Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Prophecised in other Scriptures.

Graceseeker:

It is not your belief we found offensive. You are free to believe whatever you want and to dismiss whatever you want. That has no effect on us whatsoever. What we did find offensive was your very poor and disrespectful analogy of a baseball team and what you said about our Prophet. There were a million ways you could have said why you can't accept Muhammed, pbuh, as a Prophet, without insulting our beliefs and our Prophet, especially considering this is an Islamic forum. It would be nice to use actual facts that support your belief or understanding rather than a created analogy.

Of course you are still welcome here and I don't think anyone suggested differently. You, unfortunately, chose to write an analogy that some of us found extremely offensive. I suspect this wasn't your intent, but I sincerely hope you can see why some of us were somewhat upset by your choice of words.

This is, and can continue to be, an interesting topic and your thoughts, ideas, etc., are certainly welcome.

Please understand that none of us are in a position to bring you to Islam, it is only Allah, swt, that guides. As much as we would be extremely happy to welcome you into the folds of Islam, we know that is not our call. That is between you and Allah, swt. As for answering your questions and doing our best to teach you about Islam, that is our duty. We must do that and we are happy to do that. So, no, we don't answer because we believe you will immediately leave Christianity and embrace Islam. (It took me years!!)

What happened, happened and we can't change that, so let's just leave it in the past and move forward. There is no reason why we can't discuss and reason together without expectations. You will not accept Islam because we say so, just as we will not accept Christianity because you say so, but we can talk about why we believe the way we do. Learn for the sake of learning...nothing more.

With peace,
Hana

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

I was referring to prophecies from the Koran/Mohammad's own prophecies that he himself could not fulfill.

that is not the purpose of this thread which is:
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Prophecised in other Scriptures.

The fact that you believe some content from the Bible is relevant does not mean they are. You may believe they are relevant to anybody you choose,

as apparently YOU do

but it is not supported by a proper analysis of all relevant material.

we believe that any material that is not consistent with THE WORSHIP OF THE ONE TRUE GOD AND THE OBEYANCE OF HIS LAW is faulty and erroneous, therefor not relevant for faith.

The problem is basically that you choose parts that could somehow be made applicable, but reject that which is contrary to your belief system

again, we reject anything not consistent with THE WORSHIP OF THE ONE TRUE GOD AND THE OBEYANCE OF HIS LAW

- claiming that there is no proof that for instance Jesus said something.

again, there are no contemporaneous records of what Jesus spoke, THEREFORE: we reject anything not consistent with THE WORSHIP OF THE ONE TRUE GOD AND THE OBEYANCE OF HIS LAW and we defer to the Revelation given to the Rasulullah Mohammad ibn Abdullah, Salla Allahu Alaihe Wa Salaam by Allah, Subhannahu Wa Ta' Aala through the "Holy Spirit" Jibreel/Gabriel, Alaihe Salaam

Peace be upon those who follow the guidance,

that's a brief basic outline of where we differ in case you were not aware. we do not shy away from it as we are proud of it and Alhumdlillah that Allah, Subhannahu Wa Ta' Aala has guided us to Islam!

format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku

Graceseeker:

It is not your belief we found offensive. You are free to believe whatever you want and to dismiss whatever you want. That has no effect on us whatsoever. What we did find offensive was your very poor and disrespectful analogy of a baseball team and what you said about our Prophet. There were a million ways you could have said why you can't accept Muhammed, pbuh, as a Prophet, without insulting our beliefs and our Prophet, especially considering this is an Islamic forum. It would be nice to use actual facts that support your belief or understanding rather than a created analogy.

Well, as I said, and I am glad you accept, it was not my intent to offend. I see absolutely no value in being offensive to Islam or any religion, and especially not to my friends. I was trying to respond to the "proof" that Yusuf had presented:

so, the Prophets came to "RE-ESTABLISH THE WORSHIP OF THE ONE TRUE GOD AND THE OBEYANCE OF HIS LAW"; which is EXACTLY what Islam is!! AND this message is for ALL TIMES!! which by the way is proof of existence of islam before Muhammed's[Salla Allahu Alaihe Wa Salaam] times."

