Islam has copied (say the Christians and the Jews)

[Hiroshi]

Hi Amat Allah.

I had a look at your link. I can't comment on everything there because there is too much. But I want to answer one point which is often cited as a Bible contradiction. One account in the gospel says that Judas hanged himself but in the book of Acts it says that he fell from a cliff. How can these both be true?

Actually, they could easily both be true. The gospel account tells us the method of the man's suicide whereas Acts tells us the result. Evidently, Judas tried to hang himself over a cliff but the rope or perhaps tree branch broke causing him to fall. The topography in that area makes such a thing quite conceivable.

Even today, sometimes when we read different news reports they seem to contradict one another. But often this is because details are left out of one report but included in another.

 

[Amat Allah]

My respected brother there is a difference between fell from a cliff which means died by accident and jumped off a cliff which means suicide...

and if they both were true they wouldn`t say (jumped off) but would say as you wrote in your post (fell from)...in shaa Allah you will understand...

anyway you need to know more about Qur`aan so here you are my noble brother read whenever you are free to learn and correct the misconceptions in shaa Allah:


All About The Quran


May Allah be with you Ameen

 

[Ramadhan]

This is basically the problem. Clearly, the Bible and the Qur'an are not in agreement. The Christians and Jews say that the Qur'an has copied the Bible but with errors. And the Muslims argue that the Bible is the book with the errors (corrupted over time) whereas the Qur'an is the pure truth sent to correct the Bible.

How can we know who is right?

There are many ways to do it.
Which one is 100% preserved in its original form, and which one have been translated, cross translated, mistranslated so many many times that even the actual original language is not known.
which one does not contain contradictions, and which one contain so many contradictions.
etc.

What one requires is only a genuine heart to seek the truth.

 

[Hugo]

As a muslim i would say this world is created perfect, the sky is perfect, as humans we sleep, we eat, the way the brain works is perfect, day turns to night, night turns to day, how perfect is that? If you look at the character of the Prophet Muhammad (saw) it is perfect! Thats if you study every part of his life rather than just go with the lies such as "why he did this and that?" without doing any research to why he actually did.

Well to me this is an odd idea. One might argue that the world, that includes us, is perfect because it obeys the laws of nature but it seem a long step to go from that to say we as humans don't do any wrong. Also in nature we have certain difficulties and so it is easy to think a good God created good and perfect things but at the same time where do things like the Ebola and small pox viruses comes from as there is only one creator?

I appreciate the Islamic view of prophets being perfect but no one as yet as far as I know in this or any other thread as said where this doctrine comes from. If we consider any person I suppose its often a matter of opinion as to where and act they did was good or bad. In the case of Mohammed I would consider his consummating a marriage with a nine year of girl as bad also there are many other incidents that I might regard as reprehensible, we can discuss them if you wish.

I agree that God is perfect and Holy but what about names like: the Humiliator, the avenger, the creator of harm? Incidentally, where in the Qu;ran do all these names comes from?

Surah Ar-Rahmaan is well known of course but it offers to me no hope with its flames of fire and molten brass and then these odd verses about dark eyed virgins are to be a blessing but I guess there ie nothing much in heaven for women?

Any way i cant mention everything in one post, so hopefully you should try to put the effort to find out yourself by reading say the Gospel of Mark which sets out the claims of Jesus. So you might ask me to lay aside my prejudice and examine Islam but by the same token I must ask you to lay aide yours and examine Christianity - it is simple really and the Bible challenge is clear by looking at the teaching of Jesus.

 

[Hugo]

There are many ways to do it. Which one is 100% preserved in its original form, and which one have been translated, cross translated, mistranslated so many many times that even the actual original language is not known. which one does not contain contradictions, and which one contain so many contradictions. etc. What one requires is only a genuine heart to seek the truth.

