How is it that you act as if there is no metric in which to discern what is good and true in both books?
Are there different sects or divisions of Islamic believers? Are these divisions due to the Quran or man turning away from GOD to you?
I do not quite understand the question pops...could you please elaborate?
no metric to discern what is good and true?
You mean it looks like there are different islamic opinions which is true and which is not?
Yes and no. No, that should not be the case. In fact, in basic what is obligatory, there is no difference in opinion. That part is very clear. The opinions of Muslims may differ slightly in detail from each other of course...on parts which are not obligatory...like some muslim will eat every type of seafood and some would only eat fish and not clamps, schrimps or squid.
Some Muslims know more about their religion and knows exactly what is right and what is wrong...and some did not give much thought about certain topics and only know the basic.
The biggest division is between the sunni's and the shia's. the biggest different of view here started as a political one like who should be the first caliph after our Prophets sas death...Some believed that a new leader should be chosen by consensus; others thought that only the prophet’s descendants should become caliph. The title passed to a trusted aide, Abu Bakr, though some thought it should have gone to Ali, the prophet’s cousin and son-in-law. Ali eventually did become caliph.
After Ali also was assassinated his sons Hasan and then Hussein claimed the title. But Hussein and many of his relatives were massacred in Karbala, Iraq, in 680. His martyrdom became a central tenet to those who believed that Ali should have succeeded the prophet. (It is mourned every year during the month of Muharram.) The followers became known as Shiites, a contraction of the phrase Shiat Ali, or followers of Ali.
The Sunnis, however, regard Ali as well as the three caliphs before him as rightly guided and themselves as the true adherents to the Sunnah, or the prophet’s tradition. Sunni rulers embarked on sweeping conquests that extended the caliphate into North Africa and Europe. The last caliphate ended with the fall of the Ottoman Empire after World War I.
That is how the division started. the difference nowadays is not only political anymore.
Shiites consider Ali and the leaders who came after him as imams. Most believe in a line of 12 imams, the last of whom, a boy, is believed to have vanished in the ninth century in Iraq after his father was murdered. Shiites known as Twelvers anticipate his return as the Mahdi, or Messiah. Because of the different paths the two sects took, Sunnis emphasize God’s power in the material world, sometimes including the public and political realm, while Shiites value in martyrdom and sacrifice.
Withing Sunni's there are 4 different mayor schools. Those 4 schools are all lawfull and are in peace with each other. a person from one school can easily go to a mosque from another school and pray on his own way without getting in trouble. They differ only in detail (the not obligatory part of Islam) with each other.
I hope this was your question. If not, please let me know.
I do not quite understand the question pops...could you please elaborate?
no metric to discern what is good and true?
You mean it looks like there are different islamic opinions which is true and which is not?
Yes and no. No, that should not be the case. In fact, in basic what is obligatory, there is no difference in opinion. That part is very clear. The opinions of Muslims may differ slightly in detail from each other of course...on parts which are not obligatory...like some muslim will eat every type of seafood and some would only eat fish and not clamps, schrimps or squid.
Some Muslims know more about their religion and knows exactly what is right and what is wrong...and some did not give much thought about certain topics and only know the basic.
The biggest division is between the sunni's and the shia's. the biggest different of view here started as a political one like who should be the first caliph after our Prophets sas death...Some believed that a new leader should be chosen by consensus; others thought that only the prophet’s descendants should become caliph. The title passed to a trusted aide, Abu Bakr, though some thought it should have gone to Ali, the prophet’s cousin and son-in-law. Ali eventually did become caliph.
After Ali also was assassinated his sons Hasan and then Hussein claimed the title. But Hussein and many of his relatives were massacred in Karbala, Iraq, in 680. His martyrdom became a central tenet to those who believed that Ali should have succeeded the prophet. (It is mourned every year during the month of Muharram.) The followers became known as Shiites, a contraction of the phrase Shiat Ali, or followers of Ali.
