Why do muslims use the bible if they don't 'believe' in it?

[westcoast]

I just got somethin to say about using the Bible to prove that Muhamad was prophecised
according to most if not all muslims, the Bible is flawed and what not, so why use it to "prove" you cause? and if all the verses you quoted do indeed "prophecise" mohamad, then what do you make of verses proclaiming the divinity of Jesus Christ? all you're doing is chosing quotes that'll suit your purpose and ignoring the overwhelming majority of quotes in the Bible that suggest otherwise.

[Umar001]

I just got somethin to say about using the Bible to prove that Muhamad was prophecised
according to most if not all muslims, the Bible is flawed and what not, so why use it to "prove" you cause? and if all the verses you quoted do indeed "prophecise" mohamad, then what do you make of verses proclaiming the divinity of Jesus Christ? all you're doing is chosing quotes that'll suit your purpose and ignoring the overwhelming majority of quotes in the Bible that suggest otherwise.

Hi westcoast,

You see, the Bible is something that many use as their ultimate authority. Muslims do have other ways of proving Islam, but if someone believes in the Bible, and there are verses in the Bible which contain information of Muhammad, peace be upon him, then it is only logical for the Muslim to use it, since to Christians the Bible is their authority. This is why some Muslims might use it.

Also, some Muslims use their authority to have a brief overview of what in the Bible is true. So the Qu'ran says Muhammad was propechiesed by Jesus and so forth, so if the Muslim finds this then since this does not conflict the Qu'ran, the Muslim's authority, then he can use it, but when he sees that the Bible says Jesus is son of God or that Angels are sons of God, and the authority of the Muslim, i.e. the Qu'ran says God has no sons, then the Muslim knows not to use this, as this is definetly not part of the message that could have remained.

[ACC]

Maybe we have a thread for this, not sure. Why did God have Jesus be born of a Virgin and not experience death but mohamed was born normally and died (or am I wrong here, he was raised to Heaven too, wast he?)?

[westcoast]

Hi westcoast,

You see, the Bible is something that many use as their ultimate authority. Muslims do have other ways of proving Islam, but if someone believes in the Bible, and there are verses in the Bible which contain information of Muhammad, peace be upon him, then it is only logical for the Muslim to use it, since to Christians the Bible is their authority. This is why some Muslims might use it.

Also, some Muslims use their authority to have a brief overview of what in the Bible is true. So the Qu'ran says Muhammad was propechiesed by Jesus and so forth, so if the Muslim finds this then since this does not conflict the Qu'ran, the Muslim's authority, then he can use it, but when he sees that the Bible says Jesus is son of God or that Angels are sons of God, and the authority of the Muslim, i.e. the Qu'ran says God has no sons, then the Muslim knows not to use this, as this is definetly not part of the message that could have remained.

Hi westcoast,

You see, the Bible is something that many use as their ultimate authority. Muslims do have other ways of proving Islam, but if someone believes in the Bible, and there are verses in the Bible which contain information of Muhammad, peace be upon him, then it is only logical for the Muslim to use it, since to Christians the Bible is their authority. This is why some Muslims might use it.

Also, some Muslims use their authority to have a brief overview of what in the Bible is true. So the Qu'ran says Muhammad was propechiesed by Jesus and so forth, so if the Muslim finds this then since this does not conflict the Qu'ran, the Muslim's authority, then he can use it, but when he sees that the Bible says Jesus is son of God or that Angels are sons of God, and the authority of the Muslim, i.e. the Qu'ran says God has no sons, then the Muslim knows not to use this, as this is definetly not part of the message that could have remained.

it doesn't make any sense to me. If i used the Bible to show the divinity of Jesus Christ, then you'd disagree with my statement because not only do you not believe in the Bible, but the Qu'ran also does not coincide with the teachings of the Bible (i.e Qu'ran saying God has no sons)
secondly a lot of people use and manipulate quotes from the Bible to prove their points, often times using them out of context.
The first quote from the book of Deutoronomy is used in this thread, and they claimed that this is a quote that prophesied the coming of Muhamad. Again, using a quote from the Bible out of context to prove your points:

Almighty God speaks to Moses in Book of Deuteronomy chapter 18 verse 18:
"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him."

Unfortunately, this quote was not about Muhammad.
"If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me." (John 5:46)

^Is that not crystal clear?

[Umar001]

it doesn't make any sense to me. If i used the Bible to show the divinity of Jesus Christ, then you'd disagree with my statement because not only do you not believe in the Bible, but the Qu'ran also does not coincide with the teachings of the Bible (i.e Qu'ran saying God has no sons)

Oh my, so let me put this forth for you:

Islamicly answering, Muslim hold that the Qu'ran is the Criterion, so let me put forth an example for you,

Every generation of your family's male members, i.e. your grandfather and your father and yourself, recieve a letter from a boss, who employs you to do work, say your father dies whilst your young, and you are not due to recieve your letter until the age of 25, as you get older and your father is not there no more, his letter is lost, and so you ask around, maybe your mother and aunt and so forth about what your father's letter contained, and there are various reports, some say it was of big font in blue, others say it stated your wages are 33 pounds, and some reports were conflicting, you then recieve your letter, (I should add that all the letters are the same in core, i.e. wages, fonts, only name of who is sent to changes and minor things), and in your letter you realise that it is in big red font and not blue, and that your wages is 33 pounds, and so because of your letter you can now come closer to knowing what your father's letter contained at it's core.

Sorrry for that long example, but similarly, when the Qu'ran came, it showed the Muslims what the core message of Jesus' teachings were, so when Muslims compare the Bible with the Qu'ran, anything that agrees they say 'it might have been from Jesus' anything that disagrees they say 'this is not'. Just as you would with the accounts that your mother or aunt would give you about your father's letter, if the accounts agrred with your letter which you know is exactly the same, you would say 'maybe my mother knew for sure' and when they disagree, i.e. the font, then you can say 'well this is a mistake and not truly from the letter'.

Eesa.

secondly a lot of people use and manipulate quotes from the Bible to prove their points, often times using them out of context.

If someone has taking something out of context do say, please. Remember context does not mean out of personal interpretation.

The first quote from the book of Deutoronomy is used in this thread, and they claimed that this is a quote that prophesied the coming of Muhamad. Again, using a quote from the Bible out of context to prove your points:

Almighty God speaks to Moses in Book of Deuteronomy chapter 18 verse 18:
"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him."

Unfortunately, this quote was not about Muhammad.
"If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me." (John 5:46)

^Is that not crystal clear?

First, did Moses only write Dueteronomy 18:18??

Second, we could see whether Jesus' words recorded by John are accurate.

[- Qatada -]

Hi westcoast.

Allah! There is no god but He,-the Living, the Self-Subsisting, Eternal.

It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).

[Qur'an 3: 2-3]

The Qur'an is the Criterion (Furqan) to verify what was the real message given to Jesus, son of Mary - the Messiah (peace be upon them.)


We believe that Jesus is an honorable Messenger of God, and we believe that he is the Messiah - who will slay the anti christ. He is the servant and Prophet of God, because God is not in need of children. If one was to say that God can have children if He wills, we believe that God only does what befits His Majesty. If God willed, He could pick anyone from among the creation to be His child, but He is way above what they associate with Him.