This has been debated many times and the argument is hopelessly weak. Firstly, if the criteria hold they hold for any book not just the Qu'ran therefore any book that is presented 100% in its original form must be from God which of course is a total absurdity. Secondly, the original form was a recitation and since there were no witnesses it cannot be confirmed. As to a text of the Qu'ran there are many traditions as to its transmission but either way there is no copy extant of what was written down at the time of the prophet and even if we consider the Uthman recension nothing except perhaps a few questionable fragments remain. Go and look in your Qu'ran and try to find out what 'original' the printers used when setting it in type as one supposes they did not do it from memory? When you find out let me know?

What ones requires when seeking truth is an honest desire to accept it when you find it. Biblically we are told to seek God with all our heart and soul and mind and if we do that he will be found.

 

[Hugo]

Hugo, you have to remember that while you and I may believe we live in a fallen world, Islam teaches that we live in a nuetral world. That all people are born sinless and have the capacity to chose to submit, and thus remain sinless, or to disobey and become marked by sin. But, according to Islam sin is not a given in every person's life; it is a choice. With this background, it is not inconsistent with Islam to imagine that the prophets never sinned, even though we ourselves might balk at the creduality of such a statement.

But what does a neutral world mean other than we all have to obey the laws of nature such as gravity. One supposes that Islam accepts Adam's sin and since were are descended from Adam there is a sense which we were there right at the beginning and partake of the same sin. It might be easier to understand this idea if we thing say of the crusades, we can just say it was 'unchristian' and absolve ourselves of all blame or do we accept that it was a part of our history and repent over it? In the same way Christians have to answer the question framed in the famous Spiritual song "where you there when the crucified my Lord" and they would say yes because it was their sins that put him there. If one is neutral about sin then its all to easy to contextualise it and explain it away.

 

[Ğħαrєєвαħ]

Well to me this is an odd idea. One might argue that the world, that includes us, is perfect because it obeys the laws of nature but it seem a long step to go from that to say we as humans don't do any wrong. Also in nature we have certain difficulties and so it is easy to think a good God created good and perfect things but at the same time where do things like the Ebola and small pox viruses comes from as there is only one creator?

I appreciate the Islamic view of prophets being perfect but no one as yet as far as I know in this or any other thread as said where this doctrine comes from. If we consider any person I suppose its often a matter of opinion as to where and act they did was good or bad. In the case of Mohammed I would consider his consummating a marriage with a nine year of girl as bad also there are many other incidents that I might regard as reprehensible, we can discuss them if you wish.

I agree that God is perfect and Holy but what about names like: the Humiliator, the avenger, the creator of harm? Incidentally, where in the Qu;ran do all these names comes from?

Surah Ar-Rahmaan is well known of course but it offers to me no hope with its flames of fire and molten brass and then these odd verses about dark eyed virgins are to be a blessing but I guess there ie nothing much in heaven for women?

Any way i cant mention everything in one post, so hopefully you should try to put the effort to find out yourself by reading say the Gospel of Mark which sets out the claims of Jesus. So you might ask me to lay aside my prejudice and examine Islam but by the same token I must ask you to lay aide yours and examine Christianity - it is simple really and the Bible challenge is clear by looking at the teaching of Jesus.

Greetings Hugo

Nope i agree that we humans never do anything wrong, but the fact is we are created Good as our nature is good, but its the world that leads us to do evil, am sure youve heard of the story of Adam (as) and im sure youve heard of satan/shaytaan.

Note i said God is perfect. Remember he did create the satan/shaytaan.

This is what Satan says: "[Iblis (Satan)] said: \"O my Lord! Because you misled me, I shall indeed adorn the path of error for them (mankind) on the earth, and I shall mislead them all." Al Quran 15.39

God tells us he will test us

"Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, "We believe", and that they will not be tested? We did test those before them, and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false. " Al Quran 29.2-3

Now Allaah created the Satan, he created him to test mankind. We do not enter paradise by just claiming 2 words "we believe" and then just enter we will certainly be tested. As a muslim i know the satan will try to trick me in many ways, for example drinking alcohol is forbidden in islaam but satan will trick me into thinking its fine drink one glass it will be orite, but in reality hes the evil one wanting me to enter the hellfire.
However, in the Quraan Allaah tells us to keep away from satan and his mischievious ways thats why we say "Aazu billah Hi minashaytaan nirajeem" (I seem refugee with Allaah from shaytaan the outcast).