The Sunnis, however, regard Ali as well as the three caliphs before him as rightly guided and themselves as the true adherents to the Sunnah, or the prophet’s tradition. Sunni rulers embarked on sweeping conquests that extended the caliphate into North Africa and Europe. The last caliphate ended with the fall of the Ottoman Empire after World War I.
That is how the division started. the difference nowadays is not only political anymore.
Shiites consider Ali and the leaders who came after him as imams. Most believe in a line of 12 imams, the last of whom, a boy, is believed to have vanished in the ninth century in Iraq after his father was murdered. Shiites known as Twelvers anticipate his return as the Mahdi, or Messiah. Because of the different paths the two sects took, Sunnis emphasize God’s power in the material world, sometimes including the public and political realm, while Shiites value in martyrdom and sacrifice.
Withing Sunni's there are 4 different mayor schools. Those 4 schools are all lawfull and are in peace with each other. a person from one school can easily go to a mosque from another school and pray on his own way without getting in trouble. They differ only in detail (the not obligatory part of Islam) with each other.
I hope this was your question. If not, please let me know.
My point was that there are divisions just as in Christianity, yet instead of claiming that all Islam is somehow wrong due to the book they study; you see the be claiming that these divisions are both not a bad thing and not due to the quran but man. But when we speak of the Bible and Christian's then it is without doubt to many seemingly that the divisions are a sure sign of misdirection and also that said misdirection is caused by the Bible and not the lower desires of man. This is not an even scale but a double standard. I am familiar enough with the Holy Quran to know such is looked down upon in the sight of the Lord.
Which sect or scism or division of "Islam" is responsible for killing other people and raping children. I will not associate such with Islam as a whole as I know your book and mine to be the truth.
My point was that there are divisions just as in Christianity, yet instead of claiming that all Islam is somehow wrong due to the book they study; you see the be claiming that these divisions are both not a bad thing and not due to the quran but man. But when we speak of the Bible and Christian's then it is without doubt to many seemingly that the divisions are a sure sign of misdirection and also that said misdirection is caused by the Bible and not the lower desires of man. This is not an even scale but a double standard. I am familiar enough with the Holy Quran to know such is looked down upon in the sight of the Lord.
Which sect or scism or division of "Islam" is responsible for killing other people and raping children. I will not associate such with Islam as a whole as I know your book and mine to be the truth.
peace friend
No, the Quran is clear for all divisions in Islam...there is no difference there. the four mayor schools differ only in sunnah...which means in simple tems the ways how our Prophet sas used to do, act or say. The sahabah (people around our Phophet sas) all had different experiences with him of course because they had a different relationship with him...some of them witnessed some event and other did not...or not with equal detail. That is why the school may differ slightly from each other in detail.
The shia's who perform pilgrimage to Karbala instead of Mecca is a serious difference and they are not considered as Muslims, even when they call themselves Muslim. Some of the Shia's torture and mutilate themselves on certain days and that also is generally forbidden in Islam...So, most Shia's are on the edge of being muslims or not.
then you have some sunni's who follow a certain leader and consider this leader as holy...they also are not considered as Muslims. you cannot pray to anyone else as to God...no matter how important the leader was.
Muslims do not even pray to Muhammad sas let alone some other person.
There is no division of Islam which is responsible for killing and raping...ISIS, Taliban or whatever terroristic group are definitely no Muslims no matter what they say. you cannot blow yourself up in the air in a busy mall and be considered a good muslim. killing innocent people or rape can never be justified...no matter what the cause is.
We hate them as much as you do...or even more...because they are giving Islam a bad name.
They are as much Muslims as the Ku Klux Klan are considered as good christians...if you want some comparison.
