More emphatically and frequently than any other Prophet, Prophet Jesus gave good tidings of Muhammad. In the Gospel of John, Jesus promises his arrival using several names: But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Paraklit will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment (John, 16:7-8).
In these verses, Prophet Muhammad is referred to as the Paraklit. This Greek word means "the Distinguisher between Truth and Falsehood." Christian interpreters have given it various meanings, such as Counselor (Gideons International), Helper (American Bible Society), or Comforter (the Company of the Holy Bible), and claim that it refers to the Holy Spirit. However, they have never been able to establish whether the Holy Spirit came down after Jesus and did what Jesus said it would do.
If, according to Christians, the Holy Spirit is Archangel Gabriel, he came many times to Prophet Muhammad to bring Divine Revelations. Further, Jesus mentioned and predicted the Paraklit with other names but the same function, as seen below:
When Paraklit comes—the Spirit of truth—who comes from the Father, he will testify about me. (John 15:26)
I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will bring glory to me by taking what is mine and making it known to you. (John 16:12–14)
I will not speak with you much longer, for the Prince of this world is coming. And I posses nothing of him. (John 14:30)
Who has come after Jesus other than Prophet Muhammad, as the Comforter who has comforted human beings against their fear of death, worries of the future, and spiritual ailments? As the Helper, who has helped humanity attain real peace and happiness in both worlds? As the Prince of the world, who has ruled almost half the world for fourteen centuries and has become the beloved of billions? As the Spirit of truth, who has testified to Jesus, brought glory to him by declaring his Prophethood against the Jews' denial and the Christians' false deification, and restoring his religion to its pristine purity through the Book revealed to him?
What shortcomings do Western Christians attribute to Prophet Muhammad, in contrast to Jesus and other Prophets, that, while almost all Middle Eastern Christians believed in him and became Muslim within a few decades of his death, they persist in denying him?
Mawlana Jalal al-Din al-Rumi, a great Sufi saint, expresses in the following stanza the good tidings of Prophet Muhammad found in the Gospel:
In the Gospel Mustafa is mentioned with his attributes. In him is the mystery of all the Prophets; he is the bringer of happiness. The Gospel mentions him with his external form and features, and also with his personal virtues and Prophetic qualities.
The Old and New Testaments, despite the questionable authenticity of their current versions, still contain references to Prophet Muhammad. We have quoted some of these. If, one day, the original copies or the least altered copies of the Torah and the Gospel are discovered, they will contain explicit references to the last Messenger. This may be deduced from the Traditions that say Christianity will be purified of its borrowed elements.
Not only that but Jesus said the Comforter would live inside of you as a Christian.
'And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him; but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.' St John 14: 16-17.
There has been much confusion over these verses, and who/what the Paraclete is, although the traditionally accepted view today is that these verses refer to the Holy Spirit. However it is important to note, that this verse is rather ambiguous, and many Christian historians make an interesting note. From The Anchor Bible, Doubleday & Company, Inc, Volume 29A, p. 1135 we read the following very interesting note: "…scholars like Spitta, Delafosse, Windisch, Sasse, Bultmann, and Betz have doubted whether this identification is true to the original picture and have suggested that the Paraclete was once an independent salvific figure, later confused with the Holy Spirit."
So this gets us thinking. A lot of early Christians possibly did NOT interpret this to be a Spirit. Very interesting! But, the plot thickens! Let us take another glance at the word "Paraclete."
Paraclete comes from the Greek Root word Parakletos. From this same root word comes it's derivitive, Periklytos, which means, "Praised one." Does anyone know what the Arabic word for "Praised one" is? If you guessed "Muhammad" you are right!
Now, sometimes Paraclete is translated as "Intercessor" or "Consoler." -this is in fact a misunderstanding of early translators, because the Greek word for intercessor is Paraqalon, which, although similar and from the same root, is not the word used in the Greek text.
When we take into account that the gospel was translated from Aramaic (A Semetic language similar to Arabic and Hebrew) INTO Greek, we see that it is not entirely unbelievable that this is quite likely a place where, in his original language Jesus Prophesied the coming of Muhammad (saas) by name.