He (Allaah) tells us we must strive hard to enter the jannah/Paradise, so he says:

"And certainly, We shall test you with something of fear, hunger, loss of wealth, lives and fruits, but give glad tidings to As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.). Who, when afflicted with calamity, say: "Truly! To Allah we belong and truly, to Him we shall return.They are those on whom are the Salawat (i.e. blessings, etc.) (i.e. who are blessed and will be forgiven) from their Lord, and (they are those who) receive His Mercy, and it is they who are the guided-ones."Al Quran 2:155-157

So the Quraan speaks of what we should do, it guides us in our lives, etc you be patient at the time of a calamity, do not speak rudely to your parents etc. . . .

And to your Q regarding the Prophets Marriage, i can honestly say thats your opinion, also that Aisha (ra) did not have a problem with the marriage and neither did her parents. Also to let you know more, Aisha (ra) was quite an intelligent and a mature women for someone her age. And also too add to your "problem" about the marriage, did you also know that she was the first women scholar in Islaam? She was willing to learn everything about Islaam, because of the love she had. Also just because Aisha (ra) married at a young age does not mean every muslim women marries that age, marriage is for a women once she enters puberty and mature and ready to marry and also forced marriages are haraam meaning forbidden. so the only one who has a problem with this issue is you and others who agree with you, and i quite find it pointless to have a problem when she Aisha (ra) did NOT have a problem. And i would advice others if you ask further Qs regarding Aisha (ra) marriage they should be ignored! Although i agree that there are many "Cultures" who marry there daughters at a young age at where the child has a problem with this wheras this means the marriage is being forced upon her making it haram islaam doesnt forbid such an act, the women is to be mature and able to have the chance to agree to the marriage!

And your asking soo many Qs all at once, your asking me many and your asking many other members aswell at the same time, so how much exactly are you trying to understand sincerely?

I feel i am wasting my time at times to be honest with you.

I will try answer others later

peace

 

[Ramadhan]

irstly, if the criteria hold they hold for any book not just the Qu'ran therefore any book that is presented 100% in its original form must be from God which of course is a total absurdity.

Do not be silly.
no one says that 100% preserved and accurate is the only criteria.
It is very transparent to everyone that what you're doing is that you are really trying to divert from the weaknesses of bible: no one even sure what language the original gospel was, all you have is gospel according to somebody who's written by somebody else who's heard from somebody else, and that some of the oldest books were discarded because they did not conform to the desires of powerful priests few hundred years after jesus left.

Secondly, the original form was a recitation and since there were no witnesses it cannot be confirmed.

You are such hypocrite.
You have been involved in many many discussions about the qur'an, and surely you know that there were also witnesses during revelations from jibril to the prophet Muhammad SAW. Surely you also know that prophet Muhammad SAW asked his shahabah to write down the revelations that he's just received on leather, papyrus, etc.
Also, there were many many shahabah who fully memorized the qur'an when prophet Muhammad was still alive.

Now, why don't you apply the standards you expect from the Qur'an (which are fully met) to your own bible.

What ones requires when seeking truth is an honest desire to accept it when you find it. Biblically we are told to seek God with all our heart and soul and mind and if we do that he will be found.

yes, why don't you accept islam by now, and to worship The GOD, instead of worshipping a human (with a greek name) and another vague being (holy spirit)?

You know, if I were you, I would either accept Islam or leave the boards right away, because the longer and the further you've learnt about the truth but refusing to accept it, then you will be in big big trouble after you die.

 

[Grace Seeker]

the jewish rabbis and priests distorted the true teachings of Ibrahim, Musa and Daud and they changed many accounts in the scriptures, that's why Jesus pbuh was sent to the "lost sheep" of Israel to correct the teachings, and bring back to the real truth, which ruffled the feathers of jewish rabbis/priests/establishments, toi say the least.