If you are referring to jihad,
we have 2 sorts of jihad. one of them is the lifetime inner battle of an individual to choose for the good and ban the bad out of his life.
the other form of jihad is the right to defend your religion.
for example, if Mecca is being nuked or threatened to be nuked...then that would be an attempt to change or to wipe out Islam as it is.
then you will experience jihad in its real form...even the most tolerant muslims, women and children would just stand up and go to war without hesitation.
arranging some people who are prepaired to blow themselves up in pieces on a busy trainstation is not jihad.
They will meet their 70 virgins in thehereafter...and they will not be maidens...I can guarantee you that.
you cannot blow yourself up in the air in a busy mall and be considered a good muslim. killing innocent people or rape can never be justified...no matter what the cause is.
That is the test for all truth, it should ultimately lead to justice for all people, compassion, kindness, mercy and forgiveness. By following these virtues it will lead you closer to God.
That is the test for all truth, it should ultimately lead to justice for all people, compassion, kindness, mercy and forgiveness. By following these virtues it will lead you closer to God.
Blessings
Eric
Greeting ande peace be with you, Eric H.
Sadly, some people just busy to seek how many errors in the other Holy Books, but forget to realize that there are many errors among the believers which lead them to misuse religion to do the things that against religious values itself.
That is the test for all truth, it should ultimately lead to justice for all people, compassion, kindness, mercy and forgiveness. By following these virtues it will lead you closer to God.
Blessings
Eric
Yes that is right. Eventually there will be justice for everyone of course....but that was not what İ meant here...
What İ meant to say is...no cause can justify terrorism, killing or raping innocent people.
People who do such things for a so called holy cause are all coockoo in their heads.
10. Say, "Have you considered? What if it is from Allah and you disbelieve in it? A witness from the Children of Israel testified to its like, and has believed, while you turned arrogant. Allah does not guide the unjust people."
11. Those who disbelieve say to those who believe, "If it were anything good, they would not have preceded us to it." And since they were not guided by it, they will say, "This is an ancient lie."
12. And before it was the Book of Moses, a model and a mercy. And this is a confirming Book, in the Arabic language, to warn those who do wrong—and good news for the doers of good.
13. Those who say, "Our Lord is Allah," then lead a righteous life—they have nothing to fear, nor shall they grieve.
Say, "Have you considered: if the Qur'an was from Allah , and you disbelieved in it while a witness from the Children of Israel has testified to something similar and believed while you were arrogant... ?" Indeed, Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.
According my understanding, an Israelite testified something from the Qur'an as truth against unbelievers.
Who was he and what exactly did he testify for? Or is my understanding about this verse incomplete/incorrect?
Imam a-Tabari in his tafsir (and al Baghawi agreed with him) gives two possible answers:
The testifier was Moses/Musa (peace be upon him) and the thing which is similar to the Quran is the Torah.
The testifier was Abdullah ibn Salaam (May Allah be pleased with him) whos testimony was by believing it and saying it is the word of Allah and again the similar thing to the Quran is the Torah.
Those who said so added the hadith of Sa'ad ibn abi Waqas as an evidence for it.
This interpretation is supported by al-Qurtobi and ibn Kathir, who supported this opinion and added that this also applies to others (as many other Jews converted to Islam at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him)), but he emphasized statement of the hadith:
I have never heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying about anybody walking on the earth that he is from the people of Paradise except `Abdullah bin Salam.
Ibn 'Ashur in his tafsir at-tahrir wa-tanwir was in favor for the last statement, that this applies to any of the Jews of that time, and consider it much higher and closer to truth.
A question to ask yourselves - in your daily struggles within the body and without the body - do you find yourselves strugglling with issues because certain people sincerely and truthfully adhere to the Bible and the Quran and believe in Allah and the last day? - or is it because certain complete criminals and usurers who reject Allah and the last day are running the global political scheme with complete anarchy and open satanism?
The concept of fiqh al awluwiyaat (understanding of priorities) should prove to us that expending our limited energies in straining at a gnat whilst being squished by an elephant - is foolish to say the least. These are minor issues in comparison to the greater issues facing us and the satanists love to fold their arms and grin as we bicker.