Now, I think that every person in the Western world has probably watched the Passion of the Christ, the Mel Gibson film. Well, whats interesting about that film is, to make it more true to the time, Mel Gibson had the actor who played Jesus speak in Syrio-Aramaic, a language very close to the Aramaic of the time of Christ. I.E. the script writer translated the words of Jesus from the Bible, which are in Greek, back into a Semetic language. (The Semetic languages include Arabic, Hebrew, and Aramaic, because all 3 of these languages come from the same root words). Well, in this film, Jesus (saas) recites verse 16:7 from the gospel of John, and the pronunciation is as follows: "Al teethe khalone, heefe MUNAHMA…"
As it happens, Munahma is actually a Syriac pronunciation of AHMED, which is a contracted Arabic form of Muhammad. The Syriac word used, Munahma, as well as the Arabic word Ahmed AND Muhammad ALL come from the same archaic trilateral, which is HMD (pronounced Hemed). It is known as the Semetic "Praise Root."
To make a long story short, you can translate John 16:7 from Greek into Arabic, and the word that would be where Paraclete is in Greek, would actually be Ahmad. I.E. the text reads: "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, Ahmad will not come unto you."
DOES THE SHOE FIT?
Let us briefly examine the Prophesy of the Paraclete, and see if the actions of the Paraclete fit the actions of Muhammad.
1. The world cannot accept him because it does not know him, but the disciples of Jesus know him. (John 14:16) Well, even though Islam is the worlds fastest growing religion and the worlds 2nd largest religion, your average non-Muslim knows nothing about Muhammad unless they happen to have a Muslim friend. I.E. people of this world, who live for this world do not accept him, because they do not know him. Yet, the disciples were very clear on what his message would later be, because we believe all Prophets and their righteous companions had the religion of Islam in their hearts. (Islam means "surrender to God.")
2. He will teach us all things and will remind the world of what Jesus said to them. (John 14:26) Obviously Islam is the only religion that reminds the world of the TRUE message of Jesus, which is that there is only One God, who does not beget, neither is He begotten. And indeed Muhammad (saas) did teach us ALL things, because Islam is considered more of a way of life than a religion, because it governs every aspect of how a Muslim lives.
3. He will testify of Jesus (John 15:26). Indeed, the name of Jesus is mentioned more times in the Qu'ran than the name of Muhammad.
4. He will come AFTER Jesus (John 16:7) Indeed Muhammad was born almost 600 years after Jesus.
5. He will guide men to all truth (John 16:13) Of course Muslims believe that Islam takes humanity as close to the 100% truth as is possible to know in this plane of existence.
6. He will not speak of himself, but instead only what he hears from God. (John 16:13) Well, in this Muhammad (saas) is unique, because the Qu'ran was revealed to him, and not a single one of his own words remain in it. The Qu'ran, any Muslim will tell you is 100% God speaking in the first person, whereas the sayings of Muhammad, the Hadith, are kept separate, in their own books. This also makes it difficult to apply this prophesy to the Holy Spirit, as the Holy Spirit is supposed to be God, and thus it ill-befits God to be told what to say and dictate that, for He is the author of everything. This proves that Jesus -may peace be upon him- is indeed most likely referring to a human Prophet.
IMPOSSIBLE CONCLUSION: PARACLETE = HOLY SPIRIT
Furthermore, we know these "Paraclete" verses cannot be talking about the Holy Spirit because the verse clearly says that the Paraclete will not come until Jesus goes away. (John 16:7) Yet, in the Bible, the Holy Spirit was already present both before and during the life of Jesus. (For examples of the "Holy Spirit" before Jesus "went away" see the following bible verses: (1 Samuel 10:10, Isaiah 63:11, Luke 1:15, Luke 1:35, Luke 1:41, Luke 1:67, Luke 2:25, Luke 2:26, Luke 3:22, John 20:21-22)
JESUS DISCIPLES CONFIRM: STILL WAITING FOR 'AHMAD'
Another interesting point, is that the disciples of Jesus still anticipated the fulfillment of the "Prophet like unto Moses" mentioned in Dueteronomy 18:18 AFTER Jesus [saas] had already ascended. We read in chapter 3 of the book of Acts, that the Jews who are on the verge of converting to Christianity, ask Peter, a disciple of Christ, when the end of the world will come, when all things will be fulfilled, and when Jesus will return. Peter gives an answer which proves to all reasonable people that the companions of Jesus [saas] were taught that Jesus was NOT the Prophet mentioned in Duet. 18:18, that this prophet was yet to come. He says what has been recorded and translated in Acts chapter 3 as follows:
"He (Jesus) must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets. For Moses said, 'The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from among his people."