Don't you see how all the previous prophets called to the worship of God Alone without associating partners with Him? Don't you see the message of Noah, Abraham, Moses? Didn't they call their people to worship God Alone? They never claimed that they were divine, nor did Jesus son of Mary. He ate food, and he drank. He even went to the bathroom like we do. Do you really believe that God would do that?

Remember that I said that God only does what befits His Majesty? Well that fits in with that concept - so God doesn't go to the bathroom. Nor is He in need of any children, rather we are all His servants, and we are obedient to Him. So we worship God Alone, and no-one else. The One who gave us life, the One who provides for us, the One who will cause us to die, and He will bring us back to life and we will be judged on all that we did in this world.


Know that no soul bears the burden of another, and man will only get what he/she strived for. You are responsible for the good and bad you do, and so am i. No-one else is. You have to believe in what was revealed to all the Prophets and not take a pick and mix. Rather we take the whole package. And Muhammad (peace be upon him) recieved the same message as the Prophets of the earlier times - submit to God, your Creator and Provider by obeying His Messenger. If you do, you will be successful, but if you turn away - know that your Creator is Self-Sufficient, and you will be brought to account on the day when every soul will be questioned on what it did in this world.

And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.

I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness.

If You should punish them - indeed they are Your servants; but if You forgive them - indeed it is You who is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.

Allah will say, "This is the Day when the truthful will benefit from their truthfulness." For them are gardens [in Paradise] beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever, Allah being pleased with them, and they with Him. That is the great attainment.

To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is within them. And He is over all things competent.


[Qur'an The Tablecloth [Al Ma'ida] 5: 116-120]

[جوري]

The Bible Led Me to Islam

A. M. LeBlanc tells how he discovered Islam within the pages of Bible

Source: International Edition Voice of Islam - November 1998, Page 25

During my Christian days there were many verses in the Bible that made me question the religion I was following (Christianity). There was one particular verse, 1 Thessalonians 5:17 which says; "pray without ceasing," that lingered heavily in my mind. I often wondered how a person (Christian) was supposed to pray (be in a state of worship) without ceasing? Without any biblical or divine guidance, the only way I thought this to be possible was to always do good deeds and keep the remembrance of God on my tongue and in my heart.

However, I found this to be impossible to do as a human being. But when I was introduced to Islam in 1987, and began to read and learn more about this way of life, I found that Islam provided divine guidance both from God (Allah) and Prophet Muhammad (SAW) by which a person could pray (be in a state of worship) without ceasing, if it was the Will of God.

Whether waking up, eating, sleeping, putting on clothes, being in the presence of a woman, looking at a woman, going shopping, going to the bathroom, looking in the mirror, traveling, visiting the sick, sitting in a non-religious meeting, taking a bath, having sexual intercourse with one’s wife, yawning, cutting you nails, sneezing, greeting people, talking, hosting guests at home, walking, exercising, fighting, entering one’s house, praying and many other acts, Islam and the guidance therein of the Quran, and the acts and sayings of Prophet Muhammad (SAW), provided ways in which I could observe 1 Thessalonians 5:17. In addition, it allowed me to be at peace with myself and in submission to the one True God - Allah (SWT).

This divine guidance of Islam taught me greatly about my duties, responsibilities and birthright to my Creator (Allah), and more about the religion of Christianity as a Muslim, I [By the Will of Allah (SWT)] felt it necessary to share with you how the Bible led me to Islam.

Christianity

Given the fact that there has never been in the history of the Torah (Old Testament) the religion of God to be named after a Prophet (i.e. Adaminity, Abrahamity, Mosanity, etc.), I hope to explain that Jesus did not preach the religion of Christianity, but a religion that gives all Praise and Worship to The One God.

One of the questions I asked myself as I took an objective (second) look at Christianity was; where did the word Christianity come from and was the word ever mentioned to Jesus? Well, I did not find the word Christianity in the Bible, not even in a Bible dictionary. Specifically, I did not find in the Bible where Jesus called himself a Christian.

The word Christian was first mentioned by a pagan to describe those who followed Jesus. It is mentioned one of three times in the New Testament by a pagan and Jew in Antioch about 43 AD, (Acts 11:26, Acts 26:28 and 1 Peter 4:16) long after Jesus left this earth. To accept the words of pagans as having any value or association with divinity, Jesus or God is contrary to the teachings of all Prophets.

Jesus prophesied that people would worship him uselessly and believe in doctrines made by men (Matthew 15:9).

"But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." This verse, Matthew 15:9, is further supported by these words of the Quran:

"And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say unto men: "Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?" He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours, truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower o fall that is hidden and unseen.

Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allah) did command me to say: ‘Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’ And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were a Witness to all things. (This is a great admonition and warning to the Christians of the whole world)." (Al-Ma’idah 5:116-117)

I found that Biblical verses like John 5:30, John 12:49, John 14:28, Isaiah 42:8 and Acts 2:22 support the above mentioned verses of the Quran.

Before leaving the subject of Christianity, I should mention one small point of observation. If Christians are Christ-like, why are they not greeting each other with the words; Peace be with you (Salamu Alaikum), as Jesus did in Luke 24:36. As you may be aware, the greeting from one Muslim to another Muslim is Assalamu Alaikum; a Christ-like saying.

Various Holy Bibles
It is worth mentioning that the Bible references cited might not be exactly as the Bible you are using. There are MANY Bibles on the market that are used by different Christian sects and all of these sects say that their book, though different, is the word of God. Such Bibles are: The Revised Standard Version 1952 & 1971, New American Standard Bible, The Holy Bible; New International Version, the Living Bible, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures used by Jehovah Witnesses, Roman Catholic Version and the King James Version. A special note: I have not found in any of these Bibles where the "New Testament" calls itself the "New Testament," and nowhere does the "Old Testament" call itself the "Old? Testament." Also, the word "Bible" is unknown within the pages of the Bible.

In addition to the many different Christian sects and Bibles, I have learned that there are also different men, not Prophets, who founded these sects and are using various interpretations of the Bible and/or man-made doctrines as their creed.

I would like to share with you some thoughts that you may not have read or known about the Bible being the word of God. Briefly, let me mention that on September 8, 1957, the Jehovah’s witnesses in their "Awake" magazine carried this startling headline - 50,000 Errors in the Bible. If you ask a Jehovah’s witness about this headline, it may be said that today most of those errors have been eliminated. How many have been eliminated, 5,000? Even if 50 remain, would one attribute those errors to God?

Let me pose another question: if a "Holy" book contained conflicting verses would you still consider it to be Holy? Most likely you will say of course not. Let me share with you some conflicting verses both in the Old and New Testaments:

II Samuel 8:4 (vs)
II Samuel 8:9-10
II Kings 8:26

II Samuel 6:23
Genesis 6:3
John 5:37

John 5:31
I Chronicles 18:4
I Chronicles 18:9-10

II Chronicles 22:2
II Samuel 21:8
Genesis 9:29

John 14:9
John 8:14



Only two contradictions of the New Testament have been mentioned, but others will be referenced when the Trinity, Divinity of Jesus Christ, Divine Sonship of Jesus, Original Sin and Atonement are reviewed.