And I thought an analogy might be the best way to show the fallacy in his "proof". It wasn't meant to disrespect Muhammad (pbuh) any more than my words above. And I do regret that I offended so many here.

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker

Well, as I said, and I am glad you accept, it was not my intent to offend. I see absolutely no value in being offensive to Islam or any religion, and especially not to my friends. I was trying to respond to the "proof" that Yusuf had presented:

so, the Prophets came to "RE-ESTABLISH THE WORSHIP OF THE ONE TRUE GOD AND THE OBEYANCE OF HIS LAW"; which is EXACTLY what Islam is!! AND this message is for ALL TIMES!! which by the way is proof of existence of Islam before Muhammed's[Salla Allahu Alaihe Wa Salaam] times."

And I thought an analogy might be the best way to show the fallacy in his "proof". It wasn't meant to disrespect Muhammad (pbuh) any more than my words above. And I do regret that I offended so many here.

Peace be upon those who follow the guidance,

actually there's no fallacy in my proof;

1) the Jews have stated their position on the objectives of the Prophets in the Torah & Tanakh, which is:

the Prophets came to "RE-ESTABLISH THE WORSHIP OF THE ONE TRUE GOD AND THE OBEYANCE OF HIS LAW"; this covers those that came with new messages as well as those who just called for the return to obedience

2) which is EXACTLY what Islam is!!

3) AND [Islam] is for ALL TIMES!!

4) (all of) which by the way is proof of existence of Islam before Muhammed's[Salla Allahu Alaihe Wa Salaam] times."

PLUS we can add:

5) The Prophet's [Salla Allahu Alaihe Wa Salaam] Ummah IS prophesied in the Torah [at least twice]!

i don't believe any of those facts are disputable! one might misunderstand or just plain refuse to be believe them...

in Islam worshipping the Prophets such as this:

Jesus is worthy of worship,

is fallacy as well as shirk, no matter how many times that you try to tell us different.

In the Name of Allāh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful
Peace and Blessings be upon His servant and messenger Muhammad.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

The question would not be about perceptions but about whether Muhammad passes the "test" as far as the specific paragraph is concerned as well as a considerable number of other prophesies re the prophet that will appear. It would be very helpful to learn about. prophecies by Muhammad that he was not personally able to influence.
You seem to accept the Old Testament ( as you use this to substantiate your claim) and you are thus free to quote other verses that further substantiate your claim.

If I understand your point correctly, Muhammad if he is the Prophet referred to in Deu 18:18 must fulfill this part:

When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

I want to make note of one thing, which interests me, that if the 'prophet' speaks of a thing which does not come to pass, meaning he has made an error, then he has done wrong, notice though that he is still referred to as a prophet. As for our conversation.

Now the question arrives, are there prophecies by[??] Muhammad that he was not personally able to influence.

I will say yes, more than I know of, I have only seen a handful in my short study, I have heard in lectures of others but have never researched them.

Qatadah provided a link with different prophecies, varying, you commented on the post-

Just re read and I am confused, now, having read your reply am confused. Are you asking for Prophecies which Muhammad made, i.e. him fulfilling the role of making prophecies as indicated in the text above from Deu. Or are you asking, this is what it seems, for other Prophecies from the Old Testament with regards to Muhammad being a prophet?

I will assume you are asking the second, and I will counter with a question, on an assumption you seem to hold:

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

as well as a considerable number of other prophesies re the prophet that will appear.

You assume that other prophecies, if there are any, refer to the same prophet as Deuteronomy 18, what is that assumption based on?

You again state:

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

You see, there are more than one "by the way" reference to the prophet that was to be born. Will gladly provide references in case you are not quite aware.

