Sikhism- a continuation of prophet hood?

[One Man Army]

can anyone find one singular line wrong in sri Guru Granth Sahib ji? any question what so ever? i think not. The basis of sikhism is equality, humility, serving others, and remembering allah with every breath in their body. love in Guru Granth sahib ji is unexplainable. sikhs have no reason to tell anyone they are wrong and stand forward for free speech. authenticity of Guru Sahib is demonstrated through the fact that it was written by the Gurus them selves.

 

[Malaikah]

Being authentic does not make the word of God... We are not talking about the authenticity of the Sikh works but about the claim made by Sikhs that the Quran is not the original word of God.

 

[Grace Seeker]

- According to muslims the Bible and Torah are tampered with. Yes that is correct.
- We Muslim believe and we proved the massage of Allah (SWT) and the teaching of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is flawless.

Yes, this is what you believe. But proof? There is no proof of anything, regarding anything anywhere on this whole board. Nor, I would conjecture on any other religious board. Each of us, myself included, gives what we hold to be true based on the teachings which we have received as authorititative.

Proof? It is faith and belief, not proof.

 

[Malaikah]

Grace Seeker... not so fast there. There is reason and proof involved. Muslim's have very good reason to reject the NT, specifically because it was written by men and NOT God nor through Jesus directly. That doesn't need faith to understand.

Whereas the Quran is what Muhammad pbuh received from God himself.

It doesn't matter whether you believe it to be the word of God or not, the point is whether or not it is the original, what the prophets themselves claimed to be the word of God.

Jesus never said, as far as I know, that the NT is the authentic word of God (It wasn't even written in his life time). However, Prophet Muhammad did say that the Quran is the word of God... and the Quran we have today is simply the written form of what Muhammad pbuh taught his companions orally.

Grace Seeker, you position really worries me. In Islam it is not all based on faith, there is reason and logic involved. Of course there is some degree of faith, but you make it sound as if it is purely faith.... which it is not.

Now the questions for Sikhs to answer, if this corruption of the Quran happened, please highlight when and where.

 

[PCJS]

Good evening folks,

I have trying to respond to this for a couple of days now but for some reason I was having problem activating my account until I changed my email address.

Either way let me just start by saying that I don't know much about Islam. So, I will need alot of explanation in order for anybody to clarify anything about Islam to me.

First of all,

Hi there to all the sikhs out there.

But I do not see how this can be so. Prophet Muhammad said plain and clear that he was the last prophet to be sent too all of mankind. How then can you claim that there was a prophet after him? This means you have to reject the what Muhammad pbuh taught.

So what exactly is a prophet? Is it someone who was sent by God to relay the message or is it someone who becomes spiritually aware and realizes God somehow? So someone who was sent by God could be someone like Jesus Christ. Although I don't know much about Christianity either. But as far as I know, Jesus claimed to be son of God.

Please correct me if I am wrong. Mohammad Sahib was enlightened in childhood. Is this correct? When he was a child, he used wonder about God. Some times, he wondered if God was in a star and finally he was enlightened. So in that respect, Mohammad Sahib would be an example of a prophet who was enlightened later in life.

Well, Muslims reject their Holy Book because we believe that they have been tampered with and changed over time, so they no longer reflect what the prophets really taught. I assume you must also think this because you reject the concept of the Trinity and that Jesus is the son of God?

Although this has been discussed already, this is true that baani (writings of spiritual people) included in Guru Granth Sahib was actually written by the saints and gurus themselves, which is not true in case of some other religion. Yes this is true that people, regardless how close they were close to the prophets could have never ever known what exactly prophets would have written because in order for them to write exactly what prophets would have written, they would have to be in the same spiritual state as the prophets themselves and they were in the same spiritual state as the prophets, they would have been very aware of God and would also be prophets themselves.

We do not reject the the previous religions, rather we totally accept what the prophets taught (which is not necessarily reflected in their Holy Books).

But you do reject Islam. Does this mean that you reject the Holy Quran as being the real thing? Do you think it was tampered? I don't understand how you can accept Muhammad pbuh yet reject his teachings.

Although I am not speaking on behalf of anybody else, I don't see for any non-Muslim to accept or reject anything in Quran. I personally don't even know what's written in Quran. I personally simply believe in truth - the whole truth and nothing but truth. I personally don't care where the truth comes. Whether it comes from Chrisitianity, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism or something non-religious.