How could the "inspired words" of God get the genealogy of Jesus incorrect (See Matthew 1:6-16 where it states 26 forefathers up to Prophet David, and Luke 3:23-31 says 41 in number). Or for that matter, give a genealogy to Jesus who had NO father? See II Kings 19:1-37, now read Isaiah 37:1-38. Why is it that the words of these verse are identical? Yet they have been attributed to two different authors, one unknown and the other is Isaiah, who are centuries apart; and yet, the Christians have claimed these books to be inspired by God.

I looked up the word Easter in the Nelson Bible dictionary and learned that the word "Easter" (as mentioned in Acts 12:4) is a mistranslation of "pascha," the ordinary Greek word for "Passover." As, you know Passover is a Jewish celebration not a Christian holiday. I think human hands, all to human, had played havoc with the Bible.

From the brief points mentioned above, and the fact that Biblical scholars themselves have recognized the human nature and human composition of the Bible (Curt Kuhl, The Old Testament: Its Origin and Composition, PP 47, 51, 52), there should exist in the Christian’s mind some acceptance to the fact that maybe every word of the Bible is not God’s word.

As a side note to this subject, let me mention that some Christians believe that the Bible was dictated to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) by a Christian monk, and that is why some of the biblical accounts are in the Quran. After some research, I found that this could not have happened because there were no Arabic Bible in existence in the 6th century of the Christian era when Muhammad (SAW) lived and preached. Therefore, no Arab, not even Prophet Muhammad (SAW) who was absolutely unlettered and unlearned, would have had the opportunity to examine the written text of the Bible in his own language.

The Gospels

If you read Luke 1:2-3, you will learn, as I did, that Luke (who was not one of the 12 disciples and never met Jesus) said that he himself was not an eyewitness, and the knowledge he gathered was from eyewitnesses, and not as words inspired by God. Incidentally, why does every "Gospel" begin with the introduction According to. Why "according to?" the reason for this is because not a single one of the gospels carries its original author’s autograph! Even the internal evidence of Matthew 9:9 proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel which bears his name:

"And as Jesus passed forth thence, He (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and He (Jesus) saith unto Him (Matthew), follow me (Jesus). And he (Matthew) arose, and followed Him (Jesus)."

Without any stretch of the imagination, one can see that the He’s and the Him’s of the above narration do not refer to Jesus or Matthew as its author, but a third person writing what he saw or heard - a hearsay account and not words inspired by God.

It is worth noting, and well known throughout the religious world, that the choice of the present four "gospels" of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were imposed in the Council of Nicea 325 CE for political purposes under the auspices of the pagan Emperor Constantine, and not by Jesus. Constantine’s mind had not been enlightened either by study or by inspiration. He was a pagan, a tyrant and criminal who murdered his son, his wife and thousands of innocent individuals because of his lust for political power. Constantine ratified other decisions in the Nicene Creed such as the decision to call Christ "the Son of God, only begotten of the father."

Literally, hundreds of gospels and religious writings were hidden from the people. Some of those writings were written by Jesus’ disciples, and many of them were eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ actions. The Nicea Council decided to destroy all gospels written in Hebrew, which resulted in the burning of nearly three hundred accounts. If these writings were not more authentic than the four present gospels, they were of equal authenticity. Some of them are still available such as the Gospel of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas which agree with the Quran. The Gospel of Barnabas, until now, is the only eyewitness account of the life and mission of Jesus. Even today, the whole of the Protestant word, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists and other sects and denominations condemn the Roman Catholic version of the Bible because it contains seven "extra" books. The Protestant have bravely expunged seven whole books from their word of God. A few of the outcasts are the Books of Judith, Tobnias, Baruch and Esther.

Concerning Jesus’ teachings of the Gospel (Injeel), the Gospel writers frequently mentioned Jesus preaching the Gospel: Matthew 9:35, Mark 8:35, and Luke 20:1. The word "gospel" is recurrently used in the Bible. However, in the New Testament Greek edition the word Evangeline is used in place of the word gospel, which is translated to mean good news. My question was: what Gospel did Jesus preach? Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus, and only of the 27 books are known to be attributed as the Gospel of Jesus. The remaining 23 were supposedly written by Paul. Muslims do believe that Jesus was given God’s "Good News." However, they do not recognized the present four Gospels as the utterances of Jesus.

The earliest Gospel is that of Mark’s which was written about 60-75 AD. Mark was the son of Barnabas’s sister. Matthew was a tax collector, a minor official who did not travel around with Jesus. Luke’s Gospel was written much later, and in fact, drawn from the same sources as Mark’s and Matthew’s. Luke was Paul’s physician, and like Paul, never met Jesus. By the way, did you know that the names Marks and Luke were not included in the 12 appointed disciples of Jesus as mentioned in Matthew 10:2-4?

Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; the first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

John’s Gospel is from a different source, and was written in about 100 AD. He (John) should not be confused with John, the disciple, who was beheaded by Agrippa I in the year 44 CE long before this gospel was written. It should be accepted as a reliable account of the life of Jesus, and whether it should be included in the scriptures.

Christians, as I once did, boast about the Gospels according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke and according to John. However, if we think about it, there is not a single Gospel according to Jesus himself. According to the preface of the KJV (King James Version) new open Bible study edition, the word "Gospel" was added (see below) to the original titles, "According to John, according to Matthew, according to Luke and according to Mark."

The permission to call "According to" writings the Gospel was not given by Jesus nor by any other divine guidance. These writings; Matthew, Luke, Mark and John, were never originally to be the Gospel. Therefore, Mark 1:1 can not be a true statement that his writing is the gospel of Jesus.

It should be mentioned that Muslims must believe in all Divine scriptures in their original form, their Prophets and making no distinction between them: The Suhuf (Abraham); Torah (Moses); Psalms (David); Gospel - or the Injeel (Jesus); and the Quran (Muhammad). It is clearly stated in the Quran 3:3 that Allah sent down the Torah and the Gospel. However, none of these scriptures remains in its original form now, except the Quran, which was sent for all mankind everywhere and for all times.

In addition to other reasons why the Quran was sent to mankind, as mentioned in 18:4-5 it was sent to warn the Christians of a terrible punishment from God if they cease not in saying: "Allah has begotten a son."

Muslims sincerely believe that everything Jesus (May the peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) preached was from God; the Gospel (Injeel): The "good news" and the guidance of God for the Children of Israel. There is no place mentioned in the present four Gospels that Jesus wrote a single word of his Gospel, nor is it mentioned that Jesus instructed anyone to do so. What passes off, as the "Gospels" today are the works of third party human hands. The Quran 2:79 says:
"And woe to those who write the book with their own hands and they say: "This is from Allah (God)." To traffic with it for a miserable price! So woe to them for what their hands do write, and woe to them for what they earn thereby!"