We can settle minor scores later - because those who at least accept the concept of Allah and the last day at least confirm each other to an extent.
M. M. Pickthall
Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him).
Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985)
Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah." If then they turn back, say ye: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's Will).
Quran Chapter 3, Verse 64
Bear in mind that shaytaan with his innocent childlike feminine voice is purposefully using these petty disputes in order to cast doubts on Islam whilst getting us to smack each other down and whilst pretending to be secularly neutral.
Do we not notice the deceitful trolls turning to these themes when they want to dispute with us from behind the curtain - without risking loss of face themselves in case of failiure?
Shaytaan rarely likes to manifest openly as shaytaan, other than amongst the highest levels in satanic secret societies, and instead uses dupes as a screen - because even atheists (usually from christian backgrounds) won't do the fighting knowingly on behalf of Shaytaan.
Consider the arming of saddam by the winking worshippers of the one eyed seal to fight against iran even whilst their media pundits were making him out to be the worst evil that the "benevolent" "west" (another shield of one eyed seal worshippers) shouldn't be arming - then as soon as he signed a peace treaty with iran - the egging of kuwait and saudi arabia against iraq, the arming and egging of Muslims against Assad, then the attacks against the people of shaam by deceiving kuffaar with shahadah flags
( The unorthodox tactic, which is seeing SAS units dressed in black and flying ISIS flags, has been likened to the methods used by the Long Range Desert Group against Rommel's forces during the Second World War. https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/59...ighter-Jihadis
Isis Twitter accounts 'tracked back to Department of Work and Pensions' https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a6775096.html
) , and now the same as with saddam is with saudi in yemen - and again - their mouthpieces are churning out a steady stream of anti islam via anti evil saudi warmongers propaganda in apparent preparation of what's next ..... when are we going to learn to see things exactly as they are with priorities in mind? Why wont they ever say it plainly? e.g: "bloodthirsty satanic washington shouldn't be arming the evil dictator xyz because he's evil" - well, simply because people will not buy the lie.
The occupation of palestine with Ignorant jews duped into thinking that the Rothschild, Rockefeller, prescott Bush, Carnegie, IBM backed hitler was the antichrist - whilst wiping out ashkenazi jews who refused to migrate - is another pointer to how this war by Satan and his allies is being conducted via proxies who don't have their priorities right.
The fact that EDL racists use crosses as a propaganda and support mechanism should be another pointer to how ignorant people are manipulated into pointing their guns at each other before looking at the real enemies of mankind who are open servants of Shaytaan in their private counsels.
@ Calmate
But the best advice that I can give for you is, rather than fussy about other people's Holy Book that you do not follow, it's better if you recite Qur'an. Okay, how many times you have khatam (finished) Qur'an recitation?.
You may have advised him in genuine well intention but do you realise the irony? If you keep reciting the Quran, you will keep talking about other people & other people’s Holy Book (sometimes very unfavourably) because the Quran is replete with it!!!
@ AbuAsiyah
As far as the New Testament is concerned, then 13 of the 27 books in the New Testament were written by Paul (correct me if I am wrong)--a former Jew who persecuted the followers of Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him). This is hardly a trustworthy candidate for being one of God's Noble Messengers.
Personally just like I think prophet Muhammad was sent to the 7th Century Arabs only, so was Jesus was only sent to the Jews at that time etc. I always find Paul’s name (or name calling) pops up whenever there is discussion between Muslims & Christians. I’m not sure what’s the problem since Muslims scholars actually accept Paul as a messenger of Allah too.
When We sent to them two but they denied them, so We strengthened them with a third, and they said, "Indeed, we are messengers to you." (Quran 36:14)
(so We reinforced them with a third,) means, `We supported and strengthened them with a third Messenger. ' Ibn Jurayj narrated from Wahb bin Sulayman, from Shu`ayb Al-Jaba'i, "The names of the first two Messengers were Sham`un and Yuhanna, and the name of the third was Bulus (Paul), and the city was Antioch (Antakiyah). (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)
You may have advised him in genuine well intention but do you realise the irony? If you keep reciting the Quran, you will keep talking about other people & other people’s Holy Book (sometimes very unfavourably) because the Quran is replete with it!!!
