PDA

View Full Version : Borrowing theories



Ansar Al-'Adl
04-15-2005, 08:13 PM
:sl:
I think this would be a good topic to discuss. I want to start with some of the pms from SpaceFalcon here.

SpaceFalcon responded to the following article:
http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Qurancopiedmyth

Originally Posted by SpaceFalcon2001
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
Moreover, you have now made two unsubstantiated claims- that Islam is a suppresionist religion, and the notion of religious borrowing.
You've proved it for me Ansar.
Supersesionism (not the same as suppressionism) is the belief that a given religion is the fulfillment of another. Islam claims that it is the original truth, because the Torah is inadequate. To do this, the Quran takes what already was, and rewrites it as truth.
2-The Qur’an includes many laws, instructions and commands which did not exist in the previous scriptures.
It added something that didn't exist previously.
3- The Qur’an urged people to acquire knowledge and to respect the human mind and intellect.
This isn't new to civilization, and such achievements are listed as important in the Talmud. Despite this, the following claim is put forward:
why then did these religions not include the aforementioned precept and teachings and did not play the same role as Islam
This ignores all the achievements from before Islam by the people who "did [not play an intellectual role]". The Jews practically engineered the mathmatics of ancient babylonia and ancient greece. Pythagoras himself was accused by Plato of having stolen his theorem from a travelling Jew"
4- The Qur’an is a book the style of which is consistent and eloquent. Had it been compiled from other scriptures it would have been incoherent, contradictory and inconsistent due to the alleged various sources.
Consistancy is not proof anymore than if there were a single version of the life of Siddartha Buddah. One man can write a consistant text. Many men can work together to form a consistant text. The issue is that the Quran takes the theology that existed and reworked it.
1-The Qur’an related facts totally unknown to the People of the Books.
This hurts the Quran the most. Relating historical "facts" that were "unknown" and contradictory to what had occured to those who lived it simply doesn't make sense.
2- It is related in Exodus that it was Pharaoh’s daughter who adopted Moses as a baby, whereas the Qur’an states that Pharaoh’s wife found him and adopted him. We also read Exodus that “Aaron fashioned the gold and moulded the calf …” that was worshipped by the Jews, whereas the Qur’an states that Samiri was the culprit and that Aaron was innocent.
Two rewrites are clear here. To devalue the torah, one must claim it includes mistakes. Why would the people who lived at the time "corrupt" the scripture to say that Pharoah's daughter adopted Moses? Why lie about Aaron being forced to fashion the golden calf, and protecting a previously non-existant (and guilty) person?

3-If the Qur’an had been derived from the Holy Scriptures of the Jews and Christians, why did Islam reject the principle of the Trinity which is a fundamental belief in Christianity? Why did Islam also reject the belief in the crucifixion of Christ, redemption, inherited sin and the divinity of Christ?
Muhammed himself first brought his ideas to the Jews, why? To show them his new and revised way, much as the christians before him (before their pagan deviations) had attempted, assuming they would adopt whatever history that others told them to.
4- The Qur’an presents the Prophets of Allah as ideals of morality and virtue, whereas the Old Testament states that some of them committed sins, and this is incompatible with the veneration accorded to them by Islam.
What Islam thinks didn't matter when Judaism was formed by God. It didn't exist. Nor should it change for it now. The thing also is that NO ONE is perfect. Prophecy is not a reward (like chosenness, it is a job, not a factor of how well one follows orders), nor is it an inability to commit sins. Moses himself made mistakes. In Exodus 4 we learned how he failed to circumsize his own son. He smashed the Ten commandments, angering God. Prophecy does not perfect a person.
Here, we would like to highlight the point that, for example, the Jewish legislation ordered for the killing of a person as a way of accepting his repentance. Accordingly, when a person commited a sin and later wanted to repent, he would be subject to killing as a sign of showing genuine repentance and for his repentance to be accepted.
Here we simply have misinformation. Jewish legislation refrained from ordering execution where possible. There are instances where it is demanded in the law. It is written in the talmud: Rabbinic attitudes concerning the death penalty are also reflected in statements such as "a Sanhedrin that effects an execution once in seven years is branded a destructive tribunal." Rabbi Elizer Ben Azariah said "once in seventy years." Rabbis Tarfon and Akiba said, "If we were members of a Sanhedrin, nobody would ever be put to death." In that same Gemarra, however, Rabbi Simeon Ben Gamaliel dissented: "If we never condemned anyone to death, we might be considered guilty of promoting violence and bloodshed.... [We] could also multiply shedders of blood in Israel" (all Makkot 7A) Forty years before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 C.E., the rabbis abolished capital punishment altogether (Soncino Talmud, Sanhedrin page 161, footnote 10). Rather than applying the four methods of execution themselves, they ruled that punishment should be carried out by divine agencies (Sanhedrin 37B, Ketubot 30A, & 30B). In other words, a punishment so awesome as the taking of a person's life should not be entrusted to fallible human beings, but only to God.

