Islam has copied (say the Christians and the Jews)

[Ğħαrєєвαħ]

Greetings

Nor I, and I didn't. The proper term for someone being condemned to spend eternity in hell is to say that they have been dam*ed. In that usage it is not a form of swearing or cursing at all, any more than it is to say that those that have been so dam*ed are "going to hell"..

Sorry i must have thought you cursed becaused you put these star things **** in your post, where they usually means one curses.

No. Originally, it was because I was participating in another forum where the view of many of the posters was that all Muslims, even if they weren't themselves involved in terrorism, were in agreement with the aims of those who did commit it. From personal experience I knew that it wasn't true, and I had hoped to come here and be resources with information and links to published material by which I could refute those allegations against Islam..

Well glad to hear you are refuting allegations against Islaam : D

Well, I've learned that while not all are into terrorism, there are more who stand on the sidelines cheering on their efforts than I had from my own personal experience imagined..

Yes, Unfortunately

I learned that many Muslims have no idea the truth with regard to Christianity and rather than actually read for themselves, read anti-Christian tracts for what they care to learn and prefer to use cut-and-paste methods to engage in futile debate rather than actual conversation to pursue fruitful discussion..

Yes, i agree, same goes for the hypocrytes who choose to use "Anti-Islaam" sites also!

I learned that many see the world through one set of lenses and are unable to even try to consider things in any ways different from what they have always be taught, that most will get more entrenched in their position rather than thoughtful when a non-Muslim disagrees with them and doesn't immediately see things the "true" way..

lol that sounds geeky "see the world through one set of lenses", Well we all have our beliefs and those who are strong in their faith will often tend to disagree with the opposite, so i advice either you do research yourself and sincerely, and also ask those whom are knowledgeable, if you have Qs ask them, and if you have a problem feel free to disagree and if you feel there will be a looong dialogue due to it then its best to just listen, as they know more about their faith than yourself.

Of course, this type of personality is something I already knew well from conversations with other Christians, but through this board I learned that religion doesn't change the basic tendencies of human personality..

Well ofcourse, and i disagree there.That may not always be the case maybe you also see the "world through one set of lenses" :-\

Lastly, I've learned not to judge a faith by what you encounter online, that actually caring for and being involved in one another's life comes out of face-to-face interactions; whereas, internet friendships may not even be as real as the paper they aren't printed on..

I can agree here, but also disagree : D

Oh, and I almost forgot, I learned that everything that is wrong with the world, from the source of evil to the lostness of our decadent culture from the prlifieration of Apple computers to the music of ZZ Topp, has at its roots either the USA or all things Christian.

I dont really understand what you said there, but okay : D

Peace

 

[aadil77]

P32 every year the prophets memory had to be refreshed - why if it is was all written down by dozens of scribes (60 according to Azami), the prophet was infallible and the revelations memorised perfectly by the companions? Also on P36 we read of the prophet sparing no effort in encouraging other to learn the words of Allah and on P58 we have double reward for memorization so there is some inconsistency here.

I have asked WHY this was necessary? We continually hear how the Qu'ran is perfect, everyone knew it by heart, it is faultless and so on. So WHY was it necessary for Jibril to refresh the prophet's memory every year? Do you not see that we cannot on the one hand have a supposed infallible prophet and on the other that he has to be constantly reminded?

what does being 'infallible' have to do with revising the Quran? this is a seriously weak point if you're trying to have a go at the infalibility of prophets

prophets although free of sin were not super human with infinite memories or superhero like strength

Do you not believe that Jesus (peace be upon him) was infallible?

 

[Hugo]

Rather it says '' As far as I am aware, there are no hadiths in which the prophet delineates the order of ALL the suras, opinions differ and can be summarized as follows:

The arrangement of all the suras as it stands, hearken back to the prophet himself (footnote) see as-suyti-al-itiqan i:176-177, see also ibn dawud, sunan, no 786 this is the opinion that I subscribe to. The counter view disagrees with this, citing the mushafs of certain companions such as ibn Masud and Ubbay b. Kaab) supposedly differ in sura order from the mushaf presently in our hands. 37 (see chapter 13 which is dedicated to the mushaf of ibn masud) and I'd prefer you actually read that before citing pages which you clearly have no integrity to quote correctly or in totality. 2- some believe that the entire Quran was arranged by the prophet except for sura 9, which was placed by Uthman (footnote 38) as-suyti-al-itiqan i-177, quoting al baihiqi, see also abu dawud Muslim schlarly opinion unanimously holds that the present arrangement of Surahs is identical to that of 'Uthman's Mushaf' etc. etc.

as to how it is the work of man and not god you are yet to enlighten us to that factor, given there were no computers or archives, and that the order of some events that went in particular suras happened decades apart for anyone to decide that a particular verse belongs in chapter 2 verse 281 as opposed to chapter 98 verse 4, for the suras to flow in context, lyricism, syntax, significance etc.