In other words, the Disciples are waiting on God to 'restore everything', and it cannot be considered that God has "restored everything" until Deuteronomy 18:18 is fulfilled. And, as is obvious, the Disciples, in the book of Acts, some time after the ascension of Christ, were still waiting for this Arab Prophet named Ahmed, which Jesus Christ Himself had prophesied by name.
"We are a people whom Allah has dignified with Islam. If we seek dignity and honor from other than Islam, He will humiliate us." ~'Umar ibn Al-Khattab [raa].
No, it is indeed talking about the Holy Spirit (ie the third person of the Godhead) and not Muhammad. I question the above scholarship. Muhammad does not live inside of believers. That alone eliminates Muhammad. Here is what is recorded in the book of Acts:
'When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom of Israel?
And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons that the Father has placed in his own power.
But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.' Acts 1: 6-8.
'And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judea, and Cappdocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Phrygia, and Pamphylia in Egypt, and in parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wornderful works of God.
And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?
Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy.' Acts 2: 1-18.
Speaking in tongues is something that happens to those who are in Christ even to this day. Also, let me address this point:
Furthermore, we know these "Paraclete" verses cannot be talking about the Holy Spirit because the verse clearly says that the Paraclete will not come until Jesus goes away. (John 16:7) Yet, in the Bible, the Holy Spirit was already present both before and during the life of Jesus. (For examples of the "Holy Spirit" before Jesus "went away" see the following bible verses: (1 Samuel 10:10, Isaiah 63:11, Luke 1:15, Luke 1:35, Luke 1:41, Luke 1:67, Luke 2:25, Luke 2:26, Luke 3:22, John 20:21-22)
Here's a source that addresses this:
It is noteworthy, I believe, to see that the Spirit’s coming upon men was the sovereign choice of God, rather than God’s response to the initiative of men. Generally speaking, men did not expect the Spirit of God to come upon them, nor did they do anything to prompt it. It happened. God took the initiative, and men responded accordingly. There is clearly no “pattern” for those who would wish to find some method or formula for obtaining the Spirit’s power. Men did not dispose of God or of His Spirit; rather God disposed of men, using His Spirit to do so.
He doesn't say that the Holy Spirit 'indwelled' within them. That couldn't happen until Christ's ministry. When you accept Christ and then become indwelled with the Holy Spirit then you are on a journey to be more and more like Christ, to be--as the Bible states--'conformed to the image of the Son.' On a journey towards perfection. This wasn't the case with the Old Testament saints, who had the Spirit 'come upon them.'
The true message of God is what dwells inside the believers, that is what the comforter brought.. you are literal and perverting of meaning I assume for the same reason you take men for gods and charlatans for saints..
Either way it really doesn't matter, I don't know why it should be an issue.. that is your belief.. & you have failed to validate it so that it is sensical the Church is compromised with paganism and secularism and incomprehensible theology which is exactly why it struggles within itself constantly reforming and constantly failing as well struggles with every new ideology that springs for its principles are at odds with sound practical judgment and science.. You are free to believe that god has three heads and the third head is a hovering ghost that lives in you!
all the best
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
The true message of God is what dwells inside the believers, that is what the comforter brought.. you are literal and perverting of meaning I assume for the same reason you take men for gods and charlatans for saints..
What about the fact that Peter quotes Joel 2: 28?
'And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:
And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.'
Joel doesn't say anything about a Comforter here, he says God will pour out his Spirit. The Holy Spirit being poured out on Pentacost is the fulfillment of this.
format_quote Originally Posted by Gossamer skye
Either way it really doesn't matter, I don't know why it should be an issue.. that is your belief.. & you have failed to validate it so that it is sensical the Church is compromised with paganism and secularism and incomprehensible theology which is exactly why it struggles within itself constantly reforming and constantly failing as well struggles with every new ideology that springs for its principles are at odds with sound practical judgment and science.. You are free to believe that god has three heads and the third head is a hovering ghost that lives in you!
all the best
You misunderstand. Firstly, not everyone who calls themselves Christians are truly Christs. Jesus himself said it this way:
'Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name have done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (hidden sin).' Matthew 7: 21-22.