Jesus As the Son of God
Is Jesus the Son of God? Matthew 3:17 could be used by some Christians to support the divine Sonship of Jesus. If Matthew 3:17, "And Lo a voice for heaven, saying, this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased," is used to support divine Sonship, then there should be no other verse that contradicts or gives equal divine Sonship to another person or persons in the Old or New Testament. However, many references were found in the Old and New Testaments that mentioned someone other than Jesus as having a divine Sonship to God. See Exodus 4:22:

"Israel is my son, even my firstborn." II Samuel 7:14 and I Chronicles 22:10: "...and he shall be my son (Solomon)." Jeremiah 31:9: "...and Ephraim is my firstborn." Also, Psalm 2:7.

The word "Son" must not be accepted literally because God addresses many of his chosen servants as son and sons. The Jews have also claimed Ezra to be the Son of God. The New Testament Greek words used for "son" (pias and paida, which mean servant or son in the sense of servant) are translated as son in reference to Jesus and as servant in reference to others in some translations of the Bible.

Further, the term "Father" as used by Jesus corresponds more closely to the term Rabb, i.e. One who nourishes and sustains, so that in Jesus’ doctrine, God is "Father" – Nourisher and Sustainer – of all men. The New Testament also interprets "son of God" to be mystical: "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." (Romans 8:14). This mystical suggestion is further supported with Jesus being called the only begotten Son of God.

In Psalm 2:7, the Lord said to David:

"...Thou art my son: this day have I begotten thee."

Does this mean that God had two sons? Jesus also said that God is not only his Father but also your Father (Matthew 5:45, 48). Luke 3:38 says:

"...Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the Son of God."

Who is mentioned in Hebrews 7:3 as like unto the Son of God? It is Melchisedec, King of Salem, as mentioned in Hebrews 7:1. He (Melchisedec) is more unique than Jesus or Adam. Why is he not preferred to be the Son of God? Moreover, Adam did not have a mother or father, but was the first human being created by God and in the likeness of God to exist in the Garden of Eden and on earth. Wouldn’t this give more rights to Adam to be called the Son of God in its truest meaning?

I would like to share with you an obvious contradiction between John 3:16, Luke 10:25-28 and Matthew 19:16-17. John 3:16 reads:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten, Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Now let’s read Luke 10:25-28:

And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, what is written in the law? How readest Thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and Thou shalt live.

These verses tell us that the inheritance of eternal life is for anyone who believes and worships no other God, but the One True God. Luke 10:25-28 agrees with Matthew 19:16-17 which says;

"And behold, one came and said to him (Jesus), Good teacher, what good things shall I do that I may have eternal life? So he (Jesus) said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? – No one is good but One that is, God. But if you want to enter into eternal life, keep the commandments."

There is no commandment that says to worship Jesus, but there that tells us to worship God alone.

In Luke 4:41, Jesus refused to be called the Son of God by demons. Do you think that Jesus would rebuke the demons, or anyone else for that matter, for telling the truth? Unquestionably, no! Jesus rebuked the demons because they were saying something false by calling him the Son of God. Also, if the demons knew that Jesus was the Christ, for Jesus to shut them up because they called him the Christ is a contradiction to Jesus’ mission.

In Luke 9:20 & 21, Jesus said unto his disciples:

"But who say ye that I am? Peter answered saying, "The Christ of God, and Jesus straightly charged them and commanded them to tell no man that thing."

Furthermore, verses like John 3:2, John 6:14, John 7:40, Matthew 21:11, Luke 7:16 and 24:19 confirm that Jesus accepted the title of teacher, Prophet and called himself the son of man in Matthew 8:20, 12:40, 17:9 & 12, 26:24, Luke 9:26, 22:48, 22:69, and 24:7. The most conclusive verse that says Jesus is the son (servant) of man is Mark 14:26 where Jesus is mentioning the Day of Reckoning. Jesus specifically said we would see the son of man, not the Son of God, sitting in the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

The act of begetting is a physical act and such act is against God’s nature. The Qur’an 19:35 says:


"It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! When He determines a matter He only says to it "Be," and it is." (Maryam 19:35)

The teachings of Jesus as the Son of God were not preached by Jesus nor accepted by Jesus, but were taught by Paul as supported in Acts 9:20:

"And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God."

Did Jesus ever claim to be God or say, "Here am I, your God, worship me"? The answer is no. For there is no single, unequivocal statement in the Bible whereby Jesus himself declares, "I am God, therefore worship me." Virtually all of the more than two thousand verses of the epistles of Paul are his own fabrications to include Romans 9:5 that says, depending upon which Bible you read:

"...Christ came, who is overall, the eternally blessed God."

Christians should know that Paul himself mentions his own gospel, not Jesus, in his epistle to the Romans when he says in Romans 2:16:

"In the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel."

In face, the Pauline epistle to the Romans serves as the foundation of today’s Christianity. Thus, it is the Christians whose efforts will be wasted in this life as they think they were acquiring good by their works when they attribute partners to God, as stated in Chapter 18:103-106 of the Qur’an:


"Say: Shall we tell you of those who lost most in respect of their deeds? Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life, while they thought that they were acquiring good by their works?" they are those who deny the Signs of their Lord and the fact of their having to meet Him (in the Hereafter): vain will be their works, nor shall We, on the Day of judgment, give them any weight. That is their reward, Hell; because they rejected Faith, and took My Signs and My Messengers by way of jest.
(Al-Kahf 18:103-106)

Indeed, it is so strange and ironic, knowing that none of Paul’s epistle to the Romans, more than 430 verses, were ever formulated by Jesus. Paul should have made direct reference to the pristine teachings of Jesus, if only the former claim for apostleship by divine inspiration was indeed true. Instead, large parts of his epistles’ Biblical quotations (notably those in the Epistle to the Romans) were taken from the Old Testament – Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, Psalms, Proverbs, Isaiah, Ezekiel and Hosea. His epistles were, indeed a product of tedious efforts, but that does not make Paul far better than any of the other men who authored the Bible, nor does it make him a Prophet.

Other practices that were adopted under Paul included the following: the Roman sun-day as the Christian Sabbath; the traditional birthday of the Sun-god as the birthday of Jesus; the emblem of the sun-god (the cross of light) to be the emblem of Christians; and, the incorporation of all the ceremonies which were performed at the Sun-god’s birthday celebrations.

As I come to a close concerning the position of Christ, I would like to ask my Christian reader bow down and pray earnestly to God and ask Him to invoke His curse on you, your wife, your sons, and your daughters if what you believe about Christ (Christ is God, Son of God or part of a trinity of God) are false. Likewise, I have learned that if you asked a Muslim to earnestly pray to God to invoke His curse on him, his wife, his sons, and his daughters if what he is saying about Christ (Prophet, Messenger of God, A Word from God) are false, the Muslims are firm in their faith knowing that Christ is not God, nor the Son of God and nor part of a trinity of God. This exercise of asking God to invoke His curse on you and your family may sound a bit cruel, but it would prove two points: (1) you would know that you are on the wrong path; and, (2) it would put you on the right path.

The Crucifixion and Atonement
A very significant event in the Christian doctrine is the Crucifixion of Jesus. Before talking about the many controversies surrounding the Crucifixion, it should be mentioned that it was a gospel of Paul’s which professed the Crucifixion/Resurrection of Jesus (II Timothy 2:8):

"Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel."