Further, repentance for non-executable crimes are through prayer, charity and sacrifice, as written in the torah.

The simple fact is, we experianced every bit of what happend in the Torah. No one who encountered the ancient Hebrews contradicts what is claimed in the Torah, yet the Quran is brought forth, bringing "new" details to light literally thousands of years later, after thousands of years of an unchanged story, and the Jews are supposed to accept that? As I've posted before, you can't tell us our own history Ansar, no more than I could fool muslims with a rewritten Quran detailing a different account of the events after the death of muhammed.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Ansar Al-'Adl
04-15-2005, 09:13 PM
:sl:
Insha'Allah, I will now respond to SpaceFalcon's post.

You've proved it for me Ansar.
Supersesionism (not the same as suppressionism) is the belief that a given religion is the fulfillment of another.
The confusion arose because it should be spelt Supersessionism, if that is what you mean, and that is that one thing supercedes another.

And your claim is negated because original Judaism as taught by Prophet Moses pbuh was Islam.

Islam claims that it is the original truth, because the Torah is inadequate.
No, the present Torah has become corrupt. Those are two totally different ideas.

To do this, the Quran takes what already was, and rewrites it as truth.
No, the Qur'an confirms the truth and negates the slander against the Prophets, and other corruption.

It added something that didn't exist previously.
Then that is not a case of supersession, but of addition.

This isn't new to civilization, and such achievements are listed as important in the Talmud.
Why not the Torah, or even the rest of the Tanakh?

Consistancy is not proof anymore than if there were a single version of the life of Siddartha Buddah. One man can write a consistant text. Many men can work together to form a consistant text.
Actually, I think you would understand the issue better if you read the following:
The Qur'an is Clear of all Deficiencies Inherent in Human Works


The first among the arguments, on the basis of which, the Qur'an has substantiated its claim of being revealed by God is that this book is clear of all such inconsistencies, which is a permanent feature of all human works[2]. In fact, I am not aware of any other book claiming to be revealed by God, which, like the Qur'an, gives us an objective criterion to judge whether it is truly revealed by God or not. Even the books of the Bible are not an exception. The Qur'an has clearly mentioned that:



Had it been from anyone other than God, it would then have entailed a number of inconsistencies. (Al-Nisaa 4: 82)



To fully understand the significance of this criterion as well as to be able to apply this criterion on the Qur'an, one should first be aware of some of the common features of all human beings, which translate into inconsistencies and discrepancies in their works.


A human being, in his individual capacity, as well as the human society, in its collective capacity, do not represent a stagnant phenomena. Both the individual as well as the collectivity, of which the individual is a member, is in a continuous process of development and evolution. Every person, without any exception, goes through a process of evolution and development in his ability and level of understanding, in his information, in his understanding, analysis and interpretation of phenomena as well as in the formation and presentation of his ideas. All humans go through this process of development and evolution. This process, if you would closely observe, has a tremendous bearing on the life long works of the individual. You need not go far to fully appreciate this point. You can take any writer (whether in the field of literature, philosophy, science, history or any other discipline) and study his development overtime. You shall see that every writer, without even a single exception, is prone to evolution and development in:




The information available to him;



The style of analyzing the available information;



The formation of ideas and opinions;



The presentation of his ideas and opinions;



As a person progresses through the various stages in his life and encounters these various kinds of, internal and external, evolutions and developments, the style of his writing, the formation and presentation of his ideas and the references that he uses in his writings goes through a process of development as well. This, in other words, introduces a kind of inconsistency and, sometimes, grave discrepancies in his writings and presentations, over time.


In addition to these points of evolution and development, which effect the opinions and ideas propounded by an individual, another important factor, which effects the validity of the ideas proposed by the individual overtime is the discovery of new scientific and historical facts, which were unknown or inadequately known to the individual and due to which the findings, opinions and ideas proposed by the individual are rendered redundant.


The life and works of the greatest and most influential human minds provides adequate evidence to this fact. Whether it be the great minds of science - including Sir Isaac Newton and Alfred Einstein - or of literature and philosophy every one of them was subjected to the same individual and collective developments and evolution. There is not a single exception to this rule in human history. Every individual has to undergo these, internal and external, developments in life.