Again, this is a Muslim interpretation of those events. Christians hold to a completely different view as to why Jesus came and what it means to say that Jesus was sent to the lost sheep of Israel.

Then as soon as after jesus pbuh was raised, the true gospel of Jesus was distorted again by the scribes and priest, especially paul.

naidamar, this is very interesting. Do you admit that Jesus was raised? Raised in what way?

Hence the bible consists only third person view of the events of jesus pbuh, not his direct words, and the authors of most books in the bible are unkown and the new testatements were written more than 100 years after jesus pbuh left.
Hence the books in the bible contain so much errors, so many contradictions that even all scholars of bible admit so.

Again, a Muslim providing teaching regarding Christian history. Yet, you object when non-Muslims provide teaching regarding Muslim history.

 

[Ğħαrєєвαħ]

However, Hugo seems to be making the same claims @ Graceseeker
so its fair both ways it seems.

Secondly, the original form was a recitation and since there were no witnesses it cannot be confirmed.

 

[Grace Seeker]

There are many ways to do it.
Which one is 100% preserved in its original form.

That's easy. Neither.

The miracle of the Qur'an as Muslims have told me is that Muhammad (pbuh) received the recitation over an extended period of time. And he didn't receive it in order. Indeed, it wasn't until after the Prophet's death that the Qur'an was finalized in its present form by Abu Bakr. So, when you use the phrase "original form," in reference to either the Bible or the Qur'an, no original of either exists.

 

[Hugo]

Do not be silly. no one says that 100% preserved and accurate is the only criteria. It is very transparent to everyone that what you're doing is that you are really trying to divert from the weaknesses of bible: no one even sure what language the original gospel was, all you have is gospel according to somebody who's written by somebody else who's heard from somebody else, and that some of the oldest books were discarded because they did not conform to the desires of powerful priests few hundred years after jesus left.

Do not be silly. How many criteria have to be true for it to hold and one presumes if there are criteria its like a chain, if one fails then the whole fails.? It is perfectly transparent that you have avoided most of what I said about the Qu'ran because it is troubling to you and can cannot be answered. I am perfectly happy to take the Bible as it is and all you are doing is repeating the standard Islamic views. It is you that have the problem for the Qu'ran tells us to check it with earlier scriptures but when you do that there are major difference so you come up with this shoddy argument that the Bible is corrupted and what you believe in is the originals - so the Qu'ran tells us to do something according to you that cannot be done. We know what language Jesus spoke and we also know that Galilee had been a major centre for Greek culture so there is NOTHING unreasonable in the Bible being produced in Greek as it was almost 1,000 years before Islam saw the light of day.

Of course certain books were discarded in much the same way that in the Uthaman recension we know that there was a rule that for a verse to included it had to be witnessed by two people and if that means anything at all it means that there were many verses circulating that where not true so why was that necessary if all these people knew it off by heart. They may have written it down but there is zero evidence for that now is there?

If I am a hypocrite then you are simply ignorant - I have said many times there were no witnesses to the actual recitation no one else saw or heard anything and for most of the revelation there were no witness at all. Now, why don't you apply the standards you expect from the Bible to your own Qu'ran - you cannot can you, you are simple unable to be critical about it, its history and what it says. Telling me to leave the Board is just a symptom of your uncritical view - you cannot question it and so no one must question it and all that does is ultimately lead to oppression as we know.

 

[Grace Seeker]

But what does a neutral world mean other than we all have to obey the laws of nature such as gravity. One supposes that Islam accepts Adam's sin and since were are descended from Adam there is a sense which we were there right at the beginning and partake of the same sin.

Hugo, please, decide if you're going to try to understand Islam or argue with Islam. My understanding of this board is that, for us non-Muslims, our invitation is only extended in so far as we are seeking to understand Islam. That doesn't mean we have to accept it. But when you say "one supposes that Islam..." one has to do better than say something that in fact Muslims have already posted to the contrary to in this very thread.

Yes as a christian you may believe that you are born a sinner, whereas muslims we believe we are born sinless, for how a innocent little baby can be born a sinner? The actions of the little innocent being proves he is not a sinner!