In addition, the gospel of the resurrection in Mark 16:9-20 was already removed from the text by gospel writers in the 1952 edition of the Revised Standard Version and then, for some reasons, restored in the 1971 edition. In many Bibles, if not removed, it is printed in small print or between two brackets and with commentary (See the Revised Standard Version, New American Bible and New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures).

The traditional biblical account of Jesus’ Crucifixion is that he was arrested and crucified by the orders and plans of the chief priest and Jewish elders. This account was denied in the 1960’s by the highest Catholic Christian authority, the Pope. He issued a statement in which he said the Jews had nothing to do with Jesus’ Crucifixion.

Did any one of the disciples or the writers of the Gospel see the Crucifixion or the Resurrection? No! In Mark 14:50, it says the disciples forsook Jesus and fled. Even Peter forsook Jesus after the cock crowed three times as Jesus foretold:

(Matthew 26:75) And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.

The most likely persons whom may have witnessed this moment in Jesus’ life were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, the mother of Zebedee’s children and other women (Matthew 27:55-56). However, there is no statement or account in the Gospels from those women as to what they saw or heard.

The disciple(s) found the sepulchre where Jesus was laid down, empty, and made the conclusion that he was resurrected because the disciples and other witnesses saw him alive after the alleged Crucifixion. Nobody saw the moment he was resurrected. Jesus himself stated that he did not die on the cross in Luke 24:36-41, as explained in the following paragraphs.

Early Sunday morning, Mary Magdalene went to the sepulchre, which was empty. She saw somebody standing who looked like a gardener. She recognized him after a conversation to be Jesus and wanted to touch him. Jesus said (John 20:17):

"Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father..."

Now read Luke 24:36-41:

"And as they (disciples) thus spoke, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and frightened, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are you troubled? And why so thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me end see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of boiled fish and of a honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them."

Does a spiritual or dead body have a need to eat food? Jesus eating of food was to prove to the disciples that he was not a spirit, but rather, he was still alive and not dead.

Jesus being alive and not dead is further supported in his own prophecy (Matthew 12:40):

"For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

Did Jesus fulfill this miracle? Christians would say "yes," because Jesus died and rose three days later according to Luke 24:36 and Matthew 20:19, to name a few verses. However, in line with the miracle of Jonah and according to the Bible, Jesus only spent one day and two nights in the sepulchre, and not three days and three nights as he prophesied.

Jesus was put in the sepulchre just before sunset on Friday (Good Friday) and was found missing before sunrise on Sunday (Easter). If we were to s-t-r-e-t-c-h the time frame a bit, one may say that Jesus spent three days in the earth, but there is no way and I repeat, no way, that Jesus spent three nights in the earth. We must not forget that the Gospels are explicit in telling us that it was "before sunrise" on Sunday morning that Mary Magdalene went to the tomb of Jesus and found it empty.

Consequently, there are some inconsistencies as to whether Jesus fulfilled his own prophecy. Whether he was actually crucified, or if the day (Good Friday) of his alleged Crucifixion is wrong. Another significant point to mention is that Jonah was alive in the belly of the whale. The Christians says, Jesus was dead in the belly of the earth/tomb, and this contradicts Jesus’ own prophecy. Jesus said (Luke 11:30):

"As Jonah was...so shall the Son of man be."

If Jonah was alive, so was Jesus.

One critical event that took place before the alleged Crucifixion was the prayer of Jesus to God for help. Luke 22:42:

"Saying Father if thou be willing, remove this cup (of death) from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine be done."

Jesus’ prayer not to die on the cross was accepted by God according to Luke 22:43 and Hebrews 5:7. Therefore, if all of Jesus’ prayer were accepted by God, including not to die on the cross, how could he have died on the cross?

In Matthew 27:46, it states that while Jesus was on the cross, he said:

"Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani (My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?).

If Jesus said these words, it represents a blatant declaration of disbelief according to all theological authorities. This is a great insult as such words could only come from an unbeliever in God. Further, it is incredible that such words should come from a Prophet of God, because God never breaks His promise and His Prophets never complained against His promise, especially when the Prophet’s mission is understood. It could be said that whoever relates that this statement was said by a Prophet (Jesus), is a disbeliever.

Muslims believe, as the Qur’an states, Jesus was not crucified. It was the intention of his enemies to put him to death on the cross, but Allah saved him from their plot. Qur’an 4:157:

"That they (Jews) said boasting, "We killed Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah, but they (Jews) killed him not, nor crucified him..."

(An Nisa 4:157)

[westcoast]

Hi westcoast.

Allah! There is no god but He,-the Living, the Self-Subsisting, Eternal.

It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).

[Qur'an 3: 2-3]

The Qur'an is the Criterion (Furqan) to verify what was the real message given to Jesus, son of Mary - the Messiah (peace be upon them.)


We believe that Jesus is an honorable Messenger of God, and we believe that he is the Messiah - who will slay the anti christ. He is the servant and Prophet of God, because God is not in need of children. If one was to say that God can have children if He wills, we believe that God only does what befits His Majesty. If God willed, He could pick anyone from among the creation to be His child, but He is way above what they associate with Him.


Don't you see how all the previous prophets called to the worship of God Alone without associating partners with Him? Don't you see the message of Noah, Abraham, Moses? Didn't they call their people to worship God Alone? They never claimed that they were divine, nor did Jesus son of Mary. He ate food, and he drank. He even went to the bathroom like we do. Do you really believe that God would do that?

Remember that I said that God only does what befits His Majesty? Well that fits in with that concept - so God doesn't go to the bathroom. Nor is He in need of any children, rather we are all His servants, and we are obedient to Him. So we worship God Alone, and no-one else. The One who gave us life, the One who provides for us, the One who will cause us to die, and He will bring us back to life and we will be judged on all that we did in this world.


Know that no soul bears the burden of another, and man will only get what he/she strived for. You are responsible for the good and bad you do, and so am i. No-one else is. You have to believe in what was revealed to all the Prophets and not take a pick and mix. Rather we take the whole package. And Muhammad (peace be upon him) recieved the same message as the Prophets of the earlier times - submit to God, your Creator and Provider by obeying His Messenger. If you do, you will be successful, but if you turn away - know that your Creator is Self-Sufficient, and you will be brought to account on the day when every soul will be questioned on what it did in this world.

And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.

I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness.

If You should punish them - indeed they are Your servants; but if You forgive them - indeed it is You who is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.

Allah will say, "This is the Day when the truthful will benefit from their truthfulness." For them are gardens [in Paradise] beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever, Allah being pleased with them, and they with Him. That is the great attainment.

To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is within them. And He is over all things competent.


