format_quote Originally Posted by
Ahmed.
I also said that there were proper Christians around during then that believed in Jesus (pbuh) as Allah's Messenger and thus were monothiests. Even to this day, in the gospel of barnabas the Prophet Muhammad is mentioned by name.
Allah says in Quran he does not punish until the divine message reaches a person, so if we assume this Barak was a polythiest trinitarian and if he knew another Prophet was coming and accepted that new Prophet then he'd rectify his mistakes too according to the new Prophets teachings, so Christians who accept the new Prophet and rectify their mistakes are not considered the blasphemer etc etc as they were just mistaken due to being duped by their priests. Its those who reject the new Prophet that are the blasphemers as they have no excuse to continue what God clarifies in new revelation as blasphemy
- - - Updated - - -
https://youtu.be/-hnNcgXauYw
- - - Updated - - -
And although there's a report that a Christian monk helped confirm that indeed it was Jibril (as) that came to Muhammad (saw), the absolute confirmation was clinched by the Prophets wife Khadija.
Jibril sometimes would appear to Muhammad (saw) in his home and only Muhammad (saw) could see him. So Khadija (ra) told him, "next time he comes tell me'. So when Jibril (as) appeared to Muhammad (saw), he told Khadija, and khadija sat on Muhammad's (saw) lap and uncovered her head and asked Muhammad (saw) if the 'thing' was still there in the room, the Prophet (saw) replied 'no he's left', and Khadija told him then it's not a devil and has to be an angel because an angel would not remain in a room where husband and wife start to get intimate.
She reassured him with other sound advice too, saying, he was a good man, never told lies, gave charity to poor etc etc and Allah wouldn't humiliate him with a curse of devil visits....
So it was his wife that played the 99.9 percent part in confirming his Prophethood.
Just wanted to make few corrections based on what I know.
First thing is about
Gospel of Barnabas. I have seen that my brother @
Ahmed has mentioned this in this post. Actually, this is a sad joke on many Muslims. Some have been tricked into believing this has something to do with the New Testament and it is more or less the "Lost Gospel" that will solve all the problems related to the difference between Christianity of today and Islam. But that is all nonsense, because the so-called "Gospel of Barnabas" is fake. The translators of this old manuscript were not convinced of any authenticity within it.
The "Gospel of Barnabas" is taken from a manuscript in the Italian language, although it is said it also had been written in Spanish, both of these would be about 500 years old. The actual surviving manuscript is from the 1700's. Although the synoptic gospels are quite similar in many aspects, scholars have always insisted on Mark being the oldest, and most likely more authentic, and even then Mark is said to have been taken from another, much older document referred to only as "Q". The gospel of St. John is nothing like the others and is held to be in a class by itself by scholars. So, this begs the question; "How did a document all of a sudden surface 1500 years later, in Spanish (just after the time of the Catholic conquest of Muslim Spain in January of 1492) that brings together a melding together of all the gospels and the Quran and offers the same Islamic interpretation of Christian origins, all at the same time?"
Some scholars and academics from both Christians and Muslims have considered this gospel to be late and pseud epigraphical - But, others say it may contain remnants of earlier apocryphal (hidden from the public) work that was likely edited to conform to Islamic teachings, maybe from Gnostic or Ebionite or perhaps Diatessaronic sources. Some Muslim scholars have thought it to be a surviving version of a hidden apostolic original. Some Muslim academics have referred to it in support of their view of Jesus.
There are other works, not related but with similar names and are associated with apocryphal writings. These include the surviving Epistle of Baranabas and Acts of Barabas and even an earlier (unrelated) "Gospel" of Barnabas. Although there are many "theories" being offered about this document, I seriously doubt it has the necessary credentials to be considered anything more than a very old manuscript that was translated by two people, Lon and Laura Ragg, along with their comments about 100 years ago.
For me, it is not worth the headache to deal with a translation of an old document that no longer exists. This would be similar to trying to "find" an original of the Bible. My mind asks, "Why would Muslims waste their time with this nonsense, when they have the Quran and it is still in the original language, no changes and without human corruption?"
So my advice is the for future please stay away from mentioning Gospel of Baranbas to prove Islamic point of view.
Waraqa Bin Nawfal:
@
Ahmed made a good point but failed to utilize it. The Hadith related to Waraqa Bin Nawfal are mentioned in Sahih Bukhari. Refer to Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, hadith #3; Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Hadith # 605 and Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Hadith # 111.
Now the point I want to make is that what were Christians and Jews doing in Medina and Mekkah? It was prophesized that a final prophet will come. The signs and place of birth of this prophet was mentioned in Torah and Injil. This is further confirmed if you read story of Salman Bin Farsi. Warqa bin Nawfal confirmed that Prophet Muhammad PBUH is receiving a Divine message from God.
Do we have any prophecies in current Bible? The oldest copy of Bible which we have found is the dead sea of scrolls. It is even before the time of Jesus PBUH. Book of Isiah in Old Testament and in dead sea scrolls is almost same. So I will focus on Isiah to prove that Prophet Muhammad PBUH is not only mentioned in Bible but it is even mentioned that Prophet Muhammad PBUH will settle down in Medina. More details about this will be in my post later some time today or tomorrow. Mean while whosoever is interested can look into Isiah 42.