How can he have been the last one for Islam? Islam is the religion sent to all the prophets! So are you saying that Islam is a real religion and sikhism is a real religion too? Even though their teachings clash?

There is only one God and there is one truth and that truth is the only true religion.

Could you please advise how Sikh teachings clash with Muslim teachings? I am not aware of any. If you can come up with something that clashes, then we can determine which makes better sense logically.

Also, you mentioned that Sikhism rejects the concept of the Day of Judgement and that Paradise and Hell are only symbolic. This is a direct clash with all three major religions- Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. All three of these religions have records that these things do exist and the prophets taught that they do.

I am not sure if Sikhi rejects the concept of the Day Of Judgement. There may be different ways to put it.

If they are all the prophets of God, why do some prophets teach one thing (btw, if you reject the existence of Paradise/Hell and the Day of Judgement, you are no longer a Muslim), and then your prophets comes and says that no, they do not exist (and he is the only prophet on record who said this)?

Sorry it is so long, please do take the time to reply though.

What I really wanna know is: if there is only one God, why are there so many different religions preaching entirely differently and still they all claim to know God?

By the way, I understand that you think Bible has been tampered with and that's why don't want to be Christian. Then why not try to find out what truly was originally written in Bible and try following that?

 

[PCJS]

can anyone find one singular line wrong in sri Guru Granth Sahib ji? any question what so ever? i think not. The basis of sikhism is equality, humility, serving others, and remembering allah with every breath in their body. love in Guru Granth sahib ji is unexplainable. sikhs have no reason to tell anyone they are wrong and stand forward for free speech. authenticity of Guru Sahib is demonstrated through the fact that it was written by the Gurus them selves.

Wonderful, couldn't have said it better.

 

[Malaikah]

Thank you so much for your reply! And welcome to the forum.

So what exactly is a prophet? Is it someone who was sent by God to relay the message or is it someone who becomes spiritually aware and realizes God somehow? So someone who was sent by God could be someone like Jesus Christ. Although I don't know much about Christianity either. But as far as I know, Jesus claimed to be son of God.

A Prophet (in Islam) is someone who was sent by God Himself to guide the people to the correct path. This does not mean that God talks to the prophet directly, but he sends and Angel to him, or by other means.

Someone who 'realises' God (what ever that means?:?) is not a prophet.

The Islamic belief is that Jesus was a prophet of God, not the Son of God, and we believe he never claimed to be the Son of God at all. This is a lie that was attributed to him.

Please correct me if I am wrong. Mohammad Sahib was enlightened in childhood. Is this correct? When he was a child, he used wonder about God. Some times, he wondered if God was in a star and finally he was enlightened. So in that respect, Mohammad Sahib would be an example of a prophet who was enlightened later in life.

I do not know who that is... But he is not a prophet because he was not sent by God.

Although this has been discussed already, this is true that baani (writings of spiritual people) included in Guru Granth Sahib was actually written by the saints and gurus themselves, which is not true in case of some other religion.

All that means is that you can guarantee that your texts are really what the Guru taught. This does not mean that it is automatically the word of God though!

Yes this is true that people, regardless how close they were close to the prophets could have never ever known what exactly prophets would have written because in order for them to write exactly what prophets would have written, they would have to be in the same spiritual state as the prophets themselves and they were in the same spiritual state as the prophets, they would have been very aware of God and would also be prophets themselves.

That is not true. The Quran was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). He was not the author of the Quran. God was. Prophet Muhammad pbuh has no right to add anything to it! And he never did.

That said, verses would be revealed to the prophet, and he would read them out and teach them to the Muslims exactly as he was taught it, word for word. There is no need for some kind of spiritual state. All they needed was to understand the Arabic language.

Although I am not speaking on behalf of anybody else, I don't see for any non-Muslim to accept or reject anything in Quran. I personally don't even know what's written in Quran. I personally simply believe in truth - the whole truth and nothing but truth. I personally don't care where the truth comes. Whether it comes from Chrisitianity, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism or something non-religious.

Fair enough.... but only one of them can be the whole truth.

There is only one God and there is one truth and that truth is the only true religion.

Correct.

Could you please advise how Sikh teachings clash with Muslim teachings? I am not aware of any. If you can come up with something that clashes, then we can determine which makes better sense logically.