The Qur'an, however, claims to be an exception. It has declared itself to be an exception, not because Mohammed (pbuh) - the person, who presented the Qur'an - did not go through any, internal or external, developments in his life, but because the real source of the Qur'an - The All-Knowing, All-Encompassing God - is beyond any, internal or external, developments, evolutions or inadequacies.


Thus, the Qur'an declares itself to be absolutely clear of any:




Inconsistencies in its literary style;



Evolution and developments in the proposed ideas and thoughts; and



Drawing support for its claims from such available information, which was later proved to be incorrect[3].



The referred verse of the Qur'an has stressed that if a mortal had written the Qur'an, it would then have entailed all such inconsistencies, which all human works entail.


While analyzing the Qur'an, it should be remembered that Mohammed (pbuh) was not an educated person. Throughout his life, his literary presentation consists only of the Qur'an. He neither presented any book before the Qur'an, nor one after it. He was never seen practicing poetry or oratory, even by the closest of his acquaintances. He was known to be a quiet person, with high moral standards. After living the first forty years of his life in a small town - where every individual personally knew every other individual - he started presenting a book of a literary standard, which astonished the Arabs, who were proud of their literary legacy and silenced the eloquence of their revered and venerated poets and orators. This book did not only influence the contemporary literati of the Arabic language but, even after fourteen centuries, it is still considered the standard of excellence of the Arabic language. Continually being revealed in varying circumstances: ranging from debate, persecution, migration, peace, war, victory, loss, conquest and stability, no variation could be found in either the quality of its language or the focus of its message. This book laid the foundations of one of the largest creeds in history and is still believed to be in its unaltered, original form and language - which is in keeping with God's promise of saving it from all alterations till the end of time. All the revolutionary discoveries and developments in man's information about scientific and historical facts during the past fourteen centuries, which have rendered the works of even some of the most profound human intellects redundant, has remained unable to even seriously challenge the presentation of an unlettered Arab, fourteen hundred years ago.
This hurts the Quran the most..
Not at all. It is irrefutable proof that the Qur'an could not have been copied from the previous scriptures.

With regards to the historical miracles, please read the following:
http://-----------------------/historical_07.html

Relating historical "facts" that were "unknown" and contradictory to what had occured to those who lived it simply doesn't make sense
Who has lived it, and which contradiction are you referring to? You are very good at making abstract claims, but when it comes to backing them up, your agruments seem to be lacking.

Two rewrites are clear here. To devalue the torah, one must claim it includes mistakes. Why would the people who lived at the time "corrupt" the scripture to say that Pharoah's daughter adopted Moses? Why lie about Aaron being forced to fashion the golden calf, and protecting a previously non-existant (and guilty) person?
In some cases the corruptiuon may have been unintentional, or "criminal negligence" in a way. The people did not take care to protect their scriptures (as the Torah itself proves), so they lost the facts.

And again, it is irrefutable proof that the Qur'an was not copied from previously revealed scriptures.

Muhammed himself first brought his ideas to the Jews, why? To show them his new and revised way, much as the christians before him (before their pagan deviations) had attempted, assuming they would adopt whatever history that others told them to.
I encourage you to at least take a basic examination of historical events. The Muslims migrated to the Christians of Ethiopia long before meeting the Jews of Madinah. Thus your very premise is flawed.

Secondly, the interactions with the Jews of Madinah came much after the message had already been preached for 13 years in Makkah.

What Islam thinks didn't matter when Judaism was formed by God.
Except that Islam is not doing any 'thinking'. It is the original system ordained by Allah. Any simmilarities between the Abrahamic faiths are simply evidence of Islam's claims. The Jews rebelled against their Prophets and slandered them with the most heinious sins.

The thing also is that NO ONE is perfect.
There is a very large difference between not being perfect and comitting huge abominations that are attributed ot the Prophets in the Old Testament. How can any representative of God commit such disgusting transgressions against the very law they recieve?!

It is illogical.

Prophecy is not a reward (like chosenness, it is a job, not a factor of how well one follows orders), nor is it an inability to commit sins.
You are now contradicting yourself.

Originally Posted by SpaceFalcon
HaShem chose Moses to gather the Jews to create a "light for all the nations" that there was any division
http://www.islamicboard.com/showpost...2&postcount=45

And in This post, you made the folowing comment:

Originally Posted by SpaceFalcon2001
Originally Posted by Link
Why would God only send Prophets to the people of Isreal (Isaac's decendants) and nobody else??