Where? You've never read the Quran
what is the point of you being on this forum as you dont seem to grasp basic things in Islam - you also Lie about The Quran - what is the point of all this again?
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
You may have advised him in genuine well intention but do you realise the irony? If you keep reciting the Quran, you will keep talking about other people & other people’s Holy Book (sometimes very unfavourably) because the Quran is replete with it!!!
The Quran explains things plainly in a balanced manner - it guides people to walk along the straight path of Allah, encourages them to be as nice as possible to people unless they commit injustice, and clarifies facts for those who are at risk of being deceived - the verses refuting false claims are usually in response to false claims by people who contended with the Prophet
format_quote Originally Posted by yandex
@ AbuAsiyah
Personally just like I think prophet Muhammad was sent to the 7th Century Arabs only, so was Jesus was only sent to the Jews at that time etc. I always find Paul’s name (or name calling) pops up whenever there is discussion between Muslims & Christians. I’m not sure what’s the problem since Muslims scholars actually accept Paul as a messenger of Allah too.
When We sent to them two but they denied them, so We strengthened them with a third, and they said, "Indeed, we are messengers to you." (Quran 36:14)
[I][FONT=&](so We reinforced them with a third,) means, `We supported and strengthened them with a third Messenger. ' Ibn Jurayj narrated from Wahb bin Sulayman, from Shu`ayb Al-Jaba'i, "The names of the first two Messengers were Sham`un and Yuhanna, and the name of the third was Bulus (Paul), and the city was Antioch (Antakiyah). (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)
The parable of the three that Allah is commanding His messenger to use is guiding people to ponder on the rejection the three confirmed and mass followed messengers - Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad who were sent with the truth and were confirmed by the people who believed and proclaimed the message openly to their people - then the people who believed were oppressed by the deniers - by the rejecters of just truth - by the rejecters of Allah - then Allah destroyed the unjust rejecters of Allah and His Messengers after taking the witness to Himself.
format_quote Originally Posted by yandex
Thanks
Why did you choose to claim that you're female this time? Your writing patterns and method of argument point to you being the same person that has been appearing under different usernames over the years - although you appear to be using a wider pool of knowledge.
Repent.
Btw all prophecies regarding messiah are global end of times prophecies - and he confirms Muhammad as being the recipient of the global guidance after the tribal age of banee Israeel. .....
Personally just like I think prophet Muhammad was sent to the 7th Century Arabs only, so was Jesus was only sent to the Jews at that time etc. I always find Paul’s name (or name calling) pops up whenever there is discussion between Muslims & Christians. I’m not sure what’s the problem since Muslims scholars actually accept Paul as a messenger of Allah too.
When We sent to them two but they denied them, so We strengthened them with a third, and they said, "Indeed, we are messengers to you." (Quran 36:14)
(so We reinforced them with a third,) means, `We supported and strengthened them with a third Messenger. ' Ibn Jurayj narrated from Wahb bin Sulayman, from Shu`ayb Al-Jaba'i, "The names of the first two Messengers were Sham`un and Yuhanna, and the name of the third was Bulus (Paul), and the city was Antioch (Antakiyah). (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)
here is something to read for you:
The Claim
In all their desperation Christian missionaries have now started to claim that according to the Quran Paul was a prophet of God. Their conclusions are based on conjectures and the misrepresentation of the text of the Quran. Simply put, there is not a single place in the Quran which even mentions the name “Paul” let alone mentioning him to be a prophet of God.
To make such claims the Christian missionaries run to Tafsir Ibn Kathir. They read out the tafsir by Ibn Kathir regarding the 14th ayah (Verse) of the 36th Surah (Chapter) of the Quran.