You are arguing for the Christian interpretation of those events to the exclusion of the Islamic interpretation. That, by definition is proselytizing, which is not allowed by non-Islamic members on these boards. You may feel that such a rule is unfair, but it is the rule we all agreed to. AND, I find actually leads to better and more informed discussion.

It might be easier to understand this idea if we thing say of the crusades, we can just say it was 'unchristian' and absolve ourselves of all blame or do we accept that it was a part of our history and repent over it?

We not only can say, we must say that the crusades were "unchristian". But that in itself does nothing to absolve ourselves of their legacy. We must not only confess them to be sin, we must repent and change the way we relate to the non-Christian world, by practicing a Christian ethic toward it. To my understanding, one aspect of that ethic that is really important on this board is Paul's injunction:

Romans 12

14Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited. 17Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.

Sometimes, our posts (plural: your posts, my posts, and posts by other Christians as well) don't always make for peace. I'm trying to adjust my own habits to improve on this, which is probably why I'm sensitive to other postings besides my own right now (sorry, if you think I'm over-reacting), and ask for your assistance -- both in holding me accountable and modeling for me what engaging in "peaceful posting" might look like.

 

[tango92]

That's easy. Neither.

The miracle of the Qur'an as Muslims have told me is that Muhammad (pbuh) received the recitation over an extended period of time. And he didn't receive it in order. Indeed, it wasn't until after the Prophet's death that the Qur'an was finalized in its present form by Abu Bakr. So, when you use the phrase "original form," in reference to either the Bible or the Qur'an, no original of either exists.

that is incorrect, as far as im aware the order of the quran was finalised by Muhammad pbuh and Angel Jibreel.

it was simply written down by the later Khalif's.

edit: so in this sense as the quran also remains transmitted verbally as it was originally revealed it is even more authentic than the bible.

 

[جوري]

You are such hypocrite.
You have been involved in many many discussions about the qur'an, and surely you know that there were also witnesses during revelations from jibril to the prophet .

It is either this or he has the attention span of a goldfish since he does nothing but repeat the same crap which has been amply clarified and refuted by young and old on this forum. It is a conundrum to me why the mods are idle when it comes to this under-educated orientalist yet hyper-vigilant when it comes to Muslim members..

 

[Ğħαrєєвαħ]

You are arguing for the Christian interpretation of those events to the exclusion of the Islamic interpretation. That, by definition is proselytizing, which is not allowed by non-Islamic members on these boards. You may feel that such a rule is unfair, but it is the rule we all agreed to. AND, I find actually leads to better and more informed discussion.

Could you remind me what number post that is? As i remember posting that way before the "Agreement", However i apologise if so has happened.

 

[Grace Seeker]

no one even sure what language the original gospel was, all you have is gospel according to somebody who's written by somebody else who's heard from somebody else,

That's simply not true.

and that some of the oldest books were discarded because they did not conform to the desires of powerful priests few hundred years after jesus left.

And any copy of the Qur'an that did not conform to the accepted standard was similarly destroyed. Both religions have had people make determinations of what was and was not orthodox teachings, and both have attempted to root out that which was considered unorthodox.

You are such hypocrite.
You have been involved in many many discussions about the qur'an, and surely you know that there were also witnesses during revelations from jibril to the prophet Muhammad SAW. Surely you also know that prophet Muhammad SAW asked his shahabah to write down the revelations that he's just received on leather, papyrus, etc.
Also, there were many many shahabah who fully memorized the qur'an when prophet Muhammad was still alive.

Hugo's participation in a conversation in which those things were discussed does NOT make him a hypocrite. Hypocrisy is when he says he believes one thing but behaves in a different way. I don't see that in any of Hugo's posts.

Now, why don't you apply the standards you expect from the Qur'an (which are fully met) to your own bible.