Jesus won't say, I knew you but you backslid. He will tell them that he never knew them period. And these are people who are going around supposedly casting out devils. It all comes back to whether or not you are living a life that is pleasing in the sight of the Lord, a life that he fully enabled you to live because you came to him.
Also, the body of Christ is diverse. That partially answers your concern. Here is what Paul said:
1Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
2Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
3Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
4Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
5And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
6And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
7But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
8For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
9To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
10To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits (demons or devils); to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14For the body is not one member, but many.
15If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
16And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
17If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
18But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
19And if they were all one member, where were the body?
20But now are they many members, yet but one body.
21And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
22Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
23And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
24For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked.
25That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
26And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
27Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
28And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
29Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
30Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
31But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.
1 Corinthians 12
Also here:
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
1 Corinthians 13: 9-12.
No Christian down here is ever going to come to a complete understanding of doctrine and theology. Now, that doesn't mean that heresies don't exist, because they do. But rather, even if you are truly Christian you still won't understand everything. And lastly, here's what Jesus said.
'And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.
And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.' Luke 9: 49-50.
No Christian down here is ever going to come to a complete understanding of doctrine and theology. Now, that doesn't mean that heresies don't exist, because they do. But rather, even if you are truly Christian you still won't understand everything.
Why would God send down guidance that you couldn't completely understand? It should be common sense.
Why would God send down guidance that you couldn't completely understand? It should be common sense.
I submit to you that there is not a religion in the world where even all of its own adherents believe identically. So, since there is such apparent misunderstanding within every religion. It must follow that if you are correct that God would not send down guidance that one couldn't completely understand, that either God has not sent down any of the religions that are present in the world today. Or, if it is true that one of the religions in the world today actually is sent down by God, then you are incorrect, and your theory does not actually make common sense -- at least not to God -- after all.
No, it is indeed talking about the Holy Spirit (ie the third person of the Godhead) and not Muhammad. I question the above scholarship. Muhammad does not live inside of believers. That alone eliminates Muhammad.
My post did not say Muhammad [saas] dwells inside the believers. I think the point is that Jesus [saas] often spoke figuratively, and it's not always easy to discern when he was being figurative and when he was speaking literally. I think in the instance of propheseying that the Paraclete would be recognized by the disciples, he was speaking figuratively, and that "you" in the statements of Jesus [saas] to his disciples mean, not "you" as in literally the disciples, but "you" as in the believers of all times who would come after him. The Prophet Muhammad [saas], when giving specific prophesies would often be talking to the companions saying, "you" will do such and such, and it was clear in the Arabic [a semetic language similiar to Aramaic and Hebrew] that he meant all the Muslims living then and the ones to come after.
So, if we understand Jesus [saas] to have been speaking figuratively, then when saying that the 'Paraclete' would be recognized by the believers, and they would know him, it doesn't have to literally mean that the Paraclete himself would dwell in the hearts of the disciples whom Jesus [saas] was speaking to, but it could mean that the hearts of the true believers would recognize the message of the Paraclete.
If we understand the definition and etymology of the word "Islam" it is very much an internal word. An internal action of submission to God, loving God, and finding peace and tranquility through that submission and surrendering your will to Him. -All of this is based on knowing God [which the Qu'ran says is the purpose of life], and all of this is also something which takes place, or dwells, in the hearts of human beings. i.e. it is not an external action, but an inner action.
It is also part of the Muslim tradition that all previous Prophets were sent with the religion of Islam... in the sense that they all attempted to get people to surrender their will to the Creator, rely on Him, love Him, submit to him, and basically know Him and find tranquility through knowing Him. Some Prophets were sent with new laws for the betterment of their people, the quintessential example of this being Moses [saas], others were sent to remind their people of what they had forgotten of their religion, such as Ezekiel, Jeremiah, etc, and others were sent to focus on spirituality, the best example of this being Jesus [saas].