You see there is a hidden assumption, that all these Prophecies refer to the same Prophet. You will need to provide evidence that they do, tell us what makes you think so, before we can answer possible questions which branch from there, such as, does the Prophet refered to in Deu 18 have to be the same as, for example, Isa 9.

I hope that is clear and understandable, thanks for your patient and look forward to the reply,

Servant of the Almighty,
Eesa

P.s. I do not accept the Old Testament, nor any book from Genesis to Revelations, whether from a Catholic Bible nor Protestant as the word of God.

I accept them as records of men, not inspired as such, which may contain remnants of teachings including prophecies and accurate incidents, biographies, of past Prophets, Messengers and Righteous individuals.

In the Name of Allāh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful
Peace and Blessings be upon His servant and messenger Muhammad.

I would like to show my happyness at the opportunity to have a discussion with you. I would also like remind myself and others that we are all from the first man Adaam, peace be upon him, and God willing we all have the same goal in life, to attain the pleasure of the Creator of the Creation. With this we should bear in mind that we also have a common enemy, namely satan.

I would like to focus then on parts, so not as to get lost in conversation.

The Trinity and various beliefs.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

It is sometimes a problem that we have an idea and look for support in the Scriptures. This will often lead to wrong conclusions. The proper way is to let the Scripture speak and then come to conclusions.

I agree, the coming up with an idea/belief and finding evidence is so prominent and works so well that we have such a variety of Christians now days. Trinitarians and non.

We need to realise the historical context, I do not think that Scripture, Christian, is as clear as you would like to think. Many verses can be interpreted in various ways, Jehova's Witnesses have a different fundamental belief than others, yet read a similar book.

Historically there were different groups in Early Christianity, some said Jesus was only Divine, he didn't really die, but it was only a fake body. Others said no, Jesus was only human, he had no divine in him. The Orthodox disagreed with the first group and agreed also, and the same with the second, thus Jesus was divine (agreeing with the first group and disagreeing with the second) but was also human (agreeing with the second group but disagreeing with the first). Things became complicated though. Scripture that you have now was written against this background, textual variants amongst the manuscripts have been found, where scribes have tried to edit or change words so as to provide evidence for their theological view.

Now, I do not think it possible that an individual would read the Bible, even the one you have, from cover to cover and think of a trinity. The one verse you cite as explicit, has been edited out of the Bibles by scholars as not true.

Prophecies Fulfilled by Jesus

You previously had provided a criterion for prophecies. You said:

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

It would be very helpful to learn about. prophecies by Muhammad that he was not personally able to influence.

So Jesus must have not been able to influence the Prophecy.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

Mic 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

Now, I do agree that Jesus cannot choose the place where he is born, but what I will debate is whether the sources we have could have edited or played a part in this. What I mean is, could it be possible that the Gospel Authors could have made Jesus fit this prophecy.

I think it is possible, you have show us why it is not possible, and do this for all the prophecies!

I personally do believe that the Authors did try to make Jesus fulfill prophecies.

So I leave you with that as my question/request, evidence.

Prophecies towards Jesus only?

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

The words "trinity" is nowhere found in the Bible. The concept was however formed to try and explain what Scripture reveals to us (See very last paragraph).
...
So you can see that God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are not creations of Christians, but is evident in the Holy Scriptures, and not taken out of context to make it fit preconceived conclusions.

It is sometimes a problem that we have an idea and look for support in the Scriptures. This will often lead to wrong conclusions. The proper way is to let the Scripture speak and then come to conclusions.

I trust that this will somehow help a little. There are many more that tie up, but space does not allow it.

Please be assured that I am not trying to pull the wool over your eyes, or misrepresent information. If my sole purpose was to win an argument, it will be a futile exercise as it will not change the truth. At best, we can put points across, but the result is not in our hands.

You ask some pertinent questions but I trust that the information supplied will help. I am more than willing to investigate anything that does not seem to tally.

I have yet to see what evidence there is that the prophecies are all of Jesus, I do realise that this might be the common Christian position, but what evidence is there that the authors of the Prophecies were intending them all to be solely for Jesus, just because later authors, maybe such as the Gospel authors, understood them to be only for Jesus does not mean that the original authors of the prophecies which came many years earlier, as some boast, meant them all to be for Jesus.

We need to see evidence for why we should interpret Due 18 to be speaking about the same prophet as Micah 5 etc. (if micah was speaking about a prophet).

I invite you to purify your heart and open your mind, to abstain from preconcieved ideas and resist temptations and search for God, I ask the God of Abraham, Noah, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad to open our eyes and ears and hearts to his guidance.

format_quote Originally Posted by MustafaMc

(Putting the sarcasm aside)...but were those "early church leaders" exclusive owners of the Truth. If Muhammad (saaws) was actually a Prophet of Allah, as we Muslims believe, would not what he have recited of the Divine Revelation (Quran) to him be the Truth regarding Jesus (as) even if it was in direct contradiction of what the NT authors and the early church leaders said?

As the information is contradictory. either the Bible or the Quran is true - the other is a lie. You cannot marry the two.

Welcome back and hope all is well,

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

Yes, for this reason, the reliance on the Holy Spirit is so important. We are all human and will make mistakes. There are however a few basic aspects that all true Christians believe - including the fact that Jesus died on the cross for the sin of people. It is quite evident what Satan wants to do - reject the deity of Christ, his sacrifice on the cross and resurrection. Remove that and people still sit in their sin , however good persons they are and believe all else in the Bible. If you reject these few basic aspects, you have a lot of nice (or not so nice) people still in their sin - exactly what Satan wants.

Well you see, in early Christianity there may have been some who believed that the death of Jesus was not what was important, how do you know that those type of Christians were not the Christians that were following Jesus' true message and that Satan has not decieved you?

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

What is the central message of the Quran?

The regonition of the Lordship of the One God, the Creator, through this recognition and acknowledgement one is then to build a reletionship in servitude and submission with love, fear and hope.

We have still to discuss the prophecies, which was brought up in the previous posts.

I still do think it is possible for Muhammad to have been prophecied in the Old and New Testament.

format_quote Originally Posted by Faizah

I think tawheed is more than that.

Wa Alaykum Salam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatu, go ahead sister..correct me please.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

The death of Christ is a central element of Christianity - something that was recognised and recorded by His followers, His opposition (The Sanhedrin), as well as those totally committed to normal recording of history. If Jesus did not die,and did not rise again, we would all still be with our sin.

No, you see, you need to be objective. The death of Christ is not something which is central to all Christian sects, some did not believe that. I don't dispute that some claimed it was, of course, but there were Christians who did not believe that! The question I am asking you, how do you know that this is what Jesus preached!?

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

From the very beginning, sacrifices were made (animals) - showing that a sacrifice of blood was necessary for forgiveness of sins. This however all pointed towards the complete sacrifice - someone without any sin, who took the penalty for our sin on Him by shedding His blood on the cross. This was also prophesied Isa 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

This is your, along side with many others, interpretation and retrospective looking into the scriptures. Even in the old testament, was sacrafise with blood the only way for atonement?

As for Isaiah, I won't go into the different interprettations, because not everyone interprets it like you do or how Christians do, rather the Jews have other interpretations, which also affect translations and understanding.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

How is this transfered in the Quran? How is love shown in the Quran?

An example, take the first chapter:

Allah, the Exalted, said, `I have divided the prayer (Al-Fatihah) into two halves between Myself and My servant, and My servant shall have what he asks for.' If he says,

(All praise and thanks be to Allah, the Lord of existence.)

Allah says, `My servant has praised Me.' When the servant says,

(The Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.)

Allah says, `My servant has glorified Me.' When he says,

(The Owner of the Day of Recompense.)

Allah says, `My servant has glorified Me,' or `My servant has related all matters to Me.' When he says,

(You (alone) we worship, and You (alone) we ask for help.)