There are many:

1. The Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet to be sent to mankind. The Quran is the last Holy Book to be sent to mankind. How then can sikhism be a real religion when God has already told us through Prophet Muhammad that there will be no more prophets?

2. The reject of Paradise and Hell. This is an absolutely fundamental part of Islam. In fact, any person who calls himself a Muslim but does not believe in Paradise and Hell is automatically a non-Muslim. Sikhism does not believe in either of the two. How can Sikhism be a true religion and acknowledge that Paradise and Hell do not exist and at the same time claim that Moses, Jesus and Muhammad are all prophets of God, and yet all three of these prophets taught that Paradise and Hell are REAL?

That's all I can think of for now...

What I really wanna know is: if there is only one God, why are there so many different religions preaching entirely differently and still they all claim to know God?

Simply because their claims are not true. I can't talk to you about Sikhism or Hinduism or any other religion, expect for Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

The Islamic teaching is that God sent Prophet's to mankind since the start of mankind. The first human, Adam, was also a prophet. There have been literally thousands of prophets sent, and they all taught the same thing: There is only ONE God, He created us so that we may worship Him, and that when we die we will be raised up again on the Day of Judgement and God will judge between us. Those who believed in their prophets and did good deeds will go to paradise, while those while those who disbelieved in them will go to hell. Of course there is a lot more to it than that, but that is just an brief overview. The message (which I just mentioned) was the same with each prophet, was the same, but the law that each prophet had was different. So some prophets made some things illegal, while others made them legal.

Judiasm is the religion based on the Prophet Moses, and Christianity is based on the Prophet Jesus. What the prophets originally taught was the true word of God and how ever followed them was a believer and following the correct religion of that time. However, over time, the message that these prophets brought were corrupted, and people no longer knew what was taught by the prophets and what was fake and added by men later on. When ever this happens, a new messenger is sent to remind the people of the truth.

Also, when a new prophet comes, you have to follow him. It doesn't matter if you follow one prophet and reject the others. For example, Jew believe in Moses right? So that means they should go to paradise based on what I said. BUT they reject Jesus and Muhammad. You can't just pick and choose which prophet you want to follow- you have to follow the one who comes in your life time (that is, if one comes). If you reject one prophet it is like you have rejected them all and you will go to hell forever for that crime.

So, both Moses and Jesus had their message changed and corrupted, and so Prophet Muhammad was sent. The special thing about him is that he was sent to ALL of mankind, for the the rest of the time left on earth. He is the LAST prophet, there will be none after him. His message, therefore, will never be corrupted, because if it did, we will need a new prophet.

So, although you have these three main religions, only one of them is the full truth: Islam. Christianity and Judaism are only semi-true because they have had things added to them.

By the way, I understand that you think Bible has been tampered with and that's why don't want to be Christian. Then why not try to find out what truly was originally written in Bible and try following that?

Number 1: What is called the bible today is NOT what Holy Book that was revealed to Jesus. This bible was written by men (and Christians admit this also). However Christians believe God inspired the men to write it, but Muslims reject this claim. God only send Holy Books to Prophets. So this thing called the Bible is more of an (inaccurate) historical record.

Number 2: We can not find the original Book revealed to Jesus, it was lost.

Numerb 3: The Holy Quran abrogates everything that was sent before it. Even if we have the original bible, we can only read it, but not follow its laws. We must follow the laws of the Quran, because we live in the time of Muhammad, not Jesus.

I hope that helps! Sorry it was so long. hew

 

[Grace Seeker]

The Quran was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). He did not write the Quran. God wrote it.

I thought that companions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) wrote it down. On what did God write it? Where is the original message that God himself wrote? I would rather read this than a book that had Gabriel, Muhammad (pbuh) and the companions as intermediaries.

 

[Malaikah]

Oh, you misunderstood. I meant 'wrote' as in, God was the author, not Muhammad.

I shall edit that inshaallah.

 

[PCJS]

A Prophet (in Islam) is someone who was sent by God Himself to guide the people to the correct path. This does not mean that God talks to the prophet directly, but he sends and Angel to him, or by other means.

Someone who 'realises' God (what ever that means?:?) is not a prophet.

So when you someone sent by God, does it mean that this person was born with the message of God or can someone become aware of the message later in life??

The Islamic belief is that Jesus was a prophet of God, not the Son of God, and we believe he never claimed to be the Son of God at all. This is a lie that was attributed to him.

What makes you believe that contradicts what Christians' belief that Jesus was son of God?

All that means is that you can guarantee that your texts are really what the Guru taught. This does not mean that it is automatically the word of God though!

Guru Nanak Dev Ji said,"Jaisi me aave khasam ki baani, tainsarha kari giyaan ve laalo" meaning I am simply preaching what's being taught to me by God...

There is also very good shabad by one of other gurus and I remember part of it: It says: adhishat agochar pakrhiya gurshabadi meaning through God has been revealed to me through my guru.

So the authenticity means that God was actually revealed to saints and gurus and it was claimed by themselves rather than someone else. I can assure you that there are many quotes from Guru Granth Sahib that tell us that God was revealed to all the gurus and saints whose baani is included in Guru Granth Sahib...


That is not true. The Quran was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). He was not the author of the Quran. God was. Prophet Muhammad pbuh has no right to add anything to it! And he never did.

That said, verses would be revealed to the prophet, and he would read them out and teach them to the Muslims exactly as he was taught it, word for word. There is no need for some kind of spiritual state. All they needed was to understand the Arabic language.

Fair enough.... but only one of them can be the whole truth.

Now how do you know which religion is true and which one is not? How would you and I know a way to determine whether or not a religion is true?

There are many:

1. The Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet to be sent to mankind. The Quran is the last Holy Book to be sent to mankind. How then can sikhism be a real religion when God has already told us through Prophet Muhammad that there will be no more prophets?

2. The reject of Paradise and Hell. This is an absolutely fundamental part of Islam. In fact, any person who calls himself a Muslim but does not believe in Paradise and Hell is automatically a non-Muslim. Sikhism does not believe in either of the two. How can Sikhism be a true religion and acknowledge that Paradise and Hell do not exist and at the same time claim that Moses, Jesus and Muhammad are all prophets of God, and yet all three of these prophets taught that Paradise and Hell are REAL?

That's all I can think of for now...

Something to think about...

Hinduism is the oldest religion. Following your logic, it could be questioned that how come any religion founded after Hinduism could be a real religion?

There is something called Sachkhand in Sikhism. As far as I know this is simply another way to express what heaven or paradise is. Then there is concept of re-incarnation, which is a concept of Hinduism as well, which happened to be the oldest religion.

Simply because their claims are not true. I can't talk to you about Sikhism or Hinduism or any other religion, expect for Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Why would you say that claims are not true?

If you reject one prophet it is like you have rejected them all and you will go to hell forever for that crime.

So, both Moses and Jesus had their message changed and corrupted, and so Prophet Muhammad was sent. The special thing about him is that he was sent to ALL of mankind, for the the rest of the time left on earth. He is the LAST prophet, there will be none after him. His message, therefore, will never be corrupted, because if it did, we will need a new prophet.

So, although you have these three main religions, only one of them is the full truth: Islam. Christianity and Judaism are only semi-true because they have had things added to them.


Number 1: What is called the bible today is NOT what Holy Book that was revealed to Jesus. This bible was written by men (and Christians admit this also). However Christians believe God inspired the men to write it, but Muslims reject this claim. God only send Holy Books to Prophets. So this thing called the Bible is more of an (inaccurate) historical record.

Number 2: We can not find the original Book revealed to Jesus, it was lost.

Numerb 3: The Holy Quran abrogates everything that was sent before it. Even if we have the original bible, we can only read it, but not follow its laws. We must follow the laws of the Quran, because we live in the time of Muhammad, not Jesus.

I hope that helps! Sorry it was so long. hew

So what exactly does rejecting a prophet mean? Since you claim that nobody know the whole truth about Jesus and Moses, how do you make sure that you are not rejecting their teachings?

 

[Malaikah]

On what did God write it? Where is the original message that God himself wrote? I would rather read this than a book that had Gabriel, Muhammad (pbuh) and the companions as intermediaries.

It is the one and the same book, word for word. God promised to preserve it.

God wrote it on The Preserved Tablet, on which he wrote every single thing that will happen in this universe, so that even if a leaf fell of a tree, it is recorded. All the Holy Books that where ever sent to the Prophets are written on it also. This was all written before the creation of the universe.

I do not know why you make this demand to read the book as it was written by God Himself, as if it is a problem that it went through the Angel Gabrial, the Prophet Muhammad and memories of hundreds of companions, when your own 'Holy' Book was written by men who where not prophets at all?:?

EDIT- I forgot to mention that this Tablet is in the heavens somewhere...

 

[Malaikah]

So when you someone sent by God, does it mean that this person was born with the message of God or can someone become aware of the message later in life??

They are not usually born prophets. But it depends on the circumstances. For example prophet Jesus spoke when He was born and told the people that he was a prophet of God, but he did not take on the responsibility of being a prophet until he was mature.

Prophet Muhammad did not become a prophet until he was 40 years old, but before that he was a very righteous person.

What makes you believe that contradicts what Christians' belief that Jesus was son of God?

The son of God means that Jesus was himself God! He was not God, he was a human like the rest of us!

Guru Nanak Dev Ji said,"Jaisi me aave khasam ki baani, tainsarha kari giyaan ve laalo" meaning I am simply preaching what's being taught to me by God...

There is also very good shabad by one of other gurus and I remember part of it: It says: adhishat agochar pakrhiya gurshabadi meaning through God has been revealed to me through my guru.

So the authenticity means that God was actually revealed to saints and gurus and it was claimed by themselves rather than someone else. I can assure you that there are many quotes from Guru Granth Sahib that tell us that God was revealed to all the gurus and saints whose baani is included in Guru Granth Sahib...

Anyone can claim to be a prophet though, that does not mean he IS one. But that is not the topic of this thread...

Now how do you know which religion is true and which one is not? How would you and I know a way to determine whether or not a religion is true?

We use out intellect. We ask question like, was the original message of the religion preserved? Does the message make sense? Does the way the religion views God make sense? Was the person claiming to be a prophet an honest and decent man, or was he a liar? Did he have enemies? If he did, why did they hate him? Because he was an oppressor, or because they could not stand to loose their own power to someone who was coming with a decent message? etc...

Hinduism is the oldest religion. Following your logic, it could be questioned that how come any religion founded after Hinduism could be a real religion?

That was not my logic at all! It is not a question of whether Hinduism is an old religion or not, the question is, was this religion ever the real religion revealed to a prophet by God?

Why would you say that claims are not true?

Because I am a Muslim.

So what exactly does rejecting a prophet mean? Since you claim that nobody know the whole truth about Jesus and Moses, how do you make sure that you are not rejecting their teachings?

Rejecting a prophet means that you do not believe that he is the messenger of God, and you disbelieve in his message.

I know I am not rejecting the teachings of Moses and Jesus because prophet Muhammad told us what their teachings were. They are exactly like the teachings of Islam, except that they have a different law. But anyway, they are not my prophets. I only need to acknowledge that they are prophets of God and that everything the Prophet Muhammad said about them was true. I follow the teachings of Muhammad, not Moses and Jesus.

I think we have moved away from the purpose of this thread. Sikhs already believe that Muhammad is a prophet, i do not need to prove that to you. The point is to discuss how does Sikhism fit in with Islam. My last relavent point on that topic is that the Quran has been preserved as the prophet taught it, so how can sikhs openly go against the Quran when they believe that it was the word of God?

 

[Grace Seeker]

It is the one and the same book, word for word. God promised to preserve it.

God wrote it on The Preserved Tablet, on which he wrote every single thing that will happen in this universe, so that even if a leaf fell of a tree, it is recorded. All the Holy Books that where ever sent to the Prophets are written on it also. This was all written before the creation of the universe.

I do not know why you make this demand to read the book as it was written by God Himself, as if it is a problem that it went through the Angel Gabrial, the Prophet Muhammad and memories of hundreds of companions, when your own 'Holy' Book was written by men who where not prophets at all?:?

EDIT- I forgot to mention that this Tablet is in the heavens somewhere...

So, in Islamic belief, there actually is a physical book written by the hand of God somewhere? Interesting.



And, who said that the men who penned our Holy Book were not prophets? I have said that in regards to the New Testament they did not claim to be writting canonical books at the time of their writing. That doesn't mean they were not prophets.

First, we believe the following books were written by people who God himself declares to be prophets:
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy -- all by Moses
Then the following by the Prophet whose name they bear:
1 & 2 Samuel
Isaiah
Jeremiah (who also wrote Lamentations)
Ezekiel
Daniel
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah (NOT the Zechariah you are familiar with as the father of John the Baptist)
Malachi

In addition, most of the Psalms were written by David who is considered a prophet in Islam, though we think of him primarily as a king.