[Qur'an The Tablecloth [Al Ma'ida] 5: 116-120]

fi sabilah i appreciate you taking time to respond. as i stated before, you're taking the term "Son of God" in the literal sense, hence this quote from your post:
"Nor is He in need of any children"

^To Christians, Jesus and God are one, not 2 distinct entities. Many fail to grasp this concept, and continue to assume that Christians believe that Jesus is indeed literally God's son. as in George Bush president is son of George Bush senior, ex president. that's not how it is.



and to purest ambrosia, i'm sure Jesus is mentioned in the Qu'ran as a messenger, but seeing as how i dont believe in the Qu'ran do you see that it would be pointless to provide proof in a text i dont believe in? I also wont use the Qu'ran to emphasize any of my points regarding Jesus. If only it were simple enough for Muslims NOT to use the Bible as proof of Muhammad's prophethood, seeing as how they do not believe in the Bible.

waka waka

[- Qatada -]

The difference is that we can actually use the arguments from Qur'an because many stories are mentioned of the children of Israel from there, even though the Messenger of Allaah himself was illiterate, he never had any contact with the jews or christians either in Makkah, and this is when alot of the stories of the earlier Prophets from the children of Israeel were revealed.

It also states many things which will happen in the future, like on the day of judgement.


If i were to ask you what the trinity is - you probably wouldn't be able to explain it well [no offense intended.] However, if we use common sense and go back to the message of the previous prophets - the main laws were that your Lord is One, and that others besides Him shouldn't be worshipped.

So why is it that Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him)'s message would be totally different to the rest of the Prophets messages? Isn't that a contradiction that your Lord is One. And isn't it common sense that 3 doesn't equal 1? God doesn't make religion hard for us to grasp, especially matters of creed and faith. Especially things which depend wholely on salvation.


Rather your God is One God, the One who created you from a drop of fluid, then gave you life and provides for you, then He causes you to die, and then He brings us back to life and we return to Him, this day we will be judged by Him, the Most Just. Those who obeyed all the Messengers will succeed and be entered into paradise, whereas those who rejected God and His Messengers will be punished for their disbelief.


Doesn't that make much more sense, isn't that the same message as all the previous prophets? Following a religion just because ones forefathers followed it is totally looked down upon in the sight of God, rather we seek the truth by using the logic and sense which God has bestowed upon us. I hope you may use your intelligence and wisdom to find the truth, because if you are sincere - God will make you successful in this world and the hereafter.



Regards.

[جوري]

and to purest ambrosia, i'm sure Jesus is mentioned in the Qu'ran as a messenger, but seeing as how i dont believe in the Qu'ran do you see that it would be pointless to provide proof in a text i dont believe in? I also wont use the Qu'ran to emphasize any of my points regarding Jesus. If only it were simple enough for Muslims NOT to use the Bible as proof of Muhammad's prophethood, seeing as how they do not believe in the Bible.

waka waka

You don't believe in the Quran... yet it does exist independent of your belief! .... and show you how much you know .... as far as I am concerned you don't know the first thing about Muslims... if you did then you'd not have volunteered yourself to make such foolish statements... hide your ignorance or read up before a debate pls.

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللّهِ وَمَلآئِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ وَقَالُواْ سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ {285}

[Pickthal 2:285] The messenger believeth in that which hath been revealed unto him from his Lord and (so do) believers. Each one believeth in Allah and His angels and His scriptures and His messengers - We make no distinction between any of His messengers - and they say: We hear, and we obey. (Grant us) Thy forgiveness, our Lord. Unto Thee is the journeying.


lastly we have quoted you loads of verses from the bible in the post preceding this one so at this point until you read up and do some homework there really is no point in engaging you!... When I debate I like it when the other party has at least an acceptable baseline of knowledge... I will not loan myself to sub par debate... This isn't the coba cabana-- this is a respectful forum... What are you ... two with a temper tantrum?

[westcoast]

long quote removed

i read all of that, believe it or not
and the best part was the quote about the jehova's witnesses finding all the "contradictions" in the bible, which i guess you'd use it as proof of it being invalid, correct?
Yet somehow Muslims find themselves using this "contradictory" text to prove Muhammad's prophethood. Where does any of this make sense?
Even if this were true, how does this prove there is corruption in the original Greek manuscripts from which the King James version was translated?
and since the Qu'ran doesnt directly translate from the original Arabic to English, is this proof that the Qu'ran is corrupted? I dont speak a word of arabic, and the Qu'ran's i've read are English translations. I suppose they're all corrupt as well.

thanks for the effort though

[- Qatada -]

Anything which is a translation isn't Qur'an ^ it's simply a translation. We also believe that the Gospel was revealed to Jesus peace be upon him, yet you know that today it doesn't remain in the language which Jesus recieved it in. Some christians say that Jesus spoke Aramaic, and may have spoken Greek - whatever the case - the earliest manuscripts which can be found are 300years after Jesus son of Mary was raised to God, not any earlier.

Therefore the authenticity of the bible is doubtful, and depending on what denomination you're from - you're likely to differ on what translation you have. We have the Qur'an in the original language, which was written by the companions of the final Messenger of Allaah, Muhammad (peace be upon him) and therefore we don't need to doubt its authenticity.

[westcoast]

You don't believe in the Quran... yet it does exist independent of your belief! .... and show you how much you know .... as far as I am concerned you don't know the first thing about Muslims... if you did then you'd not have volunteered yourself to make such foolish statements... hide your ignorance or read up before a debate pls.

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللّهِ وَمَلآئِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لاَ نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ وَقَالُواْ سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ {285}

[Pickthal 2:285] The messenger believeth in that which hath been revealed unto him from his Lord and (so do) believers. Each one believeth in Allah and His angels and His scriptures and His messengers - We make no distinction between any of His messengers - and they say: We hear, and we obey. (Grant us) Thy forgiveness, our Lord. Unto Thee is the journeying.


lastly we have quoted you loads of verses from the bible in the post preceding this one so at this point until you read up and do some homework there really is no point in engaging you!... When I debate I like it when the other party has at least an acceptable baseline of knowledge... I will not loan myself to sub par debate... This isn't the coba cabana-- this is a respectful forum... What are you ... two with a temper tantrum?

why even quote the bible to begin with, especially if you DO NOT BELIEVE IN IT
you wont see me quoting the Qu'ran in attempts to prove anything about Jesus, but rather, if i quote the Qu'ran it would be strictly to probe or question its content. Every quote you post from the Qu'ran is pointless especially if your attempting to negate Christian beliefs, for the most obvious reason in the world, that we dont believe in it
and its funny how you continue to whine about "i hate this debate its not as fun as other debates you dont know anything " yet you continue to reply to me and copy and paste all kinds of quotes and passages

make up your mind buddy.

[Umar001]

i dont know if you're from england or if english is your 2nd language but i really cannot understand what you're asking or saying.
example:
"First, did Moses only write Dueteronomy 18:18"

^ what? and the analogy of u used is really confusing..
im sorry i couldnt respond accordingly, i just dont know what to make of your post lol

Lol, you made a big rave about how muslim can use the Bible for what ever they use it for. I gave you an example of how a document can in fact testify to the truth or false hood of statements with regards to the content of a previous similar document.

As for me question asto whether Moses only wrote Dueteronomy 18, I asked that because you seemed to use a statement from the Gospel according to John to kind of imply that when it was said If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me." (John 5:46) it meant that Dueteronomy 18 was about Jesus.

You made a major fallacy, that being that you assumed that, if we believe John recorded Jesus' words, that Jesus was referring to Dueteronomy 18 whilst Jesus could be referring to any other part of Mosaic Scripture.