Allah says, `This is between Me and My servant, and My servant shall acquire what he sought.' When he says,

(Guide us to the straight path. The way of those on whom You have granted Your grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your anger, nor of those who went astray),

Allah says, `This is for My servant, and My servant shall acquire what he asked for.').

You see, with the guidance of Almighty God from the Qur'an I can build a reletionship, He wants me to meet Him, speak to Him, at least 5 times a day, not for His benefit but for mine, He cares about His servants and so He commands for them what is good.

This and more.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

If you take a verse here and there, you may even make some of the prophecies fit a lot of people.

Well then I guess that's the individual writer's fault for not indicating an accurate enough prophecy.

Also, do we have a reason for taking a verse here and there? I believe we do, for example, the fact that scholars write that the Gospels contain different stages of writings, and to recover the Original words we have to see the stages,

I The words and actions of the Historical Jesus.
II The Oral Traditions
III The writings of the Gospels

Now, it is possible that some of the material from stage I made it through to stage III, maybe just one verse in a whole chapter maybe more, so that is my justification for picking verses here and there.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

As mentioned earlier, you reduce the likelihood of that happening by making these all as requirements for one person to meet.

Unless you can show evidence from the authors of the prophecy that we should use this type of method to put the prophecies together then this is only your opinion. It is like me prophecing something and then a man coming later saying 'You have to understand this prophecy like this' I would ask, how do you know? I understand your logic behind what you are saying but it is not what the original authors wrote, that's the problem!

Regards Eesa.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

It is such a pity as that is the reason Jesus came to earth. I do not dispute that there are really weird sects that claim to be "Christian", but anybody with even a superficial message of the Bible will be able to confirm its central position.

It may be the central position in your bible, but you do realise that different sects had different scriptures? Early sects had their writing which they believed, just like you believe about the bible, came from the apostles.

That's the whole point, just because the version that you follow, which has this Bible, is the version which survived or became more powerful does not mean it is the right version bro!

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

We rely on the Bible as a true source of information. It is amazing that more than 40 authors have one message - and not a confusion of opinions. There are minor differences (see Luk 8: 27, Mark 5:2) but no difference about the central issues.

If, its a big if, if I agree that there are no major contradictions, then why would you think that is? Because those who chose the books which went in would not have chosen contradictory books, that should be obvious.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

See :Joh 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Joh 10:11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
To suggest that all Christians agree on all aspects, will be a lie - but this is fairly straight forward and in agreement with prophecies.
I feel sorry for guys outside of real Christianity that are confronted with such a range of opinions. My opinion would be to stick to the old guys. Read up on the revivals in Wales and you will get to know the power of God that change lives.

The old guys? Like the Ebonites, Gnostics and the gang?

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

As mentioned, the sacrifice never really removed sins, but looked forward to the ultimate sacrifice - Read Heb 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
Heb 10:2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
Heb 10:3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

This is your interpretation of the Old Testament. I understand that you and some people who claimedto be followers of Jesus claimed this.

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

Forgive me for my ignorance, but how does God show his love - by giving us what we want? I must say that there are Christians that share this view. This view is incorrect as it is not about us.

Look:

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

So God gives somethin that poeple want/need to show his love, God so loved the world that he provided for them salvation, guidance. This is what I was showing, as a sign of love. He guides who He wills, and loves who He wills, you don't think that God listening and answering a prayer could be a sign of love?

format_quote Originally Posted by fromgenesis

Your earlier response about gets some support from the Westminster catechism
Q. 1. What is the chief end of man?
A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God,[1] and to enjoy him forever.[2]

In this I think, we agree - it is all about glory to God - now and for ever and not about us.
http://www.reformed.org/documents/WSC.html

Well in Islam, God rewards us, this is part of the reletionship we have with him, with those who worship him correct and strive their hardest...

And after all God will say, translation of the meaning, to his good servants;

"Enter you, then, among My honoured slaves,

And enter you My Paradise!"