Verse under Question:
36:14
إِذْ أَرْسَلْنَا إِلَيْهِمُ اثْنَيْنِ فَكَذَّبُوهُمَا فَعَزَّزْنَا بِثَالِثٍ فَقَالُوا إِنَّا إِلَيْكُم مُّرْسَلُونَ
When We (first) sent to them two apostles, they rejected them: But We strengthened them with a third: they said, “Truly, we have been sent on a mission to you.” – [Translation: Abdullah Yusuf Ali]
Christian missionaries say that Ibn Kathir says in his Tafsir of the Quran that this verse refers to Paul of Tarsus and thus Paul (Bulus) is one of the Messengers of God according to Islam.
Let’s see whether Ibn Kathir makes such a claim.
Ibn Kathir writes:
“The names of the first two Messengers were Sham`un and Yuhanna, and the name of the third was Bulus, and the city was Antioch (Antakiyah).”
But the question is this Ibn Kathir’s view?
No. This saying is attributed to: Shu`ayb Al-Jaba’i
Ibn Kathir is quoting Shu`ayb Al-Jaba’i. Ibn Kathir has also quoted interpretations of different people as well. He says that according to Ibn Ishaq the names of these three are:
(i) Sadiq
(ii) Saduq
(iii) Shalum
Note: No Bulus (i.e. Paul) mentioned here.
Later on Ibn Kathir in his tafsir refutes this and says that according to the proceeding Quranic verses the people were destroyed. Historically there is no evidence that the city of Antioch faced such destruction and thus this cannot even be about the city of Antioch.
Analyzing Some Tafsirs
Now let’s check Qurtubi whom these missionaries have labeled to be “The Number 1 Muslim Imam”.
Qurtubi:
“Tabari mentions: Sadiq Saduq Shalum
Someone else: Shamoun Yuhanna
Al Naqash said: Saman and Yahya – Did not mention Sadiq and Saduq.
According to Qurtubi Jesus sent the first two as messengers to the king of Antioch. To him they said “We are disciples of Jesus”. The king jailed them and whipped them. This news reached Jesus and he sent a third messenger ‘Shamoun Al-Safa’.”
Note: Qurtubi does not mention any Paul (Bulus) either.
We will now check another tafsir
Tafsir Ibn Abbas:
(When We sent unto them twain) two apostles: Simon the Canaanite and Thomas, (and they denied them both, so We reinforced them with a third) We strengthened them with Simon Peter who confirmed the message conveyed by the other two apostles, (and they said; Lo! we have been sent unto you.
Note: No Paul mentioned over there either.
What we have done here is basically refuted the idea that the Tafsirs unanimously agree that one of the three people sent as messengers was Paul. There is a difference of opinion among the scholars of tafsir which is evidence that neither the Quran mentions the name of Paul as one of the messengers nor did Prophet Muhammad (saw) ever mention his name with regards to this verse.
Does The Verse Really Talk About Messengers (Rasul)?
Now we will go on to refute the idea that the verse is talking of a Rasul of Allah.
The Arabic text of the Quran clearly shows the word used for these three to be “mursaloon”. Mursaloon which is the plural of mursal means “sent one”. This word has been highlighted in the concerned verse above.
Rasul (pl. rusul) in Islam has a specific definition.
Generally the word means:ambassador, messenger, envoy, emissary, forerunner, apostle, and courier.
Mursal (pl. mursaloon) means: sent one
This word, in the Quran can or can not refer to a prophet of Allah. For example in the Quran we see the following verse:
وَإِنِّي مُرْسِلَةٌ إِلَيْهِم بِهَدِيَّةٍ فَنَاظِرَةٌ بِمَ يَرْجِعُ الْمُرْسَلُونَ
But indeed, I will send to them a gift and see with what [reply] the messengers will return. – [Quran 27:35]
The same word “mursaloon” has been used. So does this mean that the messengers that Bilqis sent were RUSUL?