Eesa.

[جوري]

i read all of that, believe it or not
and the best part was the quote about the jehova's witnesses finding all the "contradictions" in the bible, which i guess you'd use it as proof of it being invalid, correct?
Yet somehow Muslims find themselves using this "contradictory" text to prove Muhammad's prophethood. Where does any of this make sense?
Even if this were true, how does this prove there is corruption in the original Greek manuscripts from which the King James version was translated?
and since the Qu'ran doesnt directly translate from the original Arabic to English, is this proof that the Qu'ran is corrupted? I dont speak a word of arabic, and the Qu'ran's i've read are English translations. I suppose they're all corrupt as well.

thanks for the effort though

??? what you are writing here is a Non Sequitur!--- compounded by your strange ability to both pose and answer your own questions... Again, and this really is the last time... until you read up and can provide something other than a belief or a subjective view and strip it from both fallacy and insolence toward Muslims, can you expect a reply back. We get people like you every now and then they either reform, move on or educate themselves so they have proper armament for an honest debate.

peace!

[Umar001]

why even quote the bible to begin with, especially if you DO NOT BELIEVE IN IT
you wont see me quoting the Qu'ran in attempts to prove anything about Jesus, but rather, if i quote the Qu'ran it would be strictly to probe or question its content. Every quote you post from the Qu'ran is pointless especially if your attempting to negate Christian beliefs, for the most obvious reason in the world, that we dont believe in it
and its funny how you continue to whine about "i hate this debate its not as fun as other debates you dont know anything " yet you continue to reply to me and copy and paste all kinds of quotes and passages

make up your mind buddy.

You've just answered your own question.

You ask:

why even quote the bible to begin with, especially if you DO NOT BELIEVE IN IT

Well why do you think lol, you answered:

Every quote you post from the Qu'ran is pointless especially if your attempting to negate Christian beliefs, for the most obvious reason in the world, that we dont believe in it

Theres not much point in us telling you Jesus is not son of God because the Qu'ran says so.

Nice debate with yourself right there

[westcoast]

Anything which is a translation isn't Qur'an ^ it's simply a translation. We also believe that the Gospel was revealed to Jesus peace be upon him, yet you know that today it doesn't remain in the language which Jesus recieved it in. Some christians say that Jesus spoke Aramaic, and may have spoken Greek - whatever the case - the earliest manuscripts which can be found are 300years after Jesus son of Mary was raised to God, not any earlier.

Therefore the authenticity of the bible is doubtful, and depending on what denomination you're from - you're likely to differ on what translation you have. We have the Qur'an in the original language, which was written by the companions of the final Messenger of Allaah, Muhammad (peace be upon him) and therefore we don't need to doubt its authenticity.

and the earliest copy of the qu'ran was written exactly how many years after muhammad died?
and of course there aren't ANY contradictions in the Qu'ran, because it is the epitome of perfection isnt it?
Explain the different accounts/descriptions of how man was created:
"Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood," (96:2).
We created man from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape, (15:26).
"The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was," (3:59).
"But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?" (19:67, Yusuf Ali). Also, 52:35).
"He has created man from a sperm-drop; and behold this same (man) becomes an open disputer! (16:4).

so according to the perfect, infallible Qu'ran, man was made from blood clots, clay, dust, nothing, and sperm?

[- Qatada -]

Hi westcoast.


The earliest copy was written within one year after the Messenger of Allaah, Muhammad (peace be upon him) passed away. There is an Uthmani copy which is within the Museum of Istanbul today, you can even see the pictures here inshaa Allaah [God willing.]

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Qur...s/topkapi.html


By the way, i really hope you don't keep posting anti islamic articles on the site - because it's against forum rules.

But for the benefit of the doubt, since you're new here, i'll quote you the answer to that question:

The Quran says in sura 96.1 & 96.2 that man was created from a blood clot, but 21.3 & 24.45 says from water,19.67 from nothing, 3.59 & 35.11 from clay, 15.26 from mud and 16.4 & 75.37 says from a thickened liquid. Which part of the Quran is wrong?

What was Man created from?

The allegation is as follows:

What was man created from? A blood clot [96:1-2], water [21:30, 24:45, 25:54], "sounding" (i.e. burned) clay [15:26], dust [3:59, 30:20, 35:11], nothing [19:67] and this is then denied in 52:35, earth [11:61], a drop of thickened fluid [16:4, 75:37]

The obvious explanation to this question is that these references describe different aspects or stages in man's creation. This has always been the understanding of such verses.

We will give a brief explanation of each verse, while presenting them in chronological order.

Most of the references refer to two different aspects of creation: Original creation and Embryological development.
Original creation
19:67 Does not man remember that We created him before, and he was nothing?
The phrase and he was nothing is the translation of the arabic wa lam yaku shay. Some confusion may have resulted because Yusuf Ali's translation renders it as out of nothing, which is not very accurate at all. The phrase literally means, and he was nothing.

Hence, this verse states that human beings were nothing, and Allah brought us into existence. This is a tremendous favour bestowed upon us, that we may be thankful to Allah swt.

This is allegedly in contradiction to the following verse:

52:35 Were they created by nothing, or were they themselves the creators?
Ibn Kathir Ad-Damishqi (d.1372CE) has explained this verse as follows in his renowned Tafsir Al-Qur'an Al-Azim:

Allah asks them, were they created without a maker or did they create themselves Neither is true. Allah is the One Who created them and brought them into existence after they were nothing.(Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, 2000, vol. 9, p. 297)

Hence, this verse is not in contradiction to the previous verse at all, after closer examination. Even if we choose to translate verse 52:35 as "Were they created from nothing..." it would also be correct as Allah swt developed the human being from previously created substances.

20:55 Thereof (the earth) We created you, and into it We shall return you, and from it We shall bring you out once again

The original creation of Adam pbuh was from the dust of the earth.

30:20 Among His Signs is this, that He created you from dust; and then,- behold, ye are men scattered (far and wide)!

This dust was then mixed with water to produce what is mentioned in the following verse:
15:26 And indeed, We created man from dried (sounding) clay of altered mud [min hama’in masnoon]

An interesting commentary on these verses has been provided here:
http://harunyahya.com/miracles_of_the_quran_p1_08.php#1

Sheikh Muhammad Mutwalli Ash-Sha`rawi also comments:

If we take dust and add water to it, it will be mud. If it is left for some time, it will turn into clay. These are simply the stages of the creation of man. Man thus comes from dust, turned into clay after the addition of water. If we scrutinize this issue, we will find out that man, in his daily life, needs earth and depends on it in so many aspects. It is this earthy soil where we grow the plants upon which we live. Thus, preserving the materials of man depends on the source from which these materials are created.


Scientists have analyzed the human body and found that it is composed of 16 substances including oxygen and manganese. These elements are no more than the elements of the earth?s crust. This experiment was not meant for proving the credibility of the Qur'an; rather, it was solely for scientific research purposes.