However, according to Muslim thought the Prophet Muhammad [saas] was the embodiment of all three Prophetic archetypes. A law-giver, a reminder, AND the bringer of a vast treasure of spirituality. Thus the term "Paraclete" in all it's meanings is the perfect word for Muhammad [saas] in the Greek language, and saying that the hearts of the believers would recognize him, is really perfect when the meaning of the multifarious word "Islam" is understood in all it's aspects, particularly that the word itself is a verb, an "action word", and that action is something which happens in the hearts alone.
Obviously I must be clear and say that the Christian interpretation of the Paraclete verses could be correct. I'm simply pointing out that another perfectly viable interpretation is possible, and it is up to the individual to be honest to themselves and then decide which interpretation they find more valid. :-)
"We are a people whom Allah has dignified with Islam. If we seek dignity and honor from other than Islam, He will humiliate us." ~'Umar ibn Al-Khattab [raa].
'Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name have done many wonderful works?
.
I find it amusing that you quote all that and not find it applicable at all to your devil saul.. selective understanding perhaps..
all the best
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
So, if we understand Jesus [saas] to have been speaking figuratively, then when saying that the 'Paraclete' would be recognized by the believers, and they would know him, it doesn't have to literally mean that the Paraclete himself would dwell in the hearts of the disciples whom Jesus [saas] was speaking to, but it could mean that the hearts of the true believers would recognize the message of the Paraclete.
I don't think you can say he was speaking figuratively, especially when you have Peter quoted Joel 2: 28, explaining to the Jews of the day that what the disciples were experiencing was the pouring out of God's Spirit.
'And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:
And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.'
I find it amusing that you quote all that and not find it applicable at all to your devil saul.. selective understanding perhaps..
Well let's look at Saul's conversion in scripture. Let's see what the scriptures say about Paul. Here's the end of Stephen's sermon to the Jews in Acts.
51Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
52Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
53Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
54When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.
55But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
57Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,
58And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.
59And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
60And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
Acts 7: 51-60.
1And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
2And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.
3And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
4And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
5And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
6And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
7And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
8And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.
9And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.
10And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
11And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,
12And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.
13Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
14And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
15But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
16For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
Acts 9. Final passage is here and I will make my point.
12And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
13Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.
14And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
15This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
16Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.
1 Timothy 1: 12-16. The point I'm trying to make is that by saving Paul God was setting forth an example that he can redeem from the guttermost to the uttermost. That he could save even his enemies, and have mercy on them. Paul was an extreme persecuter of the Church. It doesn't matter how resistant you are to the Gospel, God can still save you. And that's the example God set forth in the conversion of Paul.
I submit to you that there is not a religion in the world where even all of its own adherents believe identically. So, since there is such apparent misunderstanding within every religion. It must follow that if you are correct that God would not send down guidance that one couldn't completely understand, that either God has not sent down any of the religions that are present in the world today. Or, if it is true that one of the religions in the world today actually is sent down by God, then you are incorrect, and your theory does not actually make common sense -- at least not to God -- after all.
I don't pretend to know Allah's reason for the division among Muslims. Common sense will tell you that Allah knows best, and if you stray from the Qur'an and Sunnah you are indeed far from the right way.
And hold fast, all together, by the rope which Allah (stretches out for
you), and be not divided among yourselves;” [Al-Qur’an 3:103]
As for those who divide Their religion and break up into sects, thou
hast no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the
end tell them the truth of all that they did.” [Al-Qur’an 6:159]
I don't pretend to know Allah's reason for the division among Muslims.
So, then you do admit that God has sent down guidance that is not completely understood by everyone who seeks to follow it. Perhaps it should not be that way, but nonetheless it is an observable fact.
So, then you do admit that God has sent down guidance that is not completely understood by everyone who seeks to follow it. Perhaps it should not be that way, but nonetheless it is an observable fact.
No, it is understood by the people Allah has guided, for everyone else, Allah knows best. I'm sorry you don't understand what I'm saying...it's a Muslim thang.
The only advice I can give you is instead of trying to find the discrepancies, try looking for the Truth and maybe you'll find it, Insha'Allah.
No, it is understood by the people Allah has guided, for everyone else, Allah knows best. I'm sorry you don't understand what I'm saying...it's a Muslim thang.
The only advice I can give you is instead of trying to find the discrepancies, try looking for the Truth and maybe you'll find it, Insha'Allah.
This is a very humble approach br. ShayB! To say, in effect, "The answer is out there because this deen is perfect, but I am not among those knowledgeable enough to be able to grasp or explain the answer" -That really is the correct response, and I hope would be the response of all the Muslims when they don't know something [which, unfortunately is rarely the case anymore].
May Allah [swt] bless you, and guide you, and make you among the believers whom He loves to meet, and who loves to meet Him! Ameen!
BTW I have somewhat of a vague idea on how to answer this question of why there are different sects in Islam... but haven't bothered to put in my 2 cents because I feel it's a bit irrelevent to the topic. Perhaps there are others more knowledgeable than I who could give a better answer that feel the same way.
Salaam
"We are a people whom Allah has dignified with Islam. If we seek dignity and honor from other than Islam, He will humiliate us." ~'Umar ibn Al-Khattab [raa].
No, it is understood by the people Allah has guided, for everyone else, Allah knows best. I'm sorry you don't understand what I'm saying...it's a Muslim thang.
The only advice I can give you is instead of trying to find the discrepancies, try looking for the Truth and maybe you'll find it, Insha'Allah.
And I submit to you once again that there is no religion, Islam included, where all of the followers of that religion have exactly identical understandings of what God has revealed to them. And I submit that the corrollary to this no one has completely understands the things and ways of God because no one but God has perfect knowledge of God. I agree with MuslimConvert's own humble commentary that one should say "I am not among those knowledgeable enough to be able to grasp...the answer." But I also think it illustrates my point.
You questioned Christianity earlier by saying: "Why would God send down guidance that you couldn't completely understand? It should be common sense." But it seems that even in Islam there are things that are not completely understood. Yet, you don't find in this reality evidence that Islam is false. I want to suggest to you that the lack of complete understanding on the part of some believers, and even more so the lack of understanding on the part of those outisde of a religion, is not in itself sufficient justification for the basis of rejecting a religion.
"As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts," says the Lord (Isaiah 55:9); therefore we should not expect that we would be able to complete understand all that there is to know about God. He may indeed reveal certain things to us as true, but that does not mean that we will understand them. I know that gravity is true and can conduct many experiments to observe and measure it, but I have yet to meet even the most accomplished scientist that can explain where this gravitational force comes from or what makes it works.
There are many aspects of God's nature that are beyond our understanding: his ominiscience, his might, his holiness, his grace, his omnipresence, but that doesn't make them any less real. Indeed we know they are real for we ourselves have undoubtedly experienced some if not all of these in our own lives. Yet, even though we know these things are true and can even testify to some aspect of them, it certainly doesn't mean that we completely understand.
So, I don't know why God sends down guidance that we can't completely understand, it might be because of our ignorance, it also might be presumption on our part to suppose that we ever should. But I do know this: "Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known" (1 Corinthians 13:12).
Here we go again. What the Koran actually says on the matter is:
Jesus son of Mary said, "Children of Israel, I am indeed the Messenger of God to you, confirming the Torah that is before me, and giving good tidings of a Messenger who shall come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." (Surah 61, verse 6, Arberry)
Read the verse carefully. It says this is something Jesus (P) said when addressing the locals in one of his speeches, not something that was necessarily written. If it was written, then it would likely have been written in the Gospel the Koran refers to when it speaks of "al-Injeel", which is one of the many lost Gospels instead of one of the four found in the Bible, as I have absolutely proved a great many different ways in no fewer than four articles on my website (link in my signature). And the statement may very well have never been written in that Gospel either. Should we expect every portent that ever came out of Jesus's (P) mouth to have been written down eventually?
As for "paraclete", whatever the word refers to, it still comes from a speech in which Jesus (P) states that he says nothing on his own authority and that he does only what God tells him to do.
Now, let me show you where the real meat lies. Here is an excerpt from another of my site's articles:
And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?”
He confessed, he did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.”
And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?”
He said, “I am not.”
”Are you the prophet?”
And he answered, “No.” (John 1:19-21, RSV)
So as you can see, here a man by the title of “The Prophet” (there were no capital letters in ancient Greek) is shown to have been expected when Jesus (on whom be peace) and John the Baptist (on whom be peace) were around.
Not “one of the prophets” but “The Prophet”.
He is mentioned here as being distinct from Jesus (on whom be peace), John the Baptist (on whom be peace) and Elijah (on whom be peace).