Why would the rest of the world need prophets? All they have to do is keep up with seven easy laws that are common sense, and the rainbow is the sign, the reminder, of their covenant. No further commands should be needed.

In a way, you could consider the Jews as the world's prophet, for it is written:
"I am the Lord; I called you with righteousness and I will strengthen your hand; and I formed you, and I made you for a people's covenant, for a light to nations." (Isaiah 42:6)
We are to be a shining example of righteousness to the nations, showing complete dedication to HaShem our God, and his commandments, and others should take note of this.
So not only did you agree that Prophets are a righteous example for humanity, but you went even further to claim the Jews as a righteous example, or Prophet, to all humanity (despite the fact that the Torah records rather rebellious and less than righteous conduct).

A Prophet has to be an example for their people. They can't preach the commandments if they recklessly break them thmeselves!

Moses himself made mistakes. In Exodus 4 we learned how he failed to circumsize his own son. He smashed the Ten commandments, angering God. Prophecy does not perfect a person.
The Jews claim that Prophet Moses pbuh was the best of humanity. If Prophet Moses pbuh comitted sins that any righteous person could avoid, then the claim fails.

:w:
Reply

kadafi
04-16-2005, 12:30 PM
I also would like to add if there is a passage in the Written Torah that states that God will preserve the Law dicated to Musa (Peace be upon him)?

In the Glorious Qur'an, Allah (Exalted is He) said in Surah Al-Ma'idah, verse 44:

Verily, We did send down the Taurat (Torah) (to Musa (Moses)), therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allahs Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests (too judged the Jews by the Taurat (Torah) after those Prophets) for to them was entrusted the protection of Allahs Book, and they were witnesses thereto. Therefore fear not men but fear Me (O Jews) and sell not My Verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafiroon (i.e. disbelievers - of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allahs Laws).

Here, the protection of the Law was entrusted to the rabbis to perserve it.

In Al-Hijr, verse 9, Allah (Exalted is He) says:
Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'an) and surely, We will guard it from corruption.” which is a proof from the Glorious Qur'an that Allah will surely guard this Glorious Qur'an as evident now (i.e. manuscripts, more than 10 million who have memorized it fully, all muslims have memorized atleast a verse or a chapter, etc.)
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
04-17-2005, 11:01 PM
Most of your rejections are on the assumption that Islam was revealed at sinai which is nonsense. If that was what had been revealed, that is what the Jews would have had. You haven't provided any proof that Islam existed, you merely claim it.
A Prophet has to be an example for their people. They can't preach the commandments if they recklessly break them thmeselves!
However, they are still human. They can accidentally break the law or succumb to temptation and other things.

In your Quran, Adam and Eve are prophets, yet they sinned and defied God (al-A`raf 7:20-23).
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
Ansar Al-'Adl
04-17-2005, 11:16 PM
Originally Posted by SpaceFalcon2001
Most of your rejections are on the assumption that Islam was revealed at sinai which is nonsense. If that was what had been revealed, that is what the Jews would have had. You haven't provided any proof that Islam existed, you merely claim it.
Its not a claim, since you don't understand what Islam is. Islam is peace achieved through submission to God, and it is the same message that has been sent to all the Prophets. Islam is the way of the universe.

42:13 The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah - the which We have sent by inspiration to thee - and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: That ye should remain steadfast in religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him).

I believe that Islam was preached by Prophet Moses and Prophet Jesus, and that is the belief I have after examining the the teachings of both.

[quopte]However, they are still human. They can accidentally break the law or succumb to temptation and other things.[/quote]
Agreed, they can make mistakes, but NEVER such grievious sins that are attributed to them in the Bible.

In your Quran, Adam and Eve are prophets, yet they sinned and defied God (al-A`raf 7:20-23).
The Qur'an says that "Satan caused them to slip". There is a large difference between a slip and the horrible sins that any human being could avoid.

:w:
Reply

Ibn Syed
04-17-2005, 11:30 PM
:sl:
Spacefalcon, you have made errors in your post. You said that Adam and Eve were prophets but only Adam was a prophet. In the same sentence you wrote that they sinned and defied God. Really it was the Satan that lead them astray with his inferior trickery and lies.
:w:
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
04-19-2005, 02:13 AM
Originally Posted by Ibn Syed
Spacefalcon, you have made errors in your post. You said that Adam and Eve were prophets but only Adam was a prophet.
My mistake, I forgot that Islam does not allow women to be prophets. Oh the equality.
In the same sentence you wrote that they sinned and defied God. Really it was the Satan that lead them astray with his inferior trickery and lies.
Did he not warn them against the trickery of Satan?
The Qur'an says that "Satan caused them to slip". There is a large difference between a slip and the horrible sins that any human being could avoid.
A sin is a sin Al-Haq.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
04-19-2005, 02:15 AM
So you would not differentiate between any minor mistake that one can make, and commiting incest? A sin is a sin, but there is a difference between the common mistakes, and the major sins.

:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
04-19-2005, 02:19 AM
SF2K, The following article directly addresses your confusion:

Some Thoughts on the Disparaging Depictions of the Noble Prophets of God(P) in the Bible


Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi





Introduction


The purpose of this short paper is to make comparisions between the Qur'ânic descriptions of the Prophets and the Biblical descriptions of their actions. This issue is bound to provoke the interesting question about which Scripture really honoures the Prophets(P), and which actually does not.


Are the Prophets Infallible?


No, of course not. But there is certainly a difference between a normal man like you and me and a Prophet of God. First, let us define "sin". I have found that there is usually a semantic problem when this issue comes up. That is, Christians use the word "sin" differently than when Muslims use the word "sin". So, first, we must define what exactly do we mean by "sin". For Muslims, "sin" is not following the Law. All Prophets of God (including Muhammad) always followed the Law, and so did not "sin". Christians often use "sin" to mean that the human is imperfect and makes any kind of mistake. It often simply means for them that the human is "not God". Hence, the idea of "original sin"; an existential state of being with which we are born. For Muslims, this human imperfection and "not-Godness" is not sin, but human weakness - and we are told that we are created weak. The Prophet Muhammad(P) did make mistakes and did not know everything, and was imperfect as a human. For instance, he did not know how to farm and fertilize date palms, and had to take advice and suggestions from other people; the digging of a ditch in preparation for battle is also another example. We do not call that "sin", we call that "being human". The Qur'ân does not use the equivalent of the word "sin", depending on what is understood by it in Christianity. It uses the phrase "missing the point" as when an arrow does not hit the target, or "straying from the path" or "error". The following notions apply:


Gunah - Everything has a proper place in the scheme of things. When something is out of its proper place, we have Gunah.


Zanb - Everything has a perfect or ideal order and is correctly equipped for its proper function. If there is some abnormal growth, a disease, we have Zanb. A desire which goes beyond actual need or a perversion is such a growth. There must be neither more nor less in size and quantity. Both excess and insufficiency are evils. A balance is required.


A Prophet of God Has Divine Guidance


Whereas a normal man only follows his own conscience or the morals of his society, a Prophet of God is guided by the perfect morals from Allâh alone. He is the perfect example for his respective Umma' to follow. His words and actions pictures the perfect man guided by Allâh as an example for mankind. The prophetic message of perfectness comes from God to his Prophet, the chosen Man to bring His message to his Umma'. If only the Message is Perfect, but the Person who brings this Message is not, who would want to follow the Person?


There is an old Malay proverb: Bagaikan ibu ketam mengajar anaknya berjalan lurus (Like the mother crab who tries to teach its children to walk straight). Of course we know a crab can never walk straight - it is its nature to walk crookedly, so how could a mother crab teach its children to walk straight?*This proverb can be applied to the Prophets(P). If the Message they bring was Divinely Perfect in every way, but they themselves are at a low level of morality, would you want to follow him? Of course not, for how could a "crooked man" ever teach his followers to "walk straight"?


This is why, in the Muslim mind, it is impossible for the Prophets(P) to intentionally commit acts of murder, incest and polytheism as it is depicted in the Bible. A Prophet is fallible, but no, he does not succumb to sins of this nature or is guided by personal desires. He only commits simple mistakes, such as giving bad advice or forgetting something (human nature). But whenever a Prophet commits a mistake, he is immediately corrected and guided by God Almighty.


Based on this criteria of the Qur'ân, can we say the same of the Prophets as pictured in the Bible? According to the Qur'ân, if what the Bible says about the Prophets committing nefarious acts of sin is true, then they are all false prophets.