Dr Al Azami's Biblical knowledge is very defective but he is a superior hadith scholar and here he is saying he does not know for sure but has an opinion - notice an opinion that the prophet did it and some companions. But I guess you cannot even let yourself think it is anything but certain such is that fragility of your faith it seems.

 

[Hugo]

what does being 'infallible' have to do with revising the Quran? this is a seriously weak point if you're trying to have a go at the infalibility of prophets. prophets although free of sin were not super human with infinite memories or superhero like strength. Do you not believe that Jesus (peace be upon him) was infallible?

I have written in an earlier post my view on the notion of infallibility of all the prophets and I don't think it is tenable. My point here about the prophets memory being refreshed is the fact that we are told that 60 scribes wrote everything down as soon as a revelation came, companions memorized everything and so on so why was this necessary, did some bits change? In terms of Jesus then Christians regard him as God and so yes we regard him as infallible in his teaching.

 

[جوري]

P32 every year the prophets memory had to be refreshed - why if it is was all written down by dozens of scribes (60 according to Azami), the prophet was infallible and the revelations memorised perfectly by the companions? Also on P36 we read of the prophet sparing no effort in encouraging other to learn the words of Allah and on P58 we have double reward for memorization so there is some inconsistency here.

If it were refreshed you'd complain, if it weren't you'd complain, if it weren't written down you'd complain, and if it is written down you'd complain. Most sane people who practice a craft, always refresh their skills. It is the way of the world, perhaps you should catch up with the rest, maybe that alone would enable you to formulate better questions-- as it seems you have perfected the art of confabulation!

I have asked WHY this was necessary? We continually hear how the Qu'ran is perfect, everyone knew it by heart, it is faultless and so on. So WHY was it necessary for Jibril to refresh the prophet's memory every year? Do you not see that we cannot on the one hand have a supposed infallible prophet and on the other that he has to be constantly reminded?

See above reply!

Dr Al Azami's Biblical knowledge is very defective but he is a superior hadith scholar and here he is saying he does not know for sure but has an opinion - notice an opinion that the prophet did it and some companions. But I guess you cannot even let yourself think it is anything but certain such is that fragility of your faith it seems.

Judging from the way you MISQUOTED Azami and repeatedly as I have demonstrated in details in multiple pages and in multiple threads, you've lost any credibility to pass judgment as to whether or not he has defective biblical knowledge or superior knowledge. And as stated before, no one really cares for your opinion. You should be utterly ashamed of your dishonesty as I have shown on multiple posts, yet you have the temerity to come back here and post again and share an opinion as if you had any formal or even informal authority to do so!

 

[Ramadhan]

The facts (for Hugo):
- There is only 1 quran exist in the world, with millions people memorize it and know the full content by heart, down to a single letter, period, and comma. This is impossible if the Qur'an had not been memorized in full by many people the prophet Muhammad SAW received its revelation, or if there were a different version along the way, or if it were changed or if memorization transmission was broken along the way. There are many records of unbroken transmissions from present day all the way the prophet SAW.
- There are currently thousands of bible versions, disagreeing with each other not only in language/wording, but also content. The authors were unknown. There is no method of memorization. There is no record of the transmission of eye witnesses. Even the translators are unknown.

 

[Hiroshi]

in shaa Allah you won`t mind me asking more Qs, with all my respect....

Was Abraham (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) a disbeliever? and is he going to hell? and again what was his message and calling?

I am very happy to answer your questions Amat Allah.

There is a prophecy in Genesis 3:15 where God says to Satan: "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."

After the rebellion of Satan in persuading Adam and Eve to disobey God, God purposed to put things right but means of an "offspring" or "seed". Who that seed would be and what he would do gradually came to be revealed through time and the unfolding of God's purpose.

In Genesis 22:18 shows that this "offspring" or "seed" would come through Abraham: "through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me."

Abraham was, of course, also an example to all of us in faith and devotion and love for God. He showed obedience even to the point of being willing to sacrifice his own son.

 

[YusufNoor]

Let us be clear here there is no known document in Arabic before the 4CE and in contrast Greek and Hebrew were fully written language many thousands of years earlier.

irrelevant to a point, but as it helps show my point, i'll accept that.

Arabic script itself was most likely devised by Christian cops.

irrelevant

Of course certain books were accepted as God's word for the Bible because all sorts of literature was circulating at the time and when various Christian councils got together they affirmed what was existing as the cannon they did not pick and choose.

that appears to be an erroneous statement. what was held a "canon" changed over many centuries. if it wasn't humans deciding was was "canon," are you saying that the Christian Holy Spirit [who you claim is 1/3 God] has mistakenly chosen some books at some time and had to redress and rethink what he thought was from God-the Father and then humans merely accepted his decisions or corrections?

If we compare this with the Qu'ran where it is impossible to know if its complete or not since there are virtually no manuscripts earlier than the late 9th century.

i'll take whichever Qur'an you genuinely consider to be the oldest in existence [w/o you arguments about it's completeness] and put it against your NT in it's COMPLETE and CURRENTLY recognized "divine inspiration and ONLY that inspiration - no other additions or subtractions JUST what YOUR particular sect of Christianity [which i don't even know is] currently considers "the Word of God" in it's ORIGINAL LANGUAGE and see if you have a complete and unadulterated one that is earlier!

You can believe it is complete if you wish but it cannot be proven whereas Christians and Jews have thousands of manuscripts some pre-dating Islam by 1,500 years.

name ONE SINGLE "Christian manuscript", that predates Islam by 1500 years. you can't include Jewish books with the Christian Books. BUT EVEN IF I LET YOU, there are books in the LXX that are no longer considered as divinely inspired and these were rejected, "in the Greek" AFTER the completion of the Qur'an!

Amongst these manuscripts, about 6,000 there are estimated to be 30,000 differences although that vast majority are of little significance and none of them affect basic Christian doctrine.

no 2 are the same, are they?

Thank you for you prompt reply but I cannot locate this hadith using on-line searches (do you know the exact number) as it may simply be a matter of translation - though there are a few similar ones in Muwatta though to me they more often that not it is difficult to know for sure if someone is relating what the prophet said or heard the words themselves.

i told you to read, or look up An Nawawi 40 Hadeeth

Would you then accept eyewitness accounts as found in the Bible?

i am unaware of ANY contemporaneous eyewitness accounts of the life of Jesus in existence. and unaware of ANY eyewitness accounts "found in the bible!"

cheers

 

[aadil77]

In terms of Jesus then Christians regard him as God and so yes we regard him as infallible in his teaching.

yet he cried as a baby, felt hungry, needed to go the toilet etc, but was 'infallible in his teaching'

seems to me he had all the qualities of a prophet and none of those possessed by God

make sense to you?

 

[Grace Seeker]

yet he cried as a baby, felt hungry, needed to go the toilet etc, but was 'infallible in his teaching'

seems to me he had all the qualities of a prophet and none of those possessed by God

make sense to you?

He was indeed a man, fully aquainted with grief. But he was also by nature fully God. And even though he counted equality with God not something to be grasped and emptied himself of those characteristics that you appear to use as the standard for determine divine nature, we still affirm that all the fullness of God dwelled in him.

The question that Christians are divided on, is NOT whether or not Jesus was God. To be a Christian is (IMO) to affirm that he was/is God. (Sorry, Hiroshi.) The questions that Christians are divided on are (1) was Jesus always aware of his divinity or was this something that was only realized later, say after the resurrection; and (2) did Jesus know all temporal truths such as the true shape and size of the earth and that the earth moved around the sun or did he only know what was known by others of his own day? This last question address this issue regarding the fallibility or infallibility of his teaching. Was Jesus' knowledge of God born out the nature of his relationship or was it some sort of absolute knowledge?


As for it making sense. What makes sense is that the view one accepts and rejects regarding Jesus is going to be determined by which set of scriptures one accepts and rejects. The Christian scriptures present Jesus as God. Though you may think that based on Islamic teaching he doesn't fit the bill, it matters not as our scriptures tell us that he in fact was.

 

[GreyKode]

The question that Christians are divided on, is NOT whether or not Jesus was God. To be a Christian is (IMO) to affirm that he was/is God. (Sorry, Hiroshi.) The questions that Christians are divided on are (1) was Jesus always aware of his divinity or was this something that was only realized later, say after the resurrection; and (2) did Jesus know all temporal truths such as the true shape and size of the earth and that the earth moved around the sun or did he only know what was known by others of his own day? This last question address this issue regarding the fallibility or infallibility of his teaching. Was Jesus' knowledge of God born out the nature of his relationship or was it some sort of absolute knowledge?