Now the Christian understanding of prophethood is two-fold. It is in its most narrow since a person who receives a message from God which fortells the future. But the greater sense is that prophecy is speaking forth on God's behalf. Whether it be to deliver a whole series of messages or a one-time occurance. As such Christians probably recognize more prophets than any other religion, though we don't hang that moniker on every person who fulfills that role. For this reason, we would agree with you that David was not only a king, but a prophet. And likewise Solomon who wrote Proverbs

Certainly the writer of the book of Revelation, John, was a prophet as he is delivering in it a very specific message from God. This is the same John who wrote the Gospel of John and three letters in the New Testament.

We also read of Paul having the gift of prophecy, and he wrote 13 of the 27 books of the New Testament.

And in reality, as all of the writers were writing as a means of speaking forth on God's behalf, they are all prophets. So, while Islam may say that the writers of our Holy Book were not prophets, that is not what we say.

 

[Malaikah]

So, in Islamic belief, there actually is a physical book written by the hand of God somewhere? Interesting.

Not by his hand. He created a pen and ordered it to write.

The issue of prophecy then is something we disagree on.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Not by his hand. He created a pen and ordered it to write.

Clear on that. Is that some place in the Qu'ran? I don't remember reading it. Or does it come from some other source?

The issue of prophecy then is something we disagree on.

Sure. It is these background understandins of what prophecy even is which we need to continue to communicate about so that we can better understand each other. With differing views of what prophecy itself is and what it means to be a prophet, we will of course have different views as to how even the original Injeel could have been authoritative, let alone any concerns you have for it being corrupted now. However, I think by the list of prophets who wrote books in the Tanakh that you can see that we still have many books written by people woulld be a prophet as you define prophethood. (Remember all the books of the Tanakh are also part of the Christian Bible.)

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

It is the one and the same book, word for word. God promised to preserve it.

God wrote it on The Preserved Tablet, on which he wrote every single thing that will happen in this universe, so that even if a leaf fell of a tree, it is recorded. All the Holy Books that where ever sent to the Prophets are written on it also. This was all written before the creation of the universe.

I do not know why you make this demand to read the book as it was written by God Himself, as if it is a problem that it went through the Angel Gabrial, the Prophet Muhammad and memories of hundreds of companions, when your own 'Holy' Book was written by men who where not prophets at all?:?EDIT- I forgot to mention that this Tablet is in the heavens somewhere...

Says you! - Christians don't acknowledge Mohammed to be a prophet, does that mean Muslims agree? No. The birth of Guru Nanak was miraculous, can't say the same about Mohammed can we. I'm trying not to make personal attacks, but claming you're right, and all others are wrong is not going to work.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

It is the one and the same book, word for word. God promised to preserve it.

God wrote it on The Preserved Tablet, on which he wrote every single thing that will happen in this universe, so that even if a leaf fell of a tree, it is recorded. All the Holy Books that where ever sent to the Prophets are written on it also. This was all written before the creation of the universe.

Really? Where is this Preserved Tablet? I'd love to see it.

 

[PCJS]

They are not usually born prophets. But it depends on the circumstances. For example prophet Jesus spoke when He was born and told the people that he was a prophet of God, but he did not take on the responsibility of being a prophet until he was mature.

Prophet Muhammad did not become a prophet until he was 40 years old, but before that he was a very righteous person.

So this is what I meant when I said if someone realized God later in life which you were confused about. Realizing God is another way to say that God revealed Himself.

The son of God means that Jesus was himself God! He was not God, he was a human like the rest of us!

Only Jesus and his followers would know what kind of relationship he had with God. But you and I should have no reason to believe that he didn't have father/son relationship with God if Christians believe so. Just like you believe that whatever you know about Islam is true, people of all religions believe that whatever they know about their religion is absolutely true and we shouldn't argue otherwise without knowing the whole truth and we could not know the truth without witnessing it or without being so spiritually wise that we understand everything about God.

Anyone can claim to be a prophet though, that does not mean he IS one. But that is not the topic of this thread...

If we had to follow your logic, then how would we know that any of the prophets were really prophets?