Alleged Sins The Bible Accuses the Prophets(P) Of


Some of the (alleged) acts of sins of the Prophets, peace be upon them, in the Bible are as follows:


Prophet Noah (Nuh)(P)



Drunkard: Noah was a drunkard and lay naked in his intoxication (Genesis 9:20)



Prophet Lot (Lut)(P)



Incestuous: Lot had incest with his daughters who begat his children (Genesis 19:30)



Prophet Abraham (Ibrahim)(P)



Incestuous: Abraham married his sister (Genesis 20:12)



Prophet Jacob (Ya'akob)(P)



Deceiver: Jacob was a deceiver (Genesis 27)



Prophet Aaron (Harun)(P)



Polytheist: Aaron led people to worship the golden calf (Exodus 32:2-11)



Prophet David (Dawud)(P)



Adulterous: David had adultery with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11:1-7)


Tiger-Show Dancer: David danced naked before the Lord (II Samuel 6:14-16)


and


David uncovers himself in front of the handmaids of his servants (II Samuel 6:20)


Murderer: David(P)murders 200 Philistines, then cuts off their foreskins. (1 Samuel 18:27)*


David(P) smites the Amalekites. (1 Samuel 30:17)


Rechan and Baanah kill Ish-bosheth, behead him, and take his head to David(P). (2 Samuel 4:7-8)


David(P) has Rechan and Baanah killed, their hands and feet cut off, and their bodies hanged by the pool at Hebron. (2 Samuel 4:12)


"And David(P) did as the Lord commanded him, and smote the Philistines ...." (2 Samuel 5:25)


A listing of some of David's(P) murderous conquests:


(2 Samuel 8:1-18) David hamstrung all but a few of the horses.


(2 Samuel 8:4) 2 Samuel 8:5 David slew 22,000 Syrians.


(2 Samuel 8:13) David slew 18,000 Edomites in the valley of salt and made the rest slaves.


(2 Samuel 10:18) David slew 47,000+ Syrians.


(2 Samuel 11:14-27) David has Uriah killed so that he can marry Uriah's wife, Bathsheba.


Sinner and Was Punished: 2 Samuel 12:1, 19 The Lord strikes David's child dead for the sin that David has committed.



Prophet Solomon (Sulayman)(P)



Polytheist: Solomon(P) worshipped idols (1 Kings 11:4)


Conspiracy of Murder: 1 Kings 2:24-25 Solomon has Adonijah murdered. 1 Kings 2:29-34 Solomon has Joab murdered. 1 Kings 2:46 Solomon has Shime-i murdered.



Prophet Zechariah (Zakaria)(P)



Punished by becoming "speechless": Zechariah(P) did not believe his wife could be pregnant with God's will and thus, for his disbelief was "cursed" by Gabriel to become speechless (Luke 1:22)



Prophet Jesus (Eesa)(P)



Christians like to think of Jesus as a sinless God-man, but even Jesus(P) does not claim as such, and as according to the Bible, he did commit sin.


Jesus(P) was seen as a wine bibber (Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:34)


Jesus(P) disrespectful to his mother (John 2:4; 19:26). Compare it with the same manner he(P) addressed a prostitute, in John 8:10



Of course, it is needless to mention that God Almighty in the Noble Qur'ân rejects such nefarious deeds attributed to the Prophets(P). It is obvious how the man-made tamperations have caused these noble men to be seen as sinners and liars and yet at the same time an elect of God. As the Qur'ân tells us:



Say ye: "We believe in Allâh and the revelation given to us and to Abraham, Isma`il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes and that given to Moses and Jesus and that given to (all) Prophets from their Lord we make no difference between one and another of them and we bow to Allâh (in Islam)." (Qur'ân, 2:136)



Christians are therefore, in essence, against this very principle of Islam; they ignore the other Prophets of God(P), but deify Jesus(P), seemingly a Prophet of God who is also God Almighty, at the same time he(P) is a man.


*


Conclusions


Muslims believe that the Prophet Muhammad(P) was the Last Prophet and Messenger of God. By way of clarification it should be stated immediately that in Islam the role of a Prophet or a Messenger is far more important than in Christianity. Both the Old and the New Testament speak of prophets who have a very minor role in the community (2 Kings 2:15, 1 Cor 12:10, Acts 13:1, etc.). In Islam however, a Prophet or a Messenger expresses the Will of God for a Nation or for all Humankind. The message delivered by him is binding on those to whom it is sent and a rejection of him is a rejection of God. The work of a Messenger, furthermore, changes earlier religious laws and create a new religious community. The belief that the Prophet Muhammad(P) is the Last Prophet and Messenger of God therefore means that after him there will not arise any person who will be authorized by God to express his will for others and/or institute a new religious direction by a new expression of the religious truth and forming a religious community around that expression. Any person claiming to have such authority is suffering from self-deception and/or is lying, no matter how smart he may be or how many miraculous deeds he may perform.