Another verse of the Quran:
فَلَمَّا جَاء آلَ لُوطٍالْمُرْسَلُونَ
At length when the messengers arrived among the adherents of Lut – [Quran 15:61]
Again the same word “mursaloon” is used. Does this mean that the angels which came to Lut were RUSUL?
Of course the answer to both the questions is “No”. None of them was a rasul but they were only ‘sent ones’. This word “mursaloon” simply means a messenger and not necessarily RasulAllah
Further Deception by Christian Missionaries
The deceiving nature of these certain Christian missionaries is actually laughable. To support their claim they try to quote another verse from the Quran. The translation of that verse is given below:
Muhammad is no more than a Messenger – [Quran 3:144]
And they say that look Muhammad was also only a messenger like the other three. But if we read the verse of the Quran we see that the word used here is “rasul” and not the general term “mursaloon”. A general term for messenger was used for the three people in 36:14 but for Prophet Muhammad (saw) the special word “rasul” has been used in this verse.
Further the verse continues:
Many Were the messengers that passed away before him. – [Quran 3:144]
This part of the verse talks about the previous rusul of Allah (swt). And in the Arabic text, for them, again the word “rasul” is used and not the common word mursaloon.
Hence clearly the three that the Quran is talking about in Surah Yasin (36) verse 14 were not “rasul” but messengers (the sent ones) sent by Jesus on the directive of Allah (swt).
Let’s give an example to make things clearer. If Allah (swt) informs Prophet Muhammad (Saw) to send Omar (ra) to Persia for Da’wah does that not mean that Omar (ra) is a messenger (mursaloon)? Of course he is a messenger! But it can never mean that he is a rasul!
Similarly these three were not rasul but were only messengers sent by Jesus (as) on the directives of Allah (swt).
Further Evidence
For more evidence we have to read Surah 36 verse 16:
They said: “Our Lord doth know that we have been sent on a mission to you: – [Quran 36:16]
This is a significant verse. These three supposed rasul of God go to a city and there they do not say ‘Our Lord sent us on a mission’ but rather say ‘Our Lord knows that we have been sent.’
Clearly when a Rasul of Allah (swt) (i.e. Jesus in this case) sends a messenger (i.e. Paul, Shamoun, Yuhanna or any of the other names mentioned by scholars in this case) to another city, God knows that they have been sent. It does not mean that God actually chose them to be rasul and sent them.
The Last Blow
It has clearly been refuted that according to the Quran or the Tafsir Paul was a Rasul of Allah (swt). For the final blow to the deception which the Christian missionaries try to create let us take a look at a hadith of Prophet Muhammad (saw).
There is a clear hadith from the mouth of Prophet Muhammad (saw):
Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Apostle saying, “I am the nearest of all the people to the son of Mary, and all the prophets are paternal brothers, and there has been no prophet between me and him (i.e. Jesus).” – [Sahih Bukhari Vol.4, Book 55, #651] This hadith has also been recorded in Sahih Muslim and Abu Dawud.
Conclusion
The whole idea of Paul being a rasul of God has been defeated in this article.
1) The verse 36:14 does not talk about a rasul but only about mursaloon.
2) Whether the verse in question refers to Paul or not is a matter of interpretation and clearly there are many scholars who don’t even mention Paul’s name in their tafsir of this verse.
3) Ibn Kathir himself refutes the claim of the city being Antioch.
4) According to Sahih Hadith it is clear that between Jesus (as) and Prophet Muhammad (saw) there has been no prophet and hence Paul could have never been a prophet.
5) Even if, for argument’s sake, we would say that according to Ibn Kathir Paul is a Rasul of God, no tafsir can supercede the authentic hadith. This would be Ibn Kathir’s interpretation and Ibn Kathir was a man and not a rasul of God hence his word can never be taken over the word of the Prophet Muhammad (saw)
- - - Updated - - -
Personally I do not like these kind of discussions about finding errors in religions.
First, because you are actually hurting people...yes, the truth must be told...but in a kind and understanding was...by starting these kind of threads, there is always someone with a rough manner stating "your religion is false" and unneccessarily hurt people.
Second, Because of a case I stumbled upon some while ago.
There was this thread about errors in the Quran on a different forum. people posted so called "errors in the quran". the list contained some claims that looked obvious from the outside...but if you really knew a little more about Islam, you could easily refute them all.
In the same way I searched for errors in the Bible and found plenty of them...one in particular caught my eye:
Leviticus 11:3-6 New International Version (NIV)3 You may eat any animal that has a divided hoof and that chews the cud. 4 “‘There are some that only chew the cud or only have a divided hoof, but you must not eat them. The camel, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is ceremonially unclean for you. 5 The hyrax, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you. 6 The rabbit, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you.
I thought "silly Christians, if this was really the word of God, then obviously God would know that the rabbit does NOT chew cud...it is His own creation".
Then I happened to google on how the rabbit digests his food...and found out that even though he does not chew cud in the same way cows and sheep do, but he poops out soft pellets, eats them for a second digestion and then poops out hard pellets.
so it is not exactly chewing on cud, but hey you gotta keep room for translation errors here...
What I mean with this...the evidence may look obvious from the outside...but if you dive into it...the rabbit hole is deeper than it looks.
You may have advised him in genuine well intention but do you realise the irony? If you keep reciting the Quran, you will keep talking about other people & other people’s Holy Book (sometimes very unfavourably) because the Quran is replete with it!!!
I read Qur'an, and I know what are written in Qur'an. But, does it make me be an extremist who keep talking bad about other religions?.
And look around. There are many intolerant Christians who keep bashing other religion, always try to convert other people with sneaky ways. But, should Bible be blamed for this?. You can blame Bible if you want. But I won't. I believe, not Holy Books that make the believers become extreme and intolerant, but their inability to counter the devils that attack their hearts.
I read Qur'an, and I know what are written in Qur'an. But, does it make me be an extremist who keep talking bad about other religions?.
And look around. There are many intolerant Christians who keep bashing other religion, always try to convert other people with sneaky ways. But, should Bible be blamed for this?. You can blame Bible if you want. But I won't. I believe, not Holy Books that make the believers become extreme and intolerant, but their inability to counter the devils that attack their hearts.
I have read the Quran and Bible multiple times. I am not intolerant.
I have read the Quran and Bible multiple times. I am not intolerant.
Non-Muslims in my place feel concerned about radicalism among Muslims. But they do not blame Qur'an because they also have meet Muslims who read Qur'an daily, but very kind toward the others including toward non-Muslims.
Non-Muslims in my place feel concerned about radicalism among Muslims. But they do not blame Qur'an because they also have meet Muslims who read Qur'an daily, but very kind toward the others including toward non-Muslims.
I wouldn't blame the Quran either. Just trying to show that one should way things with balanced scales is all.
I watch videos if they are less than fifteen minutes, but an hour twenty is too long for me. However I did skip through and listen to some of the points he made. The story of David and Bathsheba, the Trinity and the virgin Mary, I have been aware of these issues for many years.
To have faith in God is challenging, there are many things we cannot prove, or fully understand, I take that to be my failing, and not a failing with the Bible. I believe that the Bible I read today, is the Bible that God intends me to read and it is sufficient for my salvation.
I feel privileged to have journeyed with many of my Muslim brothers and sisters on this forum over the last thirteen years, and I have come to understand that you also have this same deep faith in Allah.
I feel the greater challenge is for me to try and be a better Christian, and for you to try and be better Muslims. We share this world together and we can try and make it a better place to live.
Many blessings,
Eric
You will never look into the eyes of anyone who does not matter to God.
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
Array
Eric H liked this post
and the last day are running the global political scheme with complete anarchy and open satanism?
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks