercely. It appears that perhaps the Queen Mother was inclined towards Pauline Christianity while his sister Princess Constantina was a disciple of Arius. The Emperor was wavering between the two faiths. As an administrator he was interested only in uniting all the Christians within one Church.
It was at this time that the conflict between Arius and Bishop Alexander became so widespread and so violent that it became a law and order problem. So the Emperor anxious to maintain peace in the newly unified Europe had to intervene.
In 325 A.D. a meeting of all denominations of Christianity was called at Nicea (Now Isnik, a village). Bishop Alexander was not able to attend the conference and he deputed his lieutenant Athanasius, who subsequently succeeded Alexander as Bishop of Alexandria.
The conference had many prolonged sessions. Emperor Constantine could not grasp the full implications of the ecclesiastical confrontation, but he was very clear in his mind that for maintaining peace in his realm the support and cooperation of the Church was necessary. Accordingly he threw his weight behind Athanasius and banished Arius from the realm. Thus the belief of Trinity became the official religion of the empire. Fearful massacre of Christians who did not believe in Trinity followed. It became a penal offense to possess a Bible not authorized by the Church and according to some estimates as many as 270 different versions of the Bible were burnt. Princess Constantina was not happy at the turn of events. The Emperor ultimately was persuaded to accept the faith of the men he killed. The result was that Arius was called back in 346. The day Arius was scheduled to visit the Cathedral of Constantinople in triumph, he died suddenly. The Church called it a miracle. The Emperor knew it was a murder. He banished Athanasius and two other Bishops. The Emperor then formally accepted Christianity and was baptized by an Arian Bishop. Thus Monotheism became the official religion. Constantine died in 337. The next Emperor Constantanius also accepted the faith of Arius. In 341 a conference was held in Antioch and Monotheism was accepted as a correct interpretation of Christian faith. This view was confirmed by another Council held in Sirmium in 351. As a result Arianism was accepted by an overwhelming majority of Christians. St. Jerome wrote in 359 that 'the whole world groaned and marvelled to find itself Arian'.
In this context the next important figure is that of Pope Honorius. A contemporary of Prophet Mohammed (peace be on him) he saw the rising tide of Islam whose tenets very much resembled those of Arius. As the mutual killings of Christians was still fresh in his memory he perhaps thought of finding a via media between Islam and Christianity. In his letters he began to support the doctrine of 'one mind', because if God has three independent minds the result would be chaos. The logical conclusion pointed to the belief in the existence of one God. This doctrine was not officially challenged for about half a century. Pope Honorius died in October 638. In 680, i.e. 42 years after his death, a council was held in Constantinople where Pope Honorius was anathematized. This event is unique in the history of Papacy when a Pope was denounced by a succeeding Pope and the Church.
The next two personalities of this faith that deserve mention were members of the same family. L. F. M. Sozzini (1525- 1565) was native of Siena. In 1547 he came under the influence of Camillo a Sicilian mystic. His fame spread in Switzerland He challenged Calvin on the doctrine of Trinity. He amplified the doctrine of Arius, denied the divinity of Christ and repudiated the doctrine of original sin and atonement. The object of adoration according to him could only be the one and only one God. He was followed by his nephew F. P. Sozzini (1539- 1604). In 1562 he published a work on St. John's Gospel denying the divinity of Jesus. In 1578 he went to Klausonburg in Transylvania whose ruler John Sigisumud was against the doctrine of Trinity. Here Bishop Francis David (1510-1579) was fiercely anti-Trinitarian. This led to the formation of a sect known as Racovian Catechism. It derives its name from Racow in Poland. This city became the stronghold of the faith of Arius.
Among the present-day Christians a large number of men and women still believe in one God. They are not always vocal. Due to the crushing power of the Churches they cannot express themselves and there is not much communication between them.
In the end it will be of interest to quote Athanasius the champion of Trinity. He says that whenever he forced his understanding to meditate on the divinity of Jesus his toilsome and unavailing efforts recoil on themselves, that the more he wrote the less capable was he of expressing his thoughts. At another place he pronounces his creed as:- There are not three but "ONE GOD".
Reply

جوري
09-22-2010, 02:33 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Not the way Islam describes it where you have conscious existence while waiting in your grave for centuries until the resurrection. The Bible says that the dead are conscious of nothing until they are resurrected.
'conscious' or not what is the point of resurrection if there is limited seating in heaven that has already been filled?
Do you believe that we have 'souls' a soul and 'consciousness' aren't one in the same!

all the best
Reply

M.I.A.
09-22-2010, 02:44 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Not the way Islam describes it where you have conscious existence while waiting in your grave for centuries until the resurrection. The Bible says that the dead are conscious of nothing until they are resurrected.
Is it possible that this life is the punishment in the grave?
we are unaware of the ultimate consequences of our actions for us and the people around us.
can we be forgiven for our actions in ignorance and unawareness?
sort of like dante's inferno.
islam says that even in the grave there are signs of the ultimate goal we await, glipses of heaven and hell etc etc. this might not contradict the bible as jesus peace and blessings be upon him told of his forgivness for the people even if they were not aware of there doings.

omg zombie apocalypse!
no im kidding.

edit* also islam states a comparison between those that remember allah swt and those that do not as the difference between the living and the dead. although im clutching at straws just trying to find anything that would bring us closer together than further apart.
Reply

Zafran
09-22-2010, 03:02 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Muhammed invited the pagan Arab tribes to Islam but then warred with them if they refused (but he always sent his men rather than a bird). In Surah 27:30-31 Solomon makes the same demand. Then in verses 33-34 the queen and her chiefs discuss the option of war.
are you forgetting the 13 years of oppression that the muslim minorities faced in Mecca - Boycotting, Killing and torturing the people that followed him? When did he send his men and which ones? - he did all the preaching by Himself in the early period. You also seem to forget the aggression of the Pagan arab tribes against the Muslims.

Your also mispreresenting the verse - there is no war with the Prophet Solomon pbuh and Bilqis - or invasions outside borders? so where did you get that information from as well? Quote it?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-22-2010, 03:18 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

people like Athanasius, your council of nicea where they take a vote on deification of men, saul had a large hand to play with the corruption of your religion (even if you as a Mormon/a heretical sect by christian account) don't believe he had much a role to play!
I agree with you about the Athanasian Creed (might not actually have been proposed by Athanasius) and the Council of Nicea.

But you can't blame Paul for promoting the trinity doctrine. He had nothing to do with it.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-22-2010, 03:27 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
I agree with you about the Athanasian Creed (might not actually have been proposed by Athanasius) and the Council of Nicea.

But you can't blame Paul for promoting the trinity doctrine. He had nothing to do with it.
Hiroshi, you're right, you can't blame Paul. But as you're a Jehovah's Witness I suspect you're not going to agree with my reason for agreeing. As I read the scriptures it wasn't Paul who first introduced the idea that Jesus was to be worshipped as God, but Peter and Jesus' disciples.


----edit---------

Other readers of Hiroshi's and my post, may wonder how it is that two people who both have our religion listed as Christian on this board have such dramatically different concepts. Well, as Hiroshi has already stated in a different post, Jehovah's Witnesses would not consider views such as I and the rest of historical Christianity hold to be truly Christian. Not surprisingly, the feeling is mutual on my part; I feel that the views held by Jehovah's Witnesses are not orthodox, but heterodox.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-22-2010, 03:35 PM
Originally Posted by Zafran
are you forgetting the 13 years of oppression that the muslim minorities faced in Mecca - Boycotting, Killing and torturing the people that followed him? When did he send his men and which ones? - he did all the preaching by Himself in the early period. You also seem to forget the aggression of the Pagan arab tribes against the Muslims.
The title of Surah 9 (or one of the titles) translates as "immunity". This refers to immunity from having to keep peace treaties that existed between Muhammed and the various Arab tribes. If there had been a breach of a treaty on the part of those tribes then there would have been no need to claim such immunity. Muhammed's men did exactly as they were instructed to do in Surah 9:5. They gave the pagans a waiting period to consider their course of action. Then they went out and invited the pagans to embrace Islam. If the pagans refused then they were threatened. And if they still refused then they were attacked. Did you think that all of Arabia converted to Islam as a result of peaceful preaching?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-22-2010, 03:40 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Hiroshi, you're right, you can't blame Paul. But as you're a Jehovah's Witness I suspect you're not going to agree with my reason for agreeing. As I read the scriptures it wasn't Paul who first introduced the idea that Jesus was to be worshipped as God, but Peter.
Hi Grace Seeker.

Is this referring to the transfiguration that Peter speaks of in his writings?
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-22-2010, 03:53 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Hi Grace Seeker.

Is this referring to the transfiguration that Peter speaks of in his writings?
No. I was referring to Peter's Pentecost sermon in Acts 2.
Reply

جوري
09-22-2010, 04:17 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
I agree with you about the Athanasian Creed (might not actually have been proposed by Athanasius) and the Council of Nicea.

But you can't blame Paul for promoting the trinity doctrine. He had nothing to do with it.
I can blame him for plenty, including how the alleged 'NT' doesn't reconcile at all with the so-called 'OT' aren't they both released to the world courtesy of the same god?
Reply

Hugo
09-22-2010, 05:13 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
By correcting ,the Quraan is correcting the misconceptions, actually you are wrong there so i disagree, the Quraan never accepted Abraham (pbuh) married his sister, nor Lott and his daughters, the Quraan spoke of what really happened . How could a prophet could do such things? In truth your actually saying God cannot even send perfect message to guide people to him, but rather confuse people.
But where does it say that God can only use perfect people as prophets so ANYONE who is perfect is also a prophet? If we go along this road then we end up saying that God can only use perfect people and that does not seem to make sense given the fall;en world we live in.
Reply

Hugo
09-22-2010, 05:18 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
The Quran says that incest is forbidden, theres no way prophets of god would go against that even by accident
But explain why - you cannot prove or demonstrate something by just saying it can you? In this case you also have to explain why the Bible compilers added these incidents if they are not true, surely doing so can only make your holy book look unholy? I don't know where this doctrine of perfect prophets comes from, who invented it?
Reply

Zafran
09-22-2010, 05:33 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
The title of Surah 9 (or one of the titles) translates as "immunity". This refers to immunity from having to keep peace treaties that existed between Muhammed and the various Arab tribes. If there had been a breach of a treaty on the part of those tribes then there would have been no need to claim such immunity. Muhammed's men did exactly as they were instructed to do in Surah 9:5. They gave the pagans a waiting period to consider their course of action. Then they went out and invited the pagans to embrace Islam. If the pagans refused then they were threatened. And if they still refused then they were attacked. Did you think that all of Arabia converted to Islam as a result of peaceful preaching?
First of all your either ignorant or not telling the entire truth on purpose. The prophet pbuh when he got his messege was persectued for 13 years in mecca, there was no fighting in this period - you do know this as this basic history. There were 3 skirmish that took place Badr being the famous one after he migrated to medina. Surah 9 has a context read the entire passage rather focusing on just one verse, thats like me focusing on one verse in the bible - its a total misrepresentation just as you misrepresented the Soloman pbuh story. The treaties were with the pagan arabs and the Jews and guess what they broke the treaties against the muslims when they were in medina. The pagan arabs were far more in number so they wanted exterminate the minority muslim population - but they lost and even then when the prophet came to Mecca he forgave everyone but the idols had to go.

You make it sound like the muslims were

1 - a majority.
2 - never persecuted by the majoirty of pagan arabs who boycotted, tortured and killed the minority muslims for 13 years so much so that prophet had to migrate away from Mecca to medina.
3 - totally ignore the fact that the treaties were brokern by the pagan arabs.

Last but not leaset the surat is al Tauba - any muslim knows what the word Tauba means its The Repentence.

Talk about lying or being plain ignorant.
Reply

Hugo
09-22-2010, 05:59 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
The only one deluded here is you, you and your fellow Christians. You continuously delude yourself into believing a man died for your sins, no one died for your sins - trust me you will held accountable for every single one of your actions - you're not gonna get away with anything on the Day.
I prefer to trust God and his word. I say again all you have is one man who claimed he hear God's last message but there were no other witnesses and if we exclude historical Islamic incidents its very very hard not to conclude everything else is copied from other earlier books - I have no reason at all to trust that story? So 'trust me' YOU will be held accountable because you have rejected the authentic Biblical witness.

God Al-Mighty the drama you find amongst christians, go on tell us how it afflicts you. Sin does not exist in christianity because your mangod is so Just that he's already forgiven your sins before you even commit them. We don't claim self-righteousness, like I said we're far from perfect, we don't even know for certain wether we'll even enter heaven. Self-righteousness to me is when you claim you're already 'saved', you've got your ticket to heaven and have nothing to worry about. Self-righteousness is when you claim that 'god' has spoken to you and performed miracles on you.
Let us be clear here, you are the one claiming Muslims are better than everyone else indeed that is what the Qu'ran says but I cannot see it in daily life and the Bible expressly says how all of us fall far short of God's standard. One can hardly go to God as a Christian does and confess you sins daily and at the same time be self-righteousness - but I guess from your definition (see my italics) Mohammed was self-righteous?
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-22-2010, 06:05 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
But where does it say that God can only use perfect people as prophets so ANYONE who is perfect is also a prophet? If we go along this road then we end up saying that God can only use perfect people and that does not seem to make sense given the fall;en world we live in.
Well there are many examples regarding that

As a muslim i would say this world is created perfect, the sky is perfect, as humans we sleep, we eat, the way the brain works is perfect, day turns to night, night turns to day, how perfect is that? If you look at the character of the Prophet Muhammad (saw) it is perfect! Thats if you study every part of his life rather than just go with the lies such as "why he did this and that?" without doing any research to why he actually did.

I remember speaking to a women who was cursing the Prophet Muhamamd (saw), i was telling her what ever shes saying are all lies, she was basically believing what ever those people who "curese" the prophet (saw), by saying disgusting stuff about him. but then i asked her, have you read the Quraan? or do you anything about the Prophet Muhammad (saw) she replied "no", but from what she was hearing, she didnt bother doing any research, but i guess thats whats the problem with many people today, they dont like to do their research or like to remain ignorant and arrogant.

Anyways, God is perfect, in Islaam he gives himself many names/attributes, i shall mention some and keep in mind these names make one perfect in every way . . .

Al-Malik=The King, The Master, The Sovereign Lord
Al-Quddus=The Holy, The Pure, The Perfect
Al-Muhaymin=The Guardian, The Protector
Al-Alim=The All Knowing, The Omniscient
As sami=The All Hearing
Al Karim=The Bountiful, The Generous
Al Baaith=The Resurrecter
As-samad=The Eternal, The Absolute, The Self-Sufficient

These are just a few ive mentioned, no man or creation of the Allmighty could achieve such names unless God bestows such a character in one.

Allaah speaks to Prophet Muhammad (saw) in this verse :

I really recommend you read Surah Ar-Rahmaan (The Most Glorious) it is the 55th chapter of the Quraan

Anyways i cant mention everything in one post, so hopefully you should try to put the effort to find out yourself why God is perfect and not Imperfect!

Peace
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-22-2010, 06:37 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
But where does it say that God can only use perfect people as prophets so ANYONE who is perfect is also a prophet? If we go along this road then we end up saying that God can only use perfect people and that does not seem to make sense given the fall;en world we live in.
Hugo, you have to remember that while you and I may believe we live in a fallen world, Islam teaches that we live in a nuetral world. That all people are born sinless and have the capacity to chose to submit, and thus remain sinless, or to disobey and become marked by sin. But, according to Islam sin is not a given in every person's life; it is a choice. With this background, it is not inconsistent with Islam to imagine that the prophets never sinned, even though we ourselves might balk at the creduality of such a statement.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-22-2010, 07:06 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Hugo, you have to remember that while you and I may believe we live in a fallen world, Islam teaches that we live in a nuetral world. That all people are born sinless and have the capacity to chose to submit, and thus remain sinless, or to disobey and become marked by sin. But, according to Islam sin is not a given in every person's life; it is a choice. With this background, it is not inconsistent with Islam to imagine that the prophets never sinned, even though we ourselves might balk at the creduality of such a statement.
Yes as a christian you may believe that you are born a sinner, whereas muslims we believe we are born sinless, for how a innocent little baby can be born a sinner? The actions of the little innocent being proves he is not a sinner!

That is why there is a heaven and hell, if your born a sinner and have somebody paying for your sins, whats the point of Heaven and hell exactly? As im sure Christians do believe in the Heaven and Hell.

Actually when one sins he is called a sinner, commiting something God forbade him not to do. And ive mentioned previously every prophet was meant to be a rolemodel sent to their people/nation to whom God willed. If you research carefully and look back to all beliefs you will notice how similar they are to Islamic teachings, although not all. As Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing of God be on him) was the final messenger but sent for the whole of Mankind!, Not just Muslims but Non-muslims.
Reply

Zafran
09-22-2010, 07:20 PM
Salaam

Just like to add that when God forgives or pardons someone - that sin is erazed. The person is free from that sin - as God is the great pardoner.

peace
Reply

M.I.A.
09-22-2010, 08:12 PM
you have to realise there are like 6 billion people in the world and god makes use of all of them, unfortunately we all misuse each other.

as for being born perfect im not sure, but we are born closest to god or furthest away...that is life and thats the real understanding that god is bigger than all the peoples and all there wills combined.
even if we are put on the closest or the furthest path from god we are still on a path.

to say a person is perfect is to not understand that person, worse still its the superman delusion, that these people changed the world and were not hurt.

god is everyone and no-one, his will is everyone and no-one. but if any of you claim that you are above another in every instance then sooner or later this is proved incorrect. there can be no self rightousness without constant learning and understanding.
there can be no certanty ever.
this is why muslims are best, we are servants and we strive, we are slaves. we are not those that would carry forward the will of god. those are angels.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 06:24 AM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

'conscious' or not what is the point of resurrection if there is limited seating in heaven that has already been filled?
If there are no more places reserved in heaven then you can still live forever in a paradise on earth.

The Qur'an says that the righteous will inherit the earth (Surah 21:105)
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ


Do you believe that we have 'souls' a soul and 'consciousness' aren't one in the same!

all the best
The Bible doesn't say: "Adam was given a soul". It says: "Adam became a soul". A soul is a living person (or animal). When the person dies, the soul dies. But the person can live again in the resurrection.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 09:28 AM
Originally Posted by Zafran
First of all your either ignorant or not telling the entire truth on purpose. The prophet pbuh when he got his messege was persectued for 13 years in mecca, there was no fighting in this period - you do know this as this basic history. There were 3 skirmish that took place Badr being the famous one after he migrated to medina. Surah 9 has a context read the entire passage rather focusing on just one verse, thats like me focusing on one verse in the bible - its a total misrepresentation just as you misrepresented the Soloman pbuh story. The treaties were with the pagan arabs and the Jews and guess what they broke the treaties against the muslims when they were in medina. The pagan arabs were far more in number so they wanted exterminate the minority muslim population - but they lost and even then when the prophet came to Mecca he forgave everyone but the idols had to go.

You make it sound like the muslims were

1 - a majority.
2 - never persecuted by the majoirty of pagan arabs who boycotted, tortured and killed the minority muslims for 13 years so much so that prophet had to migrate away from Mecca to medina.
3 - totally ignore the fact that the treaties were brokern by the pagan arabs.

Last but not leaset the surat is al Tauba - any muslim knows what the word Tauba means its The Repentence.

Talk about lying or being plain ignorant.
Well, if I am ignorant then you can put me right can't you?

Surah 9 has the title Al Tauba which as you rightly say means The Repentance. But it is also called Al Bara'ah meaning Immunity.

Surah 9:1 is the source of this title: "A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Apostle, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances:"


The Maariful Tafsir pages 307-309 has this commentary:
Therefore, at the beginning of Surah Al-Bara’ah (Al-Taubah), separate injunctions were revealed that covered the four kinds of non-Muslim groups.
The first such group was that of the Quraysh of Makkah who had themselves broken the treaty of Hudaibiyah. Now, they deserved no extra respite. But, since this was the period of ‘sacred months’ during which fighting and killing was forbidden by Allah, therefore, the injunction which covers them appears in the fifth verse of Surah Al-Taubah, that is (So, when the sacred months expire, kill the Mushriks wherever you find them. And catch them and besiege them and sit in ambush for them everywhere. Then, if they repent and establish salah and pay zakah, leave their way. Surely, Allah is most Forgiving, Very Merciful - 9:5). It means that they had, though, forfeited all their rights by breaking the treaty obligation, but observing the sanctity of the ‘sacred months’ was after all necessary, therefore, they should either leave the Arabian Peninsula soon after the ‘sacred months’ expire, or embrace Islam, or be prepared to face war.
Then, there was the second group with whom a peace treaty was made for a specified period of time and they had abided by it. The injunction about them was given in the fourth verse of Surah Al-Taubah:
Except those of the Mushriks with whom you have a treaty, and they have abated nothing of your rights and backed no one against you, so then, fulfill the treaty with them up to their term. Surely, Allah loves the God-fearing (9:4).
This injunction pertained to Banu Damurah and Banu Mudlaj as a result of which they were allowed a respite of nine months.
As for the third and fourth group, only one injunction was revealed to cover both. It has been mentioned in the first and the second verse of Surah Al-Taubah as follows:
Here is a withdrawal (proclaimed] by Allah and His Messenger against those of the Mushriks with whom you have a treaty. So, move in the land freely for four months, and be sure that you can never defeat Allah and that Allah is about to disgrace the disbelievers - (9:1,2).
Thus, according to the first two verses, all those who were covered by some treaty without a fixed time limit, or those with whom there was no treaty, were allowed a respite of four months.
And according to the fourth verse, those who had a treaty for a specified period of time received a respite until it expired and, according to the fifth verse, the Musriks of Makkah got their respite until the ‘sacred months’ expired.
After this public proclamation, the situation was that the first group, that is, the disbelievers of Makkah had to leave the limits of the state by the end of the ‘sacred months,’ that is, the end of the month of Muharram of the Hijrah year 10; and that of the third and fourth groups was the tenth of Rabi’ath-Thani of the Hijrah year 10. Any contravention of this executive order would have rendered the offender liable to face an armed confrontation. Under this arrangement, by the time of Hajj next year, no disbeliever was to remain within state limits. This will appear in verse 28 of Surah Al-Taubah where it has been said: (so, let them not come near Al-Masjid-al-haram after this year of theirs.). And the saying of the Holy Prophet in Hadith (The disbelievers shall not perform Hajj after this year) means precisely this.
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 01:32 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
]If there are no more places reserved in heaven then you can still live forever in a paradise on earth.
I can't imagine anyone wanting to live forever on this earth.. that would be pretty sad actually!

The Qur'an says that the righteous will inherit the earth (Surah 21:105)
Indeed.. however this doesn't mean eternally.. this means in spite of U.S and Israeli might and weaponry and soldiery, still the meek and the righteous will inherit the earth..
follow that up with this also from the Quran:

2:249------------ How many a little company hath overcome a mighty host by Allah's leave! Allah is with the steadfast.

The sad thing is that you have no knowledge of the Quran, how to interpret it, how to put it together for a cohesive picture, yet are coming here to teach Muslims about its contents!
The Bible doesn't say: "Adam was given a soul". It says: "Adam became a soul". A soul is a living person (or animal). When the person dies, the soul dies. But the person can live again in the resurrection.
Well that is unfortunate as I see the bible deficient in many ways, the soul doesn't die, least of which when we are promised immortality be it in heaven or hell (for one to choose wisely their path)

I would love to dedicate more time to teaching you things as sometimes I see a part of you wanting to genuinely learn (but for all the wrong reasons unfortunately) and like wise unfortunately I don't have the time to correct a host of your misconceptions and the end result is also not worth my effort, I prefer to channel it, either learning or teaching other Muslims..

all the best
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 02:04 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

I can't imagine anyone wanting to live forever on this earth.. that would be pretty sad actually!


Indeed.. however this doesn't mean eternally.. this means in spite of U.S and Israeli might and weaponry and soldiery, still the meek and the righteous will inherit the earth..
The Qur'an refers the reader to the Psalms. Surah 21:105 says: "Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth."

This is a direct quote from Psalms 37:29 which says: "My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth and dwell therein forever." So it does mean eternally.

And btw, according to Daniel 2:44 all human government and rulership (including those of the U.S. and Israel) will first be destroyed. The only ruling power will be rulership by God.
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 03:23 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
The Qur'an refers the reader to the Psalms. Surah 21:105 says: "Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth."

This is a direct quote from Psalms 37:29 which says: "My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth and dwell therein forever." So it does mean eternally.

And btw, according to Daniel 2:44 all human government and rulership (including those of the U.S. and Israel) will first be destroyed. The only ruling power will be rulership by God.
The Psalms also mention prophet Mohammed by name:
"HIKKOMAMITTAQIM VIKULLO MAHAMADDIM ZEHDUDIVEZEH RAAI BENUTS YARUSHALAM." "His mouth is most sweet: yea he is Muhammad the great. This is my beloved and this is my friend, O' daughter of Jerusalem."

so which part of the Psalms would you like to subscribe to and which part would you like to offer your own rendition to?
The meek shall inherit the earth denotes only that, God's law shall be supreme in the land after the second descent of Jesus (p) but he is only a man and as all men shall taste death and the peace and prosperity the world will know will no longer be, in suret ad dukhan those who are righteous will be caused to die, until there are no good souls left on earth and eventually judgment day will rise upon people so wicked who will be copulating on the streets like donkeys.

So, sorry, if you'd like to offer your own conclusions, offer it only as far as your bible is concerned. The Quran is the criterion, came to abrogate and affirm some of the previous, there is no mention there of living on earth forever!

all the best
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 03:32 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
The Psalms also mention prophet Mohammed by name:
"HIKKOMAMITTAQIM VIKULLO MAHAMADDIM ZEHDUDIVEZEH RAAI BENUTS YARUSHALAM." "His mouth is most sweet: yea he is Muhammad the great. This is my beloved and this is my friend, O' daughter of Jerusalem."

so which part of the Psalms would you like to subscribe to and which part would you like to offer your own rendition to?
I don't think that is in the Psalms actually. I believe this is quoting Song of Solomon 5:16.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 03:39 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
The meek shall inherit the earth denotes only that, God's law shall be supreme in the land after the second descent of Jesus (p) but he is only a man and as all men shall taste death and the peace and prosperity the world will know will no longer be, in suret ad dukhan those who are righteous will be caused to die, until there are no good souls left on earth and eventually judgment day will rise upon people so wicked who will be copulating on the streets like donkeys.
Is that quoting a hadith? Do you know where it is from?
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 03:52 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Is that quoting a hadith? Do you know where it is from?
http://www.islamworld.net/docs/hour/index.htm


http://www.islamawareness.net/Prophe...s_judgment.pdf

http://www.islamworld.net/docs/hour/Four.txt

enjoy
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 03:53 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
I don't think that is in the Psalms actually. I believe this is quoting Song of Solomon 5:16.
So what you are saying is, there are parts of your bible which you take and quite literally and others you choose to discard?

all the best
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 04:04 PM
I'm indebted to you.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 06:31 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
The Quran is the criterion, came to abrogate and affirm some of the previous, there is no mention there of living on earth forever!

No, you are wrong there.

Surah 39:73-74 says: "But those in fear of their Lord shall be led in throngs to Paradise. When they draw near, its gates will be opened, and its keepers will say to them: "Peace be to you; you have led good lives. Enter Paradise and dwell in it for ever." They will say: "Praise be to God who has made good to us His promise and given us the earth to inherit, that we may dwell in Paradise wherever we please"" (N. J. Dawood)
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 06:37 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
No, you are wrong there.

Surah 39:73-74 says: "But those in fear of their Lord shall be led in throngs to Paradise. When they draw near, its gates will be opened, and its keepers will say to them: "Peace be to you; you have led good lives. Enter Paradise and dwell in it for ever." They will say: "Praise be to God who has made good to us His promise and given us the earth to inherit, that we may dwell in Paradise wherever we please"" (N. J. Dawood)

you seem to have missed the operative word in there let me highlight it and 'embiggen' it for you.. I assure you, Paradise isn't on earth, don't argue you with me what is of Islamic beliefs.. you are certainly entitled to believe that earth equals paradise but that isn't of Islamic beliefs!

all the best
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-23-2010, 06:47 PM
Is it possible that paradise is to one day be on earth?

Many Christians are ignorant that our own Bible says that in the final consumation of the world, that we no longer go up to heaven, but that heaven comes down to earth. It is in this fashion the dwelling of God is to be with men forever. (See Revelation chapter 21.) But despite this clear teaching in scriptures most just focus on the being caught up in the air with Christ bit and assume since God is in heaven and heaven is often pictured as being "up", that this means we will also be going up to enter heaven. It doesn't help that a lot of folk art and folk music perpetuates these idea.

I don't know all of the texts on which Islamic cosmology is based. Is the possibility of Allah creating heaven/paradise on earth excluded?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 07:31 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

Well that is unfortunate as I see the bible deficient in many ways, the soul doesn't die, least of which when we are promised immortality be it in heaven or hell (for one to choose wisely their path)
You're wrong here too. Surah 29:57 says: "Every soul shall taste death". (Dawood)
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 07:41 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Is it possible that paradise is to one day be on earth?

Many Christians are ignorant that our own Bible says that in the final consumation of the world, that we no longer go up to heaven, but that heaven comes down to earth. It is in this fashion the dwelling of God is to be with men forever. (See Revelation chapter 21.) But despite this clear teaching in scriptures most just focus on the being caught up in the air with Christ bit and assume since God is in heaven and heaven is often pictured as being "up", that this means we will also be going up to enter heaven. It doesn't help that a lot of folk art and folk music perpetuates these idea.

I don't know all of the texts on which Islamic cosmology is based. Is the possibility of Allah creating heaven/paradise on earth excluded?
I don't know much about Islamic cosmology either. But Daniel 2:44 depicts God's kingdom as bringing an end to all manmade rulerships and Daniel 2:35 pictures God's kingdom as a large mountain that "fills the earth". Revelation 20:6 speaks of faithful ones who return to life in heaven and rule with Christ over the earth for 1,000 years. At the end of this 1,000 years Satan is allowed to make his final attack upon those dwelling on earth (Revelation 20:7-9).
Reply

Insaanah
09-23-2010, 07:43 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
You're wrong here too. Surah 29:57 says: "Every soul shall taste death". (Dawood)
Hiroshi, I am just entering this thread quickly, with no intention of further replies to any of your posts, to say that the ignorance and arrogance that you are currently displaying, is staggering. Are you here to learn about Islam, or to teach us it? If the latter, then I don't need to say the words. If the former, then please dispense with your pearls of wisdom. They are not needed or wanted. Please do not tell us we are wrong without having knowledge of our religion, the language of our book and everything else. The Arabic word used is nafs. This word is used for mainly person, and self, mainly in the plural, all over the Qur'an, as anfus, mainly as anfusakum, meaning yourselves. Ruh is the word used for the soul which is in the body. The way the word "soul" is used in this translation is for a person, eg when you say to someone, "Oh, you're such a good soul" - everyone knows that is referring to the person.

Peace.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 07:49 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ


you seem to have missed the operative word in there let me highlight it and 'embiggen' it for you.. I assure you, Paradise isn't on earth, don't argue you with me what is of Islamic beliefs.. you are certainly entitled to believe that earth equals paradise but that isn't of Islamic beliefs!

all the best
No, the earth that they inherit is the Paradise. Otherwise verse 74 doesn't make sense: "(God has) given us the earth to inherit, that we may dwell in Paradise".
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 07:50 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
You're wrong here too. Surah 29:57 says: "Every soul shall taste death". (Dawood)
There are many meanings to 'nafs' as mentioned in the sura, and several places in the Quran where they are mentioned, nafs and ruh however, are different things. nafs, can mean the self.. and mentioned several places:

The inciting nafs (nafs-i-ammara)
The self-accusing nafs (nafs-i-lawwama)
The nafs at peace (nafs-i-mutma'inna)


ruh on the other hand is the spirit, the soul, also has two other meanings, one which is the angel Gabriel..

so how about instead of displaying your ignorance openly, especially with regards to Islam, that you ask more, read more, and then offer your insights less?

all the best
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 07:54 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
No, the earth that they inherit is the Paradise. Otherwise verse 74 doesn't make sense: "(God has) given us the earth to inherit, that we may dwell in Paradise".
you really are a sad case... I don't know which is worse, arguing from ignorance or persisting in it?

also while at it, go ahead and look at the word روح and نَفْسٍ do you think you can do that for me, before proceeding? as it is I tire fast from arguing with fools..

here is a dictionary http://translation.babylon.com/arabic/to-english/

superimpose it on the verses you are using and then come argue you with me, a native Arabic speaker!

all the best
Reply

Hiroshi
09-23-2010, 08:13 PM
Originally Posted by Insaanah

Hiroshi, I am just entering this thread quickly, with no intention of further replies to any of your posts, to say that the ignorance and arrogance that you are currently displaying, is staggering. Are you here to learn about Islam, or to teach us it? If the latter, then I don't need to say the words. If the former, then please dispense with your pearls of wisdom. They are not needed or wanted. Please do not tell us we are wrong without having knowledge of our religion, the language of our book and everything else. The Arabic word used is nafs. This word is used for mainly person, and self mainly in the plural, all over the Qur'an, as anfus, mainly as anfusakum, meaning yourselves. Ruh is the word used for the soul which is in the body. The way the word "soul" is used in this translation is for a person, eg when you say to someone, "Oh, you're such a good soul". Everyone knows that is referring to the person.

Peace.
That is just fine except that every English version of the Qur'an that I have consulted reads: "soul" at Surah 29:57. Also Surah 39:42 says: "It is Allah that takes the souls of men at death". Most would surely construe that to speak of the soul leaving the body. But the word for "soul" in Surah 39:42 is "anfus" is it not?

Don't reply if you don't wish to.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-23-2010, 08:20 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
You're wrong here too. Surah 29:57 says: "Every soul shall taste death". (Dawood)
Yes every soul shall taste death doesnt mean it will Die eternally! The verse specifically means that every soul on this earth will Die and Allaah will grant that soul Paradise or Hellfire. It will also leave the earth! Thats the islamic belief and not what you interpetate it to be. May i ask why it says "Davood" in brackets after the verse insha`Allaah?

You speak as if youve memorised the whole of the Quraan and you learnt the tafseer (meaning of each verse). . .
Did you read the verse after that?

"And those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah Islamic Monotheism) and do righteous good deeds, to them We shall surely give lofty dwellings in Paradise, underneath which rivers flow, to live therein forever. Excellent is the reward of the workers." Al Quraan 29:58

However, concerning your Q

Also if you read Surah Al Imraan verses 169-170

"Think not of those who are killed in the Way of Allah as dead. Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, and they have provision. They rejoice in what Allah has bestowed upon them of His Bounty, rejoicing for the sake of those who have not yet joined them, but are left behind (not yet martyred) that on them no fear shall come, nor shall they grieve."

Although keep in mind these are the Shuhadah-The martyrs. However, its enough to prove when one is dead , they are dead in this life but not the hereafter.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-23-2010, 08:24 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
That is just fine except that every English version of the Qur'an that I have consulted reads: "soul" at Surah 29:57. Also Surah 39:42 says: "It is Allah that takes the souls of men at death". Most would surely construe that to speak of the soul leaving the body. But the word for "soul" in Surah 39:42 is "anfus" is it not?

Don't reply if you don't wish to.
It is better you read the arabic version of the Quraan considering its the "Real" version, and the english is the "translation"

And i agree with sis Insaanah

If you want to learn about Islaam, i suggest you start learning the basics of Islaam which i doubt you are aware of, instead of going too deep into debates, it surely proves that you are not just here to learn but to debate!

If you want to learn about Islaam, ask questions about Islaam InshaAllaah and the members of this forum will try to explain to the best of their knowledge but if you disagree you dont need to put your own opinions in. Like the sister said, teaching us about Islaam, we dont teach you about Christianity!
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 08:40 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
That is just fine except that every English version of the Qur'an that I have consulted reads: "soul" at Surah 29:57. Also Surah 39:42 says: "It is Allah that takes the souls of men at death". Most would surely construe that to speak of the soul leaving the body. But the word for "soul" in Surah 39:42 is "anfus" is it not?

Don't reply if you don't wish to.
did you bother look at rooh vs. nafs as I have recommended and placed them for you in Arabic plus supplemented you with a dictionary.. the mere fact that the 'soul' parts from the body upon death, denotes no more than the death of the body which is a vessel for the soul.. it is so rudimentary, that I can't imagine why you need the convoluted route to make a non-point.. you need to make a sort of paradigm shift when looking at other people's scriptures and not come in with your preconceived indoctrination looking to affirm your beliefs in spite of what everyone says and quotes..

all the best
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-23-2010, 08:47 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
It is better you read the arabic version of the Quraan considering its the "Real" version, and the english is the "translation"

And i agree with sis Insaanah

If you want to learn about Islaam, i suggest you start learning the basics of Islaam which i doubt you are aware of, instead of going too deep into debates.
I appreciate the sister's advice on this. That is what I have largely tried to do. But -- and now I'm speaking for myself, not Hiroshi -- one of the things that has lead me into more debates than I would really like to be part of is that not all of what you said is actually true. Most notably:
we dont teach you about Christianity!
Over and over again we Christians are told that we don't know Christianity, that we have changed it and only Muslims truly understand it. (I'm not accusing you or anyone personally and individually of doing that -- I have no desire to review threads just for the purpose of naming names.) It happens frequently. And much of what is reported by many on this board as being either the belief or history of Christianity is foreign to the Christianity that I was raised in and have been ordained to preach and teach today.

But given the validity of your point, perhaps we could agree (at least those of us in this thread) to let Muslims interpret the Qur'an, the Hadith, and any other Islamic teachings; and let Christians and Jews interpret the Bible and Christian or Jewish teachings. Let us spend more time trying to understand each other, and less time trying to refute each other.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-23-2010, 09:22 PM
^Yes i agree. . . . . . .

Thanks for understanding, i really appreciate it!
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 09:31 PM
we let you interpret Christianity and use your interpretation to show you where it doesn't make sense!

all the best
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-23-2010, 09:53 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
we let you interpret Christianity and use your interpretation to show you where it doesn't make sense!

all the best
That's fair. There are things in Christianity (or any other religion) that I'm sure don't make sense to those outside of it. Heck, there are things that sometimes don't make sense to those of us inside of it. To the degree that I can, I'm happy to try to help it make more sense for those who are truly seeking to understand it, even if I can't resolve every issue.

Might I also suggest that we each need to realize that even after one has explained (or attempted to explain) our own faith, it doesn't mean that it is illogical for someone to reject it. Faith, by definition I think, does ask for more than just logic.
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 10:04 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
That's fair. There are things in Christianity (or any other religion) that I'm sure don't make sense to those outside of it. Heck, there are things that sometimes don't make sense to those of us inside of it. To the degree that I can, I'm happy to try to help it make more sense for those who are truly seeking to understand it, even if I can't resolve every issue.

Might I also suggest that we each need to realize that even after one has explained (or attempted to explain) our own faith, it doesn't mean that it is illogical for someone to reject it. Faith, by definition I think, does ask for more than just logic.

indeed, and I'd naturally accept that if the portion that is concerned with ones salvation was a bit easier to digest..understanding Islamic jurisprudence for instance isn't necessary for one to attain eternal house, but understanding the 'trinity' is, and as such I'd expect that the main theme to a religion be easy enough for the common man to the most sophisticated theologian and not exclusive to some group of Illuminati and the rest are to blindly follow..

all the best
Reply

aadil77
09-23-2010, 10:07 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
The Qur'an refers the reader to the Psalms. Surah 21:105 says: "Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth."

This is a direct quote from Psalms 37:29 which says: "My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth and dwell therein forever." So it does mean eternally.

And btw, according to Daniel 2:44 all human government and rulership (including those of the U.S. and Israel) will first be destroyed. The only ruling power will be rulership by God.

I've read many of these claims that you quote in JW magazines aimed at muslims, unfortunately they are false
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-23-2010, 10:19 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ


indeed, and I'd naturally accept that if the portion that is concerned with ones salvation was a bit easier to digest..understanding Islamic jurisprudence for instance isn't necessary for one to attain eternal house, but understanding the 'trinity' is,
See, this is one of those interpretations of Christianity done by someone who is not a Christian. In truth, UNDERSTANDING of the "trinity" is not necessary for salvation. In fact, I know many Christians who would argue that not even acceptance of the Trinity is necessary for salvation.
Reply

aadil77
09-23-2010, 10:32 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
But explain why - you cannot prove or demonstrate something by just saying it can you? In this case you also have to explain why the Bible compilers added these incidents if they are not true, surely doing so can only make your holy book look unholy? I don't know where this doctrine of perfect prophets comes from, who invented it?
You look at the example of prophet Muhammad - he was sinless, the ways of prophets are similar, if they make mistakes they are mentioned, prophet Muhammad ignored a blind man - his mistake is mentioned in the quran, prophet Musa killed a man whilst helping a man from his tribe - his mistake is also mentioned, prophet ayyub left his people because he was sick of their ignorance - his mistake is mentioned, prophet noah asked god to save his disbelieving son from the flood - his mistake is also mentioned.

After these instances the prophets pleaded sincerely for forgiveness, point is these examples are enough for mankind to show that humanly mistakes can be made and that repentance is always necessary for forgiveness. Unlike in your bible our prophets are not accused of commiting major sins just to relate to their people, these minor mistakes are enough of an example to learn from.

I don't think you realise what kind of connection these people had with god, you devalue god, you put Him down to humanly status - which is why you have no fear of Him and misuse His mercy, you disregard His qualities and His Might which is why you will never understand how much fear/love/faith of god a prophet has because they've had direct contact with Him. When you have direct communication with god and such a strong connection with Him you'd have to be stupid to be overcome by satan and commit any major sins - you would have god in your conscience almost all the time
Reply

جوري
09-23-2010, 10:36 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
See, this is one of those interpretations of Christianity done by someone who is not a Christian. In truth, UNDERSTANDING of the "trinity" is not necessary for salvation. In fact, I know many Christians who would argue that not even acceptance of the Trinity is necessary for salvation.
what do you need to know to be a good christian?
so a person can accept that Jesus is a prophet and be a christian? for instance Unitarians?
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-23-2010, 10:52 PM
Originally Posted by aadil77
You look at the example of prophet Muhammad - he was sinless, the ways of prophets are similar, if they make mistakes they are mentioned, prophet Muhammad ignored a blind man - his mistake is mentioned in the quran, prophet Musa killed a man whilst helping a man from his tribe - his mistake is mentioned also mentioned, prophet ayyub left his people because he was sick of their ignorance - his mistake is also mentioned, prophet noah asked god to save his disbeleiving son from the flood - his mistake is also mentioned.

After the prophets would plead sincerely for forgiveness, point is these examples are enough for mankind to show that humanly mistakes can be made but repentance is always necessary and can save you. Unlike in your bible our prophets did not need to commit major sins just to relate to their people, these minor mistakes are enough of an example to learn from - you would have god in your conscience almost all the time

I don't think you realise what kind of connection these people had with god, you devalue god, you put Him down to humanly status - which is why you have no fear of Him, you disregard His qualities and His Might which is why you will never understand how much fear/love/faith of god a prophet has because they've had direct contact with Him. When you have a direct communication with god and such a strong connection with Him you would have to be stupid to be overcome by satan and commit any major sins.
Also adding to that

read this ayaah: "Whoso obeyeth Allah and the messenger, they are with those unto whom Allah hath shown favour, of the prophets and the saints and the martyrs and the righteous. The best of company are they!"

The prophets were sinless, we see by the characters, they were prophets of God, how could they commit such filthy acts?

Also Allah tells us that there is no nation that there was no guide, a guide is one who guides with truth. A guide who guides us who to worship, how to live our life, whats bad for us and whats good for us ,for you must remain away from whats bad for you. The Noble Quran sets out a perfect example for each prophet and how we (concerning the humans of the earth) should live our lives. as they were/are a guidance. If we were to live our lives from our own ways and wills then certainly you have seen the disgusting events being taken in the past and the present which i am not going to mention.

"Verily! We have sent you with the truth, a bearer of glad tidings, and a warner. And there never was a nation but a warner had passed among them. " Al Quraan 35:24.

peace. . . . .
Reply

M.I.A.
09-23-2010, 11:21 PM
sorry to move backwards but what distinction is made between the soul and who we are?
is the soul the person as we know them, there character or something deeper?
im not sure how to phrase the question.

its just in the quran its said that its not for us to ask who we are....loosley paraphrased and im not sure if its in context.
also another time it says that we are not to covet our own souls.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 12:20 AM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

what do you need to know to be a good christian?
so a person can accept that Jesus is a prophet and be a christian? for instance Unitarians?
First, there is a difference between knowledge (what one has to know) and faith (what one believes). There is also a difference between knowledge and understanding.

To say that one has to UNDERSTAND the trinity is simply not true. I can know what the essence of the Trinity is, I can even believe it to be true, but that doesn't mean that I understand it. That is why I said that your interpretation of Christianity above was inaccurate.


Second to ask what one needs to know to be a good Christian is going to be different and more demanding than what one needs to know to be a Christian.

Recently I asked different groups of people who all identified themselves as Christians to simply define the term "Christian". I'm still accumulating their responses, but they vary widely. The reason for that variance can, in part, be explained by what one wrote:

So, let me be pedantic here a bit. When you make a definition you have to satisfy 2 criteria:
1. Sufficient conditions.
2. Necessary conditions.

The goal is to include everyone who are Christians and exclude everyone who is not.
"A Christian is someone who out of the love for Christ follows him all the days of his/her life in abiding faith. A Christian takes the teachings of scripture to heart and serves Christ in all that he/she does to further the Kingdom of God on Earth."
Here you hint at a necessary condition: Christ. But I would ask: are you following a human Jesus? After all, you are only talking about "teachings" and furthering "the Kingdom of God". Jesus does not have to be divine to do either of these, does he? The "faith" can simply be faith that the teachings are good and the goal is worthwhile.

Is that sufficient? Doesn't a Christian also have to believe that Jesus was divine? How do we do that? Don't we also have to believe that Jesus died and was resurrected (what I tend to call "Christ")?

So you have what is called a necessary condition to be a Christian, but not a sufficient condition, because other religions can also have the same condition. (I would also argue about whether it is necessary, since I think you can be a Christian even if you can't love God with all your heart, strength, and mind, but let's do that later.)

Basically, you start with a list of necessary conditions. When that list is such that it guarantees the result, then the list is "sufficient".

Sometimes the list need one be one item. In the case of Christianity, there are several necessary conditions that must be met before the list is sufficient to label that person as "Christian".

The Nicene and Apostle's Creeds are claimed (not just by me) to be that list of necessary conditions that is sufficient to define Christianity.
And what we find is that what one person considers necessary another does not. Many would accept the Nicene Creed as definitive, but some ask for a little more and some don't need all that is contained therein. But more than a few linked the definition of being a Christian to baptism irregardless of what one actually believed. Hence the list of all that is necessary so as to be sufficient to say this person is a Christian and that person is not is impossible to be agreed upon.

My own list would include the following statements.

A Christian....
...belongs to Christ.
...has placed his/her trust in the work of Christ to effect the restoration of one's spiritual fellowship with God.
...acknowledges Jesus to be BOTH one's Lord AND Savior.
...acknowledges Jesus to be the incarnation of the one and only God come to dwell among us and reconcile we who are separated from him by sin back to himself.
...is a follower of Christ to the extent that the teachings of Jesus and one's ongoing relationship with God are patterned after Jesus' example and this forms one spiritual and moral core.
...is a follower of Jesus to the exclusion of everything and everyone else.
Reply

جوري
09-24-2010, 12:42 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
First, there is a difference between knowledge (what one has to know) and faith (what one believes). There is also a difference between knowledge and understanding.
How can one have faith without understanding?
To say that one has to UNDERSTAND the trinity is simply not true. I can know what the essence of the Trinity is, I can even believe it to be true, but that doesn't mean that I understand it. That is why I said that your interpretation of Christianity above was inaccurate.
That is truly too bad, because that article of faith is the essence of your religion, nothing distinguishes your religion from others, save that piece 'the death of god' which you must accept to attain paradise!

Second to ask what one needs to know to be a good Christian is going to be different and more demanding than what one needs to know to be a Christian.
does your god care for numbers or quality? and if it is quality, then why does the part that matter require that one shuts off their understanding?
Recently I asked different groups of people who all identified themselves as Christians to simply define the term "Christian". I'm still accumulating their responses, but they vary widely. The reason for that variance can, in part, be explained by what one wrote:
fascinating considering the majority of Christians are at odds with those values and I don't see what 'love' really means to them, I find them to be the most hateful people I have personally encountered!

And what we find is that what one person considers necessary another does not. Many would accept the Nicene Creed as definitive, but some ask for a little more and some don't need all that is contained therein. But more than a few linked the definition of being a Christian to baptism irregardless of what one actually believed. Hence the list of all that is necessary so as to be sufficient to say this person is a Christian and that person is not is impossible to be agreed upon.
It doesn't really answer my question, it is a long statement leading no where.

My own list would include the following statements.

A Christian....
...belongs to Christ.
...has placed his/her trust in the work of Christ to effect the restoration of one's spiritual fellowship with God.
...acknowledges Jesus to be BOTH one's Lord AND Savior.
...acknowledges Jesus to be the incarnation of the one and only God come to dwell among us and reconcile we who are separated from him by sin back to himself.
...is a follower of Christ to the extent that the teachings of Jesus and one's ongoing relationship with God are patterned after Jesus' example and this forms one spiritual and moral core.
...is a follower of Jesus to the exclusion of everything and everyone else.
so in fact the theme is accepting something of which you have no understanding and having your entire faith rest upon that, yet unable to explain it to others and feel no need to!

all the best
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 01:02 AM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
How can one have faith without understanding?
I believe that light is best described by a combination of both particle theory and wave theory. Do I understand this? Not completely. But I do believe it.

I have asked what was the purpose of the addendum "And Allah knows best." to responses explaining Islam to me in these forums. And the answer I got then was that even within Islam there are things that are not understood and taken on faith simply because Allah said it was so.

I don't see why one has to have understanding to have faith.


That is truly too bad, because that article of faith is the essence of your religion, nothing distinguishes your religion from others, save that piece 'the death of god' which you must accept to attain paradise!
Yes, that is indeed a key tenet of our faith, and books have been written trying to explain the manner in which the death of Christ is applied to effect the lives of others. But exactly how it is that it becomes efficacious for us is ultimately a statement of faith; meaning that in the end we trust God who said that it is efficacious whether we understand the mechanism of it or not. I acknowledge that such a response is not be a good enough answer for many people. It sounds like you are included in that group.

does your god care for numbers or quality? and if it is quality, then why does the part that matter require that one shuts off their understanding?
I'm not sure that I understand the question. If I do understand it, the answer would be quality, but I don't see that faith requires one to shut off his or her understanding. It simply says that faith and trust can be present even without understanding. My parents love me. I know this to be true. But I don't understand how or why they do, only that they do.


fascinating considering the majority of Christians are at odds with those values and I don't see what 'love' really means to them, I find them to be the most hateful people I have personally encountered!
Guilty as charged. Far too many who take on the name of Christ don't live in such a way that exemplifies any connection with him.

It doesn't really answer my question, it is a long statement leading no where.
OK.

so in fact the theme is accepting something of which you have no understanding and having your entire faith rest upon that, yet unable to explain it to others and feel no need to!
No. I don't think that is the theme. See what I said above about the ability to have faith in things even when we don't understand. I find this in all religions, not just Christianity.

Do you think that everything that is accepted as a tenet of faith in Islam is understood by its practioners?

all the best
Thank-you. I continue to wish you the best as well.
Reply

جوري
09-24-2010, 02:04 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I believe that light is best described by a combination of both particle theory and wave theory. Do I understand this? Not completely. But I do believe it.
as stated before ones salvation isn't based on wave/particle theory.. anymore than my salvation is contingent on understanding Islamic finance or jurisprudence.. if God wants his religion to be accessible to everyone, then he'd make the piece that matters most, accessible to everyone, easily understood by young and old, educated and under-educated, theologians and laymen alike!



all the best
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 02:42 AM
Originally Posted by Insaanah
Hiroshi, I am just entering this thread quickly, with no intention of further replies to any of your posts, to say that the ignorance and arrogance that you are currently displaying, is staggering. Are you here to learn about Islam, or to teach us it? If the latter, then I don't need to say the words. If the former, then please dispense with your pearls of wisdom. They are not needed or wanted. Please do not tell us we are wrong without having knowledge of our religion, the language of our book and everything else. The Arabic word used is nafs. This word is used for mainly person, and self, mainly in the plural, all over the Qur'an, as anfus, mainly as anfusakum, meaning yourselves. Ruh is the word used for the soul which is in the body. The way the word "soul" is used in this translation is for a person, eg when you say to someone, "Oh, you're such a good soul" - everyone knows that is referring to the person.

Peace.
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
you really are a sad case... I don't know which is worse, arguing from ignorance or persisting in it?
It is indeed staggering, that Hiroshi's has the guts (or ignorance) to come here and plaster us with copy-paste job of Qur'an verses and hadiths of which he doesn't understand the literal meanings of those verses (he doesn't seem to understand arabic) let alone the context, and yet attempts to enlighten us with the "new meanings" that he created for those verses.
The more staggering part is that he does it again and again.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 02:52 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
See, this is one of those interpretations of Christianity done by someone who is not a Christian. In truth, UNDERSTANDING of the "trinity" is not necessary for salvation.
So, NOT understanding who you worship is OK in christianity?
I am baffled, frankly. It seems that christianity is stripped off more and more.
At first i thought that following Jesus pbuh teachings was NOT necessary in being saved and attain paradise, but now it seems that even NOT understanding the MOST fundamental of all (ie. who you worship and pray to) is also OK.


Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
In fact, I know many Christians who would argue that not even acceptance of the Trinity is necessary for salvation.
This is also staggering.
So, NOT accepting god, or parts of god (according to christians) is also OK and still gets you to paradise?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-24-2010, 06:09 AM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

you really are a sad case... I don't know which is worse, arguing from ignorance or persisting in it?

also while at it, go ahead and look at the word روح and نَفْسٍ do you think you can do that for me, before proceeding? as it is I tire fast from arguing with fools..

here is a dictionary http://translation.babylon.com/arabic/to-english/

superimpose it on the verses you are using and then come argue you with me, a native Arabic speaker!

all the best
You are to be commended that you can speak two languages. And I am sure that you want to tell me something very relevant here concerning Arabic words. But sometimes strongly held beliefs seem to carry more weight than mere words.

The Qur'an translated by Al-Hilali and Khan reads this way at Surah 21:105: "My righteous slaves shall inherit the land (i.e. the land of Paradise)."

It must therefore be an Islamic teaching amongst at least some Muslims that what is inherited here is Paradise, contrary to what you have told me. Probably the translators of this version understand the verse to actually refer to Paradise in heaven. If so then they would see no conflict here with what they already believe.

Many thanks for the link to the dictionary. I will try to research the words that you have mentioned.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 06:12 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
This is also staggering.
So, NOT accepting god, or parts of god (according to christians) is also OK and still gets you to paradise?
I think you misunderstand me here. In saying, "I know many Christians who would argue that not even acceptance of the Trinity is necessary for salvation." I did not mean to imply that they do not accept God. I was refer to the fact that there are some people who accept that Christ is God and put their faith in him, but they do not accept the theological dogma known as the doctrine of the Trinity as being an accurate description of the nature of God. And it is only some who would argue that idea. Most Christians would expect that to be a Christian involves a statement of faith which includes a credo statement along the lines of:
I believe in one God the Father almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven and sitteth at the right hand of the Father. And He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; of His kingdom there shall be no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of life, Who proceedeth from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spake by the prophets. In one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church; I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins; I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the age to come. Amen.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-24-2010, 06:13 AM
Originally Posted by aadil77
I've read many of these claims that you quote in JW magazines aimed at muslims, unfortunately they are false
I'm sorry to hear that.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 06:29 AM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
as stated before ones salvation isn't based on wave/particle theory.. anymore than my salvation is contingent on understanding Islamic finance or jurisprudence.. if God wants his religion to be accessible to everyone, then he'd make the piece that matters most, accessible to everyone, easily understood by young and old, educated and under-educated, theologians and laymen alike!



all the best
Originally Posted by naidamar
So, NOT understanding who you worship is OK in christianity?
I am baffled, frankly. It seems that christianity is stripped off more and more.
At first i thought that following Jesus pbuh teachings was NOT necessary in being saved and attain paradise, but now it seems that even NOT understanding the MOST fundamental of all (ie. who you worship and pray to) is also OK.
Do Muslims view the term "faith" as a synonymn for "understanding"?

I don't see how understanding has anything to do with access to God. I thought that for the Muslim access to God was achieved through one's own personal obedience and merit.

For Christians, access to God is achieved through faith in the meritorious work of Christ. Our scriptures describe this faith as "being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see" (Hebrew 11:1) -- a reference to our ultimate salvation experience of being united with God in the eschaton.

3By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible. 4By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead.

5By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God. 6And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.
7By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
8By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. 9By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. 10For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God.
11By faith Abraham, even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was barren—was enabled to become a father because he considered him faithful who had made the promise. 12And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore.
13All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth. 14People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.
17By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18even though God had said to him, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." 19Abraham reasoned that God could raise the dead, and figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death.
20By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau in regard to their future.
21By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of Joseph's sons, and worshiped as he leaned on the top of his staff.
22By faith Joseph, when his end was near, spoke about the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt and gave instructions about his bones.
23By faith Moses' parents hid him for three months after he was born, because they saw he was no ordinary child, and they were not afraid of the king's edict.
24By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh's daughter. 25He chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a short time. 26He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward. 27By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the king's anger; he persevered because he saw him who is invisible. 28By faith he kept the Passover and the sprinkling of blood, so that the destroyer of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel.
29By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land; but when the Egyptians tried to do so, they were drowned.
30By faith the walls of Jericho fell, after the people had marched around them for seven days.
31By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with those who were disobedient.
32And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel and the prophets, 33who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, 34quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies. 35Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection. 36Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. 37They were stoned; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated— 38the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. 39These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. 40God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.
(Hebrews 11:3-39)
Reply

Hiroshi
09-24-2010, 06:33 AM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

did you bother look at rooh vs. nafs as I have recommended and placed them for you in Arabic plus supplemented you with a dictionary..
all the best
Not yet. I thought you were still talking about Paradise.
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

the mere fact that the 'soul' parts from the body upon death, denotes no more than the death of the body which is a vessel for the soul.. it is so rudimentary, that I can't imagine why you need the convoluted route to make a non-point.. you need to make a sort of paradigm shift when looking at other people's scriptures and not come in with your preconceived indoctrination looking to affirm your beliefs in spite of what everyone says and quotes..
My point was that Surah 39:42 seems to use the plural form of "nafs" in the same way that that "rooh" might be used.

The Hebrew equivalents of these words (correct me if I am wrong) are nephesh and ruah respectively. Nephesh means "soul" in the sense of a person, an animal, or the life that that person or animal has. Ruah means "spirit" and has a variety of different meanings. In the case of the spirit leaving the body at death, it means the life force: that which animates the body. But this does not imply that it continues conscious existence without the body after death. I say this just to explain my own viewpoint on "soul" and "spirit".
Reply

Hiroshi
09-24-2010, 06:38 AM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє

Yes every soul shall taste death doesnt mean it will Die eternally!

I agree. God can resurrect the dead and restore them to life.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 06:42 AM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
I agree. God can resurrect the dead and restore them to life.

Hiroshi, I think one thing that we need to be clear on is if you mean to imply that the dead no longer exist at all until the time of the resurrection, or if the dead exist on a different plane of existence until the time of the resurrection?

I suspect you mean the first, while Muslims and Christians such as myself would mean the second.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 06:58 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Do Muslims view the term "faith" as a synonymn for "understanding"?
You ask any muslim, and S/he will be able to explain about God:
Say, "He is Allah , [who is] One,
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
"He begets not, nor was He begotten;
Nor is there to Him any equivalent."



I am yet to meet TWO christians (including pastors, priests, what have you) who are able to provide the same (simple) explanation about god (ie. the father, his son, and holy spirit) that they are worshipping.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 07:05 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
For Christians, access to God is achieved through faith in the meritorious work of Christ.

In this sentence, you are implying that christ is not equal to god.
He sounds like having the monopoly on intercession with god (ie. he is not god)
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 07:08 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
You ask any muslim, and S/he will be able to explain about God:
Say, "He is Allah , [who is] One,
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
"He begets not, nor was He begotten;
Nor is there to Him any equivalent."
But naidamar, that isn't understanding God. That is simply yet another form of a faith statement about God, just like the credo I posted above.

I am yet to meet TWO christians (including pastors, priests, what have you) who are able to provide the same (simple) explanation about god (ie. the father, his son, and holy spirit) that they are worshipping.
But I'll bet you've run into many Christians who would affirm the faith statement that I provided above.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 07:09 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
"I know many Christians who would argue that not even acceptance of the Trinity is necessary for salvation." I did not mean to imply that they do not accept God. I was refer to the fact that there are some people who accept that Christ is God and put their faith in him, but they do not accept the theological dogma known as the doctrine of the Trinity as being an accurate description of the nature of God.
ok, so it's merely playing with words it seems.
So that means people like Hiroshi (who does not believe christ is god) will not be saved, correct?

back to people who don't accept trinity, do they also accept holy spirit as god?
because if they accept the father, christ and holy spirit as god, that also mean they accept trinity or the 3-in-1 god (even if they dont know what trinity means).
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 07:13 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
In this sentence, you are implying that christ is not equal to god.
He sounds like having the monopoly on intercession with god (ie. he is not god)
I can see why you might jump to that conclusion, except for the statement I have already made:
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
A Christian....
...belongs to Christ.
...has placed his/her trust in the work of Christ to effect the restoration of one's spiritual fellowship with God.
...acknowledges Jesus to be BOTH one's Lord AND Savior.
...acknowledges Jesus to be the incarnation of the one and only God come to dwell among us and reconcile we who are separated from him by sin back to himself.
...is a follower of Christ to the extent that the teachings of Jesus and one's ongoing relationship with God are patterned after Jesus' example and this forms one spiritual and moral core.
...is a follower of Jesus to the exclusion of everything and everyone else.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 07:15 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
But naidamar, that isn't understanding God. That is simply yet another form of a faith statement about God, just like the credo I posted above.
That is the statement indeed, the statement which is UNDERSTOOD by all. I challenge you to find me a muslim that does not understand that God is One (absolute), and that understanding.
Just like understanding that the earth is round is logical.
I challenge you to find a person who believe that the earth is round, square and triangle at the same time, you will have to do mental and verbal acrobatic to explain it, and yet no one will be able to understand.

For christians, faith is blind,
for muslims, faith is supported by understanding.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 07:18 AM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
I agree. God can resurrect the dead and restore them to life.
God can provide ability to anyone to perform miracles, in this case bringing back the dead.

The antichrist will also be able to perform the same miracle, which he will use to trick people to treat him as god.
will you believe in him then?
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 07:28 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
ok, so it's merely playing with words it seems.
So that means people like Hiroshi (who does not believe christ is god) will not be saved, correct?
Whether people who do not believe Christ is god or not will be saved is something I believe lays in the grace of God to determine. On this particular point, I'm at the more liberal end of the Christian theological spectrum. I believe that God can and will save whoever he wills. I have confidence that we have a promise that all who do in fact place their faith and trust in Christ shall be saved, but I don't believe that this necessarily excludes everyone else. I am hoping that God will save all who have sought in their hearts to serve him, by whatever name they have known him, that even if they have worshipped amiss, that their sincere desire to worship him will nonetheless be accepted as genuine worship and they also will be saved. I don't know that this will happen, but this is my hope. I see nothing in the scriptures which excludes that possibility. And I see a few things in the scriptures that, thought they don't guarantee that result, still hint at it. So, not only Hiroshi, but I have hope that you also might be saved by God's grace.

back to people who don't accept trinity, do they also accept holy spirit as god?
I don't know. It would depend on which person you talk to what exactly it is that they do or don't accept. I imagine that the world is big enough that you could find persons for whom that statement would be yes and other persons for whom that statement would be no.

because if they accept the father, christ and holy spirit as god, that also mean they accept trinity or the 3-in-1 god (even if they dont know what trinity means).
Yes. I would agree. But you've just described a person who would have faith in the triune God and yet not understand the Trinity. That is exactly what you objected to me describing above:
So, NOT understanding who you worship is OK in christianity?
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 07:39 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made.
It is extremely interesting (pardon the euphemism) to not that you insist jesus was not made, but merely begotten.

from dictionary:
be·get
   /bɪˈgɛt/ Show Spelled[bih-get] Show IPA
–verb (used with object), be·got or ( Archaic ) be·gat; be·got·ten or be·got; be·get·ting.
1.
(esp. of a male parent) to procreate or generate (offspring).
2.
to cause; produce as an effect: a belief that power begets power.
Origin:
bef. 1000; ME begeten ( see be-, get); r. ME biyeten, OE begetan; c. Goth bigitan, OHG bigezzan

—Related forms
be·get·ter, noun

—Synonyms
1. spawn, sire, breed, father. 2. occasion, engender, effect, generate.

If jesus was begotten from God, according to dictionary, he was not god.
And if god begets, he behaves like his creation.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 07:45 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
...acknowledges Jesus to be the incarnation of the one and only God come to dwell among us and reconcile we who are separated from him by sin back to himself.

This is an interesting new explanation of trinity I might admit.
That god split into two because of human sin.
we were seperated from him (by whom? our sin?), so god must send his split twin to earth and must die to collect humans to be unified with god?
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 07:48 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Whether people who do not believe Christ is god or not will be saved is something I believe lays in the grace of God to determine. On this particular point, I'm at the more liberal end of the Christian theological spectrum. I believe that God can and will save whoever he wills. I have confidence that we have a promise that all who do in fact place their faith and trust in Christ shall be saved, but I don't believe that this necessarily excludes everyone else. I am hoping that God will save all who have sought in their hearts to serve him, by whatever name they have known him, that even if they have worshipped amiss, that their sincere desire to worship him will nonetheless be accepted as genuine worship and they also will be saved. I don't know that this will happen, but this is my hope. I see nothing in the scriptures which excludes that possibility. And I see a few things in the scriptures that, thought they don't guarantee that result, still hint at it. So, not only Hiroshi, but I have hope that you also might be saved by God's grace.
This is very interesting.
So muslims who consider jesus pbuh as a prophet and messenger of god will also be saved, may I conclude from your explanation above.
how widespread is this view among christians?
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 07:52 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I don't know. It would depend on which person you talk to what exactly it is that they do or don't accept. I imagine that the world is big enough that you could find persons for whom that statement would be yes and other persons for whom that statement would be no.
Do you not find it bizzare that christians could hold such extremely differing views regarding who it is they worship?
(this is what I meant with "So, NOT understanding who you worship is OK in christianity?")

I mean, do you not find it alarming that your scripture can be the source of such radically different interpretations of the most fundamental of all?
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 08:13 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
For christians, faith is blind,
for muslims, faith is supported by understanding.
OK. I can actually accept that as far as it goes. But I don't think it goes far enough.

You see to say that faith is blind for a Christian is not quite accurate. Better to say that we accept by faith that which we do not fully yet see. This does not mean that we don't have any knowledge or understanding of it. Just that we admit to our understanding not being yet complete or perfect. Talking about the Christian faith, Paul wrote:
We don't yet see things clearly. We're squinting in a fog, peering through a mist. But it won't be long before the weather clears and the sun shines bright! We'll see it all then, see it all as clearly as God sees us, knowing him directly just as he knows us! (1 Corinthians 13:12, The Message)
And while of course one's faith is supported by understanding, I think even you will admit that not all who are Muslims fully understand Isalm. It is even recorded in the Hadith:
Narrated Qais: I heard Sad saying, "I was the first amongst the 'Arabs who shot an arrow for Allah's Cause. We used to fight along with the Prophets, while we had nothing to eat except the leaves of trees so that one's excrete would look like the excrete balls of camel or a sheep, containing nothing to mix them together. Today Banu Asad tribe blame me for not having understood Islam. I would be a loser if my deeds were in vain." Those people complained about Sad to 'Umar, claiming that he did not offer his prayers perfectly. (Book #57, Hadith #74)
And while I know that the whole concept of understanding is central to what it means to be a recipiant of the Qur'an, which is it that comes first, faith or understanding? Consider what the Qur'an itself has to say on the subject:
Verily, the rising by night (for Tahajjud prayer) is very hard and most potent and good for governing oneself, and most suitable for (understanding) the Word (of Allah).

(Al-Muzzammil, Chapter #73, Verse #6, Mohsin Kahn translation)
It seems to me that faith (expressed in the rising for prayer) comes first, and then the practice of faith produces understanding. So, while faith is supported by understanding -- reading the Qur'an would increase one's faith and knowledge of Allah. It could also be said that faith leads to understanding is is described in this verse.

It works both ways in both of our religions. But I can see that the Muslim puts the greater emphasis on understanding while the Christian puts the greater emphasis on faith.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 08:16 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
This is very interesting.
So muslims who consider jesus pbuh as a prophet and messenger of god will also be saved, may I conclude from your explanation above.
how widespread is this view among christians?
You can conclude that I hold to that hope. I would guess that the view is non-existent among more fundamentalist and conservative believing Christians. (And usually I number myself among the conservatives, but not in this case.) Among those more liberal in their theology you would find some who go so far as to suggest that eventually God saves everyone. I'm not that liberal in my views.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 08:23 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
Do you not find it bizzare that christians could hold such extremely differing views regarding who it is they worship?
(this is what I meant with "So, NOT understanding who you worship is OK in christianity?")

I mean, do you not find it alarming that your scripture can be the source of such radically different interpretations of the most fundamental of all?
Yes, I find that both alarming and distressing. But I don't think there is anything that can be done to avoid it. I think that is the way it is with all documents wherein we cannot question the author. We have to interpret what was intended by what we read and different readers come to different conclusions as to what it means. I know you would probably argue that this does not happen in Islam, but I would disagree. I believe it does happen even within Isalm. I see different schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. I see division among groups such as the Sufi and Wahhabi as to what the Sunna is. Islam may not have the plethora of denominations that Christianity has, but from all that I have observed strict theological uniformity is more of a myth than a reality within the Ummah.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 08:25 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
This is an interesting new explanation of trinity I might admit.
That god split into two because of human sin.
we were seperated from him (by whom? our sin?), so god must send his split twin to earth and must die to collect humans to be unified with god?
Well, that's not exactly what I meant. I don't consider the incarnation a case of God sending his split twin to earth. Though I'm afraid it is getting late enough for me (3:25 AM) that I probably can't express myself on this very clearly any more tonight. Perhaps we can take it up again tomorrow.

PEACE.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 08:29 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
It is extremely interesting (pardon the euphemism) to not that you insist jesus was not made, but merely begotten.

from dictionary:
be·get
   /bɪˈgɛt/ Show Spelled[bih-get] Show IPA
–verb (used with object), be·got or ( Archaic ) be·gat; be·got·ten or be·got; be·get·ting.
1.
(esp. of a male parent) to procreate or generate (offspring).
2.
to cause; produce as an effect: a belief that power begets power.
Origin:
bef. 1000; ME begeten ( see be-, get); r. ME biyeten, OE begetan; c. Goth bigitan, OHG bigezzan

—Related forms
be·get·ter, noun

—Synonyms
1. spawn, sire, breed, father. 2. occasion, engender, effect, generate.

If jesus was begotten from God, according to dictionary, he was not god.
And if god begets, he behaves like his creation.
I've commented on the use of the term "begotten" numerous times in the past. I don't find it to be the best English term to use to describe the relationship between the Father and the Son. However, I can't change historical texts, I can only tell you that those who wrote it weren't thinking of "begotten" with the same connotation you take from today's dictionaries.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 08:47 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
You see to say that faith is blind for a Christian is not quite accurate. Better to say that we accept by faith that which we do not fully yet see. This does not mean that we don't have any knowledge or understanding of it. Just that we admit to our understanding not being yet complete or perfect.
Whatever/however you say it, it requires complete faith (and complete abandonment of logic) to accept that 3 = 1.

Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Talking about the Christian faith, Paul wrote:
We don't yet see things clearly. We're squinting in a fog, peering through a mist. But it won't be long before the weather clears and the sun shines bright! We'll see it all then, see it all as clearly as God sees us, knowing him directly just as he knows us! (1 Corinthians 13:12, The Message)
a note to consider, Paul seems like the ultimate authority of all things christians, don't you agree?

Anyway, if christians can see all things clearly as God sees and knowing him completely (as Paul said), it is utter shocking that christians (at least Ive met) do not fully understand the 3-1 god concept, or at least can not explain it in words that can be understood by laymen (if at all).
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 08:56 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
And while of course one's faith is supported by understanding, I think even you will admit that not all who are Muslims fully understand Isalm. It is even recorded in the Hadith:
It is true that not all muslims do not fully understand Islam.
But as sis Lily has mentioned in previous post, it is a matter of fiqh/jurispriudence.

While belief in god is a matter of tawheed.

I am sure you also agree that faith and acceptance of god is matter of utmost importance?

While it seems that ability to understand and explain triune god can only be left to "professional" christian.

I am sure those countless atheists and agnostics who have left christianity agree with this.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-24-2010, 09:15 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
God can provide ability to anyone to perform miracles, in this case bringing back the dead.

The antichrist will also be able to perform the same miracle, which he will use to trick people to treat him as god.
will you believe in him then?
Hi Naidamar.

This must be a reference to some hadith. I would like to know the source if you can tell me. I personally cannot believe that an enemy of God would be able to bring life to the dead.

I think that these recent comments about the soul and the condition of the dead really belong in the "Comparative Religion" section. I'm discussing them there also at the moment in the "Mankind needing a saviour???" thread. Perhaps we could better talk about it there if anyone wants to pursue this further.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 09:22 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Yes, I find that both alarming and distressing. But I don't think there is anything that can be done to avoid it. I think that is the way it is with all documents wherein we cannot question the author. We have to interpret what was intended by what we read and different readers come to different conclusions as to what it means. I know you would probably argue that this does not happen in Islam, but I would disagree. I believe it does happen even within Isalm. I see different schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. I see division among groups such as the Sufi and Wahhabi as to what the Sunna is. Islam may not have the plethora of denominations that Christianity has, but from all that I have observed strict theological uniformity is more of a myth than a reality within the Ummah.
Again, as has been explained before, jurisprudence (fiqh) is not fundamental. Tawheed is (the oneness of God).
No muslim would argue with this.

Meanwhile, christians are still confused on this issue (ie. oneness of god), thousand of years after the council of niceae silenced all other groups and decided which books are collected into bible and which to be discarded and destroyed.

if it were the true message, why is the message so confusing and creates confusion?
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 09:28 AM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
This must be a reference to some hadith. I would like to know the source if you can tell me. I personally cannot believe that an enemy of God would be able to bring life to the dead.
Al-Bukhaari narrated from Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) that this man whom the Dajjaal will kill will be one of the best people, who will go out to the Dajjaal from the city of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and will say to the Dajjaal, “I bear witness that you are the Dajjaal of whom the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told us.” The Dajjaal will say (to the people): “What do you think – if I kill this man then bring him back to life, will you have any doubts?” They will say, “No.” So he will kill him, then bring him back to life. Then he (the believing man) will say, “By Allaah, I have never been more sure about you than I am today.” The Dajjaal will want to kill him but will not be permitted to. (al-Bukhaari, no. 6599)

Ok, so you don't believe that enemy of god will be able to bring back the dead to life.
But let's say hypothetically, there will come a person who have that ability, will you worship him as god?
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 09:29 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I've commented on the use of the term "begotten" numerous times in the past. I don't find it to be the best English term to use to describe the relationship between the Father and the Son. However, I can't change historical texts, I can only tell you that those who wrote it weren't thinking of "begotten" with the same connotation you take from today's dictionaries
That's your scripture.
I am sorry that it can't explain such fundamental point (if not the most fundamental) in the terms that can be understood.
Reply

جوري
09-24-2010, 11:17 AM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Not yet. I thought you were still talking about Paradise.

My point was that Surah 39:42 seems to use the plural form of "nafs" in the same way that that "rooh" might be used.

The Hebrew equivalents of these words (correct me if I am wrong) are nephesh and ruah respectively. Nephesh means "soul" in the sense of a person, an animal, or the life that that person or animal has. Ruah means "spirit" and has a variety of different meanings. In the case of the spirit leaving the body at death, it means the life force: that which animates the body. But this does not imply that it continues conscious existence without the body after death. I say this just to explain my own viewpoint on "soul" and "spirit".
nafs isn't the plural for rooh, I have no idea what you are going on about?
here read a little!

http://www.ezsoftech.com/akram/nafs.asp

.. like stated before, if you have a desire to your own rendition, do it as far as your own private scriptures are concerned, but don't teach us Muslims, Arabic or worse yet about your own interpretation of Islam!

funny stuff though..
Reply

M.I.A.
09-24-2010, 11:18 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
First, there is a difference between knowledge (what one has to know) and faith (what one believes). There is also a difference between knowledge and understanding.

To say that one has to UNDERSTAND the trinity is simply not true. I can know what the essence of the Trinity is, I can even believe it to be true, but that doesn't mean that I understand it. That is why I said that your interpretation of Christianity above was inaccurate.


Second to ask what one needs to know to be a good Christian is going to be different and more demanding than what one needs to know to be a Christian.

Recently I asked different groups of people who all identified themselves as Christians to simply define the term "Christian". I'm still accumulating their responses, but they vary widely. The reason for that variance can, in part, be explained by what one wrote:



And what we find is that what one person considers necessary another does not. Many would accept the Nicene Creed as definitive, but some ask for a little more and some don't need all that is contained therein. But more than a few linked the definition of being a Christian to baptism irregardless of what one actually believed. Hence the list of all that is necessary so as to be sufficient to say this person is a Christian and that person is not is impossible to be agreed upon.

My own list would include the following statements.

A Christian....
...belongs to Christ.
...has placed his/her trust in the work of Christ to effect the restoration of one's spiritual fellowship with God.
...acknowledges Jesus to be BOTH one's Lord AND Savior.
...acknowledges Jesus to be the incarnation of the one and only God come to dwell among us and reconcile we who are separated from him by sin back to himself.
...is a follower of Christ to the extent that the teachings of Jesus and one's ongoing relationship with God are patterned after Jesus' example and this forms one spiritual and moral core.
...is a follower of Jesus to the exclusion of everything and everyone else.
i think that making jesus peace and blessings be upon him into the incarnation of god is not a prerequisite to belief, after all jesus peace and blessings be upon him was heart moreso than anything and god is just moreso than anything....i could almost see them being at odds with each other really so i cant take jesus peace and blessings be upon him being the incarnation of god, although he was the will of god personified.

also as a follower of jesus peace and blessings be upon him you have to understand where
he drew revelation from and what he came to reinforce upon the people.
im sure he would not exclude anbody unless they excluded themselves.


Originally Posted by naidamar
So, NOT understanding who you worship is OK in christianity?
I am baffled, frankly. It seems that christianity is stripped off more and more.
At first i thought that following Jesus pbuh teachings was NOT necessary in being saved and attain paradise, but now it seems that even NOT understanding the MOST fundamental of all (ie. who you worship and pray to) is also OK.
YES i would say its A OK in any religion. ours is only to accept wholely and then its up to god to accept.


[/QUOTE]
This is also staggering.
So, NOT accepting god, or parts of god (according to christians) is also OK and still gets you to paradise?[/QUOTE]
Reply

Hiroshi
09-24-2010, 12:16 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
Al-Bukhaari narrated from Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) that this man whom the Dajjaal will kill will be one of the best people, who will go out to the Dajjaal from the city of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and will say to the Dajjaal, “I bear witness that you are the Dajjaal of whom the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told us.” The Dajjaal will say (to the people): “What do you think – if I kill this man then bring him back to life, will you have any doubts?” They will say, “No.” So he will kill him, then bring him back to life. Then he (the believing man) will say, “By Allaah, I have never been more sure about you than I am today.” The Dajjaal will want to kill him but will not be permitted to. (al-Bukhaari, no. 6599)

Ok, so you don't believe that enemy of god will be able to bring back the dead to life.
But let's say hypothetically, there will come a person who have that ability, will you worship him as god?
Many thanks for the hadith reference.

I only worship the Creator who is invisible to human eyes. I guess "Dajjaal" must mean anti-Christ.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-24-2010, 12:40 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

nafs isn't the plural for rooh, I have no idea what you are going on about?
here read a little!
Thank you for the language lesson. I will repeat this one last time. Surah 39:42 speaks of "anfus" that leaves the body at death. It was argued that this word only meant "persons" (that can die). But in that verse it is used in a different way.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 03:33 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
That's your scripture.
I am sorry that it can't explain such fundamental point (if not the most fundamental) in the terms that can be understood.
Actually, while the term "begotten" is found in some of the older English translations of the Bible, it is generally not used in more contemporary translations. I would suppose this is because language changes over time and thus connotations associated with the term "begotten" have changed and today it no longer is understood in the same way it originally was. However, to your point -- "That's your scripture." -- the passage I quoted in which the term "begotten" was used is NOT scripture. It was a translation of the Nicene Creed used by the Greek Orthodox Church.

As far as it being explained, they did explain it. When they used the term they specifically said, "begotten, not made". They wanted to emphasize that the Son was not created. All humans are created. But the Son was not created by the Father. And not just was not created, but was "eternally begotten". In other words, there never was a point in time in which the Son did not exist. This is different than the dictionary understanding of "begotten" that you cited.

As far as understanding the above goes, these ideas aren't that difficult, unless you insist on accepting some other particular understanding of the nature of God that you mind has already acceded to. Then your assent to one specific way of thinking may serve to keep you from being able to perceive any other options. I would contend that such a resultant is not a problem of logic, but rather is because of holding to certain apriori assumptions of what God can and cannot do or be. (E.g. "belief in god is a matter of tawheed." That may be a matter of faith within Islam, but if we let God reveal himself we may find that there is more than exactly one way in which unity may be expressed.)
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-24-2010, 03:33 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
I agree. God can resurrect the dead and restore them to life.
Restore life but not in this world but the hereafter!
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 04:38 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
They wanted to emphasize that the Son was not created.
Jesus pbuh was born of Maryam as, wasnt he?

Sounds as created as anything else in this universe to me.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-24-2010, 04:45 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
As far as understanding the above goes, these ideas aren't that difficult, unless you insist on accepting some other particular understanding of the nature of God that you mind has already acceded to.
Not really, I am only using normal logic that we all have. You yourself previously admitted that it requires complete faith to accept 3-in-1 god, so why do christians get so defensive in insisting that it is normal to accept 3=1?

Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I would contend that such a resultant is not a problem of logic, but rather is because of holding to certain apriori assumptions of what God can and cannot do or be. (E.g. "belief in god is a matter of tawheed." That may be a matter of faith within Islam, but if we let God reveal himself we may find that there is more than exactly one way in which unity may be expressed.)
Actually, it is you christians who define god as 3-in-1 (although many early christians did not share this view) and it is you christian who defined god in such limited and indignant way as not capable of forgiving human sins but need to split himself into two (or three?) and had to incarnate and created avatar to come down to earth and suffered from his own creation (paganism anyone?).
It is christians who attempted to limit the power of god.
Thanks to paul by the way.


jesus pbuh never said, I am your god
Jesus pbuh never said holy spirit is your god
jesus pbuh never said worship me.

And you will have a lot to answer to God in the hereafter.
Reply

ardianto
09-24-2010, 05:04 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Thank you for the language lesson. I will repeat this one last time. Surah 39:42 speaks of "anfus" that leaves the body at death. It was argued that this word only meant "persons" (that can die). But in that verse it is used in a different way.
Al-Abdan wa al-Anfus = The body and soul.
Reply

جوري
09-24-2010, 05:15 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Thank you for the language lesson. I will repeat this one last time. Surah 39:42 speaks of "anfus" that leaves the body at death. It was argued that this word only meant "persons" (that can die). But in that verse it is used in a different way.
Do you repeat because you have no desire to read or understand what others are teaching you?
anfus is plural of nafs, be that as it may, how exactly does the 'nafs' die when the body dies? you contradict yourself in fact if I am to forgo the obvious, you have failed to establish the death of the soul, with the death of the body-- so we'll be waiting!
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 08:05 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
Not really, I am only using normal logic that we all have. You yourself previously admitted that it requires complete faith to accept 3-in-1 god, so why do christians get so defensive in insisting that it is normal to accept 3=1?



Actually, it is you christians who define god as 3-in-1 (although many early christians did not share this view) and it is you christian who defined god in such limited and indignant way as not capable of forgiving human sins but need to split himself into two (or three?) and had to incarnate and created avatar to come down to earth and suffered from his own creation (paganism anyone?).
It is christians who attempted to limit the power of god.
Thanks to paul by the way.


jesus pbuh never said, I am your god
Jesus pbuh never said holy spirit is your god
jesus pbuh never said worship me.

And you will have a lot to answer to God in the hereafter.
It appears that we have gone from discussion to you providing a lecture for me on Christian beliefs and the teachings found in the Bible.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 08:08 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
Jesus pbuh was born of Maryam as, wasnt he?

Sounds as created as anything else in this universe to me.
Jesus, yes. But the person of the Son was pre-existant.
Reply

tango92
09-24-2010, 08:42 PM
^ where does the idea of begotten come in then. if jesus is begotten of god, it clearly cant be because he was begotten of mary.

if the son was begotten you contradict "the son was pre-existant" (and many times i hear the christians say the son existed eternally with the father)
Reply

Insaanah
09-24-2010, 08:56 PM
Sorry if I've repeated anything in the thread, but I just thought a comparison here was interesting.

Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I think you misunderstand me here. In saying, "I know many Christians who would argue that not even acceptance of the Trinity is necessary for salvation." I did not mean to imply that they do not accept God. I was refer to the fact that there are some people who accept that Christ is God and put their faith in him, but they do not accept the theological dogma known as the doctrine of the Trinity as being an accurate description of the nature of God. And it is only some who would argue that idea. Most Christians would expect that to be a Christian involves a statement of faith which includes a credo statement along the lines of:

I believe in one God the Father almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven and sitteth at the right hand of the Father. And He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; of His kingdom there shall be no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of life, Who proceedeth from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spake by the prophets. In one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church; I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins; I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the age to come. Amen.
If we were to take the above statement of faith, and the Muslim shahaadah, "I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah, and Muhammad (peace be upon him) is His servant and Messenger" and to add to it that:

  • We believe in One God, other than Whom there is none worthy of worship.
  • He has no sons, daughters, brothers, grandparents or relatives of any kind. He does not beget, not is He begotten.
  • He is not composed of any number of persons, godheads or essences or anything else.
  • He is Eternal, Immortal, indivisible.
  • He sent messengers and scriptures to guide & warn mankind. We believe in all of those messengers (including Jesus peace be upon him) and the scriptures He gave them

and we gave both of them (as highlighted in purple), to a child or adult (with no prior knowledge of either religion) right now, what would be easier for them to understand? What is simple, logical, and makes sense? What is digestible and easier on the mind?

The beauty of Islam is that we don't have to separate our spiritual selves from our logical selves when it comes to the main beliefs; the concepts make sense.

Why would God give you a concept that people don't understand, can't explain, doesn't make sense, and then tell you that your salvation depends on this concept?

We so wish for you to think outside of the box, with regards to the Christian concept of God, to look at things objectively and with an open mind, and to seriously consider the possibility that God didn't suddenly change the message when it came to Jesus (peace be upon him), with a trinity, but that the message is and was what it always has been since the time of Adam (peace be upon him), the same message given to all the Prophets, culminating in the final Prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him), which is to worship One God, with no added extraneous complications.

Peace.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-24-2010, 10:16 PM
Originally Posted by tango92
^ where does the idea of begotten come in then. if jesus is begotten of god, it clearly cant be because he was begotten of mary.

if the son was begotten you contradict "the son was pre-existant" (and many times i hear the christians say the son existed eternally with the father)
To understand we are going to have to think Greek rather than English. I know that sounds like a difficulty, but surely it is no more out of line to suggest that someone think Greek than to suggest that the only way to understand the Qur'an is to think Arabic.

Our English phrase "only begotten" is a translation of the Greek word monogenes, that literally means "of a single kind," and could even be used in this sense of the Phoenix (as Clement did in his letter, 1 Clement 25:2). And it is also in this sense that it is used in Hebrews 11:17 to refer to Isaac as the monogenes son of Abraham, even though it is well known that Abraham had two sons. That is why to insist on it being a biological reference misses the proper understanding of the term, which is really refering to the uniqueness of the noun to which it is applied.

monogenes is related to the Greek word mono meaning "one", "unique" or "only", and distantly related to gennao meaning "to beget". The present idea of "only begotten" can be traced back to Jerome, who translated the Bible into Latin and used unigenitus for theological rather than proper linguistic reasons. (You will recall I never argue that there is no corruption of the translations we have today, only that they prevent us from getting back to the original meaning.) Such language became embedded in centuries of Catholic tradition, and when the King James was translated, its translators depended on Jerome's work as well, and the term, which is found in the most famous verse of the Bible, John 3:16, became a fixture in English thought as well.

What it truly means, and modern translations try to convey this, is reflectd by theHebrew term yahid used in reference to Isaac in Genesis 22:2, 12, and 16. The meaning of monogenes is centered in the personal existence of the Son, and not in the generation of the Son. Jesus, as the monogenes is the One (and only one) who can say "I and the Father are one [hen esmen]" (John 10:30). monogenes tells us that the Son is included in (not distinct from) the uniquess of God of whom there is none other like him.

Indeed, interestingly, John 1:18 speaks of Christ saying, "No one has ever seen God, but God the only monogenes Son, who is at the Father's side, has made him known." The oldest manuscripts don't read ho monogenes huios (the only Son), but monogenes theos (only God).

So it is that when the Greeks wrote their formulaic understandings of the Christian faith, they asserted the diety of Christ with multiple declarations:
the Son of God,
begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God],
Light of Light,
very God of very God,
begotten, not made,
being of one substance with the Father.
And while Muslims today may think that the statement "begotten" implies some sort of creatureliness, that is exactly why they immediate made clear that it didn't with the phrase "not made". Rather, it communicates that Father and Son share one essence, or, in the words of the creed, are "of one substance". The whole creed is focused on the unity and oneness of God.
Reply

Yanal
09-25-2010, 12:49 AM
:sl:

If Islam has copied,then why do Christians defy it(and people supporting Pastors campaign burn the Quran)?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-25-2010, 06:27 AM
Originally Posted by Yanal
:sl:

If Islam has copied,then why do Christians defy it(and people supporting Pastors campaign burn the Quran)?
Hi Yanal. Peace.

I would want to distance myself from the idiot Pastor campaigning to burn the Qur'an. But to answer to your question, the charge against the Qur'an is that it has copied accounts from the Bible but sometimes with errors. And also that it has copied things from false legends that are not part of the Bible at all.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-25-2010, 06:59 AM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
I would want to distance myself from the idiot Pastor campaigning to burn the Qur'an. But to answer to your question, the charge against the Qur'an is that it has copied accounts from the Bible but sometimes with errors. And also that it has copied things from false legends that are not part of the Bible at all.
the jewish rabbis and priests distorted the true teachings of Ibrahim, Musa and Daud and they changed many accounts in the scriptures, that's why Jesus pbuh was sent to the "lost sheep" of Israel to correct the teachings, and bring back to the real truth, which ruffled the feathers of jewish rabbis/priests/establishments, toi say the least.

Then as soon as after jesus pbuh was raised, the true gospel of Jesus was distorted again by the scribes and priest, especially paul.
Hence the bible consists only third person view of the events of jesus pbuh, not his direct words, and the authors of most books in the bible are unkown and the new testatements were written more than 100 years after jesus pbuh left.
Hence the books in the bible contain so much errors, so many contradictions that even all scholars of bible admit so.
This created confusion regarding creed, and the opinions of the priests who like the idea of god incarnate coming down to earth to pay for human sins very appealing to the masses and they won the day when they forced the idea upon all christians at nicea council hundreds of years after jesus pbuh left, and destroyed other books that truly affirm the absolute oneness of God and make followers of true monotheism in christian heretics.

And after countless of translations, mistranslations that were influenced by the politics of the day, you currently have thousands of versions of bibles each contradicts the others and itself.
Each new set of bible tries to "correct" previous version, resulting in current state christianity creed and practices whic are FAR FAR from those taught by jesus and lead by his examples.
Reply

Amat Allah
09-25-2010, 07:00 AM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
the charge against the Qur'an is that it has copied accounts from the Bible but sometimes with errors. And also that it has copied things from false legends that are not part of the Bible at all.
Bible Compared to Quran
Reply

Hiroshi
09-25-2010, 07:44 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
the jewish rabbis and priests distorted the true teachings of Ibrahim, Musa and Daud and they changed many accounts in the scriptures, that's why Jesus pbuh was sent to the "lost sheep" of Israel to correct the teachings, and bring back to the real truth, which ruffled the feathers of jewish rabbis/priests/establishments, toi say the least.

Then as soon as after jesus pbuh was raised, the true gospel of Jesus was distorted again by the scribes and priest, especially paul.
Hence the bible consists only third person view of the events of jesus pbuh, not his direct words, and the authors of most books in the bible are unkown and the new testatements were written more than 100 years after jesus pbuh left.
Hence the books in the bible contain so much errors, so many contradictions that even all scholars of bible admit so.
This created confusion regarding creed, and the opinions of the priests who like the idea of god incarnate coming down to earth to pay for human sins very appealing to the masses and they won the day when they forced the idea upon all christians at nicea council hundreds of years after jesus pbuh left, and destroyed other books that truly affirm the absolute oneness of God and make followers of true monotheism in christian heretics.

And after countless of translations, mistranslations that were influenced by the politics of the day, you currently have thousands of versions of bibles each contradicts the others and itself.
Each new set of bible tries to "correct" previous version, resulting in current state christianity creed and practices whic are FAR FAR from those taught by jesus and lead by his examples.
This is basically the problem. Clearly, the Bible and the Qur'an are not in agreement. The Christians and Jews say that the Qur'an has copied the Bible but with errors. And the Muslims argue that the Bible is the book with the errors (corrupted over time) whereas the Qur'an is the pure truth sent to correct the Bible.

How can we know who is right?
Reply

Hiroshi
09-25-2010, 08:03 AM
Hi Amat Allah.

I had a look at your link. I can't comment on everything there because there is too much. But I want to answer one point which is often cited as a Bible contradiction. One account in the gospel says that Judas hanged himself but in the book of Acts it says that he fell from a cliff. How can these both be true?

Actually, they could easily both be true. The gospel account tells us the method of the man's suicide whereas Acts tells us the result. Evidently, Judas tried to hang himself over a cliff but the rope or perhaps tree branch broke causing him to fall. The topography in that area makes such a thing quite conceivable.

Even today, sometimes when we read different news reports they seem to contradict one another. But often this is because details are left out of one report but included in another.
Reply

Amat Allah
09-25-2010, 08:03 AM
My respected brother there is a difference between fell from a cliff which means died by accident and jumped off a cliff which means suicide...

and if they both were true they wouldn`t say (jumped off) but would say as you wrote in your post (fell from)...in shaa Allah you will understand...

anyway you need to know more about Qur`aan so here you are my noble brother read whenever you are free to learn and correct the misconceptions in shaa Allah:


All About The Quran


May Allah be with you Ameen
Reply

Ramadhan
09-25-2010, 08:25 AM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
This is basically the problem. Clearly, the Bible and the Qur'an are not in agreement. The Christians and Jews say that the Qur'an has copied the Bible but with errors. And the Muslims argue that the Bible is the book with the errors (corrupted over time) whereas the Qur'an is the pure truth sent to correct the Bible.

How can we know who is right?
There are many ways to do it.
Which one is 100% preserved in its original form, and which one have been translated, cross translated, mistranslated so many many times that even the actual original language is not known.
which one does not contain contradictions, and which one contain so many contradictions.
etc.

What one requires is only a genuine heart to seek the truth.
Reply

Hugo
09-25-2010, 03:00 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє
As a muslim i would say this world is created perfect, the sky is perfect, as humans we sleep, we eat, the way the brain works is perfect, day turns to night, night turns to day, how perfect is that? If you look at the character of the Prophet Muhammad (saw) it is perfect! Thats if you study every part of his life rather than just go with the lies such as "why he did this and that?" without doing any research to why he actually did.
Well to me this is an odd idea. One might argue that the world, that includes us, is perfect because it obeys the laws of nature but it seem a long step to go from that to say we as humans don't do any wrong. Also in nature we have certain difficulties and so it is easy to think a good God created good and perfect things but at the same time where do things like the Ebola and small pox viruses comes from as there is only one creator?

I appreciate the Islamic view of prophets being perfect but no one as yet as far as I know in this or any other thread as said where this doctrine comes from. If we consider any person I suppose its often a matter of opinion as to where and act they did was good or bad. In the case of Mohammed I would consider his consummating a marriage with a nine year of girl as bad also there are many other incidents that I might regard as reprehensible, we can discuss them if you wish.

I agree that God is perfect and Holy but what about names like: the Humiliator, the avenger, the creator of harm? Incidentally, where in the Qu;ran do all these names comes from?

Surah Ar-Rahmaan is well known of course but it offers to me no hope with its flames of fire and molten brass and then these odd verses about dark eyed virgins are to be a blessing but I guess there ie nothing much in heaven for women?

Any way i cant mention everything in one post, so hopefully you should try to put the effort to find out yourself by reading say the Gospel of Mark which sets out the claims of Jesus. So you might ask me to lay aside my prejudice and examine Islam but by the same token I must ask you to lay aide yours and examine Christianity - it is simple really and the Bible challenge is clear by looking at the teaching of Jesus.
Reply

Hugo
09-25-2010, 03:08 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
There are many ways to do it. Which one is 100% preserved in its original form, and which one have been translated, cross translated, mistranslated so many many times that even the actual original language is not known. which one does not contain contradictions, and which one contain so many contradictions. etc. What one requires is only a genuine heart to seek the truth.
This has been debated many times and the argument is hopelessly weak. Firstly, if the criteria hold they hold for any book not just the Qu'ran therefore any book that is presented 100% in its original form must be from God which of course is a total absurdity. Secondly, the original form was a recitation and since there were no witnesses it cannot be confirmed. As to a text of the Qu'ran there are many traditions as to its transmission but either way there is no copy extant of what was written down at the time of the prophet and even if we consider the Uthman recension nothing except perhaps a few questionable fragments remain. Go and look in your Qu'ran and try to find out what 'original' the printers used when setting it in type as one supposes they did not do it from memory? When you find out let me know?

What ones requires when seeking truth is an honest desire to accept it when you find it. Biblically we are told to seek God with all our heart and soul and mind and if we do that he will be found.
Reply

Hugo
09-25-2010, 03:24 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Hugo, you have to remember that while you and I may believe we live in a fallen world, Islam teaches that we live in a nuetral world. That all people are born sinless and have the capacity to chose to submit, and thus remain sinless, or to disobey and become marked by sin. But, according to Islam sin is not a given in every person's life; it is a choice. With this background, it is not inconsistent with Islam to imagine that the prophets never sinned, even though we ourselves might balk at the creduality of such a statement.
But what does a neutral world mean other than we all have to obey the laws of nature such as gravity. One supposes that Islam accepts Adam's sin and since were are descended from Adam there is a sense which we were there right at the beginning and partake of the same sin. It might be easier to understand this idea if we thing say of the crusades, we can just say it was 'unchristian' and absolve ourselves of all blame or do we accept that it was a part of our history and repent over it? In the same way Christians have to answer the question framed in the famous Spiritual song "where you there when the crucified my Lord" and they would say yes because it was their sins that put him there. If one is neutral about sin then its all to easy to contextualise it and explain it away.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-25-2010, 04:02 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Well to me this is an odd idea. One might argue that the world, that includes us, is perfect because it obeys the laws of nature but it seem a long step to go from that to say we as humans don't do any wrong. Also in nature we have certain difficulties and so it is easy to think a good God created good and perfect things but at the same time where do things like the Ebola and small pox viruses comes from as there is only one creator?

I appreciate the Islamic view of prophets being perfect but no one as yet as far as I know in this or any other thread as said where this doctrine comes from. If we consider any person I suppose its often a matter of opinion as to where and act they did was good or bad. In the case of Mohammed I would consider his consummating a marriage with a nine year of girl as bad also there are many other incidents that I might regard as reprehensible, we can discuss them if you wish.

I agree that God is perfect and Holy but what about names like: the Humiliator, the avenger, the creator of harm? Incidentally, where in the Qu;ran do all these names comes from?

Surah Ar-Rahmaan is well known of course but it offers to me no hope with its flames of fire and molten brass and then these odd verses about dark eyed virgins are to be a blessing but I guess there ie nothing much in heaven for women?

Any way i cant mention everything in one post, so hopefully you should try to put the effort to find out yourself by reading say the Gospel of Mark which sets out the claims of Jesus. So you might ask me to lay aside my prejudice and examine Islam but by the same token I must ask you to lay aide yours and examine Christianity - it is simple really and the Bible challenge is clear by looking at the teaching of Jesus.
Greetings Hugo

Nope i agree that we humans never do anything wrong, but the fact is we are created Good as our nature is good, but its the world that leads us to do evil, am sure youve heard of the story of Adam (as) and im sure youve heard of satan/shaytaan.

Note i said God is perfect. Remember he did create the satan/shaytaan.

This is what Satan says: "[Iblis (Satan)] said: \"O my Lord! Because you misled me, I shall indeed adorn the path of error for them (mankind) on the earth, and I shall mislead them all." Al Quran 15.39

God tells us he will test us

"Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, "We believe", and that they will not be tested? We did test those before them, and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false. " Al Quran 29.2-3

Now Allaah created the Satan, he created him to test mankind. We do not enter paradise by just claiming 2 words "we believe" and then just enter we will certainly be tested. As a muslim i know the satan will try to trick me in many ways, for example drinking alcohol is forbidden in islaam but satan will trick me into thinking its fine drink one glass it will be orite, but in reality hes the evil one wanting me to enter the hellfire.
However, in the Quraan Allaah tells us to keep away from satan and his mischievious ways thats why we say "Aazu billah Hi minashaytaan nirajeem" (I seem refugee with Allaah from shaytaan the outcast).

He (Allaah) tells us we must strive hard to enter the jannah/Paradise, so he says:

"And certainly, We shall test you with something of fear, hunger, loss of wealth, lives and fruits, but give glad tidings to As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.). Who, when afflicted with calamity, say: "Truly! To Allah we belong and truly, to Him we shall return.They are those on whom are the Salawat (i.e. blessings, etc.) (i.e. who are blessed and will be forgiven) from their Lord, and (they are those who) receive His Mercy, and it is they who are the guided-ones."Al Quran 2:155-157

So the Quraan speaks of what we should do, it guides us in our lives, etc you be patient at the time of a calamity, do not speak rudely to your parents etc. . . .

And to your Q regarding the Prophets Marriage, i can honestly say thats your opinion, also that Aisha (ra) did not have a problem with the marriage and neither did her parents. Also to let you know more, Aisha (ra) was quite an intelligent and a mature women for someone her age. And also too add to your "problem" about the marriage, did you also know that she was the first women scholar in Islaam? She was willing to learn everything about Islaam, because of the love she had. Also just because Aisha (ra) married at a young age does not mean every muslim women marries that age, marriage is for a women once she enters puberty and mature and ready to marry and also forced marriages are haraam meaning forbidden. so the only one who has a problem with this issue is you and others who agree with you, and i quite find it pointless to have a problem when she Aisha (ra) did NOT have a problem. And i would advice others if you ask further Qs regarding Aisha (ra) marriage they should be ignored! Although i agree that there are many "Cultures" who marry there daughters at a young age at where the child has a problem with this wheras this means the marriage is being forced upon her making it haram islaam doesnt forbid such an act, the women is to be mature and able to have the chance to agree to the marriage!

And your asking soo many Qs all at once, your asking me many and your asking many other members aswell at the same time, so how much exactly are you trying to understand sincerely?

I feel i am wasting my time at times to be honest with you.

I will try answer others later

peace
Reply

Ramadhan
09-25-2010, 05:05 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
irstly, if the criteria hold they hold for any book not just the Qu'ran therefore any book that is presented 100% in its original form must be from God which of course is a total absurdity.
Do not be silly.
no one says that 100% preserved and accurate is the only criteria.
It is very transparent to everyone that what you're doing is that you are really trying to divert from the weaknesses of bible: no one even sure what language the original gospel was, all you have is gospel according to somebody who's written by somebody else who's heard from somebody else, and that some of the oldest books were discarded because they did not conform to the desires of powerful priests few hundred years after jesus left.

Originally Posted by Hugo
Secondly, the original form was a recitation and since there were no witnesses it cannot be confirmed.
You are such hypocrite.
You have been involved in many many discussions about the qur'an, and surely you know that there were also witnesses during revelations from jibril to the prophet Muhammad SAW. Surely you also know that prophet Muhammad SAW asked his shahabah to write down the revelations that he's just received on leather, papyrus, etc.
Also, there were many many shahabah who fully memorized the qur'an when prophet Muhammad was still alive.

Now, why don't you apply the standards you expect from the Qur'an (which are fully met) to your own bible.

Originally Posted by Hugo
What ones requires when seeking truth is an honest desire to accept it when you find it. Biblically we are told to seek God with all our heart and soul and mind and if we do that he will be found.
yes, why don't you accept islam by now, and to worship The GOD, instead of worshipping a human (with a greek name) and another vague being (holy spirit)?

You know, if I were you, I would either accept Islam or leave the boards right away, because the longer and the further you've learnt about the truth but refusing to accept it, then you will be in big big trouble after you die.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 05:52 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
the jewish rabbis and priests distorted the true teachings of Ibrahim, Musa and Daud and they changed many accounts in the scriptures, that's why Jesus pbuh was sent to the "lost sheep" of Israel to correct the teachings, and bring back to the real truth, which ruffled the feathers of jewish rabbis/priests/establishments, toi say the least.
Again, this is a Muslim interpretation of those events. Christians hold to a completely different view as to why Jesus came and what it means to say that Jesus was sent to the lost sheep of Israel.

Then as soon as after jesus pbuh was raised, the true gospel of Jesus was distorted again by the scribes and priest, especially paul.
naidamar, this is very interesting. Do you admit that Jesus was raised? Raised in what way?

Hence the bible consists only third person view of the events of jesus pbuh, not his direct words, and the authors of most books in the bible are unkown and the new testatements were written more than 100 years after jesus pbuh left.
Hence the books in the bible contain so much errors, so many contradictions that even all scholars of bible admit so.
Again, a Muslim providing teaching regarding Christian history. Yet, you object when non-Muslims provide teaching regarding Muslim history.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-25-2010, 05:56 PM
However, Hugo seems to be making the same claims @ Graceseeker
so its fair both ways it seems.

Originally Posted by naidamar
Secondly, the original form was a recitation and since there were no witnesses it cannot be confirmed.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 05:59 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
There are many ways to do it.
Which one is 100% preserved in its original form.
That's easy. Neither.

The miracle of the Qur'an as Muslims have told me is that Muhammad (pbuh) received the recitation over an extended period of time. And he didn't receive it in order. Indeed, it wasn't until after the Prophet's death that the Qur'an was finalized in its present form by Abu Bakr. So, when you use the phrase "original form," in reference to either the Bible or the Qur'an, no original of either exists.
Reply

Hugo
09-25-2010, 06:14 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
Do not be silly. no one says that 100% preserved and accurate is the only criteria. It is very transparent to everyone that what you're doing is that you are really trying to divert from the weaknesses of bible: no one even sure what language the original gospel was, all you have is gospel according to somebody who's written by somebody else who's heard from somebody else, and that some of the oldest books were discarded because they did not conform to the desires of powerful priests few hundred years after jesus left.
Do not be silly. How many criteria have to be true for it to hold and one presumes if there are criteria its like a chain, if one fails then the whole fails.? It is perfectly transparent that you have avoided most of what I said about the Qu'ran because it is troubling to you and can cannot be answered. I am perfectly happy to take the Bible as it is and all you are doing is repeating the standard Islamic views. It is you that have the problem for the Qu'ran tells us to check it with earlier scriptures but when you do that there are major difference so you come up with this shoddy argument that the Bible is corrupted and what you believe in is the originals - so the Qu'ran tells us to do something according to you that cannot be done. We know what language Jesus spoke and we also know that Galilee had been a major centre for Greek culture so there is NOTHING unreasonable in the Bible being produced in Greek as it was almost 1,000 years before Islam saw the light of day.

Of course certain books were discarded in much the same way that in the Uthaman recension we know that there was a rule that for a verse to included it had to be witnessed by two people and if that means anything at all it means that there were many verses circulating that where not true so why was that necessary if all these people knew it off by heart. They may have written it down but there is zero evidence for that now is there?

If I am a hypocrite then you are simply ignorant - I have said many times there were no witnesses to the actual recitation no one else saw or heard anything and for most of the revelation there were no witness at all. Now, why don't you apply the standards you expect from the Bible to your own Qu'ran - you cannot can you, you are simple unable to be critical about it, its history and what it says. Telling me to leave the Board is just a symptom of your uncritical view - you cannot question it and so no one must question it and all that does is ultimately lead to oppression as we know.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 06:28 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
But what does a neutral world mean other than we all have to obey the laws of nature such as gravity. One supposes that Islam accepts Adam's sin and since were are descended from Adam there is a sense which we were there right at the beginning and partake of the same sin.
Hugo, please, decide if you're going to try to understand Islam or argue with Islam. My understanding of this board is that, for us non-Muslims, our invitation is only extended in so far as we are seeking to understand Islam. That doesn't mean we have to accept it. But when you say "one supposes that Islam..." one has to do better than say something that in fact Muslims have already posted to the contrary to in this very thread.
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє

Yes as a christian you may believe that you are born a sinner, whereas muslims we believe we are born sinless, for how a innocent little baby can be born a sinner? The actions of the little innocent being proves he is not a sinner!
You are arguing for the Christian interpretation of those events to the exclusion of the Islamic interpretation. That, by definition is proselytizing, which is not allowed by non-Islamic members on these boards. You may feel that such a rule is unfair, but it is the rule we all agreed to. AND, I find actually leads to better and more informed discussion.

It might be easier to understand this idea if we thing say of the crusades, we can just say it was 'unchristian' and absolve ourselves of all blame or do we accept that it was a part of our history and repent over it?
We not only can say, we must say that the crusades were "unchristian". But that in itself does nothing to absolve ourselves of their legacy. We must not only confess them to be sin, we must repent and change the way we relate to the non-Christian world, by practicing a Christian ethic toward it. To my understanding, one aspect of that ethic that is really important on this board is Paul's injunction:
Romans 12

14Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited. 17Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.
Sometimes, our posts (plural: your posts, my posts, and posts by other Christians as well) don't always make for peace. I'm trying to adjust my own habits to improve on this, which is probably why I'm sensitive to other postings besides my own right now (sorry, if you think I'm over-reacting), and ask for your assistance -- both in holding me accountable and modeling for me what engaging in "peaceful posting" might look like.
Reply

tango92
09-25-2010, 06:31 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
That's easy. Neither.

The miracle of the Qur'an as Muslims have told me is that Muhammad (pbuh) received the recitation over an extended period of time. And he didn't receive it in order. Indeed, it wasn't until after the Prophet's death that the Qur'an was finalized in its present form by Abu Bakr. So, when you use the phrase "original form," in reference to either the Bible or the Qur'an, no original of either exists.
that is incorrect, as far as im aware the order of the quran was finalised by Muhammad pbuh and Angel Jibreel.

it was simply written down by the later Khalif's.

edit: so in this sense as the quran also remains transmitted verbally as it was originally revealed it is even more authentic than the bible.
Reply

جوري
09-25-2010, 06:32 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar



You are such hypocrite.
You have been involved in many many discussions about the qur'an, and surely you know that there were also witnesses during revelations from jibril to the prophet .
It is either this or he has the attention span of a goldfish since he does nothing but repeat the same crap which has been amply clarified and refuted by young and old on this forum. It is a conundrum to me why the mods are idle when it comes to this under-educated orientalist yet hyper-vigilant when it comes to Muslim members..

:w:
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-25-2010, 06:35 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
You are arguing for the Christian interpretation of those events to the exclusion of the Islamic interpretation. That, by definition is proselytizing, which is not allowed by non-Islamic members on these boards. You may feel that such a rule is unfair, but it is the rule we all agreed to. AND, I find actually leads to better and more informed discussion.
Could you remind me what number post that is? As i remember posting that way before the "Agreement", However i apologise if so has happened.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 06:47 PM
Originally Posted by naidamar
no one even sure what language the original gospel was, all you have is gospel according to somebody who's written by somebody else who's heard from somebody else,
That's simply not true.

and that some of the oldest books were discarded because they did not conform to the desires of powerful priests few hundred years after jesus left.
And any copy of the Qur'an that did not conform to the accepted standard was similarly destroyed. Both religions have had people make determinations of what was and was not orthodox teachings, and both have attempted to root out that which was considered unorthodox.


You are such hypocrite.
You have been involved in many many discussions about the qur'an, and surely you know that there were also witnesses during revelations from jibril to the prophet Muhammad SAW. Surely you also know that prophet Muhammad SAW asked his shahabah to write down the revelations that he's just received on leather, papyrus, etc.
Also, there were many many shahabah who fully memorized the qur'an when prophet Muhammad was still alive.
Hugo's participation in a conversation in which those things were discussed does NOT make him a hypocrite. Hypocrisy is when he says he believes one thing but behaves in a different way. I don't see that in any of Hugo's posts.

Now, why don't you apply the standards you expect from the Qur'an (which are fully met) to your own bible.
Because the claims that Muslims make for the Qur'an are not the same that Christians make for the Bible. The double standard is that you seek to judge the worthiness of the Bible by the same standards as you do the Qur'an when they are two different books with different internal claims made regarding the nature of their inspiration. Only the Qur'an claims to be dictated by God. Thus the standard for giving evidence of that is different than for the Bible which makes no such claim beyond that of inspiration. Now some Christians make the claim that inspiration equals dictation, but that is just some, not all, not even most. To impose that standard on the Bible is to impose a Islamic understanding of the nature of inspiration on another faith's book. That may not be hypocrisy, but it isn't "halal" either.

yes, why don't you accept islam by now, and to worship The GOD, instead of worshipping a human (with a greek name) and another vague being (holy spirit)?
Hugo and I do worship The GOD. We don't worship (a mere) human; we worship Jesus is is fully God just as much as he is human. And we don't worship any vague being; we know the Holy Spirit to be as concrete of a reality as God himself.

You know, if I were you, I would either accept Islam or leave the boards right away, because the longer and the further you've learnt about the truth but refusing to accept it, then you will be in big big trouble after you die.
Thank-you for sharing with us what YOU would do. I hope you are not implying that you are the standard by which all others should pattern their lives. I trust that is just an expression of concern of Hugo's eternal well being.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 06:49 PM
Originally Posted by tango92
that is incorrect, as far as im aware the order of the quran was finalised by Muhammad pbuh and Angel Jibreel.

it was simply written down by the later Khalif's.

edit: so in this sense as the quran also remains transmitted verbally as it was originally revealed it is even more authentic than the bible.
I don't think so. But I'm going from memory here. Maybe someone with more knowledge could fill in the gaps again.

Are there any good links where I could read the history of the Qur'an from the first revealtion of it to Muhammad to the final formation of it by Abu Bakr?

I know that Lily has provided me with some of that info in the past (which, btw, I did read and apprecate), but maybe someone has something more. Perhaps there is a chronology of the revelation, writing, reordering, and final compiling of the Qur'an.?
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 06:56 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє

Could you remind me what number post that is? As i remember posting that way before the "Agreement", However i apologise if so has happened.
My apologies Muslimah 4 life. You didn't break the agreement. I was quoting one of your older posts to share with Hugo what he was asking Muslims to conclude had already been addressed in this very thread and that Islam had simply reached a different conclusion regarding the meaning of those events than Christianity had with regard to them. I wasn't saying that you were presenting an interpreation as an argument, but that you had already answered the question.

I, personally, am of the opinion that is one thing for us to discuss how we ourselves may have reached different conclusions than another person has, and that it is quite another for us to tell a person how he or she "ought" to think with regard to an issue. Our "agreement" tells me that you seem to be of the same opinion as me on that point. I fear that not everyone else shares that view.
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-25-2010, 07:03 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
That's easy. Neither.

The miracle of the Qur'an as Muslims have told me is that Muhammad (pbuh) received the recitation over an extended period of time. And he didn't receive it in order. Indeed, it wasn't until after the Prophet's death that the Qur'an was finalized in its present form by Abu Bakr. So, when you use the phrase "original form," in reference to either the Bible or the Qur'an, no original of either exists.
You seem to agree the bible isnt in its orignal form ?

The Quraan=The Recitation

yes it is true that the Quraan was recieved over an extended period of time. How does the Quran being revealed after the Prophets death mean the Quran isnt the original form? Would you like to explain?

I hope that in order to know more you must have done some reasearch

Ok lemme explain a few reasons to why the Quran is in its original form:

The Holy Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) through the angel Gabriel, and the Prophet (pbuh) memorized the whole scripture. There were lots of companions that memorised the Quraan directly from the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and according to my knowledge they were known as the Hufaadh meaning the memorisers and preservers of the Quraan. Also many of the companions wrote it down during the lifetime of the prophet Muhammad (saw). The Quraan was recorded during the lifetime of the Prophet and also the Surahs(chapters) of the Quraan were organised by him.

Also there are many things science discovered that the Quraan spoke of 14 centuries ago, and i recall scientists confirming this, if you could kindly take your time to watch a video regarding one miracle that the Quran speaks of insha`Allaah



Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'ân)
and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).

(Qur'an 15:9)

Peace
Reply

جوري
09-25-2010, 07:04 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker


Hugo's participation in a conversation in which those things were discussed does NOT make him a hypocrite. Hypocrisy is when he says he believes one thing but behaves in a different way. I don't see that in any of Hugo's posts..
a hypocrite is a person who holds beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives, and that in fact makes Hugo a synonym.
please allow me to list the many ways.
1- he pretends he is a read scholar, offers ISBN, when you ask him to elucidate a point in a particular book one that you yourself may have read, he is mum at best, poor fellow never gets past the title and bombastic words to pad a who lot of farting.
2- He pretends to approach beliefs in a concise similar scholarly fashion, yet when you ask him of massive biblical errors as pointed out by staunch biblical (non-Muslim scholars) like Bruce Metzger again, the circuitous route rather than a direct response, lest it expose him to every member in reality he is hoping everyone is as dimwitted as he is as to lap his crap right up, and who can blame him, apparently this is the way for him to lull himself that his beliefs are sensical or even superior. Note of course when Bruce says anything anti-Islamic he laps it right up without looking for the Muslim response. Which makes him the biggest hypocrite of all, for where is the scholarly research in something that can't be backed up?
3- He pretends to read responses written here on the forum in response to his queries but even on the same thread he'll recoup and ask the same questions again, adding his own sick twisted conclusions with the desire that everyone will reach the same.
4- He pretends to know what he is talking about, have a look at the 'Medical student review' thread, yet when asked two very direct questions to the subject he offered to elucidate, again, he had nothing of substance to offer, no answers, just more bulky useless posts that have nothing to do with the subject, nor do they actually break things down for people so we can overlook his shortcomings.

So indeed, he pretends to be a scholar, he pretends to be a friend, he pretends he's here to seek knowledge and exchange it, but in reality he is just another worthless missionary living off Muslim money and what he conceals is even worse than what he displays although, I can't imagine him being any more despicable!

all the best
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-25-2010, 07:07 PM
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-25-2010, 07:10 PM
. . . . . . . . .
Reply

Ğħαrєєвαħ
09-25-2010, 07:11 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
My apologies Muslimah 4 life. You didn't break the agreement.
No problem. . . . . . . . .
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 07:18 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ

a hypocrite is a person who holds beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives,
I don't see Hugo concealing his motives and certainly not his feelings. Now me? While I'm pretty upfront about my motives, I definite work at concealing my feelings and to temper them before I post. Perhaps in your view that makes me a hypocrite as well.

As for the majority of the things you cite, I'll not debate whether they are true or not, only that it seems they are more in line with the definition not of a hypocrite but what some might call a fraud (you said he "pretends"). And with reference to point #3:
3- He pretends to read responses written here on the forum in response to his queries but even on the same thread he'll recoup and ask the same questions again, adding his own sick twisted conclusions with the desire that everyone will reach the same.
I think that's all of us. I know that I've asked questions a second and third time as I go from thread to thread. Sometimes because I've forgotten the answer, sometimes because others continue to make what I see as the same erroneous assertions. In either case, I suspect that you could find that every single regular poster has done this on more than one occassion. Perhaps we're all hypocrites.

Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
all the best
Thanks for your continued well wishes and may you experience Allah's peace today.
Reply

جوري
09-25-2010, 07:22 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I don't see Hugo concealing his motives and certainly not his feelings. Now me? While I'm pretty upfront about my motives, I definite work at concealing my feelings and to temper them before I post. Perhaps in your view that makes me a hypocrite as well.
I am sure you don't.. like attracts like.. I think you are birds of a feather, but I tolerate you better seeing as you lay off the redundancy somewhat!
As for the majority of the things you cite, I'll not debate whether they are true or not, only that it seems they are more in line with the definition not of a hypocrite but what some might call a fraud (you said he "pretends"). And with reference to point #3:
I think that's all of us. I know that I've asked questions a second and third time as I go from thread to thread. Sometimes because I've forgotten the answer, sometimes because others continue to make what I see as the same erroneous assertions. In either case, I suspect that you could find that every single regular poster has done this on more than one occassion. Perhaps we're all hypocrites.
perhaps with you it is mere old age? but with him, it is definitely motivated by his sickness!

Thanks for your continued well wishes and may you experience Allah's peace today.
All the best
Reply

YusufNoor
09-25-2010, 07:50 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
Do not be silly. How many criteria have to be true for it to hold and one presumes if there are criteria its like a chain, if one fails then the whole fails.? It is perfectly transparent that you have avoided most of what I said about the Qu'ran because it is troubling to you and can cannot be answered. I am perfectly happy to take the Bible as it is and all you are doing is repeating the standard Islamic views. It is you that have the problem for the Qu'ran tells us to check it with earlier scriptures but when you do that there are major difference so you come up with this shoddy argument that the Bible is corrupted and what you believe in is the originals - so the Qu'ran tells us to do something according to you that cannot be done. We know what language Jesus spoke and we also know that Galilee had been a major centre for Greek culture so there is NOTHING unreasonable in the Bible being produced in Greek as it was almost 1,000 years before Islam saw the light of day.

WTF??? the Quran was completed in the year 632 AD, how could there be a Bible produced in Greek in the 300's BC???? Alexander didn 't even conquer the area until the late 300's, so there were NO MAJOR centers of Greek until AFTER he did so!

Of course certain books were discarded in much the same way that in the Uthaman recension we know that there was a rule that for a verse to included it had to be witnessed by two people and if that means anything at all it means that there were many verses circulating that where not true so why was that necessary if all these people knew it off by heart. They may have written it down but there is zero evidence for that now is there

If I am a hypocrite then you are simply ignorant - I have said many times there were no witnesses to the actual recitation no one else saw or heard anything and for most of the revelation there were no witness at all. Now, why don't you apply the standards you expect from the Bible to your own Qu'ran - you cannot can you, you are simple unable to be critical about it, its history and what it says. Telling me to leave the Board is just a symptom of your uncritical view - you cannot question it and so no one must question it and all that does is ultimately lead to oppression as we know.
pearls before swine i say...

anyway, a quick chat about comparing the Bible in Greek and the Qur'an in Arabic:

the Qur'an was completed in the early 7th Century and shorty thereafter put in book form, the form in which it exists today. let's go with Uthmann's and say mid 7th Century.

as for the Bible in the Greek language:

THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE SOLITARY COMPLETE VERSION OF THE BIBLE IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE, IN THE FORM IT IS ACCEPTED BY PROTESTANTS TODAY [AND ONLY THAT FORM], THAT PREDATES THE COMPLETED WRITTEN QUR'AN!

LIKEWISE:

THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE SOLITARY COMPLETE VERSION OF THE BIBLE IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE, IN THE FORM IT IS ACCEPTED BY CATHOLICS TODAY [AND ONLY THAT FORM], THAT PREDATES THE COMPLETED WRITTEN QUR'AN!

and that's the TRUTH!

PERIOD
Reply

جوري
09-25-2010, 08:14 PM
Originally Posted by YusufNoor
pearls before swine i say...
Ain't that the truth? maybe he can go makeup a story and circulate it on the web, seeing as they are so apt at producing massive B.S and not having the ability to back it up!

:w:
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 08:40 PM
Originally Posted by мυѕℓιмαн 4 ℓιfє

You seem to agree the bible isnt in its orignal form ?
A fair question, but it shows a way of thinking with regard to the Bible that isn't necessarily germane to its integrity. It seems to presuppose that the Bible had an original form. But I'm not sure we can ever say that.

The Bible is not a single book, but a library of books. And it isn't from a single date, but a library compiled over an extended period of time. During that time, some of the writings that we have in it were produced and considered scripture before other writings that we have in it were ever even written. But just because there were written and recognized scriptures doesn't mean that we had a Bible.

The Bible that we know today -- be it the library of 78 books recognized as canonical by the Catholic Church, or the library of 88 books recognized as canonical by most protestant churches -- would have various parts of it written, reviewed, and rewritten before anyone thought to consider as scripture some of what we include in the Bible today.

For an illustration, just check out Paul's letter to the Ephesians and his letter to the Colossians -- they are basically the same letter written to neighboring groups of churches. In other words, Paul was even editting himself. And the OT books of Kings and Chronicles are basically two different (but not identical) tellings of the same history. To have such "rewrites" is completely antithetical to the Muslim understanding of scripture as a direct, perfect, dictated word from God. And surely my speaking of them this way would therefore to a Muslim seem like confession of "corruption". But I don't see it that way.

What I see is that these books were written and put in use and found an acceptance as being in some sense authoritative by the community. It is in their usage, not their writing, that they became known as scripture. And that usage implies also copying, and with the copying the mistakes of copyists. By the time they were accepted as scripture they had already gone through the process of having introduced to them all the things that today Muslims point to as "corruptions" and still the church (and the Jewish community as well with regard to the Tanakh) saw fit to recognize them as being authoritative and capable of providing the standard for faith and practice (Christian behavior) in the church. This means that these "corruptions" were known and yet not deemed sufficient to negate the value of making the writings canonical (i.e., "the rule [or standard] for faith and practice"). And still we didn't have a Bible. It was only have accepting them individually as such did the church seek to identify them as a compiled unit which today we call the Bible.

So, no, the Bible isn't in its original form. Of course there were original autographs from the first time something was put to paper, but other than the first telling of a story or the first copy of a letter, we never ever had an original form for the Bible to speak of in the first place.

Probably more than you asked for, but I hope it help for better understanding.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-25-2010, 08:43 PM
Originally Posted by YusufNoor
THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE SOLITARY COMPLETE VERSION OF THE BIBLE IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE, IN THE FORM IT IS ACCEPTED BY CATHOLICS TODAY [AND ONLY THAT FORM], THAT PREDATES THE COMPLETED WRITTEN QUR'AN!
That's true. Now explain why that's so. Such a statement doesn't mean what some people are probably thinking that it means.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-26-2010, 03:59 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
naidamar, this is very interesting. Do you admit that Jesus was raised? Raised in what way?
Jesus pbuh was taken out of this world by Allah SWT without having to die first. As for the details, we do not know.
As every being shall taste death, he will be sent back to earth towards the end of the world (qiyamat) to kill the antichrist, and he will lead a normal live, the world will be prosperous, he will get married, and he will die. Soon after his death, qiyamat occurs.
Reply

Zafran
09-26-2010, 03:59 AM
If I am a hypocrite then you are simply ignorant - I have said many times there were no witnesses to the actual recitation no one else saw or heard anything and for most of the revelation there were no witness at all. Now, why don't you apply the standards you expect from the Bible to your own Qu'ran - you cannot can you, you are simple unable to be critical about it, its history and what it says. Telling me to leave the Board is just a symptom of your uncritical view - you cannot question it and so no one must question it and all that does is ultimately lead to oppression as we know.
By the way there are eye witnesses of revelation coming from the prophet Muhammad pbuh - ever heard of hadiths. You just fail to accept them for whatever reason and instead like to rely on your "sources" eg, wikipedia - the only problem now is that why do you waste your time here? when countless times your bring us the same things and we reply in the same manner.

You have asked your question and have recieved an answer. There is zero oppression here. Its you crying as usual because people disagree with you.

peace
Reply

Ramadhan
09-26-2010, 04:05 AM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I am perfectly happy to take the Bible as it is
So I see that you have no problem with the fact that bible is contains a story of imagination by some unknown people in the second century about what Jesus might have said and did.

So this is a confirmation then.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-26-2010, 04:18 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
And any copy of the Qur'an that did not conform to the accepted standard was similarly destroyed. Both religions have had people make determinations of what was and was not orthodox teachings, and both have attempted to root out that which was considered unorthodox.
You surely know that the copies that were destroyed by Uthman ra are those written in dialects other than in what it was transmitted, the content of the other copies were exactly the same. All accounts support this, if you disagree produce your evidence. This is the beauty of preservation of memorisation. You cannot destroy it.
Meanwhile, there were many books rejected by council of nicea whose content were completely faithful to monotheism. This, regardless of the fact that those rejected books (ie. the gospel of nazarenes) were older and more authorative than the books which were included in the bible.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-26-2010, 04:26 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Hugo and I do worship The GOD. We don't worship (a mere) human; we worship Jesus is is fully God just as much as he is human. And we don't worship any vague being; we know the Holy Spirit to be as concrete of a reality as God himself.
Jesus pbuh disciples did not worship him, they worship The God. They did not worship holy spirit also.


Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Thank-you for sharing with us what YOU would do. I hope you are not implying that you are the standard by which all others should pattern their lives. I trust that is just an expression of concern of Hugo's eternal well being.
My advice actually also goes for you (and any other active non-muslims).
In the judgement day, we will be asked and judged justly. So the more you know the truth about Islam, but still reject it, the severe for you the punishment.
And you have been in this board long enough to know that Islam is the truth.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-26-2010, 04:53 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
Jesus pbuh disciples did not worship him, they worship The God. They did not worship holy spirit also.
A fallacy taught by Islam.




And you have been in this board long enough to know that Islam is the truth.
Actually I was much more willing to accept that there was some truth in Islam BEFORE I came on this board. What I have learned here has caused me to question Islam more, not less.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-26-2010, 05:08 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
A fallacy taught by Islam.
In your scripture, jesus always commanded his disciples to worship God the father, never he commanded/asked/requested/hinted to his followers to worship himself or the holy spirit.

Only after he left that some christians made him into god.

Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Actually I was much more willing to accept that there was some truth in Islam BEFORE I came on this board. What I have learned here has caused me to question Islam more, not less.
Truth indeed tastes bitter to those who reject it and seal their own heart to it.
May Allah SWT guide you to the straight path.
Reply

Grace Seeker
09-26-2010, 06:29 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
May Allah SWT guide you to the straight path.
I appreciate such prayers. They are in fact my regular prayer as well.

In your scripture, jesus always commanded his disciples to worship God the father, never he commanded/asked/requested/hinted to his followers to worship himself or the holy spirit.

Only after he left that some christians made him into god.
You must skip over passages such is these:

Matthew 8

1When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him [including his disciples].
2And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. 3And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.
Matthew 9
18While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live.
19And Jesus arose, and followed him, and so did his disciples.
Doing what the leper and the ruler asked without rejecting their acts of worship would qualify at least as a hint.


The of course there actually are times when the disciples themselves worshipped him:
Matthew 14

22And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while he sent the multitudes away.
23And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone.
24But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary.
25And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.
26And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear.
27But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.
28And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water.
29And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus.
30But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me.
31And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?
32And when they were come into the ship, the wind ceased. 33Then they [the disciples] that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.
Matthew 28

9And as they [the women] went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
10Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.
11Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
12And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
13Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept.
14And if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you.
15So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.
16Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
17And when they saw him, they [the disciples] worshipped him: but some doubted.
18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
Luke 24
50And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them.

51And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. 52And they [the disciples] worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy:

And sometime Jesus even goes so far as to seemingly solicit worship of himself:
John 9
35Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?

36He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?
37And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. 38And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.
Please, don't complain about Hugo being redundant and ignoring that which he has been taught with regard to Isalm, all of these have been pointed to you before. You either have conveniently forgotten or choose to ignore. In light of that, I'll simply let you hear your own words again:

Originally Posted by naidamar
Truth indeed tastes bitter to those who reject it and seal their own heart to it. May Allah SWT guide you to the straight path.
Reply

Ramadhan
09-26-2010, 06:40 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
You must skip over passages such is these:

Matthew 8

1When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him [including his disciples].
2And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. 3And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.
Matthew 9
18While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live.
19And Jesus arose, and followed him, and so did his disciples.
Doing what the leper and the ruler asked without rejecting their acts of worship would qualify at least as a hint.


The of course there actually are times when the disciples themselves worshipped him:
Matthew 14

22And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while he sent the multitudes away.
23And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone.
24But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary.
25And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.
26And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear.
27But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.
28And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water.
29And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus.
30But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me.
31And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?
32And when they were come into the ship, the wind ceased. 33Then they [the disciples] that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.
Matthew 28

9And as they [the women] went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
10Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.
11Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
12And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
13Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept.
14And if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you.
15So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.
16Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
17And when they saw him, they [the disciples] worshipped him: but some doubted.
18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
Luke 24
50And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them.

51And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. 52And they [the disciples] worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy:

And sometime Jesus even goes so far as to seemingly solicit worship of himself:
John 9
35Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?

36He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?
37And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. 38And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.
Please, don't complain about Hugo being redundant and ignoring that which he has been taught with regard to Isalm, all of these have been pointed to you before. You either have conveniently forgotten or choose to ignore. In light of that, I'll simply let you hear your own words again:


The bible in the greek version (from which the english version translated) did NOT use the word "worship" in the meaning that we understand in english:


With regard to John 9:38 "Lord. I believe, and he worshipped him." and Matthew 28:17 "they saw him, they worshipped him." The word translated as "worshipped" in both verses is the GREEK word "prosekunesan" which is derived from the root word proskuneo {pros-ku-neh'-o}.

The literal meaning of this word is : "to kiss, like a dog licking his masters hand." This word also has the general meaning of "bow, crouch, crawl, kneel or prostrate." Please check the Strong's concordance for the true meaning of this word. Is the act of kissing someone's hand the same as worshipping him? Once again, selective translation.

However, the above two verses of John and Matthew are not the only two verses of the Bible were such selective translation techniques are employed in order to impress upon the reader a chosen doctrine. For example, in the "Gospel of Matthew" the English "translation" records that Jesus was "worshipped" by Magi that came from the East (2:11); by a ruler (9:18) , by boat people (14:33), by a Canaanite woman (15:24), by the mother of the Zebedees (20:20); and by Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (28:9) to name but a very few.

Since worshipping any one other than God is a fundamental sin, therefore, the reader understands that Jesus was God since he condoned them "worshipping" him. Since Jesus (pbuh) never once in the whole Bible ever told anyone "worship me!" (as God Himself does in many places), therefore, once again, we are told that Jesus was "hinting" that he wants us to worship him. However, as we can plainly see, what the author was in fact saying in these verses is that these people "fell at Jesus' feet," or that these people "knelt before Jesus."

How then shall we interpret their "kneeling down before Jesus."? Should we understand that they were "praying" to him? Far from it!.

When Abigail "fell before" king David was she "worshipping" him? Was she "praying" to him? When she addressed him as "my lord," did she mean that he was her God?

A detailed analysis of selective translating by the church, go to [divinity of Jesus]

Finally, in order to seal the proof of this matter and to dispel any lingering doubt that may remain in the reader's mind, the reader is encouraged to obtain a copy of the "New English Bible." In it they will find the translations of the quoted verses to read:

"bowed to the ground" (2:11);

"fell at his feet" (14:33);

"falling prostrate before him" (28:9), and

"fell prostrate before him" (28:17)...etc.

Please also read the translation of these verses in "The Complete Bible, an American Translation" By Edward Goodspeed and J. M. Powis Smith where they are once again honestly translated as:

"they threw themselves down and did homage to him" (2:11),

"fell down before him"(14:33),

"and they went up to him and clasped his feed and bowed to the ground before him" (28:9), and

"bowed down before him"(28:17), etc.

Once again, we remember that such sublime manipulation of the translation in order to establish with the reader a chosen doctrine was exposed by God in the noble Qur'an. The Qur'an says:

"There is among them a party who distort the Scripture with their tongues that you might think that it is from the Scripture, when it is not from the Scripture; and they say, 'It is from God,' but it is not from God; and they speak a lie against God, and [well] they know it!"

- Qur'an, 3:78
Reply

Ramadhan
09-26-2010, 06:54 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
May Allah SWT guide you to the straight path.
I appreciate such prayers. They are in fact my regular prayer as well.

The fact that you are on IslamicBoard with so many brothers and sisters providing you knowledge about Islam and encouraging you towards the truth is evidence in itself that your prayer has been answered.

Have you ever wondered about this?

For the next step, you have to do the part though.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-26-2010, 09:49 AM
Originally Posted by Amat Allah
My respected brother there is a difference between fell from a cliff which means died by accident and jumped off a cliff which means suicide...

and if they both were true they wouldn`t say (jumped off) but would say as you wrote in your post (fell from)...in shaa Allah you will understand...

anyway you need to know more about Qur`aan so here you are my noble brother read whenever you are free to learn and correct the misconceptions in shaa Allah:


All About The Quran


May Allah be with you Ameen
Thank you for the link.

The account of Judas' death in the book of Acts 1:18 says literally: "pitching head foremost he burst open and his intestines were poured out". The next verse then tells us that everyone in Jerusalem came to know about this incident.

The writer, Luke, was a doctor and, as might be expected, recorded the cause of death. But perhaps since the thing had become so widely known to all he doesn't give a lot of other details.

The account in Matthew 27:5 says that Judas hanged himself. As I pointed out, if he hanged himself over a cliff and something broke causing him to fall then both accounts could be true.
Reply

Hiroshi
09-26-2010, 09:54 AM
Originally Posted by naidamar
There are many ways to do it.
Which one is 100% preserved in its original form, and which one have been translated, cross translated, mistranslated so many many times that even the actual original language is not known.
which one does not contain contradictions, and which one contain so many contradictions.
etc.

What one requires is only a genuine heart to seek the truth.
Could we take a look at these contradictions in the Bible that you speak of and discuss them one by one? (Don't all rush now!!)
Reply

Amat Allah
09-26-2010, 12:08 PM
Originally Posted by Hiroshi
Thank you for the link.

The account of Judas' death in the book of Acts 1:18 says literally: "pitching head foremost he burst open and his intestines were poured out". The next verse then tells us that everyone in Jerusalem came to know about this incident.

The writer, Luke, was a doctor and, as might be expected, recorded the cause of death. But perhaps since the thing had become so widely known to all he doesn't give a lot of other details.

The account in Matthew 27:5 says that Judas hanged himself. As I pointed out, if he hanged himself over a cliff and something broke causing him to fall then both accounts could be true.
you are always wellcome my respcetd brother...

what I meant that there is no phrase such as fell from only two as written :

1_Matthew 27:5 says that Judas Iscariot when he died he hung himself

2_Acts 1 says that, no he jumped off a cliff head first.

and those two (to a normal person who has a sound brain) are impossible to be gathered to make an end for one story ...with all my respect...

anyway , who wants to know the truth would strive sincerely to find it and would open his/her eyes mind and heart to be able to understand ...and as I said before Allah Is The Only One Who Guides and Misguides , got nothing in my hand as a slave and servant of Allah but to show others the way as Allah taught me...

May Allah guide us All...Ameeeeeen
Reply

Amat Allah
09-26-2010, 02:01 PM
brother Hiroshi I have a Q would you please answer it ?

Why some priests do not marry and have children?
Reply

Hugo
09-26-2010, 05:23 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Hugo, please, decide if you're going to try to understand Islam or argue with Islam. My understanding of this board is that, for us non-Muslims, our invitation is only extended in so far as we are seeking to understand Islam.....
I am sorry if you take that interpretation but what I was seeking was clarity about where the dogma that we are born neutral comes from. Certainly the Torah can be read that way though it perhaps describes a new life a neither good nor bad but uses the word 'innocent' and of course I have some sympathy for that idea. But there are issues with the idea of perfection for one supposes that if Adam and Eve had not sinned then would they have died? If we deny our ancestry then its a small step to say that sin can be cast aside and of course even though the Torah says that sin can be overcomes there is no evidence anywhere inn the OT that it was. It also seems logical to assert that if its a matter of perfection then anyone might achieve it and such a person need not be a Christian or Muslim so what place for faith?

So if there is an Islamic position it must be grounded somewhere and it must bone hope be complete.
Reply

Hugo
09-26-2010, 05:24 PM
[QUOTE=Hugo;1371235]I am sorry if you take that interpretation but what I was seeking was clarity about where the dogma that we are born neutral comes from in Islam. Certainly the Torah can be read that way though it perhaps describes a new life a neither good nor bad but uses the word 'innocent' and of course I have some sympathy for that idea. But there are issues with the idea of perfection for one supposes that if Adam and Eve had not sinned then would they have died? If we deny our ancestry then its a small step to say that sin can be cast aside and of course even though the Torah says that sin can be overcomes there is no evidence anywhere inn the OT that it was. It also seems logical to assert that if its a matter of perfection then anyone might achieve it and such a person need not be a Christian or Muslim so what place for faith?

So if there is an Islamic position it must be grounded somewhere and it must bone hope be complete.
Reply

Hugo
09-26-2010, 05:26 PM
Can the moderators delete this post as somehow two copies where made but only post 245 is needed?

I am sorry if you take that interpretation but what I was seeking was clarity about where the dogma that we are born neutral comes from in Islam. Certainly the Torah can be read that way though it perhaps describes a new life a neither good nor bad but uses the word 'innocent' and of course I have some sympathy for that idea. But there are issues with the idea of perfection for one supposes that if Adam and Eve had not sinned then would they have died? If we deny our ancestry then its a small step to say that sin can be cast aside and of course even though the Torah says that sin can be overcomes there is no evidence anywhere inn the OT that it was. It also seems logical to assert that if its a matter of perfection then anyone might achieve it and such a person need not be a Christian or Muslim so what place for faith?

So if there is an Islamic position it must be grounded somewhere and it must bone hope be complete.
Reply

جوري
09-26-2010, 05:34 PM
Originally Posted by Hugo
I am sorry if you take that interpretation but what I was seeking was clarity about where the dogma that we are born neutral comes from. Certainly the Torah can be read that way though it perhaps describes a new life a neither good nor bad but uses the word 'innocent' and of course I have some sympathy for that idea. But there are issues with the idea of perfection for one supposes that if Adam and Eve had not sinned then would they have died? If we deny our ancestry then its a small step to say that sin can be cast aside and of course even though the Torah says that sin can be overcomes there is no evidence anywhere inn the OT that it was. It also seems logical to assert that if its a matter of perfection then anyone might achieve it and such a person need not be a Christian or Muslim so what place for faith?

So if there is an Islamic position it must be grounded somewhere and it must bone hope be complete.
why do you ask Grace seeker about the Islamic position?
This has been clarified to you before, I believe which makes it tedious to again, have to reply to the same query!
Mistakes and sins differ greatly, and I think it is difficult to achieve the latter, certainly not impossible, many a sinless righteous people weren't chosen for prophethood, for instance zhu ilkhidr. There was a time when Moses thought he was the wisest man alive because he was chosen for prophet-hood, yet God taught him differently when he arranged for the meeting with zhu ilkhidr!
As to why God chooses a person and not another for prophet-hood, well that is a matter of divine judgment, and as such we expect that this divine judgment not choose a person who has for instance committed incest with his daughters after being drunk-- they have to lead by example, so how credible is it to warn against lewd sins of the flesh by committing lewd sins of the flesh?

It is really that simple complicating it to create excuses for the grievous and slanderous errors in your bible won't make the matter any less serious!

all the best
Reply

Hugo
09-26-2010, 05:57 PM
Originally Posted by YusufNoor
anyway, a quick chat about comparing the Bible in Greek and the Qur'an in Arabic: the Qur'an was completed in the early 7th Century and shorty thereafter put in book form, the form in which it exists today. let's go with Uthmann's and say mid 7th Century.
Well tell us where we can see a copy of it, this Qu'ran? The fact is that the is an unbridgeable gulf as far as actual manuscripts go, they simply do not exist and the earliest readings from the Qu'ran are on coins or those such as on the dome of the rock. Do you KNOW what 'original' was used to set the type for the Qu'ran on your shelf - what did the printers use? Dr Azami in his book "The History of the Quranic text" talks about having access to "the most accurate Qu'ranic text in the world" so every other text is not accurate is it. So let us be clear there IS NOT A SINGLE SOLITARY COMPLETE VERSION OF THE QU'RAN dated to the time of the prophet
THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE SOLITARY COMPLETE VERSION OF THE BIBLE IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE, IN THE FORM IT IS ACCEPTED BY PROTESTANTS TODAY [AND ONLY THAT FORM], THAT PREDATES THE COMPLETED WRITTEN QUR'AN!
Technically this is correct but it amounts to dissimulation. Consider the Codex Alexandrinas dated to the 5th century (200 years before the Hijrah); it contains the whole Bible except for a FEW PAGES - go to the British Museum and see it. The point is there are some 6,000 manuscripts of the Bible ranging from complete copies to just a page so it is possible to reconstruct the original. If you look in almost ANY translation they will tell you what manuscripts were used and of course scholars have produced from all these manuscripts a definitive Greek edition and you can search it on-line.

If we now consider the Qu'ran there are almost ZERO early manuscripts because Uthman BURNED them all so there is NO foundation to your remarks. Indeed any one who really reads the Qu'ran can see its a recension without any difficulty because so often it changes subject mid way through a section without any warning or logic. We can discuss all this if you wish and I can point out the many ambiguities.
Reply

Hugo
09-26-2010, 06:04 PM
Originally Posted by τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ
Mistakes and sins differ greatly, and I think it is difficult to achieve the latter, certainly not impossible, many a sinless righteous people weren't chosen for prophethood, for instance zhu ilkhidr. There was a time when Moses thought he was the wisest man alive because he was chosen for prophet-hood, yet God taught him differently when he arranged for the meeting with zhu ilkhidr! As to why God chooses a person and not another for prophet-hood, well that is a matter of divine judgment, and as such we expect that this divine judgment not choose a person who has for instance committed incest with his daughters after being drunk-- they have to lead by example, so how credible is it to warn against lewd sins of the flesh by committing lewd sins of the flesh? It is really that simple complicating it to create excuses for the grievous and slanderous errors in your bible won't make the matter any less serious! all the best
Why don't you do something unusual for you and actually tell us where the dogma of prophets being sinless can be found; in the Qu'ran, in the hadith, in the Bible, where? - please do it in a single screen.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!