Previous revelations have been corrupted and deprived of their spiritual value by their followers' vain controversies and disputes. It was possible to settle such disputes under the flag, as it were, or the old Revelations, but God's Plan was to revive and rejuvenate His Message through Islam, amongst a newer and younger people, unhampered by the burden of age-old prejudices. Islam is the universal religion par excellence. But there is always in human affairs the conflict between the old and the new, the worn-out system of our ancestors, and the fresh living spring of Allâh's inspiration fitting in with new times and new surroundings. The advocates of the former look upon this latter not only with intellectual doubt but with moral suspicion, as the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) do upon Islam, with its fresh outlook and vigorous realistic way of looking at things.


And certainly, only God knows best!
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
04-20-2005, 12:19 AM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
So you would not differentiate between any minor mistake that one can make, and commiting incest? A sin is a sin, but there is a difference between the common mistakes, and the major sins.
A sin is a deviation from the law. There is no difference between stealing, eating pork, and murder. The only difference between sins are the punishment perscribed.

Some interesting things:
Just a note, I found it interesting that it claims that Abraham made the sin of incest. 2 facts: The law didn't exist yet, and Abraham didn't really marry his sister.

It doesn't mention any of the sins of Moses (including murder, failure to circumsize his son, etc).

It says David murdered 200 Philistines, other people, etc. , when Israel was at war with them, and he was commanded by the king.

Muhammed waged wars and killed as well.

And more, I'm sure, but these particularly stood out.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
04-20-2005, 02:15 AM
Originally Posted by SpaceFalcon2001
A sin is a deviation from the law.
To quote the article once again:
No, of course not. But there is certainly a difference between a normal man like you and me and a Prophet of God. First, let us define "sin". I have found that there is usually a semantic problem when this issue comes up. That is, Christians use the word "sin" differently than when Muslims use the word "sin". So, first, we must define what exactly do we mean by "sin". For Muslims, "sin" is not following the Law. All Prophets of God (including Muhammad) always followed the Law, and so did not "sin". Christians often use "sin" to mean that the human is imperfect and makes any kind of mistake. It often simply means for them that the human is "not God". Hence, the idea of "original sin"; an existential state of being with which we are born. For Muslims, this human imperfection and "not-Godness" is not sin, but human weakness - and we are told that we are created weak. The Prophet Muhammad(P) did make mistakes and did not know everything, and was imperfect as a human. For instance, he did not know how to farm and fertilize date palms, and had to take advice and suggestions from other people; the digging of a ditch in preparation for battle is also another example. We do not call that "sin", we call that "being human". The Qur'ân does not use the equivalent of the word "sin", depending on what is understood by it in Christianity. It uses the phrase "missing the point" as when an arrow does not hit the target, or "straying from the path" or "error". The following notions apply:
There is no difference between stealing, eating pork, and murder.
SpaceFalcon, this is now becoming ridiculous. The Bible portrays the Prophets of God as criminals and evildoers. This is not an issue of natural human mistakes. If you can't see the contradiction there, I am afraid I can't help you. Its willful blindness.

The only difference between sins are the punishment perscribed.
You're skipping a step, and thus you've created a logical fallacy. The differences in punishment are [b]because[/u] of the differences in the nature of the sin, not the other way around! We don't randomly select punishments in order to differentiate sins.

Just a note, I found it interesting that it claims that Abraham made the sin of incest. 2 facts: The law didn't exist yet,
This is an empty argument. The laws and the moral standards of God are eternal. Prophet Abraham was the Prophet of God and to claim that he would commit a sin that would be deemed abominable by His Lord in the future is ridiculous. And the way of God has remained the same throughout time. You can't claim that Hitler wasn't evil if the international conventions came into effect later!!

and Abraham didn't really marry his sister.
Why don't you elaborate on that one?

It doesn't mention any of the sins of Moses (including murder, failure to circumsize his son, etc).
Thanks for pointing that out. Although the former deed was partially justifiable through self-defense, and at any rate it could not be considered murder, but manslaughter.

It says David murdered 200 Philistines, other people, etc. , when Israel was at war with them, and he was commanded by the king.
How about the foreskins?

Muhammed waged wars and killed as well.
Can you point to any unjustified killings as those commited by the biblical prophets?

If you research the history of Prophet Muhammad saws in context, you will see no such crimes.