We use out intellect. We ask question like, was the original message of the religion preserved? Does the message make sense? Does the way the religion views God make sense? Was the person claiming to be a prophet an honest and decent man, or was he a liar? Did he have enemies? If he did, why did they hate him? Because he was an oppressor, or because they could not stand to loose their own power to someone who was coming with a decent message? etc...

The original message of Sikhism is preserved and is still the same as it was in the beginning of the world and will remain true till the end. Yes we have used our intellect and it makes perfect sense to us that God revealed Himself to gurus and saints whose baani is included in Guru Granth Sahib. Rest of your quote doesn't apply to any of the gurus and saints mentioned above.

That was not my logic at all! It is not a question of whether Hinduism is an old religion or not, the question is, was this religion ever the real religion revealed to a prophet by God?

Let's think for a minute. If you had never seen Sun, would you know if Sun existed? The same way, if God didn't reveal Himself to anybody in what we call Hinduism today, would they really know that God existed?


My Quote was:
Why would you say that claims are not true?
and your answer was:
Because I am a Muslim.

So what does this mean?

Rejecting a prophet means that you do not believe that he is the messenger of God, and you disbelieve in his message.

I know I am not rejecting the teachings of Moses and Jesus because prophet Muhammad told us what their teachings were. They are exactly like the teachings of Islam, except that they have a different law. But anyway, they are not my prophets. I only need to acknowledge that they are prophets of God and that everything the Prophet Muhammad said about them was true. I follow the teachings of Muhammad, not Moses and Jesus.

OK, originally you said that one must believe in all three prophet. Otherwise, they go to hell and now you are saying that Moses and Jesus were not your prophet. That means you don't believe in Moses and Jesus. So basically you are contradicting yourself. This is your quote:

Also, when a new prophet comes, you have to follow him. It doesn't matter if you follow one prophet and reject the others. For example, Jew believe in Moses right? So that means they should go to paradise based on what I said. BUT they reject Jesus and Muhammad. You can't just pick and choose which prophet you want to follow- you have to follow the one who comes in your life time (that is, if one comes). If you reject one prophet it is like you have rejected them all and you will go to hell forever for that crime.

I think we have moved away from the purpose of this thread. Sikhs already believe that Muhammad is a prophet, i do not need to prove that to you. The point is to discuss how does Sikhism fit in with Islam. My last relavent point on that topic is that the Quran has been preserved as the prophet taught it, so how can sikhs openly go against the Quran when they believe that it was the word of God?

Sikhism doesn't need to fit in with any religion. Just because Sikhism is the youngest religion, it doesn't mean it needs to fit in with other religions.

 

[PCJS]

I think we have moved away from the purpose of this thread. Sikhs already believe that Muhammad is a prophet, i do not need to prove that to you. The point is to discuss how does Sikhism fit in with Islam. My last relavent point on that topic is that the Quran has been preserved as the prophet taught it, so how can sikhs openly go against the Quran when they believe that it was the word of God?

If all religions had to fit in with previous religions, then following your own logic all religions must fit in with Hinduism...

 

[Grace Seeker]

If all religions had to fit in with previous religions, then following your own logic all religions must fit in with Hinduism...

I don't think that follows from what Malaikah has said.

As I understood her point, you claim that Muhammad (pbuh) was a prophet, yet you do not keep the whole of his message. And the reason the second half of that statement is true, is because Muhammad said that he was the last prophet, and yet you claim to follow other people's supposed revelations of God, not just Muhammad's. Speaking as a prophet, Muhammad would have none of that, either you follow what he has shared or you do not; you cannot pick and choose what of which Muhammad has shared and still be a follower of Muhammad as Muhammad would have recognized what it means to be a follower.

As a Christian, I would say almost the same thing about Jesus' message. (I'll let Malaikah throw these words back at me later. :statisfie ) You cannot be a follower of Jesus and yet teach and practice things that are contrary to the teaching and practice of Jesus.



From what I have read in this thread, it seems that Sikhism has a lot in common with Bahai understanding in which they claim to accept pretty much accept all the teachings of other religions incorporating them into their own faith, each person as individually led by God to do so in faith and practice. And yet, in truth, by trying to incorporate all, they in effect reject them all as well. For religions like Islam, Christianity, and Judaim make exclusivist claims which cannot be abandoned and still be a incorporating those faith, nor be accepting of their progenitors as true articulators of faith in God.