Because the claims that Muslims make for the Qur'an are not the same that Christians make for the Bible. The double standard is that you seek to judge the worthiness of the Bible by the same standards as you do the Qur'an when they are two different books with different internal claims made regarding the nature of their inspiration. Only the Qur'an claims to be dictated by God. Thus the standard for giving evidence of that is different than for the Bible which makes no such claim beyond that of inspiration. Now some Christians make the claim that inspiration equals dictation, but that is just some, not all, not even most. To impose that standard on the Bible is to impose a Islamic understanding of the nature of inspiration on another faith's book. That may not be hypocrisy, but it isn't "halal" either.

yes, why don't you accept islam by now, and to worship The GOD, instead of worshipping a human (with a greek name) and another vague being (holy spirit)?

Hugo and I do worship The GOD. We don't worship (a mere) human; we worship Jesus is is fully God just as much as he is human. And we don't worship any vague being; we know the Holy Spirit to be as concrete of a reality as God himself.

You know, if I were you, I would either accept Islam or leave the boards right away, because the longer and the further you've learnt about the truth but refusing to accept it, then you will be in big big trouble after you die.

Thank-you for sharing with us what YOU would do. I hope you are not implying that you are the standard by which all others should pattern their lives. I trust that is just an expression of concern of Hugo's eternal well being.

 

[Grace Seeker]

that is incorrect, as far as im aware the order of the quran was finalised by Muhammad pbuh and Angel Jibreel.

it was simply written down by the later Khalif's.

edit: so in this sense as the quran also remains transmitted verbally as it was originally revealed it is even more authentic than the bible.

I don't think so. But I'm going from memory here. Maybe someone with more knowledge could fill in the gaps again.

Are there any good links where I could read the history of the Qur'an from the first revealtion of it to Muhammad to the final formation of it by Abu Bakr?

I know that Lily has provided me with some of that info in the past (which, btw, I did read and apprecate), but maybe someone has something more. Perhaps there is a chronology of the revelation, writing, reordering, and final compiling of the Qur'an.?

 

[Grace Seeker]

Could you remind me what number post that is? As i remember posting that way before the "Agreement", However i apologise if so has happened.

My apologies Muslimah 4 life. You didn't break the agreement. I was quoting one of your older posts to share with Hugo what he was asking Muslims to conclude had already been addressed in this very thread and that Islam had simply reached a different conclusion regarding the meaning of those events than Christianity had with regard to them. I wasn't saying that you were presenting an interpreation as an argument, but that you had already answered the question.

I, personally, am of the opinion that is one thing for us to discuss how we ourselves may have reached different conclusions than another person has, and that it is quite another for us to tell a person how he or she "ought" to think with regard to an issue. Our "agreement" tells me that you seem to be of the same opinion as me on that point. I fear that not everyone else shares that view.

 

[Ğħαrєєвαħ]

That's easy. Neither.

The miracle of the Qur'an as Muslims have told me is that Muhammad (pbuh) received the recitation over an extended period of time. And he didn't receive it in order. Indeed, it wasn't until after the Prophet's death that the Qur'an was finalized in its present form by Abu Bakr. So, when you use the phrase "original form," in reference to either the Bible or the Qur'an, no original of either exists.

You seem to agree the bible isnt in its orignal form ?

The Quraan=The Recitation

yes it is true that the Quraan was recieved over an extended period of time. How does the Quran being revealed after the Prophets death mean the Quran isnt the original form? Would you like to explain?

I hope that in order to know more you must have done some reasearch

Ok lemme explain a few reasons to why the Quran is in its original form:

The Holy Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) through the angel Gabriel, and the Prophet (pbuh) memorized the whole scripture. There were lots of companions that memorised the Quraan directly from the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and according to my knowledge they were known as the Hufaadh meaning the memorisers and preservers of the Quraan. Also many of the companions wrote it down during the lifetime of the prophet Muhammad (saw). The Quraan was recorded during the lifetime of the Prophet and also the Surahs(chapters) of the Quraan were organised by him.

Also there are many things science discovered that the Quraan spoke of 14 centuries ago, and i recall scientists confirming this, if you could kindly take your time to watch a video regarding one miracle that the Quran speaks of insha`Allaah

Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'ân)
and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).

(Qur'an 15:9)

Peace