Please read here:
http://www.load-islam.com/C/Muhammad...f_the_Prophet/


:w:
Reply

SpaceFalcon2001
04-20-2005, 04:55 AM
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
To quote the article once again:
I don't care about your article. It 1. speaks of the christian notion of sin, and 2. speaks of the Quran notion of sin. Both do not apply.
SpaceFalcon, this is now becoming ridiculous. The Bible portrays the Prophets of God as criminals and evildoers.
Not as evil dooers, but they do commit sins.
This is an empty argument. The laws and the moral standards of God are eternal. Prophet Abraham was the Prophet of God and to claim that he would commit a sin that would be deemed abominable by His Lord in the future is ridiculous. And the way of God has remained the same throughout time.
The way of God is the same. However, you're (mis)holding him to a law that applied to a people that didn't exist yet. God says that Jews can't marry brother and sister. Abraham wasn't a Jew, he was a Hebrew. The laws before the Mosaic laws that applied to the Jews were the Noahide laws.
Why don't you elaborate on that one?
They ignore that Abraham claimed she was his sister so the egyptians wouldn't kill him to marry her (as they were known to do).
Although the former deed was partially justifiable through self-defense, and at any rate it could not be considered murder, but manslaughter.
Moses didn't have the right to kill who he did. He killed the taskmaster to spare a slave from more lashes, and the one he saved pointed how how he should not have killed the taskmaster, pharoah found out and sought to kill him for murder. That is why he ran away from egypt.
11. Now it came to pass in those days that Moses grew up and went out to his brothers and looked at their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian man striking a Hebrew man of his brothers.

12. He turned this way and that way, and he saw that there was no man; so he struck the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.

13. He went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarreling, and he said to the wicked one, "Why are you going to strike your friend?"

14. And he retorted, "Who made you a man, a prince, and a judge over us? Do you plan to slay me as you have slain the Egyptian?" Moses became frightened and said, "Indeed, the matter has become known!"

15. Pharaoh heard of this incident, and he sought to slay Moses; so Moses fled from before Pharaoh. He stayed in the land of Midian, and he sat down by a well.
How about the foreskins?
Saul commanded him to bring those back as proof he killed them (as a phillistine would never willingly circumsize himself).
Saul was pretty nasty, but David was following orders tere.
Can you point to any unjustified killings as those commited by the biblical prophets?
Well so far, I'm the only one to bring forth an unjustified (although not entirely) killing.

The ones you name are war acts. Muhammed waged several wars. If you consider acts of war to be murder, then Muhammed is guilty of that as well. Otherwise it's a double standard.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
04-20-2005, 10:06 PM
Originally Posted by SpaceFalcon2001
I don't care about your article. It 1. speaks of the christian notion of sin, and 2. speaks of the Quran notion of sin. Both do not apply.
What do you mean, "both do not apply"? The Qur'anic definition has been stated to clarify the notion of sin within Islam. The Judaic definition is the one that doesn't apply, because it makes no difference what you interpret sins to be, the contradiction is still there.

Not as evil dooers, but they do commit sins.
The Tanakh itself calls these crimes evil! If the Prophets are portrayed as indulging in what the Tanakh describes as evil, then they are being portrayed as evildoers. evil-doers, someone who does evil.

:w:
Reply

Abu Zakariya
11-23-2005, 10:10 PM
This thread is old, but reading it I felt that maybe there is some benefit if I clarify one thing.

"So he (Satan) misled them with deception." (Ch 7:22)

The reason they ate from the tree is because Satan swore by God that they were now allowed to eat from it. In other words, he was lied to by Satan and Adam simply couldn't believe that someone physicly could swear by God and lie.
(A shaykh explained this in an arabic lecture about the Prophets, I can't remember the Shaykh's name right now, but I'll find out what lecture it was and who the Shaykh was insha'Allah).

So, there's an enormous difference between being deceived by Satan being and lied to, and commiting major sins.
Reply

Abdul Fattah
11-24-2005, 01:21 AM
The way of God is the same. However, you're (mis)holding him to a law that applied to a people that didn't exist yet. God says that Jews can't marry brother and sister. Abraham wasn't a Jew, he was a Hebrew. The laws before the Mosaic laws that applied to the Jews were the Noahide laws.
You're hiding after terminology here. A name only has importance to refer. If you believe in the prophesy of Mozes, you believe in the one of Abraham to, as both of the same God. Even though you call one a jew and the other a Hebrew. They followed the same God with the same laws. Likewise If you believe in Islam Then you believe all the prophets were Islamic. They just didn't know that word yet. Youcan argue that you do not believe in Islam. But you cannot justify that disbelieve with an argument that starts from a non-believing perspective. That's just illogical
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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-21-2011, 06:49 AM
  2. Replies: 56
    Last Post: 08-21-2007, 11:23 PM
  3. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-21-2006, 11:34 AM
  4. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-05-2006, 01:22 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!