Maybe you can explain to muslim members this concept a little bit.

 

[tango92]

Maybe you can explain to muslim members this concept a little bit.

indeed it seems like insanity of the highest order to me. a man who is god, doesnt know he is god............. words cant express what im thinking

 

[جوري]

indeed it seems like insanity of the highest order to me. a man who is god, doesnt know he is god............. words cant express what im thinking

amnesia experienced in the womb, and the breast feeding years apparently.
Glad the universe didn't collapse upon itself in that period of infancy and confusion..

Sob7an Allah, at the utterances of these fools..

 

[Insaanah]

The question that Christians are divided on, is NOT whether or not Jesus was God. To be a Christian is (IMO) to affirm that he was/is God. (Sorry, Hiroshi.) The questions that Christians are divided on are (1) was Jesus always aware of his divinity or was this something that was only realized later, say after the resurrection;

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

I said not to them except what You commanded me - "Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness." (Qur'an 5:116-117)

Peace.

 

[DavidK565]

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

I said not to them except what You commanded me - "Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness." (Qur'an 5:116-117)

Peace.

You do know that you can't invalidate someone else's religious beliefs by using your own holy book, right? That's not how it works. If the Christian Bible says Jesus is God, then to Christians, Jesus is God. The Qu'ran obviously states that he was merely a prophet, therefore, Muslims believe that he was not God. But you can't use one book to disprove the other's beliefs. Can't work.

 

[Insaanah]

You do know that you can't invalidate someone else's religious beliefs by using your own holy book, right? That's not how it works. If the Christian Bible says Jesus is God, then to Christians, Jesus is God. The Qu'ran obviously states that he was merely a prophet, therefore, Muslims believe that he was not God. But you can't use one book to disprove the other's beliefs. Can't work.

If someone feels that a quote from the Qur'an has invalidated their belief, that means they are not comfortable with their own beliefs!

Peace.

 

[DavidK565]

If someone feels that a quote from the Qur'an has invalidated their belief, that means they are not comfortable with their own beliefs!

Peace.

Religious texts naturally contradict each other. If they were all exactly the same, then there would never be any disagreement. You will always find something in the Qur'an that contradicts the Bible. And you're always going to have material in the Bible that contradicts the Qur'an. So, the argument can be flipped around and it can be said that the Bible proves that the Qur'an is wrong about Jesus, right?

But that gets us nowhere.

 

[جوري]

Religious texts naturally contradict each other. If they were all exactly the same, then there would never be any disagreement. You will always find something in the Qur'an that contradicts the Bible. And you're always going to have material in the Bible that contradicts the Qur'an. So, the argument can be flipped around and it can be said that the Bible proves that the Qur'an is wrong about Jesus, right?

But that gets us nowhere.

You don't need any holy books to invalidate Christianity, it is a mere question of logic, the piece concerned with your salvation is so convoluted, that a group of theologians can't break it down let alone understand it themselves. If God wanted his religion to be accessible to all, paupers and kings, simple and complex, then he wouldn't come up with a mangod hovering spirit fiasco, leaving the universe behind to show up in west Asia to die for something as ludicrous as eating sins and abrogating his previous commandments through a fellow he didn't choose an apostle while he was 'alive' .. is he incapable of forgiving or understanding the human condition without being born to a woman?

 

[GreyKode]

You do know that you can't invalidate someone else's religious beliefs by using your own holy book, right? That's not how it works. If the Christian Bible says Jesus is God, then to Christians, Jesus is God. The Qu'ran obviously states that he was merely a prophet, therefore, Muslims believe that he was not God. But you can't use one book to disprove the other's beliefs. Can't work.

I whole heartedly agree.

 

[DavidK565]

You don't need any holy books to invalidate Christianity, it is a mere question of logic, the piece concerned with your salvation is so convoluted, that a group of theologians can't break it down let alone understand it themselves. If God wanted his religion to be accessible to all, paupers and kings, simple and complex, then he wouldn't come up with a mangod hovering spirit fiasco, leaving the universe behind to show up in west Asia to die for something as ludicrous as eating sins and abrogating his previous commandments through a fellow he didn't choose an apostle while he was 'alive' .. is he incapable of forgiving or understanding the human condition without being born to a woman?

Uh huh.... and you're a Muslim, right? So you picked the religion that you felt suited you best. Obviously, you don't agree with Christian teachings, otherwise you would have been a Christian. Regardless of which religion you choose however, you need a certain amount of faith, and a certain amount of "mystery". Otherwise, any religion falls apart.