In addition, death itself serves as a proof of creation. When we try to demolish a building, we follow the reverse order of building it; we start with the last floor. By the same token, since we have not eye-witnessed the creation of man, then we shall see how death occurs. Actually, we witness several deaths everyday. When man dies, his soul leaves his body, then the decline starts; his body becomes dry (which is similar to the stage of clay) and then decays and turns finally into dust which was his original substance. Life is given to man through the soul that is blown into his body. When the soul departs, man dies and starts his way back to his original form going through the stages of his first creation. Thus, death stands as a living proof for creation (SOURCE)

21:30...We made of water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
This verse explains that all living things are composed of water.

Dr. Zakir Naik has commented on the above verse by saying:

Only after advances have been made in science, do we now know that cytoplasm, the basic substance of the cell is made up of 80% water. Modern research has also revealed that most organisms consist of 50% to 90% water and that every living entity requires water for its existence. Was it possible 14 centuries ago for any human-being to guess that every living being was made of water? Moreover would such a guess be conceivable by a human being in the deserts of Arabia where there has always been scarcity of water? (SOURCE)

The following link also comments on this:
http://www.-----------------------/scientific_58.html

Embryological development

16:4 He has created man from a nutfah; and behold this same (man) becomes an open disputer!

Dr. Omar Abdul Rehman has explained this as follow:

Nutfah (The drop)

Al-Nutfah in Arabic means a drop or a small part of fluid and Nutfah in general describes a stage where the beginnings of a human being are found in this fluid (Ref: 6A, 12/6; 17/118; 19/120: 13A, 3/436: 15A, 17/116: 1C, 2/121: 7B, 3/116: 4D, 9/235-6: 5D, 6/258: 4A, 30/234: 7A, 4/336: 10A, 13/9: 12A, 4/288). Its real meaning can only be deduced from the text of Qur'an; evidently it is a comprehensive term and includes male and female gametes and part of their natural environments of fluid. It also includes zygote, morula and blastocyst till implantation in the uterus. This is illustrated by the following citation:

"was he not a drop or part of germinal fluid (Mani) emitted or programmed" (Surah Al- Qiyama, Ayah 37)

Here "Mani" means male or female germinal fluid (Ref: 1D, 5/276: 5D, 10/348:2D, 6/2497).

The Prophet's Hadith confirms the fact that the offspring is created from part of the germinal fluids.

"Not from all the fluid is the offspring created"

(Sahih. Muslim: Kitab Al-Nekah, Bab Al-Azl)

It is also known that not all parts of the ejaculate are equally potent in the fertilisation process. "In the first portion of the ejaculate are the spermatozoa, epididymal fluids, and the secretions from the Cowper and prostate gland fluids. In the last portions of the ejaculate are the secretions of the seminal vesicles. Most spermatozoa appear in the first part of the ejaculate, which is made primarily of prostatic secretions. Thus spermatozoa in the initial portion of the ejaculate have better motility and survival than those in the later portions, which are chiefly vesicular in origin". (SOURCE)

And concerning the verse:
96:2 Created man, out of a (mere) clot of an Alaqah
Dr. Omar Abdul Rehman states:

The 'Alaqah stage

"Then (thumm) We made the drop into an 'Alaqah". (Surah Al-Mu 'minun, Ayah 14)

In Arabic the word ‘Alaqah in fact has several meanings;

• 
  
  something which clings or a suspended thing (Ref: 7B, 5/440: 1D, 4/125: 2D, 4/1529: 3D, 343: 4D, 10/267: 5D, 7/20)
• a leech-like structure (Ref: 9A, 3/242: 20A, 2/281: 7B, 5/139: 2D, 4/1529: 3D, 343: 4D, 10/267)

Amazingly each of these terms can be applied to the developing embryo with stunning precision. All of these terms encompassed by the word ‘Alaqah describe the appearance of the embryo as well as its relationship with the womb. From the discussion below it becomes clear that the embryo resembles a primitive multicellular organism which is attached to a host and feeding on its blood.

a) something which clings

Modern science informs us that once the egg has been fertilised in the Fallopian tube it undergoes successive divisions to form a ball like structure of 12-16 cells by the third day. This structure is called a blastocyst and it reaches the uterus in 4 to 5 days. The blastocyst then lies free in the uterine secretions for a further 2 days. About a week after fertilisation the blastocyst begins to attach and implant into the uterine wall. By the 11th to 12th day it is completely embedded in the uterine wall. At this stage chorionic villosities begin to develop like roots in the soil, these draw nourishment from the uterus necessary for the blastocyst's growth. These formations cover the whole blastocyst and make it literally cling to the uterus. By the end of the second week implantation is complete. Inside the blastocyst the embryo is anchored to the wall of the chorionic cavity by a connecting stalk. Hence, these different ways of clinging and attachment seem to represent the most dominant features from day 7 to 21, and are perfectly described in the Qur'anic description by the word ‘Alaqah. For greater detail see S. Hussain (1986) ‘Al-‘Alaq:the mystery explored, Ark Journal, London, pp. 31-36.

b) a suspended thing

The 3 week old embryo inside the blastocyst which is embedded in the uterine wall is seen to be suspended in the chorionic cavity by means of the connecting stalk and is surrounded by the amniotic cavity and the yolk sac. Therefore, the term ‘Alaqah accurately describes the suspended embryo after it has been implanted.

c) a leech-like structure

The word ‘Alaqah can also be translated as ‘leech like structure'. The leech is a elongated pear shaped creature which thrives on blood sucking. At this stage of development the embryo from top view does bear a resemblance to a leech. This resemblance is even more marked if the 24 day old embryo is seen from the side. It is also interesting to note that the embryo is now dependent on the maternal blood for its nutrition and behaves very much like a leech!. (For greater detail see Moore, KL. ‘A scientists interpretation of references to embryology in the Qur'an.' Journal of the Islamic Medical Association of US and Canada, 1986, 18:15, and Moore, KL. and Azzindani, AMA.: "The Developing Human, Clinically Orientated Embryology, With Islamic Additions". 3rd Ed., Dar Al-Qiblah and WB Saunders).

In conclusion, whichever of the above terms are used to translate the word ‘Alaqah they are all stunningly accurate descriptions of the embryo at this stage in it's development as confirmed by modern science.

There is a gap of a few days between the stages of implantation (Nutfah) and 'Alaqah and this period is clearly explained by the above Ayah:

The word "Thumm" in Arabic is a conjunction indicating a time lag and the Ayah will, therefore, mean that after some time we created the "Nutfah" into 'Alaqah. (SOURCE)

These explanations make it evident that each verse is describing different stages in the creation of man.

[westcoast]

You made a major fallacy, that being that you assumed that, if we believe John recorded Jesus' words, that Jesus was referring to Dueteronomy 18 whilst Jesus could be referring to any other part of Mosaic Scripture.

Eesa.

yes, he could, and what other part of the scripture could he be referring to? Why would he even mention Moses if not for that passage? You'll be hard pressed to find any other possible explanation to that quoted passage from John.

[Umar001]

yes, he could, and what other part of the scripture could he be referring to? Why would he even mention Moses if not for that passage? You'll be hard pressed to find any other possible explanation to that quoted passage from John.

So let me ask you, within the 5 books of Moses there is no other prophecy about Jesus?

You assume a point and then try to prove it. Amazing.