The only major religious leader to come who was known by the title “The Prophet” was Muhammad (on whom be peace). Therefore this passage is undeniably prophesying his coming.
Now as for the inevitable rebuttals of the Christians:
First the evasive response Christians sometimes give that we are selectively believing in these three verses while disbelieving in John 1:1 for no good reason: we have perfectly good grounds for doing this, since the two passages are in two, completely different contexts. One is the author’s personal commentary, his own beliefs, and the other is an event that he was reporting. By the faulty logic of this evasive response, you would have to believe whatever a television news reporter said if they commented on the news they were about to report.
Another common attempt of Christians to dodge the obvious is to say that while "the Prophet" was going to be Jesus (P), the people at the time didn't necessarily know he wouldn't be distinct from the Christ. If this was the case, you would think that John the Baptist (P), the man who talked to God in the desert and knew all about the situation, would have corrected the guy on the matter, since his very job was to get people up to speed on the guy who was to succeed him. Also, the Bible verse the Christians making this weak defense point to as their defense says only that some of the people thought Jesus (P) to be "one of the prophets". Again, the question asked of John (P) in the above passage was not "Are you a prophet?" (He would have answered "yes"; the Bible itself confirms he was.) It was not, "Are you one of the prophets?" (Synonymous with the first question.) It was "Are you The Prophet?"
Last edited by IAmZamzam; 12-12-2009 at 10:09 PM.
Peace be to any prophets I may have mentioned above. Praised and exalted be my Maker, if I have mentioned Him. (Come to think of it praise Him anyway.)
And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?”
He confessed, he did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.”
And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?”
He said, “I am not.”
”Are you the prophet?”
And he answered, “No.” (John 1:19-21, RSV)
So as you can see, here a man by the title of “The Prophet” (there were no capital letters in ancient Greek) is shown to have been expected when Jesus (on whom be peace) and John the Baptist (on whom be peace) were around.
Not “one of the prophets” but “The Prophet”.
He is mentioned here as being distinct from Jesus (on whom be peace), John the Baptist (on whom be peace) and Elijah (on whom be peace).
The only major religious leader to come who was known by the title “The Prophet” was Muhammad (on whom be peace). Therefore this passage is undeniably prophesying his coming.
Now as for the inevitable rebuttals of the Christians:
First the evasive response Christians sometimes give that we are selectively believing in these three verses while disbelieving in John 1:1 for no good reason: we have perfectly good grounds for doing this, since the two passages are in two, completely different contexts. One is the author’s personal commentary, his own beliefs, and the other is an event that he was reporting. By the faulty logic of this evasive response, you would have to believe whatever a television news reporter said if they commented on the news they were about to report.
Another common attempt of Christians to dodge the obvious is to say that while "the Prophet" was going to be Jesus (P), the people at the time didn't necessarily know he wouldn't be distinct from the Christ. If this was the case, you would think that John the Baptist (P), the man who talked to God in the desert and knew all about the situation, would have corrected the guy on the matter, since his very job was to get people up to speed on the guy who was to succeed him. Also, the Bible verse the Christians making this weak defense point to as their defense says only that some of the people thought Jesus (P) to be "one of the prophets". Again, the question asked of John (P) in the above passage was not "Are you a prophet?" (He would have answered "yes"; the Bible itself confirms he was.) It was not, "Are you one of the prophets?" (Synonymous with the first question.) It was "Are you The Prophet?"
You misunderstand. The Jews when making that statement were inquiring about whether or not John the Baptist was the Messiah. They believed the forerunner who was to come was to be Elijah, as it plainly stated, while the forerunner was supposed to come in the spirit and power of him, not be him, as it is explained in the book of Luke.
As I said, when the Jews questioned John the Baptist with the following (are you that prophet) they were asking whether or not he was the Messiah. Consider this passage.
'Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.'
St. John 6: 14.
Jesus is unique throughout all of human history in that he is Priest, Prophet, and King. Indeed, the site Jews for Jesus is quoted as referring to him as a Jewish-God-Man-King and asks, could the Messiah be anyone else?
Then why were they three separate questions with three separate answers in succession?
Peace be to any prophets I may have mentioned above. Praised and exalted be my Maker, if I have mentioned Him. (Come to think of it praise Him anyway.)
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks