Print Page | Close Window

Christians and Jews Will receive a Double Reward

Printed From: IslamiCity.com
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Interfaith Dialogue
Forum Discription: It is for Interfaith dialogue, where Muslims discuss with non-Muslims. We encourge that dialogue takes place in a cordial atmosphere on various topics including religious tolerance.
URL: http://www.IslamiCity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24591
Printed Date: 31 October 2014 at 12:44am


Topic: Christians and Jews Will receive a Double Reward
Posted By: Abu Loren
Subject: Christians and Jews Will receive a Double Reward
Date Posted: 06 January 2013 at 2:34am
As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."



Replies:
Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 06 January 2013 at 9:31pm
Originally posted by Abu Loren

As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

Salaam Alaikum.

Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?

Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?


Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 07 January 2013 at 2:14am
Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by Abu Loren

As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

Salaam Alaikum.

Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?

Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?
 
Wa Alaikkum,
 
This applies to all Jews and Christians who follow the Muhammadan Covenent since Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) was chosen as the final messenger to mankind.
 
No, you are wrong. It means (to my understanding) that if one who is a Jew or a Christian believe that the Torah was given to Prophet Musa (Alayhi Salaam) and the Injil was given to Masih Isa (Alayhi Salaam) and followed their example in believing that there is only One God, prayed to this One God and gave charity and fasted, believing in His angels, pre-destination etc and then believing in the final revelation that is the Holy Qur'an.
 
Further, a Christian who used to believe in the Trinity and prayed to Isa Ibna Maryam (Alayhi Salaam) and abandoned that belief system and embraced Islam (submitted himself wholly to the One God) and believe in what Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) brought.
 
Ever since the final revelation was given, one must believe in it to achieve salvation.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 07 January 2013 at 5:29am
There are also verses similar to this in the Quran but it only applies to the (Unitarian)Christians before Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Jews before Prophets Zechariah, John and Jesus(PBUT).


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 09 January 2013 at 5:27am
Originally posted by Abu Loren

Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by Abu Loren

As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

Salaam Alaikum.

Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?

Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?
 
Wa Alaikkum,
 
This applies to all Jews and Christians who follow the Muhammadan Covenent since Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) was chosen as the final messenger to mankind.
 
No, you are wrong. It means (to my understanding) that if one who is a Jew or a Christian believe that the Torah was given to Prophet Musa (Alayhi Salaam) and the Injil was given to Masih Isa (Alayhi Salaam) and followed their example in believing that there is only One God, prayed to this One God and gave charity and fasted, believing in His angels, pre-destination etc and then believing in the final revelation that is the Holy Qur'an.
 
Further, a Christian who used to believe in the Trinity and prayed to Isa Ibna Maryam (Alayhi Salaam) and abandoned that belief system and embraced Islam (submitted himself wholly to the One God) and believe in what Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) brought.
 
Ever since the final revelation was given, one must believe in it to achieve salvation.


Wa Alaykum salaam, Abu Loren. Thank you for your answer. You said that if a Christian believes the Torah was given to Moses and the Injil was given to Jesus and followed their example by believing there is only one God, prayed to Him, have charity and fasted and believed in His angels, predestination and then believed in the Quran, he or she will be saved.

A problem I see with this statement is that aside from the Quran, to the best of my knowledge there is no evidence or even any claim of the existence of a book that was revealed to Jesus. Christians believe that the story of Jesus is found in the Gospels, which were written by people who God inspired and who knew Him or knew those who knew Him. I am unaware of any Christian group, sect or denomination prior to the coming of Muhammad or today for that matter that believes that a book was revealed to Jesus- orthodox or otherwise. I am unaware of any non-Muslim claims that such a book is or ever was in existence.

How could a Christian believe that God sent a book to Jesus prior to him or her believing in the Quran? There is no record outside of the Quran or hadiths of such a book either existing or in anyone believing in the existence of such a book. If I am wrong on that, please show me sources that prove otherwise.

Another problem I see is that, according to the translation at least of the hadith that you posted, the word "believed in" is written both in regards to the Quran and the earlier Book.
If you are arguing that by "believed in" an earlier book it means only that a person believed it was given to Jesus, then there is no reason to assume "believed in" another book (ie the Quran) would not mean only believing in it was given to Muhammad. However, if I am not mistaken believing in the Quran means following what it says.

If we argue that "believed in" means to follow what was in it, that would apply to the Quran well but the problem would be that people in Muhammad's time were following the Injil which

a) there is no proof that I am aware of outside the Quran that such a book exists or ever has existed

and

b) would contradict the claim that many Muslims that Christians are basing their theology on corrupted scriptures.


Lastly, you wrote:

Further, a Christian who used to believe in the Trinity and prayed to Isa Ibna Maryam (Alayhi Salaam) and abandoned that belief system and embraced Islam (submitted himself wholly to the One God) and believe in what Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) brought.

I would fit that category for the underlined part, however the Book that I follow is the Bible and the Gospels in it were not given to Jesus by God but rather are accounts of His teachings and some of the things that He did.


This is an interesting discussion. Looking forward to hearing your views on this.

Salaam.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 09 January 2013 at 5:30am
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

There are also verses similar to this in the Quran but it only applies to the (Unitarian)Christians before Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Jews before Prophets Zechariah, John and Jesus(PBUT).


Which verses?

According to Abu Loren it does not apply only  to Unitarian "christians". What proof do you have it only applies to them?

I put the word christians beside Unitarian in brackets because I do not believe they are following the Bible's teachings, like I am sure you do not believe that muslims like the Nation of Islam, Submitters International, Ahmadiyya are following Islam.


Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 10 January 2013 at 12:18am
Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

There are also verses similar to this in the Quran but it only applies to the (Unitarian)Christians before Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Jews before Prophets Zechariah, John and Jesus(PBUT).


Which verses?

According to Abu Loren it does not apply only  to Unitarian "christians". What proof do you have it only applies to them?

I put the word christians beside Unitarian in brackets because I do not believe they are following the Bible's teachings, like I am sure you do not believe that muslims like the Nation of Islam, Submitters International, Ahmadiyya are following Islam.
 
You're just over-complicating things. A Jew and a Christian who accepts Islam will receive a double reward.


Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 10 January 2013 at 12:20am
Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by Abu Loren

Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by Abu Loren

As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

Salaam Alaikum.

Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?

Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?
 
Wa Alaikkum,
 
This applies to all Jews and Christians who follow the Muhammadan Covenent since Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) was chosen as the final messenger to mankind.
 
No, you are wrong. It means (to my understanding) that if one who is a Jew or a Christian believe that the Torah was given to Prophet Musa (Alayhi Salaam) and the Injil was given to Masih Isa (Alayhi Salaam) and followed their example in believing that there is only One God, prayed to this One God and gave charity and fasted, believing in His angels, pre-destination etc and then believing in the final revelation that is the Holy Qur'an.
 
Further, a Christian who used to believe in the Trinity and prayed to Isa Ibna Maryam (Alayhi Salaam) and abandoned that belief system and embraced Islam (submitted himself wholly to the One God) and believe in what Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) brought.
 
Ever since the final revelation was given, one must believe in it to achieve salvation.


Wa Alaykum salaam, Abu Loren. Thank you for your answer. You said that if a Christian believes the Torah was given to Moses and the Injil was given to Jesus and followed their example by believing there is only one God, prayed to Him, have charity and fasted and believed in His angels, predestination and then believed in the Quran, he or she will be saved.

A problem I see with this statement is that aside from the Quran, to the best of my knowledge there is no evidence or even any claim of the existence of a book that was revealed to Jesus. Christians believe that the story of Jesus is found in the Gospels, which were written by people who God inspired and who knew Him or knew those who knew Him. I am unaware of any Christian group, sect or denomination prior to the coming of Muhammad or today for that matter that believes that a book was revealed to Jesus- orthodox or otherwise. I am unaware of any non-Muslim claims that such a book is or ever was in existence.

How could a Christian believe that God sent a book to Jesus prior to him or her believing in the Quran? There is no record outside of the Quran or hadiths of such a book either existing or in anyone believing in the existence of such a book. If I am wrong on that, please show me sources that prove otherwise.

Another problem I see is that, according to the translation at least of the hadith that you posted, the word "believed in" is written both in regards to the Quran and the earlier Book.
If you are arguing that by "believed in" an earlier book it means only that a person believed it was given to Jesus, then there is no reason to assume "believed in" another book (ie the Quran) would not mean only believing in it was given to Muhammad. However, if I am not mistaken believing in the Quran means following what it says.

If we argue that "believed in" means to follow what was in it, that would apply to the Quran well but the problem would be that people in Muhammad's time were following the Injil which

a) there is no proof that I am aware of outside the Quran that such a book exists or ever has existed

and

b) would contradict the claim that many Muslims that Christians are basing their theology on corrupted scriptures.


Lastly, you wrote:

Further, a Christian who used to believe in the Trinity and prayed to Isa Ibna Maryam (Alayhi Salaam) and abandoned that belief system and embraced Islam (submitted himself wholly to the One God) and believe in what Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) brought.

I would fit that category for the underlined part, however the Book that I follow is the Bible and the Gospels in it were not given to Jesus by God but rather are accounts of His teachings and some of the things that He did.


This is an interesting discussion. Looking forward to hearing your views on this.

Salaam.
 
Sorry I'm just bored out of my skull with all this dissection. I thought what I've posted was prettey clear.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 10 January 2013 at 5:02am
Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

There are also verses similar to this in the Quran but it only applies to the (Unitarian)Christians before Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Jews before Prophets Zechariah, John and Jesus(PBUT).


Which verses?

According to Abu Loren it does not apply only  to Unitarian "christians". What proof do you have it only applies to them?

I put the word christians beside Unitarian in brackets because I do not believe they are following the Bible's teachings, like I am sure you do not believe that muslims like the Nation of Islam, Submitters International, Ahmadiyya are following Islam.
 
Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
—Qur'an, sura 2 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Baqarah - Al-Baqarah ), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayah - ayat 62
 
Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book (the Jews and Christians) are a portion that stand (for the right): They rehearse the Signs of God all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration.
They believe in God and the Last Day; they enjoin what is right, and forbid what is wrong; and they hasten (in emulation) in (all) good works. They are in the ranks of the righteous.
Of the good that they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for God knoweth well those that do right.
—Qur'an, sura 3 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Imran - Al-Imran ), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayah - ayat 113-115

And there are, certainly, among the People of the Book (the Jews and Christians), those who believe in God, in the revelation given to you, and in the revelation given to them, bowing in humility to God: They will not sell the Signs of God for a miserable gain! For them is a reward with their Lord, and God is swift in account.

—Qur'an, sura 3 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Imran - Al-Imran ), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayah - ayat 199
 
Here is a detailed interpretation of the above verses:
http://islamqa.info/en/ref/2912 - http://islamqa.info/en/ref/2912
 
Also Note that I said Unitarian Christians BEFORE Prophet Muhammad(Time Period) as they were not obligated to follow him since he wasn't yet born etc.
Unitarianism is not a sect but a type of Christian theology where they do not believe in the Trinity, Divinity of Jesus or Divine Sonship of Jesus(PBUH), which is similar to Islamic Doctrine.
I hope that anwers any questions.Smile
 


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 10 January 2013 at 3:57pm
Originally posted by Abu Loren

Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by Abu Loren

Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by Abu Loren

As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

Salaam Alaikum.

Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?

Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?
 
Wa Alaikkum,
 
This applies to all Jews and Christians who follow the Muhammadan Covenent since Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) was chosen as the final messenger to mankind.
 
No, you are wrong. It means (to my understanding) that if one who is a Jew or a Christian believe that the Torah was given to Prophet Musa (Alayhi Salaam) and the Injil was given to Masih Isa (Alayhi Salaam) and followed their example in believing that there is only One God, prayed to this One God and gave charity and fasted, believing in His angels, pre-destination etc and then believing in the final revelation that is the Holy Qur'an.
 
Further, a Christian who used to believe in the Trinity and prayed to Isa Ibna Maryam (Alayhi Salaam) and abandoned that belief system and embraced Islam (submitted himself wholly to the One God) and believe in what Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) brought.
 
Ever since the final revelation was given, one must believe in it to achieve salvation.


Wa Alaykum salaam, Abu Loren. Thank you for your answer. You said that if a Christian believes the Torah was given to Moses and the Injil was given to Jesus and followed their example by believing there is only one God, prayed to Him, have charity and fasted and believed in His angels, predestination and then believed in the Quran, he or she will be saved.

A problem I see with this statement is that aside from the Quran, to the best of my knowledge there is no evidence or even any claim of the existence of a book that was revealed to Jesus. Christians believe that the story of Jesus is found in the Gospels, which were written by people who God inspired and who knew Him or knew those who knew Him. I am unaware of any Christian group, sect or denomination prior to the coming of Muhammad or today for that matter that believes that a book was revealed to Jesus- orthodox or otherwise. I am unaware of any non-Muslim claims that such a book is or ever was in existence.

How could a Christian believe that God sent a book to Jesus prior to him or her believing in the Quran? There is no record outside of the Quran or hadiths of such a book either existing or in anyone believing in the existence of such a book. If I am wrong on that, please show me sources that prove otherwise.

Another problem I see is that, according to the translation at least of the hadith that you posted, the word "believed in" is written both in regards to the Quran and the earlier Book.
If you are arguing that by "believed in" an earlier book it means only that a person believed it was given to Jesus, then there is no reason to assume "believed in" another book (ie the Quran) would not mean only believing in it was given to Muhammad. However, if I am not mistaken believing in the Quran means following what it says.

If we argue that "believed in" means to follow what was in it, that would apply to the Quran well but the problem would be that people in Muhammad's time were following the Injil which

a) there is no proof that I am aware of outside the Quran that such a book exists or ever has existed

and

b) would contradict the claim that many Muslims that Christians are basing their theology on corrupted scriptures.


Lastly, you wrote:

Further, a Christian who used to believe in the Trinity and prayed to Isa Ibna Maryam (Alayhi Salaam) and abandoned that belief system and embraced Islam (submitted himself wholly to the One God) and believe in what Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) brought.

I would fit that category for the underlined part, however the Book that I follow is the Bible and the Gospels in it were not given to Jesus by God but rather are accounts of His teachings and some of the things that He did.


This is an interesting discussion. Looking forward to hearing your views on this.

Salaam.
 
Sorry I'm just bored out of my skull with all this dissection. I thought what I've posted was prettey clear.


Salaam Alaikum, Abu Loren.

If you don't want to continue this discussion now or at all, it is your choice. The hadith you quoted raised a lot of questions about Islamic beliefs on Christian scriptures.

I will restate my points for you if you do decide to continue this discussion, and for others who may be reading and may want to jump in.

The hadith claims that people who believed in earlier books and then followed the book sent to them will get a double reward.

This allegedly applies to Christians and Jews who believed in the existence of the Torah and Injil and followed a set of practices (like charity, prayer, etc) and then believed in another book that came to them. This you claim also applies to Christians who believe God is a Trinity.

Here are some of my points.

1) I am unaware of any non-Islamic historical or theological belief in the existence of a book that was revealed to Jesus. I am unaware of any Christian orthodox or heretical groups now or in the past who believed or made any allusion to the existence of such a book. I am unaware of any non-Muslim secular source confirming that such a book ever existed, or that Christians or other non-Muslims at any time in history prior to the coming of Muhammad believed in the existence of such a text. More importantly, I am unaware of any Arabic or other middle-eastern church, denomination or Christian group (heretical or not) prior to the coming of Muhammad that stated or believed that such a book exists.

Yet, according to the hadith, the Christians who believed in the Quran first believed in the Injil. I see absolutely no historical evidence that a book called the "Injil" or a book that was revealed to Jesus by God ever existed or was believed to have existed by non-Muslims.

2) If by "believing in" the earlier book and the book that has now come means simply believing in its existence, then the Christians who became Muslims were not good Muslims since you believe you are instructed to follow what is in the Quran.

3) If, on the other hand, "believing in" the earlier book and the book that has now come means following what is in it, this means that Christians had the Injil with them during the time of Muhammad and the problems with this assertion is that

a) According to what Muslims believe, Christians base their theology on corrupted Scripture, yet this would mean that Christians in Muhammad's time still had the book God allegedly gave to Jesus

and

b) This brings us back to the lack of any non-Islamic historical evidence that a book like the "Injil" exists or ever has existed. One would think that the Christians who followed the Injil and then followed the Quran would preserve and not destroy what God previously gave to them.

Take care.




Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 10 January 2013 at 4:01pm
 
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

There are also verses similar to this in the Quran but it only applies to the (Unitarian)Christians before Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Jews before Prophets Zechariah, John and Jesus(PBUT).


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Which verses?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

According to Abu Loren it does not apply only  to Unitarian "christians". What proof do you have it only applies to them?

I put the word christians beside Unitarian in brackets because I do not believe they are following the Bible's teachings, like I am sure you do not believe that muslims like the Nation of Islam, Submitters International, Ahmadiyya are following Islam.
 
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
—Qur'an, sura 2 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Baqarah - Al-Baqarah ), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayah - ayat 62
 
Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book (the Jews and Christians) are a portion that stand (for the right): They rehearse the Signs of God all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration.
They believe in God and the Last Day; they enjoin what is right, and forbid what is wrong; and they hasten (in emulation) in (all) good works. They are in the ranks of the righteous.
Of the good that they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for God knoweth well those that do right.
—Qur'an, sura 3 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Imran - Al-Imran ), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayah - ayat 113-115

And there are, certainly, among the People of the Book (the Jews and Christians), those who believe in God, in the revelation given to you, and in the revelation given to them, bowing in humility to God: They will not sell the Signs of God for a miserable gain! For them is a reward with their Lord, and God is swift in account.

—Qur'an, sura 3 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Imran - Al-Imran ), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayah - ayat 199
 
Here is a detailed interpretation of the above verses:
http://islamqa.info/en/ref/2912 - http://islamqa.info/en/ref/2912
 
Also Note that I said Unitarian Christians BEFORE Prophet Muhammad(Time Period) as they were not obligated to follow him since he wasn't yet born etc.
Unitarianism is not a sect but a type of Christian theology where they do not believe in the Trinity, Divinity of Jesus or Divine Sonship of Jesus(PBUH), which is similar to Islamic Doctrine.
I hope that anwers any questions.Smile
 


Salaam Alaikum, 786SalaamKhan.

I see what you mean by Unitarian 'christians' who lived before Muhammad. 

If these 'christians' lived before Muhammad, how could they have had another book (which you believe is the Quran) come to them? Did the Quran come before Muhammad?

PS on an unrelated note, where is this hadith from? Is it from an authentic hadith collection?


Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."



Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 11 January 2013 at 12:23am
[/QUOTE]

Salaam Alaikum, 786SalaamKhan.

I see what you mean by Unitarian 'christians' who lived before Muhammad. 

If these 'christians' lived before Muhammad, how could they have had another book (which you believe is the Quran) come to them? Did the Quran come before Muhammad?

PS on an unrelated note, where is this hadith from? Is it from an authentic hadith collection?
[/QUOTE]

Wa Alaikum,

You're just making things complicated, I myself never claimed that the Quran came before Muhammad(PBUH) nor do I know where you got that idea.

Also from before when you said there is no proof outside the Quran about the Gospel given to Jesus(PBUH), the scholars say that the Gospel was most likely divinely inspired rather than written down; makes sense since Gospel means "Good News".



Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 11 January 2013 at 1:22pm
Originally posted by TG12345



1) I am unaware of any non-Islamic historical or theological belief in the existence of a book that was revealed to Jesus. I am unaware of any Christian orthodox or heretical groups now or in the past who believed or made any allusion to the existence of such a book. I am unaware of any non-Muslim secular source confirming that such a book ever existed, or that Christians or other non-Muslims at any time in history prior to the coming of Muhammad believed in the existence of such a text. More importantly, I am unaware of any Arabic or other middle-eastern church, denomination or Christian group (heretical or not) prior to the coming of Muhammad that stated or believed that such a book exists.

Yet, according to the hadith, the Christians who believed in the Quran first believed in the Injil. I see absolutely no historical evidence that a book called the "Injil" or a book that was revealed to Jesus by God ever existed or was believed to have existed by non-Muslims.
You are confused like the rest of Christendom, which is ok because your way of thinking is, of course, different to a Muslim.
First of all, what you have to understand is that some Prophets like Musa, Isa and Muhammad (peace be upon them all) are given revelations and instructions in how to live a holy life according to the Laws of God. These revelations are later written down by the disciples of these Prophets, hence we have the Torah, the Injil and the Holy Qur'an.
With regard to the Injil what happened was that the disciples of Isa (Alayhi Salaam) wrote down what was given to him but the Trinitarians only 'selected' what they wanted to use for their Trinitarian purposes. The rest of the books were discarded and lost. So what you have today of the Bible is not the Injil but a selection of work that was chosen specifically for the Trinatarian cause. 
Originally posted by TG12345



2) If by "believing in" the earlier book and the book that has now come means simply believing in its existence, then the Christians who became Muslims were not good Muslims since you believe you are instructed to follow what is in the Quran.
What the Christians believen in was the corrupted version of the message that Isa (Alayhi Salaam) gave. So they must abondon that and accept the final revelation given to Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam).
Originally posted by TG12345



3) If, on the other hand, "believing in" the earlier book and the book that has now come means following what is in it, this means that Christians had the Injil with them during the time of Muhammad and the problems with this assertion is that
Wrong. The Gospels and the epistles are not the Injil.
Originally posted by TG12345



a) According to what Muslims believe, Christians base their theology on corrupted Scripture, yet this would mean that Christians in Muhammad's time still had the book God allegedly gave to Jesus
Wrong. Christians only had had the corrupted Bible.
Originally posted by TG12345



and

b) This brings us back to the lack of any non-Islamic historical evidence that a book like the "Injil" exists or ever has existed. One would think that the Christians who followed the Injil and then followed the Quran would preserve and not destroy what God previously gave to them.

Take care.


 
The Injil does not exist. See the thread 'Where is the Injil?".
 
You are one confused individual me thinks.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 12 January 2013 at 6:03am
 
Originally posted by TG12345



1) I am unaware of any non-Islamic historical or theological belief in the existence of a book that was revealed to Jesus. I am unaware of any Christian orthodox or heretical groups now or in the past who believed or made any allusion to the existence of such a book. I am unaware of any non-Muslim secular source confirming that such a book ever existed, or that Christians or other non-Muslims at any time in history prior to the coming of Muhammad believed in the existence of such a text. More importantly, I am unaware of any Arabic or other middle-eastern church, denomination or Christian group (heretical or not) prior to the coming of Muhammad that stated or believed that such a book exists.

Yet, according to the hadith, the Christians who believed in the Quran first believed in the Injil. I see absolutely no historical evidence that a book called the "Injil" or a book that was revealed to Jesus by God ever existed or was believed to have existed by non-Muslims.
Originally posted by Abu Loren

You are confused like the rest of Christendom, which is ok because your way of thinking is, of course, different to a Muslim.
First of all, what you have to understand is that some Prophets like Musa, Isa and Muhammad (peace be upon them all) are given revelations and instructions in how to live a holy life according to the Laws of God. These revelations are later written down by the disciples of these Prophets, hence we have the Torah, the Injil and the Holy Qur'an.
With regard to the Injil what happened was that the disciples of Isa (Alayhi Salaam) wrote down what was given to him but the Trinitarians only 'selected' what they wanted to use for their Trinitarian purposes. The rest of the books were discarded and lost. So what you have today of the Bible is not the Injil but a selection of work that was chosen specifically for the Trinatarian cause.

Salaam Alaikum, Abu Loren. Thanks for replying. I understand the Muslim belief about the alleged Injil that was revealed to Jesus. Does the Quran teach that the Injil was written down by Jesus' disciples in the form of several 'books', or does it teach it was a book that God revealed to Jesus by God?

The problem with your statement that parts of this book were 'selected' by Trinitarians and other parts lost and discarded, is that the Quran states that those who follow Muhammad, whom they will find mentioned in the Gospel and Torah, will be those who are successful.

7:157

Those who follow the Messenger-Prophet, the Ummi, whom they find written down with them in the Taurat and the Injeel (who) enjoins them good and forbids them evil, and makes lawful to them the good things and makes unlawful to them impure things, and removes from them their burden and the shackles which were upon them; so (as for) those who believe in him and honor him and help him, and follow the light which has been sent down with him, these it is that are the successful.

If the Gospel was lost, how could people have found Muhammad mentioned in it and chose to follow him?

It was obviously around in the time of Muhammad, otherwise he would have not praised Christians who 'found' him in it!

Originally posted by TG12345



2) If by "believing in" the earlier book and the book that has now come means simply believing in its existence, then the Christians who became Muslims were not good Muslims since you believe you are instructed to follow what is in the Quran.
Originally posted by Abu Loren

What the Christians believen in was the corrupted version of the message that Isa (Alayhi Salaam) gave. So they must abondon that and accept the final revelation given to Prophet Muhammad (SalAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam).

Let's look at the hadith again.

"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

Are you saying that 'an earlier Book' is a reference to a corrupted version of the Gospel? Where does the hadith say this?

7:157 says "the Injeel".

Originally posted by TG12345



3) If, on the other hand, "believing in" the earlier book and the book that has now come means following what is in it, this means that Christians had the Injil with them during the time of Muhammad and the problems with this assertion is that
Originally posted by Abu Loren

Wrong. The Gospels and the epistles are not the Injil.
Originally posted by TG12345



The problem is that 7:157 disagrees with you. Muhammad believed that Christians during his time had the Gospel with them, and were praised for following him after allegedly finding him mentioned therein.

Originally posted by TG12345

a) According to what Muslims believe, Christians base their theology on corrupted Scripture, yet this would mean that Christians in Muhammad's time still had the book God allegedly gave to Jesus
Originally posted by Abu Loren

Wrong. Christians only had had the corrupted Bible.

That would imply that the Injil that God gave to Jesus is a "corrupted" book, since Christians still had it at the time of Muhammad and were told he was mentioned in it.

BTW where is Muhammad 'written down' in Christian scriptures?
 
Originally posted by TG12345

and

b) This brings us back to the lack of any non-Islamic historical evidence that a book like the "Injil" exists or ever has existed. One would think that the Christians who followed the Injil and then followed the Quran would preserve and not destroy what God previously gave to them.

Take care.


 
[QUOTE=Abu Loren]The Injil does not exist. See the thread 'Where is the Injil?".

If the Injil does not exist, then the author of the Quran was asking people to refer to an imaginary book or books.
 
[QUOTE=Abu Loren]You are one confused individual me thinks.

I think you are the one who is confused. I can't say I blame you. Islamic teachings on the "Injil" are contradictory.

On one hand, this was a book allegedly given by God to Jesus, and written down by his disciples, which was corrupted and lost. On the other hand, Christians during Muhammad's time were told to look in it to find Muhammad's traits mentioned therein so they could follow.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 12 January 2013 at 6:21am
Originally posted by TG12345

Salaam Alaikum, 786SalaamKhan.

I see what you mean by Unitarian 'christians' who lived before Muhammad. 

If these 'christians' lived before Muhammad, how could they have had another book (which you believe is the Quran) come to them? Did the Quran come before Muhammad?

PS on an unrelated note, where is this hadith from? Is it from an authentic hadith collection?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

You're just making things complicated, I myself never claimed that the Quran came before Muhammad(PBUH) nor do I know where you got that idea.


You wrote:

There are also verses similar to this in the Quran but it only applies to the (Unitarian)Christians before Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Jews before Prophets Zechariah, John and Jesus(PBUT).

If the following hadith (which we were discussing)

Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

applies to only Unitarian Christians before Muhammad, and another Book is a reference to the Quran, you are saying that the Quran came to Unitarian Christians who lived before Muhammad.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Also from before when you said there is no proof outside the Quran about the Gospel given to Jesus(PBUH), the scholars say that the Gospel was most likely divinely inspired rather than written down; makes sense since Gospel means "Good News".


I actually wrote:

How could a Christian believe that God sent a book to Jesus prior to him or her believing in the Quran? There is no record outside of the Quran or hadiths of such a book either existing or in anyone believing in the existence of such a book. If I am wrong on that, please show me sources that prove otherwise.

Who are the scholars who claim the Injil existed? On what basis do they make this claim?

19:30 says that the Gospel was a "Scripture" revealed to Jesus by God.

[Jesus] said, "Indeed, I am the servant of Allah . He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet.

If you examine the website "Corpus Quran", you will see that the word for Scripture is "l-kitaba"
http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=%2819:30:6%29

The same word is used for the Torah in 23:49.
http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=%2823:49:4%29

I am no expert in Arabic, so if this site is providing bad translations please let me know, I am going based on what it says.

If it is correct, the same word that is used for "Scripture" regarding the "Injil" is used regarding the Torah, which Muslims if I am not mistaken do believe is a real book (which was also allegedly corrupted).

Allahu Akhbar.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 13 January 2013 at 12:01am
Originally posted by TG12345

Originally posted by TG12345



You wrote:

There are also verses similar to this in the Quran but it only applies to the (Unitarian)Christians before Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Jews before Prophets Zechariah, John and Jesus(PBUT).

If the following hadith (which we were discussing)

Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

applies to only Unitarian Christians before Muhammad, and another Book is a reference to the Quran, you are saying that the Quran came to Unitarian Christians who lived before Muhammad.



I actually wrote:

How could a Christian believe that God sent a book to Jesus prior to him or her believing in the Quran? There is no record outside of the Quran or hadiths of such a book either existing or in anyone believing in the existence of such a book. If I am wrong on that, please show me sources that prove otherwise.

Who are the scholars who claim the Injil existed? On what basis do they make this claim?

19:30 says that the Gospel was a "Scripture" revealed to Jesus by God.

[Jesus] said, "Indeed, I am the servant of Allah . He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet.

If you examine the website "Corpus Quran", you will see that the word for Scripture is "l-kitaba"
http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=%2819:30:6%29

The same word is used for the Torah in 23:49.
http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=%2823:49:4%29

I am no expert in Arabic, so if this site is providing bad translations please let me know, I am going based on what it says.

If it is correct, the same word that is used for "Scripture" regarding the "Injil" is used regarding the Torah, which Muslims if I am not mistaken do believe is a real book (which was also allegedly corrupted).

Allahu Akhbar.


Oh so you thought that when I said only Unitarian Christians I meant in relation to the Hadith. Sorry, I meant that the Quranic verses alone apply to them. Notice how I said "Similar verses" and then "but".

Muslim scholars conclude that the Injeel was most likely inspired. Also it gets tedious when both Christians and Muslims cherry pick verses from both the Quran and Bible to prove a point without looking at the context or reading beyond the text.
You should know from the lives of the Prophets Muhammad(PBUH) and Moses(PBUH) that the words "scripture" and "book" aren't literal since Prophet Moses and Prophet Muhammad didn't actually receive the Torah and Quran in written form rather the words were divinely inspired.
Prophet Jesus (PBUH) received the message and taught it to others who may or may not have written it down. If you still aren't convinced here is a text which dates before the four canonical Gospel and Paul's Writings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XllGiKmb_e0
 
If you still not convinced check Quran 3:7 which says that verses are clear whilst others are allegories.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 13 January 2013 at 1:50pm
 
Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan



You wrote:

There are also verses similar to this in the Quran but it only applies to the (Unitarian)Christians before Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and the Jews before Prophets Zechariah, John and Jesus(PBUT).

If the following hadith (which we were discussing)

Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
"Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

applies to only Unitarian Christians before Muhammad, and another Book is a reference to the Quran, you are saying that the Quran came to Unitarian Christians who lived before Muhammad.



Originally posted by TG12345

I actually wrote:

How could a Christian believe that God sent a book to Jesus prior to him or her believing in the Quran? There is no record outside of the Quran or hadiths of such a book either existing or in anyone believing in the existence of such a book. If I am wrong on that, please show me sources that prove otherwise.

Who are the scholars who claim the Injil existed? On what basis do they make this claim?

19:30 says that the Gospel was a "Scripture" revealed to Jesus by God.

[Jesus] said, "Indeed, I am the servant of Allah . He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet.

If you examine the website "Corpus Quran", you will see that the word for Scripture is "l-kitaba"
http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=%2819:30:6%29

The same word is used for the Torah in 23:49.
http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=%2823:49:4%29

I am no expert in Arabic, so if this site is providing bad translations please let me know, I am going based on what it says.

If it is correct, the same word that is used for "Scripture" regarding the "Injil" is used regarding the Torah, which Muslims if I am not mistaken do believe is a real book (which was also allegedly corrupted).

Allahu Akhbar.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Oh so you thought that when I said only Unitarian Christians I meant in relation to the Hadith. Sorry, I meant that the Quranic verses alone apply to them. Notice how I said "Similar verses" and then "but".

Salaam Alaikum, 786SalaamKhan. I misunderstood your words. I apologize for that.

Who do you believe the hadiths are about?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Muslim scholars conclude that the Injeel was most likely inspired. Also it gets tedious when both Christians and Muslims cherry pick verses from both the Quran and Bible to prove a point without looking at the context or reading beyond the text.

I strongly agree with you. This is especially relevant to the video which you showed, which we will discuss later.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You should know from the lives of the Prophets Muhammad(PBUH) and Moses(PBUH) that the words "scripture" and "book" aren't literal since Prophet Moses and Prophet Muhammad didn't actually receive the Torah and Quran in written form rather the words were divinely inspired.

However, the words were written down. The Quran existed in book form in Muhammad's life time.


When Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him received the Noble Quran's Revelations in a 10-years span, he had everything documented on paper and saved with his close disciples and immediate family.  He also had the entire Noble Quran memorized along with many of his followers.  The Noble Quran during the times of our beloved Prophet peace be upon him was carefully preserved and protected from man's corruption.  It was documented on paper and it was entirely memorized by many.

http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/other_books.htm



2. Written Text of the Quran

Prophet's Lifetime:

Prophet Muhammad (S) was very vigilant in preserving the Quran in the written form from the very beginning up until the last revelation. The Prophet himself was unlettered, did not knew how to read and write, therefore he called upon his numerous scribes to write the revelation for him. Complete Quran thus existed in written form in the lifetime of the Prophet.

Whenever a new revelation use to come to him, the Prophet would immediately call one of his scribes to write it down.

'Some people visited Zaid Ibn Thabit (one of the scribes of the Prophet) and asked him to tell them some stories about Allah's Messenger. He replied: "I was his (Prophet's) neighbor, and when the inspiration descended on him he sent for me and I went to him and wrote it down for him…" [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#14 - 14 ]

Narrated by al-Bara': There was revealed 'Not equal are those believers who sit (home) and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah' (4:95). The Prophet said: 'Call Zaid for me and let him bring the board, the ink pot and scapula bone.' Then he (Prophet) said: 'Write: Not equal are those believers…' [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#15 - 15 ]

Zaid is reported to have said: 'We use to compile the Qur'an from small scraps in the presence of the Apostle'. [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#16 - 16 ]

'The Prophet, while in Madinah, had about 48 scribes who use to write for him'. [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#17 - 17 ]

Abdullah Ibn 'Umar relates:… 'The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "Do not take the Qur'an on a journey with you, for I am afraid lest it should fall into the hands of the enemy"' [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#18 - 18 ]

During the Prophet's last pilgrimage, he gave a sermon in which he said: 'I have left with you something which if you will hold fast to it you will never fall into error - a plain indication, the Book of God (Quran) and the practice of his Prophet…' [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#19 - 19 ]

'Besides the official manuscripts of the Quran kept with the Prophet, many of his companions use to possess their own written copies of the revelation'. [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#20 - 20 ]

'A list of Companions of whom it is related that they had their own written collections included the following: Ibn Mas'ud, Ubay bin Ka'b, Ali, Ibn Abbas, Abu Musa, Hafsa, Anas bin Malik, Umar, Zaid bin Thabit, Ibn Al-Zubair, Abdullah ibn Amr, Aisha, Salim, Umm Salama, Ubaid bin Umar'. [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#21 - 21 ]

'The best known among these (Prophet's Scribes) are: Ibn Masud, Ubay bin Kab and Zaid bin Thabit'. [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#22 - 22 ]

'Aisha and Hafsa, the wives of the Prophet had their own scripts written after the Prophet had died'. [ http://iol.ie/%7Eafifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm#23 - 23 ]


http://iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

I
Prophet Jesus (PBUH) received the message and taught it to others who may or may not have written it down.

If I am not mistaken, Islam teaches that God gave Jesus a book.


The Injeel

The Injeel is the book of Allah revealed to Prophet Eesa (Jesus, peace be upon him). Injeel means evangelion, or Gospel Book. It is often just translated as The Gospel.

Like the Tawrat, many people make the mistake of stating the Injeel is the New Testament of the Bible. But that is far from the truth.

The New Testament consists of written work attributed to some of Jesus’ disciples. And a good portion of the New Testament was written by Paul, who was not a disciple at all.

Most modern scholars have concluded it is highly unlikely that Jesus’ actual disciples wrote any part of the New Testament. Even if they had written it (which they did not) They were not the http://islamiclearningmaterials.com/prophets-in-islam - prophets of Allah.

While there may be some truth in the writings popularly known as the Gospels of Mark, Luke, John, and Matt, Muslims are not obliged to follow or even read them.

The only Gospel we are concerned with, is the Gospel of http://islamiclearningmaterials.com/jesus-islam-isa-eesa - Jesus . But like many other Books of Allah, the actual text is no longer available.

And like all of the other Books of Allah, the message of the Injeel is preserved in the message of the Quran.

http://islamiclearningmaterials.com/books-of-allah/


  1. The Injeel (Gospel) : The Injeel is the Book which was revealed to ‘Eesaa («may god exalt their mention») (Jesus). Allah says:

    "And in their footsteps, We sent ‘Eesaa, son of Maryam (Mary), confirming the Torah that had come before him. And We gave him the Injeel, in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Tauraat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for the Allah-fearing." (5:46)

    A Muslim must believe in all the Heavenly Books and he must believe that they are from Allah. It is not lawful for him to abide by its laws, since these Books were revealed to certain nations at certain times.

    The Qur'an has explained some of what was found in the Torah and the Injeel; such as the prophecy of Muhammad (peace be upon him):

    "…and My mercy encompasses all things; so I will ordain it (specially) for those who are pious and give Zakah (Obligatory Charity), and those who believe in Our Ayaat. Those who follow the unlettered Prophet, whom they find written down with them in the Torah and the Injeel (who) enjoins them good and forbids them evil, and makes lawful to them the good things and makes unlawful to them impure things, and removes from the their burden and the shackles which were upon them; so (as for) those who believe in him and honor him and help him, and follow the light which has been sent down with him, these it is that are the successful." (7:156)

http://1ststepsinislam.com/en/belief-in-books.aspx

If there was no book, why did the author of the Quran tell Christians that they will find Muhammad mentioned in the Gospel?

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

If you still aren't convinced here is a text which dates before the four canonical Gospel and Paul's Writings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XllGiKmb_e0

Thanks for the video, it was quite interesting.

The producer is saying that the Book of James and Didache show the real teachings of Jesus and beliefs of the early Christians, and that there is no mention in them of Christ's divinity, death, or resurrection.

The Book of James focuses on some of the teachings of Jesus, not on what He did for us the cross.

It does not deny the crucifixion, Trinity, resurrection or death as the Quran does. It just does not mention them.

It also does not mention Him making birds out of clay as the Quran said He did, or healing the blind and lepers and raising the dead (which both Muslims and Christians believe He did). He also does not mention anything of Him making lawful to the Jews what was not lawful to them before. It also says nothing about Him escaping the crucifixion, or warning people not to worship Him. There is nothing in it about the coming of Muhammad, which Jesus allegedly preached.

The Book of James contains teachings that contradict the Quran.

James 1:1 states

 James, a servant "#fen-ESV-30251a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+1&version=ESV#fen-ESV-30251a - a ] of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,

James 2:1
My brothers, "#fen-ESV-30278a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+2&version=ESV#fen-ESV-30278a - a ] show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.

However, as you probably know, the Quran teaches that a prophet of God could not say to people to take him or an angel as Lord.

3:79,80
3
It is not for a human [prophet] that Allah should give him the Scripture and authority and prophethood and then he would say to the people, "Be servants to me rather than Allah ," but [instead, he would say], "Be pious scholars of the Lord because of what you have taught of the Scripture and because of what you have studied."

Christians call Jesus Lord because we believe He is God. We don't call Paul or Peter or other disciples "lord". His brother also obviously believed this, and called Him Lord.

In the Book of James, God is referred to as the Father. Christians call God our Father.
 
James 1:26,27

26 If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and

widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=james%201&version=ESV


James 3:9

With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings, who have been made in God’s likeness.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+3&version=ESV

Yet the Quran attacks Christians and Jews for saying God is our Father, and it states that God has no son.

19:30
PICKTHAL: And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!


005.018
PICKTHAL: The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones. Say: Why then doth He chastise you for your sins? Nay, ye are but mortals of His creating. He forgiveth whom He will, and chastiseth whom He will. Allah's is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and unto Him is the journeying.

http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/005-qmt.php

As we see, although the Book of James does not confirm Christ's death, resurrection, deity (directly) or saving grace, it also does not deny these truths. There is absolutely nothing in it that confirms what the Quran says about Him (raising the dead, healing the sick... which both Muslims and Christians believe He did... or making birds out of clay, or escaping the crucifixion, or making things lawful which were not lawful before). It also does not say Jesus was only a prophet.

In opposition to the Quran's teaching, it refers to Jesus as Lord and refers to God as the Father.

Let us now examine the second book the producer mentioned, the Didache.

The Didache does not mention Jesus' death and resurrection. It also does not deny  them.

It does, however, mention the Trinity!

Chapter 7. Concerning Baptism. And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whoever else can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html

This is of course, based on Jesus' words, which are recorded for us in the Bible.

Matthew 28:16-20

16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. 17 And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in "#fen-ESV-24211b" - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+28&version=ESV#fen-ESV-24211b - b ] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2028&version=ESV


The Didache also quotes the Book of Matthew as "the Gospel".

Chapter 8. Fasting and Prayer (the Lord's Prayer). But let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week. Rather, fast on the fourth day and the Preparation (Friday). Do not pray like the hypocrites, but rather as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, like this:

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily (needful) bread, and forgive us our debt as we also forgive our debtors. And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one (or, evil); for Thine is the power and the glory for ever..


Matthew 6:7-13


“And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. Pray then like this:

“Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name. "#fen-ESV-23292a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%206&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23292a - a ]
10 Your kingdom come,
your will be done, "#fen-ESV-23293b" - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%206&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23293b - b ]
    on earth as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our daily bread, "#fen-ESV-23294c" - c ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%206&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23294c - c ]
12 and forgive us our debts,
    as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation,
    but deliver us from evil. "#fen-ESV-23296d" - d ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%206&version=ESV#fen-ESV-23296d - d ]


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%206&version=ESV#en-ESV-23296 - d. Matthew 6:13 Or the evil one; some manuscripts add For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever. Amen

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%206&version=ESV


"#fen-ESV-23296d" - d ]">The word Gospel means "Good News". It was the message Jesus preached, His life, His death, His resurrection, His divinity, everything He is. The Gospels were accounts of Him that were written by His disciples.

Far from being an "alternative version", the Didache not only does not deny Christian teachings about Jesus, but confirms the Trinity and quotes the Gospel of Matthew as His Gospel! Notice again that God is referred to as "our Father", something the Quran claims is not true.

Notice also that it confirms nothing that the Quran teaches about Jesus.

Neither the Didache or Book of James challenge the truths of Jesus' death or resurrection, and they also do not confirm what is said about Him in the Quran.

The Book of James contradicts the Quran by claiming Jesus is Lord and referring to God as the Father. The Didache not only does this, but also quotes the Gospel of Matthew as the Lord's Gospel and confirms the Trinity.

They are in no way, shape or form an alternative version to Christianity, they are simply a part of it.

The video producer is the one who should have read more carefully what his sources have to say.

 
Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

If you still not convinced

Sorry, I have to say I am not. The video shows that the Didache and Book of James not only don't contradict the Bible but that they confirm some of its important teachings. They also not only don't confirm the Quran but actually contradict it a few times.

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

check Quran 3:7 which says that verses are clear whilst others are allegories.


Sorry, I'm not following what you mean by that. Could you please explain? Shukran.





Posted By: honeto
Date Posted: 13 January 2013 at 3:08pm
Originally posted by TG12345



Originally posted by Abu Loren



As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
<div ="hadith_narrated"="">Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
<div ="text_details"="">                      "Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."
Salaam Alaikum.Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?


My two or so cents!

Answering your first question:
Yes it does. The Quran and the Prophet(pbuh) are valid till the end times.
The last line of the Hadith Abu Loren has written is very simple. If you believe in a book from God before, and believe the Quran to be from God, it is those whose reward will be doubled.
There were many who fit this category when the Quran was revealed and they accepted it to be from God, and became Muslim.
I personally believe that yes it applies to all of the people of the book that followed it's (Quran's) revelation. I say that on the basis of this understanding that once they accept the Quran, they enter light and guidance that also shows them that what they believed to be from God was indeed from God, just not in it's purity.
So as a reward for their test of faith, they are rewarded twice!
Hasan



-------------
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 13 January 2013 at 8:40pm
Originally posted by honeto

Originally posted by TG12345



Originally posted by Abu Loren



As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
<div ="hadith_narrated"="">Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
<div ="text_details"="">                      "Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice.

Salaam Alaikum.Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?


My two or so cents!

Answering your first question:
Yes it does. The Quran and the Prophet(pbuh) are valid till the end times.
The last line of the Hadith Abu Loren has written is very simple. If you believe in a book from God before, and believe the Quran to be from God, it is those whose reward will be doubled.
There were many who fit this category when the Quran was revealed and they accepted it to be from God, and became Muslim.
I personally believe that yes it applies to all of the people of the book that followed it's (Quran's) revelation. I say that on the basis of this understanding that once they accept the Quran, they enter light and guidance that also shows them that what they believed to be from God was indeed from God, just not in it's purity.
So as a reward for their test of faith, they are rewarded twice!
Hasan



Salaam Alaikum Hasan,

Thank you for your answer. I will ask you the same question I asked of Abu Loren.

What evidence is there that Christians, before they met Muhammad and had the Quran come to them, believed in or even stated there was such a thing as the Injil (which would be the 'previous Book' for Christians if I am not mistaken)?

According to the hadith:

And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book came to him and he believed in it; then he will be given his reward twice."

It is pretty clear from the text that the Christians rewarded twice first believed in an earlier Book, and then the Quran came to them and they believed in it.


I have yet to find evidence outside the Quran and hadiths that Christians ever believed in a book like the Injil, which the Quran describes as a Scripture that was given to Jesus.

If you have any evidence of the belief in the existence of a Book revealed to Jesus by God from Christians or other non-Muslims around or prior to the time of Muhammad, please show me.

Allahu Akhbar.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 14 January 2013 at 4:19am
786SalaamKhan,

Salaam Alaikum. I hope you are doing well. I found some more hadiths which I think show that Muhammad believed that the Gospel was in book form.


(1) Narrated 'Aisha: (the mother of the faithful believers) The commencement of the Divine Inspiration to Allah's Apostle was in the form of good dreams which came true like bright day light, and then the love of seclusion was bestowed upon him. He used to go in seclusion in the cave of Hira where he used to worship (Allah alone) continuously for many days before his desire to see his family. He used to take with him the journey food for the stay and then come back to (his wife) Khadija to take his food like-wise again till suddenly the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, "I do not know how to read. The Prophet added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, 'I do not know how to read.' Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, 'I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?' Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said, 'Read in the name of your Lord, who has created (all that exists) has created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous." (96.1, 96.2, 96.3) Then Allah's Apostle returned with the Inspiration and with his heart beating severely. Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, "Cover me! Cover me!" They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, "I fear that something may happen to me." Khadija replied, "Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your Kith and kin, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guests generously and assist the deserving calamity-afflicted ones." Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. Khadija said to Waraqa, "Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!" Waraqa asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?" Allah's Apostle described whatever he had seen. Waraqa said, "This is the same one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out." Allah's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?" Waraqa replied in the affirmative and said, "Anyone (man) who came with something similar to what you have brought was treated with hostility; and if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly." But after a few days Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while. Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah Al-Ansari while talking about the period of pause in revelation reporting the speech of the Prophet "While I was walking, all of a sudden I heard a voice from the sky. I looked up and saw the same angel who had visited me at the cave of Hira' sitting on a chair between the sky and the earth. I got afraid of him and came back home and said, 'Wrap me (in blankets).' And then Allah revealed the following Holy Verses (of Quran): 'O you (i.e. Muhammad)! wrapped up in garments!' Arise and warn (the people against Allah's Punishment),... up to 'and desert the idols.' (74.1-5) After this the revelation started coming strongly, frequently and regularly."  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=1&translator=1&start=0&number=3 - #1 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=1&translator=1&start=0&number=3#3 - #3 )

(2) Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), "What do you see?" When he told him, Waraqa said, "That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=55&translator=1&start=0&number=605 - #55 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=55&translator=1&start=0&number=605#605 - #605 )


http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=Waraqa+bin+Naufal&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all


According to these hadiths in Bukhari,

God had Ibn Warraqa, who was a Christian who was an elderly man when he met Muhammad, write in Hebrew from the Gospel.

Ibn Warraqa used to read the Gospels in Arabic.


This is I think significant, since it shows that people in Muhammad's time did have the Gospel, and that it was in written form.

I don't see how the first hadith could refer to a 'changed Gospel', unless you would assume that God would order an elderly man to write words that were not from Him.

It is interesting to me that Ibn Warraqa would read "the Gospels" in Arabic. If they were books that were changed by man, why would Khadija take Muhammad to him?


What are your thoughts?


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 15 January 2013 at 5:54am
Wa Alaikum, I am fine thank you I hope you are doing well also.

Narrated Ubaidullah:  "Ibn 'Abbas said, 'Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!'  (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461)

Narrated Abu Huraira:  "The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. Allah's Apostle said (to the Muslims). 'Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, 'We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.' '  (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 460)

According to Islam, Allah Almighty (GOD Almighty) in the Bible promised those who try to tamper His Words in the Bible to face hell fire, because He knew that it was going to happen.   He gave the people of the book (Jews and Christians) a chance/test and they simply blew it!. Look at Noble Verse 5:13 from the Noble Quran: "But on account of their breaking their covenant We cursed them (Jews and Christians) and made their hearts hard; they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others)."

It's not like there isn't some truth left in the previous scriptures. Also I don't think Allah literally commanded Waraqa to write the Gospel, it could merely be narrated in that way because nothing happens without Allah's will. Also who else would Khadija go to for help in a Pagan Arabia when her husband told her that it was Gabriel that had visited him? And Allah knows best.

And silly me, I never realized that variant of the book of James was available outside of that video but then again I didn't fully agree with the title of the video. How does it mention the trinity if it says "In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost"? If you had three people sitting together eating lunch would it mean they are one? I knew that the Quran was written during Prophet Muhammad(PBUH)'s lifetime but I merely pointed out he didn't receive it in written.

And regarding Quran 3:7Allah points out that some verses need interpretation, I applied that to when it says that Jesus received a "book". The hadith in discussion I think means that Jews and Christians who become muslims will receive more rewards that any other non muslims who accept Islam. Again, Allah knows best.



Posted By: Webber
Date Posted: 16 January 2013 at 1:15am

I don't get it. If Moses followed the laws and so did his people they would have gone to heaven. If all the Prophets followed the same "injil" then following any one of them would land you in heaven, why only Muhammad? The Quran seems to have the least "plan of salvation" of all.

Which Muslim knows they will be saved for sure, anyone on this site?


-------------
I'm a Gentile.
Numb. 6:24-26


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 16 January 2013 at 7:50pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum, I am fine thank you I hope you are doing well also.

Salaam Alaikum. Shukran, ana tamaam. InshAllah anta tamaam aydan.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Narrated Ubaidullah:  "Ibn 'Abbas said, 'Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!'  (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461) 

I can see that this states that according to Muhammad the Jews and Christians corrupted their scriptures, and I can see why Muslims would claim Islam teaches this.

I think that this is a contradiction of ayahs which call Christians and Jews to find Muhammad in the Gospel and Torah and of the hadith about Waraqa.

This may be an inconsequential observation, but notice that the bit about Jews and Christians corrupting their scriptures in the hadith you cited was stated not by Muhammad, but Ibn Abbas.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Narrated Abu Huraira:  "The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. Allah's Apostle said (to the Muslims). 'Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, 'We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.' '  (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 460)

I find this hadith to be very interesting. If the people of the Book are believing false things about God, why would they not be disbelieved?

Also if the Torah was corrupted, how could the people of the Book be reading it to the Arabs?

Interestingly, Muhammad was cited as saying:

 'We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.'

What did the Jews have at the time of Muhammad that God revealed to them? I think this is a reference to the Torah they were reading to the Muslims, whom Muhammad told to neither believe or disbelieve the Jews.

If the Torah that the Jews were reading were what God revealed to them, how could it be corrupt?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

According to Islam, Allah Almighty (GOD Almighty) in the Bible promised those who try to tamper His Words in the Bible to face hell fire, because He knew that it was going to happen.   He gave the people of the book (Jews and Christians) a chance/test and they simply blew it!. Look at Noble Verse 5:13 from the Noble Quran: "But on account of their breaking their covenant We cursed them (Jews and Christians) and made their hearts hard; they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others)."


Thanks for sharing that verse. Let's look at what Ibn Abbas had to say about it.

Allah then explained the punishment of those who had disbelieved, saying: (And because of their) i.e. the kings (breaking their covenant, We have cursed them) We punished them through imposing the capitation tax upon them (and made hard) and lightless (their hearts. They change words from their context) they change the traits and description of Muhammad (pbuh) and the legal ruling on stoning [married people who fornicate] after this was exposited upon in the Torah (and forget a part) and leave part (of that whereof they were admonished) they were commanded with in the Torah concerning their following of Muhammad (pbuh) and manifesting his traits and description to others. Allah then showed their betrayal of the Prophet (pbuh) saying: (Thou wilt not) O Muhammad (cease to discover treachery) and contravention (from all) i.e. the Banu Qurayzah (save a few of them) 'Abdullah Ibn Salam and his followers. (But bear with them) and punish them not (and pardon them) and leave them. (Lo! Allah loveth the kindly) towards others.

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=5&tAyahNo=13&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

According to Ibn Abbas (who is quoted in the hadith about Christians and Jews corrupting their scriptures) , the Torah was corrupted by the Jews at the time of Muhammad. They changed the parts which allegedly talked about him and the ruling of stoning... although funnily enough that is in the Old Testament. They allegedly left what the Torah said about their command to follow Muhammad and tell others about him. These same Jews then betrayed Muhammad.

According to 5:13, the Jews who changed the Torah were the ones who betrayed Muhammad and refused to follow him.

This would imply that before their time, the Torah spoke of Muhammad and of stoning adulterers (which it still does).

Can you show me any copy of the Torah where Muhammad is mentioned?


Sorry for going off on a tangent, but this brings me to another question. If 5:13 is a reference to the textual corruption of the Torah and according to Ibn Abbas tafsir one of the things the Jews removed was the stoning verse, then what do you make of this?

(1) Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: The Jews came to Allah's Apostle and told him that a man and a woman from amongst them had committed illegal sexual intercourse. Allah's Apostle said to them, "What do you find in the torah (old Testament) about the legal punishment of Ar-Rajm (stoning)?" They replied, (But) we announce their crime and lash them." Abdullah bin Salam said, "You are telling a lie; torah contains the order of Rajm." They brought and opened the torah and one of them solaced his hand on the Verse of Rajm and read the verses preceding and following it. Abdullah bin Salam said to him, "Lift your hand." When he lifted his hand, the Verse of Rajm was written there. They said, "Muhammad has told the truth; the torah has the Verse of Rajm. The Prophet then gave the order that both of them should be stoned to death. ('Abdullah bin 'Umar said, "I saw the man leaning over the woman to shelter her from the stones." 
(Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=56&translator=1&start=0&number=829 - #56 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=56&translator=1&start=0&number=829#829 - #829 )

http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=torah+stoning&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all

The verse was clearly in the Torah, Abdullah bin Salaam had the Jew uncover it, and there it was!
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

It's not like there isn't some truth left in the previous scriptures.

However, the Quran verses and hadiths I brought up do not say that. They call on Christians and Jews to refer to the Injil and Torah. There is nothing to my knowledge saying to refer to corrupted books that contain some traces of them.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Also I don't think Allah literally commanded Waraqa to write the Gospel, it could merely be narrated in that way because nothing happens without Allah's will.

He wrote as much as God wished him to write. If Waraqa was a follower of God would God have allowed him to translate falsehoods into Arabic?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Also who else would Khadija go to for help in a Pagan Arabia when her husband told her that it was Gabriel that had visited him? And Allah knows best.

Good question. Another one is this- if Waraqa had been reading and copying down perversions of the Gospel, would he have had revelation about Muhammad's prophethood?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

And silly me, I never realized that variant of the book of James was available outside of that video but then again I didn't fully agree with the title of the video.

It's ok, we all make mistakes. That's what makes us us and makes God God. We mess up, He does not. Hopefully however as you can see it does not prove any evidence of a suppressed Gospel of Jesus.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

How does it mention the trinity if it says "In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost"? If you had three people sitting together eating lunch would it mean they are one?

Notice that the Father, Son, Holy Spirit are identified as one. "in the name..."

In John 1, it is explicitly stated that Jesus (the Son) is God. Jesus was called God by Thomas, He also said that those who have seen Him have seen the Father, and said a variety of things to indicate He is God.

God is referred to as the Father in many places in the Bible.

The Holy Spirit is referred to as God. An example of this would be in the Book of Acts 5:3-4 where Peter rebukes Ananias for lying.

3 http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Acts%205.3%E2%80%934#footnote0 - But Peter said, “Ananias, why has http://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/Acts%205.3%E2%80%934#footnote1 - Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? 4 While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.”

The Trinity teaching states that God exists as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. One God, but in three persons (not 'people').

Jesus confirmed this in the Book of Matthew, and the Didache quotes Him as saying this.

Furthermore, notice that Jesus said "in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit".

The Quran does not call God the Father, and calling Jesus the Son of God is considered blasphemous if I am not mistaken.

Neither the Didache or Book of James confirm the documentary maker's point that Jesus' disciples somehow preached a message opposite to what is in the Bible, nor do they prove that a book called the Gospel of Jesus ever existed. They not only do not contradict the Bible but they actually contradict Islamic teachings in their theology.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

I knew that the Quran was written during Prophet Muhammad(PBUH)'s lifetime but I merely pointed out he didn't receive it in written.

Fair enough, but Islam teaches it is a Book. To the best of my understanding, it also teaches the Gospel is a Book. It tells Christians in Muhammad's time to refer to it and find him mentioned therein.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

And regarding Quran 3:7Allah points out that some verses need interpretation, I applied that to when it says that Jesus received a "book".

Do you have any proof that unlike the Torah and Quran, the Gospel that God according to the Quran revealed to Jesus was not a book?

According to Islamic Learning,

The only Gospel we are concerned with, is the Gospel of http://islamiclearningmaterials.com/jesus-islam-isa-eesa - Jesus . But like many other Books of Allah, the actual text is no longer available.

http://islamiclearningmaterials.com/books-of-allah/

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan


The hadith in discussion I think means that Jews and Christians who become muslims will receive more rewards that any other non muslims who accept Islam. Again, Allah knows best.


If that is all it said, I wouldn't be writing these posts :-)

However, it clearly says that Christians and Jews who believed in a Book (the Injil or Torah) and then believed in another book (the Quran) will be rewarded more.

As I pointed out, outside of the Quran and hadiths, there is no evidence of a book called the Injil ever existing.

I'll be away from the forum probably until next week, I will read your response and be glad to answer it but it may take a few days.

Allahma3k.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 18 January 2013 at 3:39am
Wa Alaikum,

Hadith like majority of the New Testament, Majority of the Tanakh and the Talmud isn't divine. It will obviously conflict and contradict itself in some places, many hadith are fabricated but not all are.

Again not all of the Torah and the Gospels are corrupted which is why the Quran says to look in the scriptures for the unlettered Prophet. The Quran also criticizes Christians for believing the Trinity and the Divine Sonship of Jesus but we know that not all christians believe these things. Most of the time anything that contradicts the Quran is false so 'Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them' probably refers to Bible verses that do not contradict the Quran but are also not mentioned in the Quran.

We both worship G-d yet why is he allowing us to continue in this discussion? Same with Waraqa. Allah gave us free will. Fair enough the New Testament does claim enough evidence for christians to believe in the Trinity. But anytime Jesus would pray who exactly is he worshiping or praying to? Himself?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5upXp-8xHAY

Well there is no known evidence for me or other muslims to provide about the Injil, but it's a good thing this is the InterFAITH section. There is not much known evidence for what both our religions claim such as Adam and Noah(PBUT) but we still believe. Now It's known in the New Testament and the Talmud that Jesus(PBUH) was a Galilean or Nazarean Jew who taught things to others which were unknown or foreign to the Rabbis etc. Is this not proof of a new law? The Injil perhaps? Again, Allah knows best.



Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 18 January 2013 at 9:25pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

Hadith like majority of the New Testament, Majority of the Tanakh and the Talmud isn't divine. It will obviously conflict and contradict itself in some places, many hadith are fabricated but not all are.

Alaikum Salaam, 786SalaamKhan.

If you will notice, the only hadiths I cite are from Bukhari and Muslim. Most Muslims consider them to be an accurate description of what Muhammad said.

3 - Sahih Al-Bukhari

Imam Bukhari had written several books, but his most distinguished work was this compilation of ahadith book titled as ‘ al Jaama’e al Sahih Al Musnad min Hadith Rasool Allah sws wa Sunnahi wa Ayyamihi’. Imam Bukhari was inspired by his most beloved teacher Imam Ishaq ibn Rahwayh (161 – 238 H, was muhaddith, faqih, and the Imam of Khurasan of his time) to compile a book that contains only Sahih ahadith. In this book Imam Bukhari collected only those ahadith that fulfilled all the criterion of soundness and reliability of ‘isnad’ and ‘matan’.

 

From the collected ahadith, Imam Bukhar had inferred the biography of Rasool Allah sws and the principles of ‘fiqh’ (jurisprudence). This book is divided into 97 chapters, that are further subdivided into 3450 chapters. In all this book contains 7275 ahadith. If the repeated ahadith are omitted then the number falls down to 4000 only.

 

Uncountable commentaries and ‘Sharuh’ (explanations) have been written for this ‘Sahih al-Bukari’, the most prominent one is that of Hafiz ibn Hajar Assqalani, titled as ‘ Fath al-Bari’.

 

4 - Sahih Muslim

It is the second most authentic hadith collection after Sahih Al-Bukhari, and is highly acclaimed book. Out of 300,000 hadith which he evaluated, approximately 4,000 were extracted for inclusion into his collection based on stringent acceptance criteria. Each report in his collection was checked and the veracity of the chain of reporters was painstakingly established. Muslim is divided into 43 books,containing a total of 7190 narrations. It is estimated that there are a total of 4000 hadiths (without repetition) in Sahih Muslim.

 

In this ‘Sahih’ Imam Muslim collected those ahadith which are narrated by at least two narrators of all the periods right from him to that of the Prophet sws. For Imam Muslim all the narrators should not only be honest but he hould fulfill all the conditions of being a witness. In this book 218 ‘Sahaaba’ (companions) are included as narrators, whereas in Sahih al-Bukhari this number is 208.

 

A large number of commentaries and ‘Sharuh’ (explanations) have been written for Sahih Muslim. These include Al-Dibaj ela Sahih Muslim by Imam Jalaluddin Sauti or Sharah Muslim by Mulla Ali Qari.

 

The creditability of this Sahih can be judged by the opinion of some of the scholars who rate this book over Sahih Bukhari.


http://www.studying-islam.org/articletext.aspx?id=1325
 

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Again not all of the Torah and the Gospels are corrupted which is why the Quran says to look in the scriptures for the unlettered Prophet. The Quran also criticizes Christians for believing the Trinity and the Divine Sonship of Jesus but we know that not all christians believe these things. Most of the time anything that contradicts the Quran is false so 'Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them' probably refers to Bible verses that do not contradict the Quran but are also not mentioned in the Quran.

If the Torah and Gospel are books that have been lost, yet parts of them remain in certain scriptures, which scriptures was Muhammad referring to? Which scriptures that Christians and Jews read in the time of Muhammad contain anything about Muhammad? You used the word "Bible verses". Do you believe that the Bible is a corrupted version of the Injil and Torah? If that is the case, where in the Bible (New Testament or Old Testament) is anything said about Muhammad?

The Bible clearly says that Jesus is divine and that He is the Son of God. The teaching of the Trinity is derived from the fact that the Bible teaches that Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit are God.

Also, where does the Quran say Christians changed their Scriptures? I know Ibn Abbas said this, he also said in his tafsirs that Christians and Jews have the Injil and Torah with them. He was obviously contradicting himself. Did Muhammad or the author of the Quran who you believe to be God say that? Thanks.

Is there an authentic hadith that says that the Scriptures that Christians have contain traces of the Torah and Injil, as many Muslims claim?

Again, if the Gospel was lost at the time of Muhammad and there were only copies with half truths, it makes no sense for God to have instructed Waraqa to be translating them.

The charge against the Jews who changed the Torah was thrown against the Jews of the time of Muhammad, as the tafsir of Ibn Abbas shows. Is there evidence of changes to the Torah in the 7th century?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

We both worship G-d yet why is he allowing us to continue in this discussion? Same with Waraqa. Allah gave us free will.

He did. I don't see the point you are getting at though.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Fair enough the New Testament does claim enough evidence for christians to believe in the Trinity. But anytime Jesus would pray who exactly is he worshiping or praying to? Himself?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5upXp-8xHAY


The video made me laugh at some points, I have to admit. The speaker offered $5000 to anyone who could find Jesus saying He is God in the Bible.

He said very clearly that those who have seen Him have seen the Father. Did Muhammad ever say that those who have seen him have seen Allah? Or did Adam or Moses or Abraham, in either the Bible or Quran ever say that? Of course not!

Jesus was God in the flesh.

The speaker can keep his money, but he should read the Bible better before he talks about what it says on tv. :)

John 14:1-14

14 “Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; "#fen-ESV-26658a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%2014&version=ESV#fen-ESV-26658a - a ] believe also in me. In my Father's house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? "#fen-ESV-26659b" - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%2014&version=ESV#fen-ESV-26659b - b ] And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also. And you know the way to where I am going.” "#fen-ESV-26661c" - c ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%2014&version=ESV#fen-ESV-26661c - c ] Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. "#fen-ESV-26664d" - d ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%2014&version=ESV#fen-ESV-26664d - d ] From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.

12 “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask me "#fen-ESV-26671e" - e ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%2014&version=ESV#fen-ESV-26671e - e ] anything in my name, I will do it.


Jesus voluntarily made Himself inferior to the Father, though He was in the form of God. So He prayed to the Father.

Why did He do this? On earth, He was both man and God. As man He prayed to God. He also set a good example for Christians.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Well there is no known evidence for me or other muslims to provide about the Injil, but it's a good thing this is the InterFAITH section.

True, but if I came to you and said that the Quran you have today is not the real Quran but earlier on there was a book called the "Message" whose message was lost but traces of it can be found in what you refer to as the Quran, you would probably demand evidence right? ;)

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

There is not much known evidence for what both our religions claim such as Adam and Noah(PBUT) but we still believe.

True, but there was little to no traces of books existing back then. That is not the case with early Christianity and early Islam.

 
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Now It's known in the New Testament and the Talmud that Jesus(PBUH) was a Galilean or Nazarean Jew who taught things to others which were unknown or foreign to the Rabbis etc. Is this not proof of a new law? The Injil perhaps? Again, Allah knows best.

Jesus did not come to change the Law but to fulfill it. He explained its meaning and revealed the full truth. He exposed the hypocrisy of the religious leadership at that time and explained the truth to those really looking for it. However, He did not at any time receive a book and there is no evidence whatsoever of such a book existing.

Also, there is historical proof for the crucifixion of Jesus, from both Christian and non-Christian sources.

Jesus' crucifixion was recorded by the Roman historian Tacitus, who although is widely respected for the accuracy of his works, was also very anti-Christian and would not have been influenced by the early church.

But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the Bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements Which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero From the infamy of being believed to have ordered the Conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he Falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were Hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was Put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign Of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time Broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief Originated, but through the city of Rome also, where all things Hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their Center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first Made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an Immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of Firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.

http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/tacitus.html

There is no evidence however for a book called the Injil ever existing.
[/QUOTE]


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 20 January 2013 at 7:23am

Wa Alaikum,

Originally posted by TG12345



If you will notice, the only hadiths I cite are from Bukhari and Muslim. Most Muslims consider them to be an accurate description of what Muhammad said.


However hadith are not divine and will contain mistakes whether they are unchanged or not.

Originally posted by TG12345


If the Torah and Gospel are books that have been lost, yet parts of them remain in certain scriptures, which scriptures was Muhammad referring to? Which scriptures that Christians and Jews read in the time of Muhammad contain anything about Muhammad? You used the word "Bible verses". Do you believe that the Bible is a corrupted version of the Injil and Torah? If that is the case, where in the Bible (New Testament or Old Testament) is anything said about Muhammad?

Deuteronomy 18:18

King James Version (KJV)

I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

Brethren immediately suggests Edomites, Moabites, Ammonites, Midianites or Ishmaelites. Later translations say among Israel but how did brethren transform into Israel? Unless the actual hebrew word is Y'srael for both.

Muhammad also performed miracles like Moses such as the splitting of the moon.

Deuteronomy 34:10

King James Version (KJV)

10 And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face,

In the night of Isra and Miraj Muhammad spoke to Allah himself about the prayers.

Originally posted by TG12345


Also, where does the Quran say Christians changed their Scriptures? I know Ibn Abbas said this, he also said in his tafsirs that Christians and Jews have the Injil and Torah with them. He was obviously contradicting himself. Did Muhammad or the author of the Quran who you believe to be God say that? Thanks.

Can ye (o ye men of Faith) entertain the hope that they will believe in you?- Seeing that a party of them heard the Word of Allah, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it… Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (Quran 2:75,79)

 

There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," but it is not from Allah: It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it! (Quran 3:78)

 

And remember Allah took a covenant from the People of the Book, to make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it; but they threw it away behind their backs, and purchased with it some miserable gain! And vile was the bargain they made! (Quran 3:187)


Originally posted by TG12345


He did. I don't see the point you are getting at though.

You asked why Allah would allow falsehoods to be written and I said because of free will. Waraqa was no Prophet and he didn't have any direct or spiritual contact with G-d, just influence.

No disrespect but to be honest I can't even be bothered to reply to the rest or reply anymore. I'm not gonna convince you and you're not gonna convince me. I'm not a good debater, usually when I have a religious debate with either muslim or non muslim it leads to nowhere or the other person ends up insulting, cursing or attacking me personally. What's the point? I've been a better questioner than a answerer.

Life is really simple, but men insist on making it complicated.- http://quotationsbook.com/quotes/author/1644/ - Confucius



Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 20 January 2013 at 1:10pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

Peace be upon you as well.

Originally posted by TG12345


If you will notice, the only hadiths I cite are from Bukhari and Muslim. Most Muslims consider them to be an accurate description of what Muhammad said.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

However hadith are not divine and will contain mistakes whether they are unchanged or not.

I understand there is a substantial difference between the Quran and hadiths. Islam teaches the Quran was revealed by God to Muhammad through Gabriel, while the hadiths are his teachings that God revealed to him but are not part of the Quran.

However, as we both know the Quran tells its followers to defer to Muhammad for decisions. People can't have any real faith until their souls make no resistance to Muhammad's decisions and accept them with fullest conviction.

4:65

But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.

Muslims are called to obey God and to obey Muhammad, according to the Quran. He preaches the clear message. This verse also says this duty was placed on him by God.

24:54

Say: "Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message).

If authentic hadith (like Bukhari and Muslim, as you will notice I am not quoting Abu Dawud or others that some see as suspect) contain mistakes, aren't you saying that the clear message God gave him is full of mistakes?

If I am wrong in any of this (ie that God does not tell people that what Muhammad told them is from Him and it must be followed if one is to follow God as these ayahs say) please correct me.

Originally posted by TG12345


If the Torah and Gospel are books that have been lost, yet parts of them remain in certain scriptures, which scriptures was Muhammad referring to? Which scriptures that Christians and Jews read in the time of Muhammad contain anything about Muhammad? You used the word "Bible verses". Do you believe that the Bible is a corrupted version of the Injil and Torah? If that is the case, where in the Bible (New Testament or Old Testament) is anything said about Muhammad?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Deuteronomy 18:18

King James Version (KJV)

I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

Brethren immediately suggests Edomites, Moabites, Ammonites, Midianites or Ishmaelites. Later translations say among Israel but how did brethren transform into Israel? Unless the actual hebrew word is Y'srael for both.

Thanks for bringing this up. Let's examine Deuteronomy 18:18 in the context of the chapter. As you will surely agree, it is important to read texts in the proper context... when this doesn't happen you have Christians who make errors about the Quran and Muslims who make errors about the Bible.

Deuteronomy 18

18 “The Levitical priests, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel. They shall eat the Lord's food offerings "#fen-ESV-5386a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5386a - a ] as their "#fen-ESV-5386b" - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5386b - b ] inheritance. They shall have no inheritance among their brothers; the Lord is their inheritance, as he promised them. And this shall be the priests' due from the people, from those offering a sacrifice, whether an ox or a sheep: they shall give to the priest the shoulder and the two cheeks and the stomach. The firstfruits of your grain, of your wine and of your oil, and the first fleece of your sheep, you shall give him. For the Lord your God has chosen him out of all your tribes to stand and minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for all time.

“And if a Levite comes from any of your towns out of all Israel, where he lives—and he may come when he desires "#fen-ESV-5391c" - c ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5391c - c ]—to the place that the Lord will choose, and ministers in the name of the Lord his God, like all his fellow Levites who stand to minister there before the Lord, then he may have equal portions to eat, besides what he receives from the sale of his patrimony. "#fen-ESV-5393d" - d ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5393d - d ]

Abominable Practices

“When you come into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. 10 There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, "#fen-ESV-5395e" - e ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5395e - e ] anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer 11 or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, 12 for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord. And because of these abominations the Lord your God is driving them out before you. 13 You shall be blameless before the Lord your God, 14 for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the Lord your God has not allowed you to do this.

A New Prophet like Moses

15 “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen— 16 just as you desired of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.’ 17 And the Lord said to me, ‘They are right in what they have spoken. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19 And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him. 20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or "#fen-ESV-5405f" - f ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5405f - f ] who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ 21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.

As we can see from the text (in its entirety), the word "brothers" was used for the Israelites. God promised the Israelites to raise a prophet from among them, from their brothers. (Deuteronomy 18:15).

Deuteronomy 17:14,15 forbids Israelites from letting a foreigner rule over them, who would not be from among their brothers.

Deuteronomy 17:14,15

14 “When you come to the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,’ 15 you may indeed set a king over you whom the Lord your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother.

For Muhammad to have matched the description in Deuteronomy, he would have had to been an Israelite. There is no word to insert "Israelite" into the text... when read in its context it is clear that "brothers" referred to other Israelites, not non-Israelites.
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Muhammad also performed miracles like Moses such as the splitting of the moon.
Deuteronomy 34:10

King James Version (KJV)

10 And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face,

I know that the Quran teaches that Muhammad did miracles, according to the Bible so did Jesus and also His followers. Unlike Jesus and many of His followers (and other prophets in the Old Testament), Muhammad was not an Israelite.

There is nothing wrong with non-Jews, but the prophecy in Deuteronomy 18 could not have been about him.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

In the night of Isra and Miraj Muhammad spoke to Allah himself about the prayers.

I am aware Islam teaches this, thanks for sharing. However, what we are debating is whether the Torah and Injil (or remnants of them as Muslims believe that what we have are changed copies of the original) contain descriptions of Muhammad. When read it its entirety, the Book of Deuteronomy is clearly not describing Muhammad or any other non-Israelite prophet.


Also, is Deuteronomy considered by Muslims to be part of the Injil? Where in the New Testament is Muhammad mentioned?

Originally posted by TG12345


Also, where does the Quran say Christians changed their Scriptures? I know Ibn Abbas said this, he also said in his tafsirs that Christians and Jews have the Injil and Torah with them. He was obviously contradicting himself. Did Muhammad or the author of the Quran who you believe to be God say that? Thanks.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Can ye (o ye men of Faith) entertain the hope that they will believe in you?- Seeing that a party of them heard the Word of Allah, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it… Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (Quran 2:75,79) 

Thanks for sharing this, 786Salaam Khan. Are you aware of the fact that this passage is about Jews, and not Christians?

According to tafsir Ibn Abbas:

(Have ye any hope that they will be true to you) do you hope, O Muhammad, that the Jews will believe in you (when a party of them) the 70 men who were with Moses (used to listen to the Word of Allah) used to listen to Moses reciting the Word of Allah, (then used to change it) alter it, (after they had understood it) after knowing it and fully understanding it (knowingly?) while knowing that they were altering it?

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=2&tAyahNo=75&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2


The alterations that the Jews were charged with are of changing the description of Muhammad in the Torah... yet in the same Quran the Jews are told to look to the Torah to find Muhammad mentioned there!

(Therefore woe) severe punishment, and it is said this means: a valley in hell (be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands) change the description and traits of Muhammad (pbuh) in the Book (and then say, “This is) in the Book that has come (from Allah”, that they may purchase) through changing and altering it (a small gain therewith) a small gain in terms of means of subsistence and surplus of property. (Woe unto them) theirs is a severe punishment (for what their hands have written) have altered (and woe unto them) and theirs is a severe punishment (for what they earn thereby) of unlawful earnings and bribes.

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=2&tAyahNo=79&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

Tafsir Ibn Jalalayn says the same thing more or less.

Also, the charge of writing Scripture with their hands is made to Jews in Muhammad's time... which would indicate they were the ones who changed the text. The 70 Jews in the time of Moses allegedly would alter the word they heard recited to them, but there is no mention of them changing the Scripture. That allegation was made against Jews in the time of Muhammad.
 

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," but it is not from Allah: It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it! (Quran 3:78)

3:78 is also not a reference to Christians, but to Jews in the time of Muhammad.

(And Lo! there is) of the Jews (a party of them) Ka'b and his fellow men (who distort the Scripture with their tongues) by reading the traits of the anti-Christ in their Scripture, (that ye may think) that the lowly may think (that what they say is from the Scripture, when it is not from the Scripture. And they say: It is from Allah) in the Torah, (when it is not from Allah) in the Torah; (and they speak a lie concerning Allah knowingly) fully aware that this is not in their Scripture.

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=3&tAyahNo=78&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

They are accused not of changing the text, but from misreading it to alter what the Torah really says. Notice they are fully aware that what they read is not in their Torah... so that would indicate quite clearly that the Torah was around in its true form up to the time of Muhammad and it was misread by some Jews who knew what it really said and were twisting it anyways.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

And remember Allah took a covenant from the People of the Book, to make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it; but they threw it away behind their backs, and purchased with it some miserable gain! And vile was the bargain they made! (Quran 3:187)

3:187 does refer to Christians and Jews according to Ibn Abbas, and Jews only according to Ibn Jalalayn.

According to Ibn Abbas, the Christians and Jews hid the traits and descriptions of Muhammad in their Scriptures.

Then Allah mentioned His covenant with the people of the Book in the Scripture, which required them to exposit the traits and description of His Prophet, saying: (And (remember) when Allah laid a charge on those who had received the Scripture) i.e. the Torah and the Gospel ((He said): Ye are to expound it) the trait and description of Muhammad (to mankind and not to hide it) not to hide these traits and description of Muhammad in their Scripture. (But they flung it behind their backs) and did not act upon it (and bought thereby a little gain) a paltry acquisition in their means of living by hiding the traits and description of Muhammad in their Scripture. (Verily evil is that which they have gained thereby) evil is that which they have chosen for themselves: Judaism and the concealment of the traits and description of Muhammad.

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=3&tAyahNo=187&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2


If this verse applies to Christians and the Injil, then Christians were ordered to proclaim to mankind the traits and descriptions of Muhammad in their text, but instead they hid it and did not act upon it. If the traits and descriptions of Muhammad were hidden in the Gospel by the Christians, then how is it possible that God would tell Christians to look for these same things therein? Were they hidden from the Gospel, or were they not?

According to tafsir Ibn Jalalayn, the verse is a reference to the Jews.

And, mention, when God made covenant with those who had been given the Scripture, that is, the pledge [taken] from them in the Torah, ‘You shall expound it (read tubayyinunnahu, or yubayyinunnahu, ‘they shall expound it’) the Book, to people, and not conceal it’ (read taktumūnahu, ‘you shall not conceal it’, or yaktumūnahu, ‘they shall not conceal it’). But they rejected it, they discarded the covenant, behind their backs, and so they did not act in accordance with it, and bought with it, they took in its place, a small price, of this world from the debased among them, enjoying supremacy over them in knowledge, and they concealed it, lest it [the supremacy] escape them; how evil is what they have bought, [how evil is] this purchase of theirs!

Originally posted by TG12345


He did. I don't see the point you are getting at though.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You asked why Allah would allow falsehoods to be written and I said because of free will. Waraqa was no Prophet and he didn't have any direct or spiritual contact with G-d, just influence.

What do you mean by "influence"?

If Ibn Waraqa had no direct or spiritual contact with God, how could he have known that Gabriel was the angel who Muhammad spoke to?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

No disrespect but to be honest I can't even be bothered to reply to the rest or reply anymore. I'm not gonna convince you and you're not gonna convince me. I'm not a good debater, usually when I have a religious debate with either muslim or non muslim it leads to nowhere or the other person ends up insulting, cursing or attacking me personally. What's the point? I've been a better questioner than a answerer.

Life is really simple, but men insist on making it complicated.- http://quotationsbook.com/quotes/author/1644/ - Confucius



No disrespect taken, 786SalaamKhan. I think these are important things to look at and debate, and hopefully the truth will come out of such discussions. If you want to not engage in them anymore, I have nothing against you.

I can assure you though that regardless of whether this discussion/debate would have continued or not, I would never curse, attack or insult you. My faith in Christ does not allow me to do that.

Salaam.


Posted By: honeto
Date Posted: 21 January 2013 at 10:11am
Originally posted by TG12345


Originally posted by honeto

Originally posted by TG12345



Originally posted by Abu Loren



As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
<div ="hadith_narrated"="">Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
<div ="text_details"="">                      "Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice.
Salaam Alaikum.Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?


My two or so cents!

Answering your first question:
Yes it does. The Quran and the Prophet(pbuh) are valid till the end times.
The last line of the Hadith Abu Loren has written is very simple. If you believe in a book from God before, and believe the Quran to be from God, it is those whose reward will be doubled.
There were many who fit this category when the Quran was revealed and they accepted it to be from God, and became Muslim.
I personally believe that yes it applies to all of the people of the book that followed it's (Quran's) revelation. I say that on the basis of this understanding that once they accept the Quran, they enter light and guidance that also shows them that what they believed to be from God was indeed from God, just not in it's purity.
So as a reward for their test of faith, they are rewarded twice!
Hasan

Salaam Alaikum Hasan,Thank you for your answer. I will ask you the same question I asked of Abu Loren.What evidence is there that Christians, before they met Muhammad and had the Quran come to them, believed in or even stated there was such a thing as the Injil (which would be the 'previous Book' for Christians if I am not mistaken)? According to the hadith:And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book
came to him and he believed in it
; then he will be given his reward
twice
."
It is pretty clear from the text that the Christians rewarded twice first believed in an earlier Book, and then the Quran came to them and they believed in it.I have yet to find evidence outside the Quran and hadiths that Christians ever believed in a book like the Injil, which the Quran describes as a Scripture that was given to Jesus.If you have any evidence of the belief in the existence of a Book revealed to Jesus by God from Christians or other non-Muslims around or prior to the time of Muhammad, please show me.Allahu Akhbar.


TG12345,
sorry, I have been busy so could not reply soon, but here is my response and answer to your question.
First of all for me and any believer, the Quran being the Final word of God and the most authentic source with us today says so. So for a believer like myself there it is clear, what it says what it is. For those of you that needs other proves out side the authentic word of God, I have previously mentioned that what we have of the Injeel, you call the NT or the Bible, there are verses that clearly show the existence of the Gospel, the one that Jesus went around preaching! Whatever Jesus was revealed to preach is the Gospel or Injeel.
Here are a couple of those verses for you:
Mark 1:14
"Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the GOSPEL of the kingdom of God,"
Matthew 9:35
"And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the GOSPEL of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people."

And people other than Jesus also are recorded to have preached the same:
Luke 9:6 And they (the twelve disciples) departed, and went through the towns, preaching the GOSPEL, and healing every where.

Hasan

-------------
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"


Posted By: Placid
Date Posted: 21 January 2013 at 2:07pm
Hi TG and others,

Quoted from one of your posts:
Deuteronomy 18:15 “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen—
16 just as you desired of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.’
17 And the Lord said to me, ‘They are right in what they have spoken.
18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.
19 And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him

Response: --- While there are some similarities between Moses and Muhammad in their calling, and them sacrificing themselves in their dedication to God’s work,--- these verses definitely refer to Jesus.

--- The crowd compared Jesus to Moses, --- in the miracle of Moses having given them ‘manna’ from heaven, --- to the miracle of Jesus feeding the 5000 on the hillside,--- and it says this in John 6:
14 Then those men, when they had seen the sign that Jesus did, said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.”

And at Jesus baptism in Matthew 3:
16 When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him.
17 And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

On the mount of transfiguration in Matthew 17:
1 Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, led them up on a high mountain by themselves;
2 and He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light.
3 And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him.
5 Behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!”

And, after Jesus had ascended to the right hand of God, and the Holy Spirit had come, in Acts 3:
22 (Peter is speaking) --- For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you.
23 And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’
24 Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days.
25 You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’
26 To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”

And concerning Jesus speaking the words that God put in His mouth, it says this in John 17:
8 For I have given to them the words which You have given Me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me.


Placid



Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 21 January 2013 at 7:44pm
Originally posted by Abu Loren



As'alaamu Alaikkum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu
 
Good news for Christians and Jews.
 
<div ="hadith_narrated"="">Abu Burdah bin Abi Musa narrated from his father that the Messenger of Allah said:
<div ="text_details"="">                      "Three will receive their reward twice: A slave who fulfills the rights of Allah and the rights of his owners, then he will be given his reward twice. And a man who has a beautiful slave girl, so he teaches her good manners, then he frees her, then he married her seeking the Face of Allah by that; then he will be given his reward twice.


Originally posted by TG12345

Salaam Alaikum.Do you believe this applies to Christians and Jews today, or during Muhammad's time only?Also, what does the term "believe in" the earlier Book and "believe in" another Book mean? I would assume that means reading it and believing in what it says, am I right?


Originally posted by honeto

My two or so cents!

Answering your first question:
Yes it does. The Quran and the Prophet(pbuh) are valid till the end times.
The last line of the Hadith Abu Loren has written is very simple. If you believe in a book from God before, and believe the Quran to be from God, it is those whose reward will be doubled.
There were many who fit this category when the Quran was revealed and they accepted it to be from God, and became Muslim.
I personally believe that yes it applies to all of the people of the book that followed it's (Quran's) revelation. I say that on the basis of this understanding that once they accept the Quran, they enter light and guidance that also shows them that what they believed to be from God was indeed from God, just not in it's purity.
So as a reward for their test of faith, they are rewarded twice!
Hasan



Originally posted by honeto


Salaam Alaikum Hasan,Thank you for your answer. I will ask you the same question I asked of Abu Loren.What evidence is there that Christians, before they met Muhammad and had the Quran come to them, believed in or even stated there was such a thing as the Injil (which would be the 'previous Book' for Christians if I am not mistaken)? According to the hadith:And a man who believed in an earlier Book, then another Book
came to him and he believed in it
; then he will be given his reward
twice
."
It is pretty clear from the text that the Christians rewarded twice first believed in an earlier Book, and then the Quran came to them and they believed in it.I have yet to find evidence outside the Quran and hadiths that Christians ever believed in a book like the Injil, which the Quran describes as a Scripture that was given to Jesus.If you have any evidence of the belief in the existence of a Book revealed to Jesus by God from Christians or other non-Muslims around or prior to the time of Muhammad, please show me.Allahu Akhbar.


Originally posted by honeto

TG12345,
sorry, I have been busy so could not reply soon, but here is my response and answer to your question.
First of all for me and any believer, the Quran being the Final word of God and the most authentic source with us today says so. So for a believer like myself there it is clear, what it says what it is. 

Salaam Alaikum, Hasan. Thank you for your response and please do not worry about it coming 'late', sometimes my responses can take a while too.

I feel the same way with the Bible that you do about the Quran so I understand where you are coming from, but if a non-believer questions something in the Bible, I try to say more than tell him or her it is from God so it is true. The Bible definitely is God breathed, but this explanation makes little sense to a non-Christian so I try to explain more.

Like you are doing below.

Originally posted by honeto

For those of you that needs other proves out side the authentic word of God, I have previously mentioned that what we have of the Injeel, you call the NT or the Bible,

Where does the Quran or hadiths say that what we have of the Injil is in the Bible or New Testament?

Originally posted by honeto

  there are verses that clearly show the existence of the Gospel, the one that Jesus went around preaching! Whatever Jesus was revealed to preach is the Gospel or Injeel.
Here are a couple of those verses for you:
Mark 1:14
"Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the GOSPEL of the kingdom of God,"
Matthew 9:35
"And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the GOSPEL of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people."

And people other than Jesus also are recorded to have preached the same:
Luke 9:6 And they (the twelve disciples) departed, and went through the towns, preaching the GOSPEL, and healing every where.

Hasan


True, and as you surely see, there is nothing about the Gospel being a book that was revealed by God to Jesus as the Quran teaches. There is nothing about the Gospel about Muhammad, or about Him making birds out of clay or doing many other things that the Quran claims He did, like escaping the crucifixion, or saying He is not God.


So what is the Gospel? This is explained in 1 Corinthians 15:1-11


Now I would remind you, brothers, "#fen-ESV-28703a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2015&version=ESV#fen-ESV-28703a - a ] of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6

 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.


The Gospel is the Good News about Jesus- including Jesus dying for our sins, His burial and resurrection.


Jesus foretold of His death, burial and resurrection in the Bible. The Gospels confirm Paul's words. For the most part, they do not confirm what is said of Jesus in the Quran.



Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 22 January 2013 at 3:11am
Originally posted by TG12345


Peace be upon you as well.

Wa Alaikum, I know said I wasn't going to reply but are there some last few things I would like to say.

Originally posted by TG12345

I understand there is a substantial difference between the Quran and hadiths. Islam teaches the Quran was revealed by God to Muhammad through Gabriel, while the hadiths are his teachings that God revealed to him but are not part of the Quran.

However, as we both know the Quran tells its followers to defer to Muhammad for decisions. People can't have any real faith until their souls make no resistance to Muhammad's decisions and accept them with fullest conviction.

4:65

But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.

Muslims are called to obey God and to obey Muhammad, according to the Quran. He preaches the clear message. This verse also says this duty was placed on him by God.

24:54

Say: "Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message).

If authentic hadith (like Bukhari and Muslim, as you will notice I am not quoting Abu Dawud or others that some see as suspect) contain mistakes, aren't you saying that the clear message God gave him is full of mistakes?

If I am wrong in any of this (ie that God does not tell people that what Muhammad told them is from Him and it must be followed if one is to follow God as these ayahs say) please correct me.

Please stop trying to teach me Ahadith. I already know this. These Quran refer to the Sunnah of the Prophet and not Ahadith. Sunnah are the established acts of the Prophet and the closest way of following the Sunnah is to follow the one of the four Madhabs(Schools of thought) which by the way the founders appeared within 200 years after Prophet Muhammad while no disrespect to them Bukhari and Muslim appeared around 600 years after! I only follow hadith that don't conflict or contradict themselves, others I go to someone knowledgeable for guidance or I just leave it.

Originally posted by TG12345

Deuteronomy 18

18 “The Levitical priests, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel. They shall eat the Lord's food offerings "#fen-ESV-5386a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5386a - a ] as their "#fen-ESV-5386b" - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5386b - b ] inheritance. They shall have no inheritance among their brothers; the Lord is their inheritance, as he promised them. And this shall be the priests' due from the people, from those offering a sacrifice, whether an ox or a sheep: they shall give to the priest the shoulder and the two cheeks and the stomach. The firstfruits of your grain, of your wine and of your oil, and the first fleece of your sheep, you shall give him. For the Lord your God has chosen him out of all your tribes to stand and minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for all time.


Interesting, that goes against this:
Genesis 17:20

http://niv.scripturetext.com/genesis/17.htm -
And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation.

And here are some interesting pages If you would like to see.
http://www.islamawareness.net/Christianity/bible_nt.html
http://www.islamawareness.net/Christianity/new.html
http://www.islamawareness.net/DeadSeaScrolls/bible_scrolls_dead_sea.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnSw6f6Pka4

Originally posted by TG12345


No disrespect taken, 786SalaamKhan. I think these are important things to look at and debate, and hopefully the truth will come out of such discussions. If you want to not engage in them anymore, I have nothing against you.

I can assure you though that regardless of whether this discussion/debate would have continued or not, I would never curse, attack or insult you. My faith in Christ does not allow me to do that.

Salaam.


Thank you for your kindness. I forgot to say in my previous post that I concede.Smile


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 22 January 2013 at 4:41am
Originally posted by TG12345


Peace be upon you as well.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum, I know said I wasn't going to reply but are there some last few things I would like to say.

Wa alaikum salaam. Feel free to make any responses you want, just know that I will reply to them. Smile

Originally posted by TG12345

I understand there is a substantial difference between the Quran and hadiths. Islam teaches the Quran was revealed by God to Muhammad through Gabriel, while the hadiths are his teachings that God revealed to him but are not part of the Quran.

However, as we both know the Quran tells its followers to defer to Muhammad for decisions. People can't have any real faith until their souls make no resistance to Muhammad's decisions and accept them with fullest conviction.

4:65

But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.

Muslims are called to obey God and to obey Muhammad, according to the Quran. He preaches the clear message. This verse also says this duty was placed on him by God.

24:54

Say: "Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message).

If authentic hadith (like Bukhari and Muslim, as you will notice I am not quoting Abu Dawud or others that some see as suspect) contain mistakes, aren't you saying that the clear message God gave him is full of mistakes?

If I am wrong in any of this (ie that God does not tell people that what Muhammad told them is from Him and it must be followed if one is to follow God as these ayahs say) please correct me.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Please stop trying to teach me Ahadith. I already know this. These Quran refer to the Sunnah of the Prophet and not Ahadith. Sunnah are the established acts of the Prophet and the closest way of following the Sunnah is to follow the one of the four Madhabs(Schools of thought) which by the way the founders appeared within 200 years after Prophet Muhammad while Bukhari and Muslim appeared around 600 years after!

I have to admit I am confused, and there is something I am definitely not understanding, maybe you can help me. The Sunnah from what I read are the legal ways, orders, statements, acts of worship from Muhammad, right? The hadiths are collections of things that he said and did, is that correct?

If the hadiths and Sunnah are two different things, my question then is where can you read the Sunnah? Where can you read about the life of Muhammad and his teachings? I mistakenly assumed this was the hadith, I guess I was wrong.

If Bukhari and Muslim and other hadiths are not the Sunnah, then what is? Where can I read it? Can you provide any links?

Also, how do you know that 4:65 and 24:54 refer to the Sunnah and not the hadiths?


According to Islaamnet,


Sunnah:=The legal way or ways, orders, acts of worship and statements of the Prophet, that are ideals and models to be followed by Muslims.

http://www.islaamnet.com/whatissunnah.html


Interestingly, when I tried to look for Sunnahs to read them and came across sunnah.com, the collections were the hadiths.

http://sunnah.com/


Islam, the Arabic word Sunnah has come to denote the way Prophet Muhammad (S), the Messenger of Allah, lived his life. The Sunnah is the second source of Islamic jurisprudence, the first being the Qur’an. Both sources are indispensable; one cannot practice Islam without consulting both of them. The Arabic word hadith (pl. ahadith) is very similar to Sunnah, but not identical. A hadith is a narration about the life of the Prophet (S) or what he approved - as opposed to his life itself, which is the Sunnah as already mentioned.

In M. M. Azami's Studies in Hadith Methodology and Literature, the following precise definition of a hadith is given,

According to Muhaddithiin [scholars of hadith -ed.] it stands for 'what was transmitted on the authority of the Prophet, his deeds, sayings, tacit approval, or description of his sifaat (features) meaning his physical appearance. However, physical appearance of the Prophet is not included in the definition used by the jurists.'

Thus hadith literature means the literature, which consists of the narrations of the life of the Prophet and the things approved by him. However, the term was used sometimes in much broader sense to cover the narrations about the Companions [of the Prophet -ed.] and Successors [to the Companions -ed.] as well.

The explosion of Islam in the 7th and 8th centuries confronted Islamic scholars with a daunting task: to preserve the knowledge of the Sunnah of the Prophet (S). Hence the science of hadith evaluation was born.

http://www.nicheoftruth.org/pages/sunnah.htm



Originally posted by TG12345

Deuteronomy 18

18 “The Levitical priests, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel. They shall eat the Lord's food offerings "#fen-ESV-5386a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5386a - a ] as their "#fen-ESV-5386b" - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5386b - b ] inheritance. They shall have no inheritance among their brothers; the Lord is their inheritance, as he promised them. And this shall be the priests' due from the people, from those offering a sacrifice, whether an ox or a sheep: they shall give to the priest the shoulder and the two cheeks and the stomach. The firstfruits of your grain, of your wine and of your oil, and the first fleece of your sheep, you shall give him. For the Lord your God has chosen him out of all your tribes to stand and minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for all time.



Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan


Interesting, that goes against this:
Genesis 17:20

http://niv.scripturetext.com/genesis/17.htm -
And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation.



How does Deuteronomy 18 contradict this? Ishmael was indeed blessed by God and made into a great nation. Genesis 17 confirms this.

However, this does not change the fact that the word "brothers" refers to Israel. The passage you cited itself shows this.

18 “The Levitical priests, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel. They shall eat the Lord's food offerings http://www.islamicity.com/forum/#fen-ESV-5386a - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5386a - a ] as their http://www.islamicity.com/forum/#fen-ESV-5386b - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2018&version=ESV#fen-ESV-5386b - b ] inheritance. They shall have no inheritance among their brothers; the Lord is their inheritance, as he promised them. And this shall be the priests' due from the people, from those offering a sacrifice, whether an ox or a sheep: they shall give to the priest the shoulder and the two cheeks and the stomach. The firstfruits of your grain, of your wine and of your oil, and the first fleece of your sheep, you shall give him. For the Lord your God has chosen him out of all your tribes to stand and minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for all time.


Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan


And here are some interesting pages If you would like to see.
http://www.islamawareness.net/Christianity/bible_nt.html
http://www.islamawareness.net/Christianity/new.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnSw6f6Pka4

They are interesting. There are some minor variations in Bible versions, but nothing that has any huge impact on Christian theology.

Originally posted by TG12345


No disrespect taken, 786SalaamKhan. I think these are important things to look at and debate, and hopefully the truth will come out of such discussions. If you want to not engage in them anymore, I have nothing against you.

I can assure you though that regardless of whether this discussion/debate would have continued or not, I would never curse, attack or insult you. My faith in Christ does not allow me to do that.

Salaam.



Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

Thank you for your kindness. I forgot to say in my previous post that I concede.Smile


Thank you for yours. Sorry, I'm not sure if I understand what you mean that you concede. What are you conceding to?

Salaam.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 23 January 2013 at 10:46am
Wa Alaikum,

Originally posted by TG12345


I have to admit I am confused, and there is something I am definitely not understanding, maybe you can help me. The Sunnah from what I read are the legal ways, orders, statements, acts of worship from Muhammad, right? The hadiths are collections of things that he said and did, is that correct?

If the hadiths and Sunnah are two different things, my question then is where can you read the Sunnah? Where can you read about the life of Muhammad and his teachings? I mistakenly assumed this was the hadith, I guess I was wrong.

Also, how do you know that 4:65 and 24:54 refer to the Sunnah and not the hadiths?

http://www.islamawareness.net/Hadith/authenticity1.html

Originally posted by TG12345


If Bukhari and Muslim and other hadiths are not the Sunnah, then what is? Where can I read it? Can you provide any links?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sunni_books#Islamic_jurisprudence

Originally posted by TG12345


They are interesting. There are some minor variations in Bible versions, but nothing that has any huge impact on Christian theology.

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31511
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW99U4JWNEc
http://www.answering-christianity.com/at.htm

Originally posted by TG12345


So what is the Gospel? This is explained in 1 Corinthians 15:1-11

So you actually trust Paul's teachings? Well that explains alot.......
On another note:
'Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6'

This is explaining Paul's Gospel not Jesus'.......

Originally posted by TG12345


Thank you for yours. Sorry, I'm not sure if I understand what you mean that you concede. What are you conceding to?

What I meant was because I withdrawed so I'm neutral with instead of against you(In debate), that kind of concession.



Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 24 January 2013 at 5:00pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

Wa alaikum salaam.

Originally posted by TG12345


I have to admit I am confused, and there is something I am definitely not understanding, maybe you can help me. The Sunnah from what I read are the legal ways, orders, statements, acts of worship from Muhammad, right? The hadiths are collections of things that he said and did, is that correct?

If the hadiths and Sunnah are two different things, my question then is where can you read the Sunnah? Where can you read about the life of Muhammad and his teachings? I mistakenly assumed this was the hadith, I guess I was wrong.

Also, how do you know that 4:65 and 24:54 refer to the Sunnah and not the hadiths?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

http://www.islamawareness.net/Hadith/authenticity1.html

Thanks for the link. Is it right to assume that since what matters is the Quran and Sunnah, a Muslim can then reject most of what is in Bukhari and Muslim and other hadiths?

Is following the hadiths just a good idea, or is accepting them crucial to salvation in Islam?

In other words, can a Muslim reject them and as long as he follows the Sunna and Quran still be a Muslim?

Originally posted by TG12345


If Bukhari and Muslim and other hadiths are not the Sunnah, then what is? Where can I read it? Can you provide any links?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sunni_books#Islamic_jurisprudence

Thanks for the link. Are you saying that Muslims are more obligated to follow what is in Bashar El Shariat then what is in Bukhari and Muslim?

For example, can a Muslim reject this statement as false:

(1) Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me. 1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. 2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. 3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me. 4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection). 5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331 - #7 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331#331 - #331 )

http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=%22nation+only%22&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all

and still be a Muslim? Why or why not? Thanks.

Originally posted by TG12345


They are interesting. There are some minor variations in Bible versions, but nothing that has any huge impact on Christian theology.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31511
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW99U4JWNEc
http://www.answering-christianity.com/at.htm

Feel free to bring up one of these arguments if you want and we can discuss it.

Originally posted by TG12345


So what is the Gospel? This is explained in 1 Corinthians 15:1-11

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

So you actually trust Paul's teachings? Well that explains alot.......
On another note:
'Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6'

This is explaining Paul's Gospel not Jesus'.......

Yes, I trust Paul's teachings. I have no reason not to. He was an amazing and courageous person who went from being a persecutor of the early church to one of its leaders, after he met Jesus.


Notice the verse you quoted:


'Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6'


Paul was accepted by Christ's followers and worked with them to build the early church. He suffered beatings, mockings, imprisonment, and eventually death for his faith.


Originally posted by TG12345


Thank you for yours. Sorry, I'm not sure if I understand what you mean that you concede. What are you conceding to?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

What I meant was because I withdrawed so I'm neutral with instead of against you(In debate), that kind of concession.


I'm not sure I understand, what are you neutral on? In either case, I wanted to say I enjoy our debates and if you want to continue I look forward to talking more.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 24 January 2013 at 11:42pm
Wa Alaikum,

Originally posted by TG12345


Thanks for the link. Is it right to assume that since what matters is the Quran and Sunnah, a Muslim can then reject most of what is in Bukhari and Muslim and other hadiths?

Is following the hadiths just a good idea, or is accepting them crucial to salvation in Islam?

In other words, can a Muslim reject them and as long as he follows the Sunna and Quran still be a Muslim?

http://www.muftisays.com/viewarticle.php?article=zntaqleed

Originally posted by TG12345


Thanks for the link. Are you saying that Muslims are more obligated to follow what is in Bashar El Shariat then what is in Bukhari and Muslim?

For example, can a Muslim reject this statement as false:

(1) Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me. 1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. 2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. 3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me. 4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection). 5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331 - #7 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331#331 - #331 )

and still be a Muslim? Why or why not? Thanks.


That is not what I'm saying. It is better to follow the Madhabs (Schools of Thought) than Hadith when following the Sunnah. Not every muslim has access to the Hadith but an average muslim has access to the Quran and Sunnah not by text but at least through his teacher. You asked where to read so I provided a list of books, I recommend for you Muwatta which can be found online.
Of course you can accept Hadith not just completely reject it especially one as important as that hadith. You just need the proper guidance or knowledge.

Originally posted by TG12345


Feel free to bring up one of these arguments if you want and we can discuss it.

Do they not have any impact on Christian theology? They also forgot to mention when Thomas saw Christ he called out to G-d and Christ praised him for that and other believers in G-d even though he had not taught them and that David is called begotten son in Psalms. And what about salvation for Moses and Abraham? Surely they never worshiped the Trinity and Malachi says G-d does not change.
Originally posted by TG12345


Yes, I trust Paul's teachings. I have no reason not to. He was an amazing and courageous person who went from being a persecutor of the early church to one of its leaders, after he met Jesus.

Paul was accepted by Christ's followers and worked with them to build the early church. He suffered beatings, mockings, imprisonment, and eventually death for his faith.

Well just because Paul saw Jesus alive he started preaching his Divinity, Paul abolished Moses' law even though Jesus came to fulfill it so how would he be a follower of Jesus? And there was that time with Timothy's circumcision even though both our religions do not permit homosexuality...
Paul also taught that Christ died for all humanity's sins so it wouldn't even matter if anyone is non-Christian right?

Originally posted by TG12345


I'm not sure I understand, what are you neutral on?


LOLNever mind.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 25 January 2013 at 5:07pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

Peace be upon you as well.

Originally posted by TG12345


Thanks for the link. Is it right to assume that since what matters is the Quran and Sunnah, a Muslim can then reject most of what is in Bukhari and Muslim and other hadiths?

Is following the hadiths just a good idea, or is accepting them crucial to salvation in Islam?

In other words, can a Muslim reject them and as long as he follows the Sunna and Quran still be a Muslim?

[/QUOTE]

http://www.muftisays.com/viewarticle.php?article=zntaqleed

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan


Thanks. From what I understand, think that the sahih hadiths contain the Sunna and that a Muslim cannot reject it, is that correct or did I misunderstand completely?




Originally posted by TG12345


Thanks for the link. Are you saying that Muslims are more obligated to follow what is in Bashar El Shariat then what is in Bukhari and Muslim?

For example, can a Muslim reject this statement as false:

(1) Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me. 1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. 2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. 3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me. 4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection). 5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331 - #7 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331#331 - #331 )

and still be a Muslim? Why or why not? Thanks.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

That is not what I'm saying. It is better to follow the Madhabs (Schools of Thought) than Hadith when following the Sunnah. Not every muslim has access to the Hadith but an average muslim has access to the Quran and Sunnah not by text but at least through his teacher. You asked where to read so I provided a list of books, I recommend for you Muwatta which can be found online.
Of course you can accept Hadith not just completely reject it especially one as important as that hadith. You just need the proper guidance or knowledge.

Can I ask you what makes the hadith above important? Do we know for sure that Muhammad said this? If so, is it binding for a Muslim to believe this?

Not trying to be argumentative, but I am curious what you and other think of this.

I will definitely read through the Muwatta, thank you for sharing it with me.

Originally posted by TG12345


Feel free to bring up one of these arguments if you want and we can discuss it.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Do they not have any impact on Christian theology?

Let's look at these claims one by one.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

They also forgot to mention when Thomas saw Christ he called out to G-d and Christ praised him for that and other believers in G-d even though he had not taught them

I don't understand what you mean by this. Christ did not teach Thomas and other believers what? That He is God? He did so by saying He and the Father are one, that those who have seen Him have seen the Father, by saying He will judge the world, many other things.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

and that David is called begotten son in Psalms.

Can you please show me the verse you are referring to?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

And what about salvation for Moses and Abraham? Surely they never worshiped the Trinity and Malachi says G-d does not change.

God does not change. God also reveals Himself over time. He did not reveal He is a Trinity until He came down as Jesus. He refers to Himself in the plural sense throughout the New Testament, and He did personally come down and wrestle with Israel... and let him win. However, He didn't reveal He is a Trinity until the New Testament.

Did God reveal the Quran right away, or do you believe He revealed it with Muhammad and the prophets before him were given other books?

Originally posted by TG12345


Yes, I trust Paul's teachings. I have no reason not to. He was an amazing and courageous person who went from being a persecutor of the early church to one of its leaders, after he met Jesus.

Paul was accepted by Christ's followers and worked with them to build the early church. He suffered beatings, mockings, imprisonment, and eventually death for his faith.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Well just because Paul saw Jesus alive he started preaching his Divinity,

Yes. You could say that just because Muhammad saw Gabriel according to your faith, he started preaching Islam.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Paul abolished Moses' law even though Jesus came to fulfill it so how would he be a follower of Jesus?

This is what Jesus said:

Matthew 5:17,18

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Jesus fulfilled the Law. He claimed that not one dot will pass from it until it is accomplished. This is what He did on the earth.

When He rose, the Law had been fulfilled by Him. All had been accomplished.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

And there was that time with Timothy's circumcision even though both our religions do not permit homosexuality...

I don't understand the connection between circumcision and homosexuality...


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Paul also taught that Christ died for all humanity's sins so it wouldn't even matter if anyone is non-Christian right?
Originally posted by TG12345


Ephesians 2:8,9

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Jesus died on the cross for all mankind. But we are saved by believing in Him.

Originally posted by TG12345

I'm not sure I understand, what are you neutral on?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

LOLNever mind.


OK. Sorry, I can be kind of slow at times... Embarrassed


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 25 January 2013 at 7:59pm
Salaam Alaikum, 786SalaamKhan,

I have just began reading Malik's Muwatta, and came across something very interesting that Muhammad said.

Section: The Intestines of the Kafir


Book 49, Number 49.6.9:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zinad from al-Araj that Abu Hurayra said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'The muslim eats in one intestine, and the kafir eats in seven!' "


Book 49, Number 49.6.10:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Suhayl ibn Abi Salih from his father from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, gave hospitality to a kafir guest. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered a sheep to be brought for him and it was milked. He drank its milk. Then another came, and he drank it. Then another came and he drank it until he had drunk the milk of seven sheep. In the morning he became muslim, and the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered a sheep for him. It was milked and he drank its milk. Then he ordered another for him and he could not finish it. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "The mumin drinks in one intestine, and the kafir drinks in seven intestines."

http://malikmuwatta.blogspot.ca/2008/03/book-49-description-of-prophet-may.html


If Malik's Muwatta contains the Sunna (which is stronger than the hadiths if I understand correctly), then Muhammad truly said this.

As you probably know, every human being has not one or seven but two intestines. The small intestine and the large intestine. Food goes through both the small intestine and the large intestine, although the indigestible food goes into the large one.

Both Muslims and non-Muslims, when we eat, have food go into first the small intestine, and then whatever is left (after the good stuff has been absorbed into our blood).. the indigestible waste left over... goes into the large intestine.

Non-Muslims do not eat with seven intestines. Like Muslims, we only have two. Muslims do not eat with only one intestine... both the small and large intestines absorb food that we had eaten.


http://www.news-medical.net/health/What-Does-the-Large-Intestine-Do.aspx

http://www.news-medical.net/health/What-Does-the-Small-Intestine-Do.aspx

http://www.chp.edu/CHP/organs+intestine


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 25 January 2013 at 8:25pm
Salaam Alaikum, 786Salaam Khan,

I just came across another interesting Sunnah.

Muhammad said allegedly that there is no harm in eating what was cast up by the sea.

Was he aware that there are certain types of fish that are very poisonous, and which should not be eaten as they may cause great harm, even death?

http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/faq/fishfaq1c.html


Ciguatera poisoning is the most common nonbacterial, fish-borne poisoning in the United States. It is caused by consumption of reef fish that feed on certain dinoflagellates (ie, algae) associated with coral reef systems. At least 5 types of ciguatoxin have been identified and are noted to accumulate in larger and older fish higher up the food chain.

Ciguatera poisoning has been a significant concern in tropical areas for centuries and generally is believed to be confined to coral reef fish in water between the latitudes of 35 degrees north and 35 degrees south. One study of the impact of climate changes on ciguatera producing organisms has suggested that elevations of sea surface temperatures may expand the band of concern above and below the 35th degree parallels.[1] Ironically, it also suggested that some areas may become too warm for the dinoflagellates to flourish. But, in the modern era of world travel and rapid transportation, many warm-water fish are available commercially in markets throughout the world, and cases of ciguatera poisoning may be seen in any location.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/813869-overview




Section: Game of the Sea


Book 25, Number 25.3.9:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abi Hurayra asked Abdullah ibn Umar about eating what was cast up by the sea and he forbade him to eat it. Then Abdullah turned and asked for a Qur'an, and read, "The game of the sea and its flesh are halal for you." Nafi added, "Abdullah ibn Umar sent me to Abdar-Rahman Ibn Abi Hurayra to say that there was no harm in eating it."


Book 25, Number 25.3.10:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that Sad al-Jari, the mawla of Umar ibn al-Khattab asked Abdullah ibn Umar about fish which had killed each other or which had died from severe cold . He said, "There is no harm in eating them.'' Sad said,' 'I then asked Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al As and he said the same."


Book 25, Number 25.3.11:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zinad from Abu Salama ibn Abd ar-Rahman from Abu Hurayra and Zayd ibn Thabit that they saw no harm in eating what was cast up by the sea.


Book 25, Number 25.3.12:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zinad from Abu Salama ibn Abd ar-Rahman that some people from al-Jar came to Marwan ibn al-Hakam and asked him about eating what was cast up by the sea. He said, "There is no harm in eating it." Marwan said, "Go to Zayd ibn Thabit and Abu Hurayra and ask them about it, then come to me and tell me what they say." They went to them and asked them, and they both said, "There is no harm in eating it " They returned to Marwan and told him. Marwan said, "I told you."

Malik said that there was no harm in eating fish caught by magians, because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "In the sea's water is purity, and that which is dead in it is halal. "

Malik said, "If it is eaten when it is dead, there is no harm in who catches it."




Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 26 January 2013 at 12:59am
Wa Alaikum, I hope you are well.

Originally posted by TG12345


Yes. You could say that just because Muhammad saw Gabriel according to your faith, he started preaching Islam.

The difference is that Gabriel taught him that he is a Prophet, Christ only asked Paul why he is persecuting him not that he is Divine etc.

Originally posted by TG12345


I don't understand the connection between circumcision and homosexuality...

He sucked the blood from Timothy's penis(I can't believe I had to say it!) I mean why not use a cloth instead!?

Originally posted by TG12345


Thanks. From what I understand, think that the sahih hadiths contain the Sunna and that a Muslim cannot reject it, is that correct or did I misunderstand completely?

No you are not wrong but I wanted you to read the response to Dr Zakir Naik's claims unless you did and I misunderstood you?

Originally posted by TG12345


Can I ask you what makes the hadith above important? Do we know for sure that Muhammad said this? If so, is it binding for a Muslim to believe this?

Not trying to be argumentative, but I am curious what you and other think of this.


It's a known part of Islamic theology that Muhammad(PBUH) is sent unto all mankind, it's part of law that a muslim can pray anywhere clean etc.

Originally posted by TG12345


I have just began reading Malik's Muwatta, and came across something very interesting that Muhammad said.

Section: The Intestines of the Kafir


LOLYou take that literally?

Originally posted by TG12345



I just came across another interesting Sunnah.

Muhammad said allegedly that there is no harm in eating what was cast up by the sea.

Was he aware that there are certain types of fish that are very poisonous, and which should not be eaten as they may cause great harm, even death?

It's a known fact that fish is halal to eat, and it's also known one should not eat anything harmful because that is against common sense!

Originally posted by TG12345


Can you please show me the verse you are referring to?

Psalm 2:7

I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.


Originally posted by TG12345


God does not change. God also reveals Himself over time. He did not reveal He is a Trinity until He came down as Jesus. He refers to Himself in the plural sense throughout the New Testament, and He did personally come down and wrestle with Israel... and let him win. However, He didn't reveal He is a Trinity until the New Testament.

Did God reveal the Quran right away, or do you believe He revealed it with Muhammad and the prophets before him were given other books?


Losing to Jacob and claiming that no one has seen him and lived? Changing his entire nature and method of salvation? What is this!?

However Muhammad and all the prophets brought the same message and method of salvation which is to submit one's will to Allah.

Originally posted by TG12345


I don't understand what you mean by this. Christ did not teach Thomas and other believers what? That He is God? He did so by saying He and the Father are one, that those who have seen Him have seen the Father, by saying He will judge the world, many other things.

When Thomas saw Jesus was still alive he called out to G-d and Christ praised him for doing so and praised others who believe in G-d even though they had not seen him.
1. Jesus and "the Father" are one in each other with purpose, Jesus is under G-d's will.
2. There is a saying in Islam that Allah is beautiful and that you could see Allah's beauty through the beauty of his creation (Allah knows best).
Also:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090909012139AAlOtbj
3. In Islam Jesus will kill Dajjal and stay on earth as a leader beside Mahdi that is what is meant by judge.

Originally posted by TG12345


Ephesians 2:8,9

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Jesus died on the cross for all mankind. But we are saved by believing in Him.


So in the end Jesus "dying for all mankind" means nothing as in most religions people are saved through belief, but that also means Christians can sin as long as they believe? Doesn't the Trinity demote God from Universal to only Human? The Doctrines of Trinity and Atonement make no sense whatsoever to me.

Originally posted by TG12345


Let's look at these claims one by one.

I merely wanted to know your opinion but you still believe in the trinity so like I said: "What's the point?"

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-15-9/ - Matthew 15:9 .

But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.





Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 28 January 2013 at 4:44pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum, I hope you are well.

Wa alaikum salaam! I am, thanks! Sorry for the delay in response!

Originally posted by TG12345


Yes. You could say that just because Muhammad saw Gabriel according to your faith, he started preaching Islam.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

The difference is that Gabriel taught him that he is a Prophet, Christ only asked Paul why he is persecuting him not that he is Divine etc.


That is true, but then He sent Ananias to baptize him. I think that during these three days Jesus either spoke to Paul (we He did send Paul a vision as he was praying), or Ananias told him the Gospel.

We know that Ananias did tell Paul that God appointed him to know His will and to see the Righteous One. The Bible doesn't say exactly where and how Paul was told of Christ's divinity and crucifixion and resurrection, but it does say God sent him Ananias and we know He spoke to him during his three days of blindness. For me that is evidence enough to believe He spoke to Paul and revealed the Truth to him.

Acts 9:9-19

But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. Saul rose from the ground, and although his eyes were opened, he saw nothing. So they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank.

10 Now there was a disciple at Damascus named Ananias. The Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias.” And he said, “Here I am, Lord.” 11 And the Lord said to him, “Rise and go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man of Tarsus named Saul, for behold, he is praying, 12 and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him so that he might regain his sight.” 13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem. 14 And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on your name.” 15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” 17 So Ananias departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes, and he regained his sight. Then he rose and was baptized; 19 and taking food, he was strengthened.


Acts 22:12-16

12 “And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, well spoken of by all the Jews who lived there, 13 came to me, and standing by me said to me, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight.’ And at that very hour I received my sight and saw him. 14 And he said, ‘The God of our fathers appointed you to know his will, to see the Righteous One and to hear a voice from his mouth; 15 for you will be a witness for him to everyone of what you have seen and heard. 16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’



Originally posted by TG12345


I don't understand the connection between circumcision and homosexuality...

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

He sucked the blood from Timothy's penis(I can't believe I had to say it!) I mean why not use a cloth instead!?

How do you know how Timothy was circumcised? The Bible doesn't say this.

Making a connection between circumcision and homosexuality is like connecting circumcision with pedophilia and sadism, since the person who does it looks at a naked boys genitals and then cuts them.

Clearly Paul had no erotic feelings for Timothy or any other man for that matter.
 
Originally posted by TG12345


Thanks. From what I understand, think that the sahih hadiths contain the Sunna and that a Muslim cannot reject it, is that correct or did I misunderstand completely?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

No you are not wrong but I wanted you to read the response to Dr Zakir Naik's claims unless you did and I misunderstood you?

OK, so do we agree that the Sunna is Muhammad's words that are recorded in the sahih hadiths?

Originally posted by TG12345


Can I ask you what makes the hadith above important? Do we know for sure that Muhammad said this? If so, is it binding for a Muslim to believe this?

Not trying to be argumentative, but I am curious what you and other think of this.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

It's a known part of Islamic theology that Muhammad(PBUH) is sent unto all mankind, it's part of law that a muslim can pray anywhere clean etc.

So you are absolutely certain that he said this?

(4) Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me. 1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. 2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. 3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me. 4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection). 5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331 - #7 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331#331 - #331 )

http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=mankind&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0

Would this be considered part of the Sunnah?



Originally posted by TG12345


I have just began reading Malik's Muwatta, and came across something very interesting that Muhammad said.

Section: The Intestines of the Kafir


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

LOLYou take that literally?

Did he indicate anywhere it was meant to be taken metaphorically?

What would you say of this statement:

"An intelligent person uses all seven of his heads but a fool uses only two of them"

See any problems with it? If so, what would they be?

Originally posted by TG12345



I just came across another interesting Sunnah.

Muhammad said allegedly that there is no harm in eating what was cast up by the sea.

Was he aware that there are certain types of fish that are very poisonous, and which should not be eaten as they may cause great harm, even death?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

It's a known fact that fish is halal to eat, and it's also known one should not eat anything harmful because that is against common sense!


If that is the case, it is not true that the game of the sea and its flesh is halal. This is only true of game in the sea and flesh that is not poisonous.

Muhammad could just have easily said

"Most of the game of the sea and its flesh are halal for most of you."

Did Muhammad say that liquids are halal for people? Why not? Could it be because a liquid can be alcohol or poison as well as water or grape juice?

Originally posted by TG12345


Can you please show me the verse you are referring to?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Psalm 2:7

I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

These words were not spoken by David, but by the Messiah.

Psalm 2:7-12

I will tell of the decree:
The Lord said to me, “You are my Son;
    today I have begotten you.
Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,
    and the ends of the earth your possession.
You shall break "#fen-ESV-13955b" - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=psalm%202&version=ESV#fen-ESV-13955b - b ] them with a rod of iron
    and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.”

10 Now therefore, O kings, be wise;
    be warned, O rulers of the earth.
11 Serve the Lord with fear,
    and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son,
    lest he be angry, and you perish in the way,
    for his wrath is quickly kindled.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

Originally posted by TG12345


God does not change. God also reveals Himself over time. He did not reveal He is a Trinity until He came down as Jesus. He refers to Himself in the plural sense throughout the New Testament, and He did personally come down and wrestle with Israel... and let him win. However, He didn't reveal He is a Trinity until the New Testament.

Did God reveal the Quran right away, or do you believe He revealed it with Muhammad and the prophets before him were given other books?



Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Losing to Jacob and claiming that no one has seen him and lived?

No one who has seen God's face and lived. When God presented Himself to Jacob, He presented Himself as a man.

http://www.gotquestions.org/seen-God.html

Jacob did not see God in His full glory.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Changing his entire nature and method of salvation? What is this!?

Not changing His nature, but revealing Himself more and more. He did not change His method of salvation either, but also gradually revealed it to people.

As a Muslim I don't see why you have a problem with this.

Did God reveal the Quran right away to the first messenger? Does this mean that because He allegedly used different books (most of which were corrupted or lost as you believe), He kept changing what was in them?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

However Muhammad and all the prophets brought the same message and method of salvation which is to submit one's will to Allah.

According to the Quran. There is no way to check whether this is true or not because all of the other books were corrupted or lost... in spite of the fact that Christians and Jews are instructed to look into two of them for descriptions of Muhammad which were allegedly removed earlier by others.

Originally posted by TG12345


I don't understand what you mean by this. Christ did not teach Thomas and other believers what? That He is God? He did so by saying He and the Father are one, that those who have seen Him have seen the Father, by saying He will judge the world, many other things.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

When Thomas saw Jesus was still alive he called out to G-d and Christ praised him for doing so and praised others who believe in G-d even though they had not seen him.


John 20:27-29

27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Thomas called Jesus "my Lord and my God". Thomas was praised for believing in Jesus.


http://barnes.biblecommenter.com/john/20.htm - Barnes' Notes on the Bible

My Lord and my God - In this passage the name God is expressly given to Christ, in his own presence and by one of his own apostles. This declaration has been considered as a clear proof of the divinity of Christ, for the following reasons:

1. There is no evidence that this was a mere expression, as some have supposed, of surprise or astonishment.

2. The language was addressed to Jesus himself - "Thomas ...said unto him."

3. The Saviour did not reprove him or check him as using any improper language. If he had not been divine, it is impossible to reconcile it with his honesty that he did not rebuke the disciple. No pious man would have allowed such language to be addressed to him. Compare http://niv.scripturetext.com/acts/14-13.htm - Acts 14:13-15 ; http://niv.scripturetext.com/revelation/22-8.htm - Revelation 22:8-9 .

4. The Saviour proceeds immediately to commend Thomas for believing; but what was the evidence of his believing? It was this declaration, and this only. If this was a mere exclamation of surprise, what proof was it that Thomas believed? Before this he doubted. Now he believed, and gave utterance to his belief, that Jesus was his Lord and his God.

5. If this was not the meaning of Thomas, then his exclamation was a mere act of profaneness, and the Saviour would not have commended him for taking the name of the Lord his God in vain. The passage proves, therefore, that it is proper to apply to Christ the name Lord and God, and thus accords with what John affirmed in http://niv.scripturetext.com/john/1-1.htm - John 1:1 , and which is established throughout this gospel.

http://bible.cc/john/20-28.htm

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

1. Jesus and "the Father" are one in each other with purpose, Jesus is under G-d's will.

He didn't say they are one in purpose, He said He and the Father are one.

Did Muhammad say he and Allah are one?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

2. There is a saying in Islam that Allah is beautiful and that you could see Allah's beauty through the beauty of his creation (Allah knows best).

Did Muhammad say that those who have seen him have seen Allah?

A person I once met had a beautiful German shepherd. Would it not be problematic if I pointed to it and said "those who have seen this dog have seen God"?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Also:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090909012139AAlOtbj

I read through them. Anyone in particular you want to bring up and discuss?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

3. In Islam Jesus will kill Dajjal and stay on earth as a leader beside Mahdi that is what is meant by judge.

Matthew 25:31-49 does not speak of Jesus and Mahdi (or Him and anyone else for that matter) staying on earth as leaders. It also makes it very clear that He will decide who goes to heaven and who goes to hell.

Does Islam teach that a human will decide who spends eternity in heaven and who will spend eternity in hell?


Originally posted by TG12345


Ephesians 2:8,9

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Jesus died on the cross for all mankind. But we are saved by believing in Him.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

So in the end Jesus "dying for all mankind" means nothing as in most religions people are saved through belief,

Obviously, one's faith needs to be in Jesus.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

but that also means Christians can sin as long as they believe?

Not at all. The Holy Spirit convicts us. Those who live in sin do not have God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Doesn't the Trinity demote God from Universal to only Human?

No. The Trinity teaches He exists as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. As the Son (Jesus), God lived on earth as both man and God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

The Doctrines of Trinity and Atonement make no sense whatsoever to me.

Why not?


Originally posted by TG12345


Let's look at these claims one by one.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

I merely wanted to know your opinion but you still believe in the trinity so like I said: "What's the point?"

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-15-9/ - Matthew 15:9 .

But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.



Jesus was not saying that He should not be worshiped in this passage.

Of course I believe the Trinity. The Bible teaches it plainly.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 28 January 2013 at 10:24pm
Originally posted by TG12345


Wa alaikum salaam! I am, thanks! Sorry for the delay in response!

It's okay, due to time off I found some useful material for us both.Smile

Originally posted by TG12345


Making a connection between circumcision and homosexuality is like connecting circumcision with pedophilia and sadism, since the person who does it looks at a naked boys genitals and then cuts them.

Clearly Paul had no erotic feelings for Timothy or any other man for that matter.

Forgive me, I read some statement that Paul put the penis in his mouth to suck the blood out. When I looked back I realized it was not in the Bible!
 
Originally posted by TG12345


OK, so do we agree that the Sunna is Muhammad's words that are recorded in the sahih hadiths?

If you want.......

Originally posted by TG12345


So you are absolutely certain that he said this?

(4) Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me. 1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. 2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. 3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me. 4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection). 5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331 - #7 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331#331 - #331 )

http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=mankind&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0

Would this be considered part of the Sunnah?

"And We have not sent you but to all the men as a bearer of good news and as a warner, but most men do not know." (Saba' 34:28)

Originally posted by TG12345


Did he indicate anywhere it was meant to be taken metaphorically?

What would you say of this statement:

"An intelligent person uses all seven of his heads but a fool uses only two of them"

See any problems with it? If so, what would they be?

Muhammad(SAW) knows that all mankind are descended from Adam(PBUH), why would else would he say this? There were some other hadith where he said the Black Stone is the hand of Allah, Metaphorical.

Originally posted by TG12345


If that is the case, it is not true that the game of the sea and its flesh is halal. This is only true of game in the sea and flesh that is not poisonous.

Muhammad could just have easily said

"Most of the game of the sea and its flesh are halal for most of you."

Did Muhammad say that liquids are halal for people? Why not? Could it be because a liquid can be alcohol or poison as well as water or grape juice?

There are various Hadith and rulings of Madhabs that state consumption of harmful things is prohibited. If you are not satisfied with Muwatta then go back to Bukhari and Muslim, Simple. I won't hold a grudge.

Originally posted by TG12345


No one who has seen God's face and lived. When God presented Himself to Jacob, He presented Himself as a man.

http://www.gotquestions.org/seen-God.html

Jacob did not see God in His full glory.

This was apparently an Angel of G-d.

Originally posted by TG12345


Not changing His nature, but revealing Himself more and more. He did not change His method of salvation either, but also gradually revealed it to people.

As a Muslim I don't see why you have a problem with this.

Did God reveal the Quran right away to the first messenger? Does this mean that because He allegedly used different books (most of which were corrupted or lost as you believe), He kept changing what was in them?

Ah, I no longer believe the Bible is corrupted. I apologize, you were right when you posted hadith about Waraqa proving the existence of the Injil; I was just too stiff-necked. It was Salafi scholars like Ahmad Deedat and Zakir Naik that borrowed the ideas from the Qadianis.   http://unchangingword.com/
While I do not 100% agree with the above website, I agree with most and I'm sure you will as well so please your time and read through it. However I believe that anything in the Bible that differs from the Quran is because of the long passage of time where it was mistransmitted, mistranslated, misinterpreted but maybe a few deliberate/accidental changes. That is why there are many versions and I do not mean translations like King James but I mean Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Greek etc. Similar to how there is a Shia Quran.

Originally posted by TG12345


John 20:27-29

27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Thomas called Jesus "my Lord and my God". Thomas was praised for believing in Jesus.


http://barnes.biblecommenter.com/john/20.htm - Barnes' Notes on the Bible

My Lord and my God - In this passage the name God is expressly given to Christ, in his own presence and by one of his own apostles. This declaration has been considered as a clear proof of the divinity of Christ, for the following reasons:

1. There is no evidence that this was a mere expression, as some have supposed, of surprise or astonishment.

2. The language was addressed to Jesus himself - "Thomas ...said unto him."

3. The Saviour did not reprove him or check him as using any improper language. If he had not been divine, it is impossible to reconcile it with his honesty that he did not rebuke the disciple. No pious man would have allowed such language to be addressed to him. Compare http://niv.scripturetext.com/acts/14-13.htm - Acts 14:13-15 ; http://niv.scripturetext.com/revelation/22-8.htm - Revelation 22:8-9 .

4. The Saviour proceeds immediately to commend Thomas for believing; but what was the evidence of his believing? It was this declaration, and this only. If this was a mere exclamation of surprise, what proof was it that Thomas believed? Before this he doubted. Now he believed, and gave utterance to his belief, that Jesus was his Lord and his God.

5. If this was not the meaning of Thomas, then his exclamation was a mere act of profaneness, and the Saviour would not have commended him for taking the name of the Lord his God in vain. The passage proves, therefore, that it is proper to apply to Christ the name Lord and God, and thus accords with what John affirmed in http://niv.scripturetext.com/john/1-1.htm - John 1:1 , and which is established throughout this gospel.

http://bible.cc/john/20-28.htm

http://bibleq.net/answer/1360/


Originally posted by TG12345


Why not?

Well the Quran teaches that Adam and Eve were forgiven so there should be no original sin?

Originally posted by TG12345


Jesus was not saying that He should not be worshiped in this passage.

Of course I believe the Trinity. The Bible teaches it plainly.

http://www.heaven.net.nz/answers/answer08.htm
http://www.earthsmightiest.com/fansites/BlasphemousRumors/news/?a=5690
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3957
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3938
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3956
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3939

Addressing other issues:
http://www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?53815-Does-the-Quran-say-that-Ishmael-was-sacrificed-instead-of-Issac/#10
http://www.anusha.com/jesuspaul.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k94n1GfBbcw&list=LLCTZqIQFXzgBrH8RHH5q1tA
http://arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA2N2Iz5ExM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtEpM9BqvQI
http://www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Jesus%27_death#Substitution_interpretation

And Finally:
So  in conclusion to the topic, the hadith does say that a Jew and/or Christian who believes in the Previous Scriptures and then accepts fully Islam will receive a double reward.

And Allah knows best.


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 30 January 2013 at 5:24pm
Originally posted by TG12345


Wa alaikum salaam! I am, thanks! Sorry for the delay in response!

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

It's okay, due to time off I found some useful material for us both.Smile

Sweet Smile

Originally posted by TG12345


Making a connection between circumcision and homosexuality is like connecting circumcision with pedophilia and sadism, since the person who does it looks at a naked boys genitals and then cuts them.

Clearly Paul had no erotic feelings for Timothy or any other man for that matter.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Forgive me, I read some statement that Paul put the penis in his mouth to suck the blood out. When I looked back I realized it was not in the Bible!

No problem, we all make mistakes. I'm sure I've also made mistakes like that about Islam. Let's move on, Smile
 
Originally posted by TG12345


OK, so do we agree that the Sunna is Muhammad's words that are recorded in the sahih hadiths?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

If you want.......

Does that mean yes or no?

Originally posted by TG12345


So you are absolutely certain that he said this?

(4) Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me. 1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. 2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. 3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me. 4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection). 5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331 - #7 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=7&translator=1&start=0&number=331#331 - #331 )

http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=mankind&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0

Would this be considered part of the Sunnah?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

"And We have not sent you but to all the men as a bearer of good news and as a warner, but most men do not know." (Saba' 34:28)

Thanks for the Surah quotation but I can't say it answered my question. Smile Did Muhammad say the words attributed to him in Bukhari Book #8, #429?

Can you answer please with a "yes" or a "no"?

Originally posted by TG12345


Did he indicate anywhere it was meant to be taken metaphorically?

What would you say of this statement:

"An intelligent person uses all seven of his heads but a fool uses only two of them"

See any problems with it? If so, what would they be?


Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

Muhammad(SAW) knows that all mankind are descended from Adam(PBUH), why would else would he say this?

I also know that all mankind is descended from Adam and Eve.

If I made such a statement:

"An intelligent person uses all seven of his heads but a fool uses only two of them"

what would you think of it? Would it make sense? Would it be correct?

Why or why not?

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

There were some other hadith where he said the Black Stone is the hand of Allah, Metaphorical.

Can you please show it to me? Is it sahih?

Originally posted by TG12345


If that is the case, it is not true that the game of the sea and its flesh is halal. This is only true of game in the sea and flesh that is not poisonous.

Muhammad could just have easily said

"Most of the game of the sea and its flesh are halal for most of you."

Did Muhammad say that liquids are halal for people? Why not? Could it be because a liquid can be alcohol or poison as well as water or grape juice?

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

There are various Hadith and rulings of Madhabs that state consumption of harmful things is prohibited.


If there are things in the ocean that are haraam (prohibited, if I understand the word correctly) because they are poisonous, then how can it be true that the game of the sea and its flesh are halal? Clearly, some of it is, and some of it isn't.

That would be like Muhammad saying that liquids are halal. According to your faith, some of them (like juice and water) are halal and others (like wine or gasoline... on the second we both agree) are not.


Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

If you are not satisfied with Muwatta then go back to Bukhari and Muslim, Simple. I won't hold a grudge.

LOL, thanks for not holding grudges against me. If I am not mistaken, you referred me to Muwatta so I could read the Sunnah. Are you saying that Muhammad's words in Bukhari and Muslim are Sunnah also?
Originally posted by TG12345


No one who has seen God's face and lived. When God presented Himself to Jacob, He presented Himself as a man.

http://www.gotquestions.org/seen-God.html

Jacob did not see God in His full glory.

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

This was apparently an Angel of G-d.

No, he saw and wrestled with God. God allowed Him to win.

Originally posted by TG12345


Not changing His nature, but revealing Himself more and more. He did not change His method of salvation either, but also gradually revealed it to people.

As a Muslim I don't see why you have a problem with this.

Did God reveal the Quran right away to the first messenger? Does this mean that because He allegedly used different books (most of which were corrupted or lost as you believe), He kept changing what was in them?

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

Ah, I no longer believe the Bible is corrupted. I apologize, you were right when you posted hadith about Waraqa proving the existence of the Injil; I was just too stiff-necked. It was Salafi scholars like Ahmad Deedat and Zakir Naik that borrowed the ideas from the Qadianis.   http://unchangingword.com/
While I do not 100% agree with the above website, I agree with most and I'm sure you will as well so please your time and read through it.

Well, I have to admit I am shocked. Pleasantly, I have to add.

 You are the very first Muslim I know who does not believe the Bible is not corrupted. Prior to reading this website, I did not believe there were Muslims who believe it has not been corrupted.

I checked out the website and there is quite a bit on it with which I agree, other parts on which I disagree with it.

It is quite interesting though, thank you for sharing it.

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

However I believe that anything in the Bible that differs from the Quran is because of the long passage of time where it was mistransmitted, mistranslated, misinterpreted but maybe a few deliberate/accidental changes. That is why there are many versions and I do not mean translations like King James but I mean Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Greek etc.

I would challenge you to read different Bibles... the ones used by Catholics, by Protestants, by Greeks, by Jews. If you want to read the Bible that people in the middle east were reading during the time of Muhammad, I would encourage you to check out the Peshitta.

http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicNTtools/dr_george_lamsa_bible.htm

The Catholic Bible does contain a few more books than the Protestant Bible, and you will see differences in wording between Catholic and Protestant Bibles... as a former Catholic, I can attest to this. You will see some differences in wording between most Bible translations.

Having said this, on the issues where the Quran differs with the Bible, the Bibles all say the same thing.

They all teach Jesus was crucified. They all teach He is the Son of God. They all teach He is God.

None of them say anything about Muhammad being prophesied by Him.

Doctrinally, all Christians agree on the nature of Jesus and about what He did for us on the cross. There are some sects like the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons and others who hold to some unBiblical beliefs, but they are no different from the Ismaili or NOI sects in Islam.

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

  Similar to how there is a Shia Quran.


Hold on... now I am confused. Are you saying that the Shias use a different Quran than Sunni Muslims do?

Can you show me any evidence for such a claim? I have to admit I am blown away by this allegation. I am curious to see any proof of such a statement. Thanks.

Originally posted by TG12345


John 20:27-29

27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.” 28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Thomas called Jesus "my Lord and my God". Thomas was praised for believing in Jesus.


http://barnes.biblecommenter.com/john/20.htm - Barnes' Notes on the Bible

My Lord and my God - In this passage the name God is expressly given to Christ, in his own presence and by one of his own apostles. This declaration has been considered as a clear proof of the divinity of Christ, for the following reasons:

1. There is no evidence that this was a mere expression, as some have supposed, of surprise or astonishment.

2. The language was addressed to Jesus himself - "Thomas ...said unto him."

3. The Saviour did not reprove him or check him as using any improper language. If he had not been divine, it is impossible to reconcile it with his honesty that he did not rebuke the disciple. No pious man would have allowed such language to be addressed to him. Compare http://niv.scripturetext.com/acts/14-13.htm - Acts 14:13-15 ; http://niv.scripturetext.com/revelation/22-8.htm - Revelation 22:8-9 .

4. The Saviour proceeds immediately to commend Thomas for believing; but what was the evidence of his believing? It was this declaration, and this only. If this was a mere exclamation of surprise, what proof was it that Thomas believed? Before this he doubted. Now he believed, and gave utterance to his belief, that Jesus was his Lord and his God.

5. If this was not the meaning of Thomas, then his exclamation was a mere act of profaneness, and the Saviour would not have commended him for taking the name of the Lord his God in vain. The passage proves, therefore, that it is proper to apply to Christ the name Lord and God, and thus accords with what John affirmed in http://niv.scripturetext.com/john/1-1.htm - John 1:1 , and which is established throughout this gospel.

http://bible.cc/john/20-28.htm

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

  http://bibleq.net/answer/1360/

I read the article and it is interesting, but I have to say I disagree. I think that when Thomas said "my Lord and my God" to Jesus, he was referring to Jesus as both Lord and God.

I think if "my God" was an exclamation and Jesus was not God, Jesus would have rebuked him since we are not to take God's name in vain.

Additionally, John 1 states that the Word of God was with God and was God, and that it became flesh as Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by TG12345


Why not?


Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

  Well the Quran teaches that Adam and Eve were forgiven so there should be no original sin?

Would you agree that all human beings who have free will and know right from wrong and have the ability to act on their free will, do sin at one point or another during their lives?

Originally posted by TG12345


Jesus was not saying that He should not be worshiped in this passage.

Of course I believe the Trinity. The Bible teaches it plainly.

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

   http://www.heaven.net.nz/answers/answer08.htm
http://www.earthsmightiest.com/fansites/BlasphemousRumors/news/?a=5690
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3957
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3938
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3956
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3939

Addressing other issues:
http://www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?53815-Does-the-Quran-say-that-Ishmael-was-sacrificed-instead-of-Issac/#10
http://www.anusha.com/jesuspaul.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k94n1GfBbcw&list=LLCTZqIQFXzgBrH8RHH5q1tA
http://arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA2N2Iz5ExM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtEpM9BqvQI
http://www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Jesus%27_death#Substitution_interpretation


These links are interesting, and I am looking through some of them. I hope you are OK with the fact I don't have time to respond to every single claim made on each of these sites. That is why I think it would be best for you to do what you are doing now, and post specific things about the Bible and Christianity that you want to challenge or debate or discuss... as I do with Islam and the Quran and hadiths.

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

  And Finally:
So  in conclusion to the topic, the hadith does say that a Jew and/or Christian who believes in the Previous Scriptures and then accepts fully Islam will receive a double reward.

If you accept that Previous Scripture means the Bible, then we have come to more of an understanding and I don't have the same questions to ask of you as I did of Abu Loren... not that I am comparing you to each other. I appreciate you actually taking the time to debate and discuss with me and your honesty and the fact that you are open about your faith and not afraid to speak your mind when you disagree with me... and manage to do it all without being insulting or disrespectful. Smile

However, having said this... if you believe that Previous Scripture means the Bible, then I'm afraid there are problems with this too.

Much of what the Bible teaches contradicts Islam.

The Bible teaches Jesus was crucified. Islam denies this... at least most Muslims do, and I have to say I disagree with the site "unchanging word" where it states the Quran does not deny His crucifixion... it does.

The Bible teaches that Jesus is God and that He is the Son of God. Islam denies both of these things.

The Bible does not contain descriptions of Muhammad, as Islam claims it does. We are assuming that the Injil and Torah according to Islam = the Bible.

There are some other differences too.

According to the Bible, Jesus taught that those who forgive will be forgiven by God, and those who do not forgive will not be forgiven by God. Islam teaches that forgiveness is the better thing to do, but that it is a choice and retribution is also an acceptable response.

According to the Bible, Jesus instructed people to love their enemies and to turn the other cheek. Islam instructs Muslims to not be aggressors and when war is waged that it is forbidden to kill women and children, plunder, rape, murder prisoners... but it does teach that in self-defence, violence is acceptable. Jesus taught that the response to enemies is love and non-violence. This does not mean submission- turning the other cheek was an act that was subversive and forced the attacker to treat his victim as an equal, and carrying an extra mile for a soldier who forced you to carry his pack actually got him into trouble with the same imperialist system that allowed him to mistreat others, and there are other examples. However, Jesus never allowed for violence to be used. Muhammad did.

Of course, contrary to the *****ic and ignorant rants of some Islamophobes, he did not order Muslims to go out and kill every non-Muslim they saw.

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

 
And Allah knows best.


This is something we can both agree on. Smile

Blessed be His Name.


It was awesome to be able to respond! Like with Rational, please forgive me for how long it takes me to get back to you and for the fact that my responses will probably take more time in the future.


Allahma3k.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 31 January 2013 at 11:16am
Wa Alaikum,

Originally posted by TG12345


Does that mean yes or no?

Thanks for the Surah quotation but I can't say it answered my question. Smile Did Muhammad say the words attributed to him in Bukhari Book #8, #429?

Can you answer please with a "yes" or a "no"?

LOL, thanks for not holding grudges against me. If I am not mistaken, you referred me to Muwatta so I could read the Sunnah. Are you saying that Muhammad's words in Bukhari and Muslim are Sunnah also?


Ah so you misunderstood the Sunnah. I said before that the Sunnah are the established Acts, Hadith are oral traditions or narrations that attribute to different things such as the Quran, the Sunnah, Aqidah(theology), the Sahaba, The Prophet(SAWS) etc.

The Sunnah was around before any hadith was written such as the Five Pillars, Hijab, Beard etc. and proof of this is in the (Early)Fiqh scholars books and Madhabs(Schools of thought). I myself do not follow the Maliki Madhab which is based on Imam Malik's Muwatta but the Hanafi one, although no madhab is wrong; you would have to be a muslim to understand fully.

I recommended Muwatta to you because it is more available and has many hadith as well. But you seem to criticise it and had no problem using Bukhari and Muslim. Oh and the Salafis like Zakir Naik do use Bukhari and Muslim as their source for the Sunnah. But Hadiths really are just good references.

Originally posted by TG12345


I also know that all mankind is descended from Adam and Eve.

If I made such a statement:

"An intelligent person uses all seven of his heads but a fool uses only two of them"

what would you think of it? Would it make sense? Would it be correct?

Why or why not?

Can you please show it to me? Is it sahih?

I don't know what to make of that statement.LOL
Also:
http://islamqa.com/en/ref/45643
Sorry I found that the hadith about Allah's hand is not Sahih and is fabricated.

Originally posted by TG12345


Having said this, on the issues where the Quran differs with the Bible, the Bibles all say the same thing.

They all teach Jesus was crucified. They all teach He is the Son of God. They all teach He is God.

None of them say anything about Muhammad being prophesied by Him.

It's not whether to consider is the Bible is corrupted or not(which it isn't) but to consider which parts are G-d's word or the words of his Prophets. There are verses in the Bible that conflict with each other such as Jesus being Son of God(which can be interpreted as close servant of God), God himself(which can maybe be interpreted if you check all my links) or just man and also Jesus' geneology.

Biblical scholars are agreed that most of these texts agree with one another in about ninety-five per cent of their content. That seems quite a lot. However, five per cent of a book is still a considerable number of words, especially when you consider that the Old Testament is made up of 39 different books and a total of 593,493 words, and that the New Testament is made up of 27 books and 181,253 words. That means that nearly thirty thousand words differ in the Old Testament and nearly nine thousand words are different from one another in the New Testament.

As for Muhammad "not" being in the Bible, I already posted a link in my last reply(which I don't know if you have read yet) with a hadith that describes Muhammad in the "Tawrat"; it suggests that the Tawrat actually refers to the Torah AND the Nevi'im(Prophets) sections of the Tanakh. As for Muhammad in the Injil the Quran already gives us a hint:

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is http://quran.com/61/6# - Ahmad ." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic."(61:6)

This cannot refer to "Another Comforter" or "Least in the Kingdom of Heaven" in the Gospel as those comments are directed to his disciples. Look at the response by the Jews above, we must find something in the Gospels(or New Testament?) to match this.

Originally posted by TG12345


Hold on... now I am confused. Are you saying that the Shias use a different Quran than Sunni Muslims do?

Can you show me any evidence for such a claim? I have to admit I am blown away by this allegation. I am curious to see any proof of such a statement. Thanks.


Some Sunnis suggest that they use a different Quran but this is unlikely so they use the same Quran but have a different opinion. The truth is that Shias deny that Uthman compiled the Quran and believe that the Quran was actually compiled by Muhammad(SAW) during his lifetime. Some suggest that the Shias believe that Muhammad(SAW) gave the True Quran to Ali and it is actually three times longer and that a future Imam(Mahdi?) will return this Quran but this view is apparently a misconception to discredit them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_view_of_the_Quran

Originally posted by TG12345


Would you agree that all human beings who have free will and know right from wrong and have the ability to act on their free will, do sin at one point or another during their lives?

I agree but I thought the Crucifixion and Atonement doctrine points to the Original Sin?

Originally posted by TG12345


However, having said this... if you believe that Previous Scripture means the Bible, then I'm afraid there are problems with this too.

Much of what the Bible teaches contradicts Islam.

The Bible teaches Jesus was crucified. Islam denies this... at least most Muslims do, and I have to say I disagree with the site "unchanging word" where it states the Quran does not deny His crucifixion... it does.

The Bible teaches that Jesus is God and that He is the Son of God. Islam denies both of these things.

The Bible does not contain descriptions of Muhammad, as Islam claims it does. We are assuming that the Injil and Torah according to Islam = the Bible.

Like I said before, it's not whether the Bible is corrupt or not(which it isn't) but to determine which parts are from G-d or his Prophets. If we use the Quran it says that the Injil was given to Jesus so the Injil is almost everything in the Gospels that took place before the Betrayal and alleged Crucifixion as Jesus probably wouldn't have preached the Gospel of the Kingdom of God during these times. A hadith states that the youngest of Jesus' disciples volunteered to be matyred in his place and Jesus escaped the house when them men came over, the hadith is in one of the links in my previous post.

The Quran may state that it came to confirm the Bible but is also criticizes the Jews and Christians for misinterpreting verses and criticizes Christians for equating Jesus(PBUH) to Son of God and God himself. There may be verses in the Old Testament which prophecies the suffering of the Messiah but there are others that say G-d will not let harm to him which the Gospels confirm:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%204:10-12,%20Matthew%204:5-10;&version=51; -
10 For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect and guard you.
11 And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.
’”
12 Jesus responded, “The Scriptures
also say, ‘You must not test the Lord your God.’”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%204:10-12,%20Matthew%204:5-10;&version=51; - Matthew 4:5-10
5 Then the devil took him to the holy city, Jerusalem, to the highest point of the Temple,
6 and said, “If you are the Son of God, jump off! For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect you. And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.’”
7 Jesus responded, “The Scriptures
also say, ‘You must not test the Lord your God.’”
8 Next the devil took him to the peak of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.
9 “I will give it all to you,” he said, “if you will kneel down and worship me.”
10 “Get out of here, Satan,” Jesus told him. “For the Scriptures say, ‘You must worship the Lord your God and serve only him.’”

Although both the Bible and Quran are not science books they do contain aspects of science before man had discovered them, the Quran even more so and it is a much smaller book and doesn't really conflict with itself, is this not proof to you that the Quran is G-d's word? The Quran is right about many things so I don't see why it wouldn't be right about what it differs from the Bible.

Also, may I ask which sect or denomination are you a part of?


Originally posted by TG12345


There are some other differences too.

According to the Bible, Jesus taught that those who forgive will be forgiven by God, and those who do not forgive will not be forgiven by God. Islam teaches that forgiveness is the better thing to do, but that it is a choice and retribution is also an acceptable response.

According to the Bible, Jesus instructed people to love their enemies and to turn the other cheek. Islam instructs Muslims to not be aggressors and when war is waged that it is forbidden to kill women and children, plunder, rape, murder prisoners... but it does teach that in self-defence, violence is acceptable. Jesus taught that the response to enemies is love and non-violence. This does not mean submission- turning the other cheek was an act that was subversive and forced the attacker to treat his victim as an equal, and carrying an extra mile for a soldier who forced you to carry his pack actually got him into trouble with the same imperialist system that allowed him to mistreat others, and there are other examples. However, Jesus never allowed for violence to be used. Muhammad did.

Jesus(PBUH) is corfirmed by the Quran as also a messenger. The Quran does say that different messengers and nations had different laws.
Jesus(PBUH) wasn't always about non-violence:

Matthew 10:34

“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

Luke 19:27

"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’”

Originally posted by TG12345


Of course, contrary to the *****ic and ignorant rants of some Islamophobes, he did not order Muslims to go out and kill every non-Muslim they saw.

This may be wrong for me to say or do but I'm trying to figure out which curse/insult word has "ic" at the end.LOL

Originally posted by TG12345


This is something we can both agree on. Smile

Blessed be His Name.


It was awesome to be able to respond! Like with Rational, please forgive me for how long it takes me to get back to you and for the fact that my responses will probably take more time in the future.


Allahma3k.

Indeed, Allahu Akbar.

It does not matter if you take your time, I enjoy our relaxed discussion where we can agree on things instead fall into heavy debate, argument and dispute because that could possibly fall into Ilm al Kalam which is Haram. So I'm glad but since this is gone off topic our discussion should really be PMs.Smile Oh well, maybe others might want to input or see our discussion. And please take your time to look at all the links I posted in my last reply.

And Again, Allah knows best.



Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 02 February 2013 at 1:41pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

Peace unto you as well.

Originally posted by TG12345


Does that mean yes or no?

Thanks for the Surah quotation but I can't say it answered my question. Smile Did Muhammad say the words attributed to him in Bukhari Book #8, #429?

Can you answer please with a "yes" or a "no"?

LOL, thanks for not holding grudges against me. If I am not mistaken, you referred me to Muwatta so I could read the Sunnah. Are you saying that Muhammad's words in Bukhari and Muslim are Sunnah also?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  Ah so you misunderstood the Sunnah. I said before that the Sunnah are the established Acts, Hadith are oral traditions or narrations that attribute to different things such as the Quran, the Sunnah, Aqidah(theology), the Sahaba, The Prophet(SAWS) etc.

The Sunnah was around before any hadith was written such as the Five Pillars, Hijab, Beard etc. and proof of this is in the (Early)Fiqh scholars books and Madhabs(Schools of thought). I myself do not follow the Maliki Madhab which is based on Imam Malik's Muwatta but the Hanafi one, although no madhab is wrong; you would have to be a muslim to understand fully.

I recommended Muwatta to you because it is more available and has many hadith as well. But you seem to criticise it and had no problem using Bukhari and Muslim. Oh and the Salafis like Zakir Naik do use Bukhari and Muslim as their source for the Sunnah. But Hadiths really are just good references.

All of the passages in Muwatta I looked at were about Muhammad saying something. They consisted of his words, not actions. I think I am really misunderstanding something here, are you saying that the hadiths are a record of Muhammad's words and the Sunnah a record of his actions? Can you provide me some examples then of the Sunnah?

Does the Quran say anything about the hadiths? If someone rejects the hadiths completely, can they still be saved as a Muslim or are they then non-Muslims? Thanks.

Originally posted by TG12345


I also know that all mankind is descended from Adam and Eve.

If I made such a statement:

"An intelligent person uses all seven of his heads but a fool uses only two of them"

what would you think of it? Would it make sense? Would it be correct?

Why or why not?

Can you please show it to me? Is it sahih?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  I don't know what to make of that statement.LOL

What if I told you I got it from God?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  Also:
http://islamqa.com/en/ref/45643
Sorry I found that the hadith about Allah's hand is not Sahih and is fabricated.

No problems. Which leads us back to the passage we are looking for. What did Muhammad mean when he said that a Muslim eats with one intestine and a non-Muslim with seven?

Originally posted by TG12345


Having said this, on the issues where the Quran differs with the Bible, the Bibles all say the same thing.

They all teach Jesus was crucified. They all teach He is the Son of God. They all teach He is God.

None of them say anything about Muhammad being prophesied by Him.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  It's not whether to consider is the Bible is corrupted or not(which it isn't) but to consider which parts are G-d's word or the words of his Prophets. There are verses in the Bible that conflict with each other such as Jesus being Son of God(which can be interpreted as close servant of God), God himself(which can maybe be interpreted if you check all my links) or just man and also Jesus' geneology.

Jesus being the Son of God does not conflict with Him being God and that does not conflict with Him being man. As the New Testament points out, Jesus was both God and man... the Word of God made flesh.

If you believe that parts of the Bible are parts of God's word and his prophets are others are not, then obviously you must believe it is corrupted.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  Biblical scholars are agreed that most of these texts agree with one another in about ninety-five per cent of their content. That seems quite a lot. However, five per cent of a book is still a considerable number of words, especially when you consider that the Old Testament is made up of 39 different books and a total of 593,493 words, and that the New Testament is made up of 27 books and 181,253 words. That means that nearly thirty thousand words differ in the Old Testament and nearly nine thousand words are different from one another in the New Testament.

I have a NIV Bible at home, as well as an NIV. When I used to be a Catholic Christian, I would read the NRSV. The differences are so minor in most cases one can barely notice them. Theologically, they make no real difference.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  As for Muhammad "not" being in the Bible, I already posted a link in my last reply(which I don't know if you have read yet) with a hadith that describes Muhammad in the "Tawrat"; it suggests that the Tawrat actually refers to the Torah AND the Nevi'im(Prophets) sections of the Tanakh. As for Muhammad in the Injil the Quran already gives us a hint:

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is http://quran.com/61/6# - Ahmad ." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic."(61:6)

This cannot refer to "Another Comforter" or "Least in the Kingdom of Heaven" in the Gospel as those comments are directed to his disciples. Look at the response by the Jews above, we must find something in the Gospels(or New Testament?) to match this.

I am reading through the links you posted in your last reply, I have to admit I haven't seen the one you are referring to yet.

Where do you think Muhammad is mentioned in the Torah or Prophets?

Where do you think he is mentioned in the Gospels or New Testament? I am glad you realize He is not the Comforter. Smile


Originally posted by TG12345


Hold on... now I am confused. Are you saying that the Shias use a different Quran than Sunni Muslims do?

Can you show me any evidence for such a claim? I have to admit I am blown away by this allegation. I am curious to see any proof of such a statement. Thanks.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
Some Sunnis suggest that they use a different Quran but this is unlikely so they use the same Quran but have a different opinion. The truth is that Shias deny that Uthman compiled the Quran and believe that the Quran was actually compiled by Muhammad(SAW) during his lifetime. Some suggest that the Shias believe that Muhammad(SAW) gave the True Quran to Ali and it is actually three times longer and that a future Imam(Mahdi?) will return this Quran but this view is apparently a misconception to discredit them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_view_of_the_Quran


I asked because previously you wrote that there is a Shia Quran. So you do not believe this to be the case?

Originally posted by TG12345


Would you agree that all human beings who have free will and know right from wrong and have the ability to act on their free will, do sin at one point or another during their lives?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
I agree but I thought the Crucifixion and Atonement doctrine points to the Original Sin?

Not necessarily. Jesus died on the cross for us because we are all sinners and are in need of God's grace.

Originally posted by TG12345


However, having said this... if you believe that Previous Scripture means the Bible, then I'm afraid there are problems with this too.

Much of what the Bible teaches contradicts Islam.

The Bible teaches Jesus was crucified. Islam denies this... at least most Muslims do, and I have to say I disagree with the site "unchanging word" where it states the Quran does not deny His crucifixion... it does.

The Bible teaches that Jesus is God and that He is the Son of God. Islam denies both of these things.

The Bible does not contain descriptions of Muhammad, as Islam claims it does. We are assuming that the Injil and Torah according to Islam = the Bible.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  
Like I said before, it's not whether the Bible is corrupt or not(which it isn't) but to determine which parts are from G-d or his Prophets.

If some parts are and other parts are not, then wouldn't that imply that it is corrupted?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
If we use the Quran it says that the Injil was given to Jesus so the Injil is almost everything in the Gospels that took place before the Betrayal and alleged Crucifixion as Jesus probably wouldn't have preached the Gospel of the Kingdom of God during these times. A hadith states that the youngest of Jesus' disciples volunteered to be matyred in his place and Jesus escaped the house when them men came over, the hadith is in one of the links in my previous post.

Yet if the Gospel = New Testament, it clearly states that Jesus was crucified. Can you please show me the hadith you are referring to? I guess I haven't gotten to it yet.

If you believe that the Bible is not corrupted, then the Quran and the Bible conflict since the Bible does state clearly that Jesus was crucified. Interestingly, the authors of "unchanging word" also believe He was crucified, though not that He is God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
The Quran may state that it came to confirm the Bible but is also criticizes the Jews and Christians for misinterpreting verses and criticizes Christians for equating Jesus(PBUH) to Son of God and God himself.

In the Bible, Jesus said many things that He would not say unless He was claiming divinity. Some of the links you presented so far have tried to address this and state He was saying He and God are one in purpose when He said that He and the Father are one. If this was true, however, then why was He the only prophet on record as saying this? Also, other parts of the Bible, like John 1, clearly state He is God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
There may be verses in the Old Testament which prophecies the suffering of the Messiah but there are others that say G-d will not let harm to him which the Gospels confirm:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%204:10-12,%20Matthew%204:5-10;&version=51; -
10 For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect and guard you.
11 And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.
’”
12 Jesus responded, “The Scriptures
also say, ‘You must not test the Lord your God.’”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%204:10-12,%20Matthew%204:5-10;&version=51; - Matthew 4:5-10
5 Then the devil took him to the holy city, Jerusalem, to the highest point of the Temple,
6 and said, “If you are the Son of God, jump off! For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect you. And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.’”
7 Jesus responded, “The Scriptures
also say, ‘You must not test the Lord your God.’”
8 Next the devil took him to the peak of a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.
9 “I will give it all to you,” he said, “if you will kneel down and worship me.”
10 “Get out of here, Satan,” Jesus told him. “For the Scriptures say, ‘You must worship the Lord your God and serve only him.’”

These passages do not contradict the crucifixion. The angels would have protected Jesus from falling if He jumped, it doesn't say He would be protected from the crucifixion.

Jesus could have called on angels to have protected Him from crucifixion.


Matthew 26:53

53 Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?

Instead, He chose to suffer. He could have escaped from all this, but chose not to.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
Although both the Bible and Quran are not science books they do contain aspects of science before man had discovered them, the Quran even more so and it is a much smaller book and doesn't really conflict with itself, is this not proof to you that the Quran is G-d's word?
The Quran is right about many things so I don't see why it wouldn't be right about what it differs from the Bible. [/QUOTE]

Please show me some of the science claims, let's look at them together.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
Also, m
ay I ask which sect or denomination are you a part of?

I am an evangelical Christian who used to be a Catholic Christian.

Originally posted by TG12345


There are some other differences too.

According to the Bible, Jesus taught that those who forgive will be forgiven by God, and those who do not forgive will not be forgiven by God. Islam teaches that forgiveness is the better thing to do, but that it is a choice and retribution is also an acceptable response.

According to the Bible, Jesus instructed people to love their enemies and to turn the other cheek. Islam instructs Muslims to not be aggressors and when war is waged that it is forbidden to kill women and children, plunder, rape, murder prisoners... but it does teach that in self-defence, violence is acceptable. Jesus taught that the response to enemies is love and non-violence. This does not mean submission- turning the other cheek was an act that was subversive and forced the attacker to treat his victim as an equal, and carrying an extra mile for a soldier who forced you to carry his pack actually got him into trouble with the same imperialist system that allowed him to mistreat others, and there are other examples. However, Jesus never allowed for violence to be used. Muhammad did.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
Jesus(PBUH) is corfirmed by the Quran as also a messenger. The Quran does say that different messengers and nations had different laws.

But would one messenger allow his people to do things that another did not?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
Jesus(PBUH) wasn't always about non-violence:

Matthew 10:34

“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

Notice that this was Jesus talking about Himself. When He returns, He will judge the world and send many people to hell.

This is in no way a permission for His disciples to attack others.

This is how Christians are to respond to violence against us:


Luke 6:27-36

27 “But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic "#fen-ESV-25167b" - b ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+6&version=ESV#fen-ESV-25167b - b ] either. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

32 “If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. 35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.

Muhammad did not teach love for enemies, even if he taught to show them mercy when they surrendered (usually).

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
Luke 19:27

"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’”


This was a parable describing what will happen to those who reject God. It was not Jesus giving His disciples permission to fight their enemies.

By allowing and ordering his men to judge and execute and flog people who committed crimes as well as giving permission to either forgive or punish someone who has committed you harm, Muhammad was contradicting the teachings of Jesus who said:

Luke 6:37-38

37 Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven; 38 give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.”


Originally posted by TG12345

  Of course, contrary to the *****ic and ignorant rants of some Islamophobes, he did not order Muslims to go out and kill every non-Muslim they saw.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

 
This may be wrong for me to say or do but I'm trying to figure out which curse/insult word has "ic" at the end.LOL

LOL. The word was m-o-r-o-n-i-c. It may or may not exist in the proper grammar and spelling of the English language. Smile

Originally posted by TG12345


This is something we can both agree on. Smile

Blessed be His Name.


It was awesome to be able to respond! Like with Rational, please forgive me for how long it takes me to get back to you and for the fact that my responses will probably take more time in the future.


Allahma3k.

[QUOTE=786SalamKhan]  Indeed, Allahu Akbar.

It does not matter if you take your time, I enjoy our relaxed discussion where we can agree on things instead fall into heavy debate, argument and dispute because that could possibly fall into Ilm al Kalam which is Haram. So I'm glad but since this is gone off topic our discussion should really be PMs.Smile Oh well, maybe others might want to input or see our discussion. And please take your time to look at all the links I posted in my last reply.

And Again, Allah knows best.


LOL maybe it would be best to keep it on the forum. I am engaged in a very long discussion with another Muslim friend via email (we debate, and our debates have ran into hundreds of pages on MS Word) and am not sure if I can keep up with more than one like that.

I am looking through your links, though slowly as I am also involved in other things.

What is Ilm al Kalam?

Allah Akhbar!


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 1:41am
Wa Alaikum,

Originally posted by TG12345


All of the passages in Muwatta I looked at were about Muhammad saying something. They consisted of his words, not actions. I think I am really misunderstanding something here, are you saying that the hadiths are a record of Muhammad's words and the Sunnah a record of his actions? Can you provide me some examples then of the Sunnah?

Does the Quran say anything about the hadiths? If someone rejects the hadiths completely, can they still be saved as a Muslim or are they then non-Muslims? Thanks.

Examples of the Sunnah would be the Five Pillars, keeping of beard, covering of women etc.
An average muslim would not really have time to read all hadith, so law would usually be taught to him and he would usually have time to read the Quran and practice the five pillars.

Originally posted by TG12345


What if I told you I got it from God?

Did Muhammad(SAW) claim he got it from G-d?

Originally posted by TG12345


No problems. Which leads us back to the passage we are looking for. What did Muhammad mean when he said that a Muslim eats with one intestine and a non-Muslim with seven?

If I'm not mistaken was Muhammad(SAW) not referring to that very incident where the non-muslim ate more than them? I don't remember the hadith you posted.

Originally posted by TG12345


Jesus being the Son of God does not conflict with Him being God and that does not conflict with Him being man. As the New Testament points out, Jesus was both God and man... the Word of God made flesh.

If you believe that parts of the Bible are parts of God's word and his prophets are others are not, then obviously you must believe it is corrupted.

So you believe God supposedly gave birth to himself through a virgin but he came out human? That doesn't make sense.

Wouldn't corrupted imply that they were aware they were "corrupting" it.

Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn ‘Abbas said that the Ayah means they alter and add although none among Allah’s creation CAN REMOVE THE WORDS OF ALLAH FROM HIS BOOKS, THEY ALTER AND DISTORT THEIR APPARENT MEANINGS. Wahb bin Munabbih said, "The Tawrah and Injil REMAIN AS ALLAH REVEALED THEM, AND NO LETTER IN THEM WAS REMOVED. However, the people misguide others by addition and false interpretation, relying on books that they wrote themselves." 

Nothing was removed but additions(such as the crucifixion account added to the written gospels) were made and meanings were changed.

Originally posted by TG12345

I have a NIV Bible at home, as well as an NIV. When I used to be a Catholic Christian, I would read the NRSV. The differences are so minor in most cases one can barely notice them. Theologically, they make no real difference.

You have a NIV Bible as well as an NIV? What?LOL


Originally posted by TG12345


I am reading through the links you posted in your last reply, I have to admit I haven't seen the one you are referring to yet.

Where do you think Muhammad is mentioned in the Torah or Prophets?

Where do you think he is mentioned in the Gospels or New Testament? I am glad you realize He is not the Comforter. Smile

The hadith implies Prophets as in Isaiah 42(?):

Narrated Ata bin Yasar:

I met Abdullah bin 'Amr bin Al-'As and asked him, "Tell me about the description of Allah's Apostle which is mentioned in Torah (i.e. Old Testament). He replied, 'Yes. By Allah, he is described in Torah with some of the qualities attributed to him in the Quran such as: "O Prophet ! We have sent you as a witness  and a giver of glad tidings, and a warner (Qur'an 48:8) and guardian of the Ummiyyeen. You are My Servant and My http://www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa/# - by CouponDropDown">messenger (i.e. Apostle). I have named you "Al-Mutawakkil" (who depends upon Allah). You are neither discourteous, harsh nor a noise-maker in the markets And you do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness. Allah will not let him (the Prophet) die till he makes straight the crooked people by making them say: "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah," with which will be opened blind eyes and deaf ears and enveloped hearts."
[Bukhari Kitaab al-Buyu' (Book of Sales and Trade) Chapter 50 (The dislike of raising voices in the market)]

Read my links for more info on this.

The only accounts in the New Testament for Jesus' life are the Gospels are they not? So the Prophecy of Muhammad would be in the Gospel.


Originally posted by TG12345


I asked because previously you wrote that there is a Shia Quran. So you do not believe this to be the case?

I do not know much about Shia Islam.

Originally posted by TG12345


Yet if the Gospel = New Testament, it clearly states that Jesus was crucified. Can you please show me the hadith you are referring to? I guess I haven't gotten to it yet.
If you believe that the Bible is not corrupted, then the Quran and the Bible conflict since the Bible does state clearly that Jesus was crucified. Interestingly, the authors of "unchanging word" also believe He was crucified, though not that He is God.

There are different books in the New Testament, not just the Gospels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%60Abd_Allah_ibn_%60Abbas - Ibn Abbas said, "Just before Allah raised Jesus to the Heavens, Jesus went to his disciples, who were twelve inside the house. When he arrived, his hair was dripping with water (as if he had just had a bath) and he said, 'There are those among you who will disbelieve in me twelve times after you had believed in me.' He then asked, 'Who among you will volunteer for his appearance to be transformed into mine, and be killed in my place. Whoever volunteers for that, he will be with me (in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise - Paradise ).' One of the youngest ones among them volunteered, but Jesus asked him to sit down. Jesus asked again for a volunteer, and the same young man volunteered and Jesus asked him to sit down again. Then the young man volunteered a third time and Jesus said, 'You will be that man,' and the resemblance of Jesus was cast over that man while Jesus ascended to Heaven from a hole in the roof of the house. When the Jews came looking for Jesus, they found that young man and crucified him. Some of Jesus' followers disbelieved in him twelve times after they had believed in him. They then divided into three groups. One group, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Baradaeus - Jacobites , said, 'Allah remained with us as long as He willed and then ascended to Heaven.' Another group, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_East - Nestorians , said, 'The son of Allah was with us as long as he willed and Allah took him to Heaven.' Another group, the Muslims, said, 'The servant and Messenger of Allah remained with us as long as Allah willed, and Allah then took him to Him.' The two disbelieving groups cooperated against the Muslim group and they killed them. Ever since that happened, Islam was then veiled until Allah sent Muhammad."

I do not know how authentic this hadith is. But if we disregard it a Crucifixion followed by a resurrection in the Quran is still possible as it says ".....for of a surety they killed him not:-"
—Qur'an, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sura - sura 4 157 Could mean they did not kill him for good or definite as Jews and other non believers think they did. But in Islam whether he was killed or not is not that important but that he is alive in Heaven and there will be a Second Coming.

Originally posted by TG12345


These passages do not contradict the crucifixion. The angels would have protected Jesus from falling if He jumped, it doesn't say He would be protected from the crucifixion.

Jesus could have called on angels to have protected Him from crucifixion.


Matthew 26:53

53 Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?

Instead, He chose to suffer. He could have escaped from all this, but chose not to.

That contradicts Matthew 27:46:

46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, "#fen-NIV-24176c" - c ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+27&version=NIV#fen-NIV-24176c - c ] lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).

Also, you believe Jesus to be God yet he's calling out to his God!?

And in the verses where Satan tells Jesus (who you believe to be God) to worship but Jesus(who you believe to be God) says he serves and worships the Lord his God only!?

Originally posted by TG12345

Please show me some of the science claims, let's look at them together.

Why? You do not think so?

Originally posted by TG12345

Notice that this was Jesus talking about Himself. When He returns, He will judge the world and send many people to hell.


Did Jesus himself say will judge to send people to either Heaven or Hell? Doesn't that contradict his teaching to condemn not?

Originally posted by TG12345


This was a parable describing what will happen to those who reject God. It was not Jesus giving His disciples permission to fight their enemies.

Is this an actual interpretation or just your opinion?
The Pope and Crusaders in the middle ages thought otherwise. But then again Suicide Bombers go against the teachings of Muhammad(PBUH) and Quran.

Oh and Messengers all taught that G-d alone should be worshiped but had different laws but always had the Seven Laws of Noah at least in their laws.

Originally posted by TG12345


LOL maybe it would be best to keep it on the forum. I am engaged in a very long discussion with another Muslim friend via email (we debate, and our debates have ran into hundreds of pages on MS Word) and am not sure if I can keep up with more than one like that.

I am looking through your links, though slowly as I am also involved in other things.

What is Ilm al Kalam?

Allah Akhbar!


Ilm al Kalam is the "science of speech" interpreted as Attempting to gain unknowable knowledge especially through debate, it is Haram. For  example, early muslims debated whether the Quran is created or uncreated since it is G-d's word. And whether Allah speaks or has speech?

Only Allah knows best.
Allahu Akbar!


-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 3:56am
<>

Salaam to all!

Brothers can you see this guy is a pro. You nee a pro to deal with his game!

  Now, THE FACT: First of all when the scripture mentioned God reveal a book to some one it not literally a book that you can hold but rather a MESSAGE and later on people people memorise it or wrote it down; so when when the Quran mentioned names of books it is the message that was given to the respective Prophet and it was then put in a form of a  literal book.

    As of the Injil, It was a message given to Jesus (S) and he convayed it to his disciples which was later on put in writhing with additional history of Jesus (S) and some opinions of others, that is why the qur’an conforms the message but point out the additional imformation:

·                 “There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (as they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, “That is from Allah,” But it is not from Allah: it is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it! (Q.3:78)

·               Ye People of the Book! Why do you mix truth with falsehood, and conceal the truth, while ye have knowledge. (Q.3:71)

·                O People of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that you used to hide in your Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary): There hath come to you from Allah a light [Muhamed (pbuh)] and a perspicuous Book.” (Q.5:15)

·                ye People of the Book! Believe in what We have (now) revealed, conforming what was (already) with you… (Q.4: 47)

·                None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: knowest thou not Allah hath power over all things?  (Q.2:106) 

·                Children of Israel! Call to mind the (special) favors which I bestowed upon you, and I preferred you to all others (of your time period, in the past). (Q.2:47)

·                …in that they (Jews) broke the Covenant; that they reject the signs of Allah; that they slew the Messengers in defiance of right…Allah hath set the seal on their heart for their blasphemy…that they REJECTED FAITH… (Q.4:155-156)

·                Of the Jews there are those who displace words from their (right) place, and say “We hear and disobey,”…and but few of them will believe. (Q.4:46)

From those, too, who called themselves Christians We did take a Covenant, But they forgot a good part of the message that was sent down: So We stirred up enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the Day of Judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done. (Q.5:14)

…and the disciples were called Christians first in An-ti-och. (Act.11:26)

 

Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We have sent down, and the Guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book,-on them shall be Allah's curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse,”

Truth has (now) come, and falsehood perished: for falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish. (Q.17:81)




-------------
LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES!


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 5:21am
Originally posted by truthnowcome

<>

Salaam to all!

Brothers can you see this guy is a pro. You nee a pro to deal with his game!

  Now, THE FACT: First of all when the scripture mentioned God reveal a book to some one it not literally a book that you can hold but rather a MESSAGE and later on people people memorise it or wrote it down; so when when the Quran mentioned names of books it is the message that was given to the respective Prophet and it was then put in a form of a  literal book.

    As of the Injil, It was a message given to Jesus (S) and he convayed it to his disciples which was later on put in writhing with additional history of Jesus (S) and some opinions of others, that is why the qur’an conforms the message but point out the additional imformation:

·                 “There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (as they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, “That is from Allah,” But it is not from Allah: it is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it! (Q.3:78)

·               Ye People of the Book! Why do you mix truth with falsehood, and conceal the truth, while ye have knowledge. (Q.3:71)

·                O People of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that you used to hide in your Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary): There hath come to you from Allah a light [Muhamed (pbuh)] and a perspicuous Book.” (Q.5:15)

·                ye People of the Book! Believe in what We have (now) revealed, conforming what was (already) with you… (Q.4: 47)

·                None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: knowest thou not Allah hath power over all things?  (Q.2:106) 

·                Children of Israel! Call to mind the (special) favors which I bestowed upon you, and I preferred you to all others (of your time period, in the past). (Q.2:47)

·                …in that they (Jews) broke the Covenant; that they reject the signs of Allah; that they slew the Messengers in defiance of right…Allah hath set the seal on their heart for their blasphemy…that they REJECTED FAITH… (Q.4:155-156)

·                Of the Jews there are those who displace words from their (right) place, and say “We hear and disobey,”…and but few of them will believe. (Q.4:46)

From those, too, who called themselves Christians We did take a Covenant, But they forgot a good part of the message that was sent down: So We stirred up enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the Day of Judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done. (Q.5:14)

…and the disciples were called Christians first in An-ti-och. (Act.11:26)

 

Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We have sent down, and the Guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book,-on them shall be Allah's curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse,”

Truth has (now) come, and falsehood perished: for falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish. (Q.17:81)




Wa Alaikum Salam,

Jazakallakhair brother for your input. I was going to say that the verses applied to the Arab Jews and Christians during Muhammad(PBUH)'s time until I saw the verses from Q.4:46 onwards. Excellent input!

May Allah grant you peace.


-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: Rational
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 8:11am
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

Originally posted by TG12345

Jesus died on the cross for us because we are all sinners and are in need of God's grace.

Even a new born baby has sins?

والسلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته



-------------
الله


Posted By: Rational
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 8:33am
Originally posted by TG12345

since the Bible does state clearly that Jesus was crucified

Where does the bible clearly states that Jesus was crucified?

-------------
الله


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 11:43am
It does, trust me....

-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: Rational
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 2:19pm
I'm sure it does but I just wanted to ask where in the bible so I can go read it. I quess I need to use google more often.

-------------
الله


Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 8:28pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Originally posted by truthnowcome

<>

Salaam to all!

Brothers can you see this guy is a pro. You nee a pro to deal with his game!

  Now, THE FACT: First of all when the scripture mentioned God reveal a book to some one it not literally a book that you can hold but rather a MESSAGE and later on people people memorise it or wrote it down; so when when the Quran mentioned names of books it is the message that was given to the respective Prophet and it was then put in a form of a  literal book.

    As of the Injil, It was a message given to Jesus (S) and he convayed it to his disciples which was later on put in writhing with additional history of Jesus (S) and some opinions of others, that is why the qur’an conforms the message but point out the additional imformation:

·                 “There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (as they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, “That is from Allah,” But it is not from Allah: it is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it! (Q.3:78)

·               Ye People of the Book! Why do you mix truth with falsehood, and conceal the truth, while ye have knowledge. (Q.3:71)

·                O People of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that you used to hide in your Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary): There hath come to you from Allah a light [Muhamed (pbuh)] and a perspicuous Book.” (Q.5:15)

·                ye People of the Book! Believe in what We have (now) revealed, conforming what was (already) with you… (Q.4: 47)

·                None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: knowest thou not Allah hath power over all things?  (Q.2:106) 

·                Children of Israel! Call to mind the (special) favors which I bestowed upon you, and I preferred you to all others (of your time period, in the past). (Q.2:47)

·                …in that they (Jews) broke the Covenant; that they reject the signs of Allah; that they slew the Messengers in defiance of right…Allah hath set the seal on their heart for their blasphemy…that they REJECTED FAITH… (Q.4:155-156)

·                Of the Jews there are those who displace words from their (right) place, and say “We hear and disobey,”…and but few of them will believe. (Q.4:46)

From those, too, who called themselves Christians We did take a Covenant, But they forgot a good part of the message that was sent down: So We stirred up enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the Day of Judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done. (Q.5:14)

…and the disciples were called Christians first in An-ti-och. (Act.11:26)

 

Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We have sent down, and the Guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book,-on them shall be Allah's curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse,”

Truth has (now) come, and falsehood perished: for falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish. (Q.17:81)




Wa Alaikum Salam,

Jazakallakhair brother for your input. I was going to say that the verses applied to the Arab Jews and Christians during Muhammad(PBUH)'s time until I saw the verses from Q.4:46 onwards. Excellent input!

May Allah grant you peace.
Salaam Bro. Khan, you are most welcome.

These Guys are professional lier, they know how to twist the truth to mislead public but they cant try that on this forum.

Wa Salaam

 


-------------
LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES!


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 9:46pm
Originally posted by truthnowcome



Wa Alaikum Salam,Jazakallakhair brother for your input. I was going to say that the verses applied to the Arab Jews and Christians during Muhammad(PBUH)'s time until I saw the verses from Q.4:46 onwards. Excellent input!May Allah grant you peace.[/QUOTE]Salaam Bro. Khan, you are most welcome.These Guys are professional lier, they know how to twist the truth to mislead public but they cant try that on this forum. Wa Salaam [/QUOTE]

Salam,
Who? TG12345?

-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 03 February 2013 at 11:20pm
Originally posted by Rational


I'm sure it does but I just wanted to ask where in the bible so I can go read it. I quess I need to use google more often.


Try Matthew chapter 27.

-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 04 February 2013 at 3:03am
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Originally posted by truthnowcome



Wa Alaikum Salam,Jazakallakhair brother for your input. I was going to say that the verses applied to the Arab Jews and Christians during Muhammad(PBUH)'s time until I saw the verses from Q.4:46 onwards. Excellent input!May Allah grant you peace.
Salaam Bro. Khan, you are most welcome.These Guys are professional lier, they know how to twist the truth to mislead public but they cant try that on this forum. Wa Salaam [/QUOTE]

Salam,
Who? TG12345?[/QUOTE]

YES!


-------------
LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES!


Posted By: Rational
Date Posted: 04 February 2013 at 3:22am
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Try Matthew chapter 27.

Jazak Allahu Khairan brother Khan



-------------
الله


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 04 February 2013 at 3:54am
Originally posted by truthnowcome



Salam,
YES!


Ah I understand.

Originally posted by Rational


Jazak Allahu Khairan brother Khan


No Problem. Peace be unto you both.

-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 07 February 2013 at 6:21pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

Wa alaikum salaam.

Originally posted by TG12345


All of the passages in Muwatta I looked at were about Muhammad saying something. They consisted of his words, not actions. I think I am really misunderstanding something here, are you saying that the hadiths are a record of Muhammad's words and the Sunnah a record of his actions? Can you provide me some examples then of the Sunnah?

Does the Quran say anything about the hadiths? If someone rejects the hadiths completely, can they still be saved as a Muslim or are they then non-Muslims? Thanks.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Examples of the Sunnah would be the Five Pillars, keeping of beard, covering of women etc.
An average muslim would not really have time to read all hadith, so law would usually be taught to him and he would usually have time to read the Quran and practice the five pillars.

And where are the 5 pillars mentioned?...

Originally posted by TG12345


What if I told you I got it from God?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Did Muhammad(SAW) claim he got it from G-d?

Are you saying that his teachings are not from God? I would actually agree with you if you did, but somehow doubt that to be the case. Wink

Originally posted by TG12345


No problems. Which leads us back to the passage we are looking for. What did Muhammad mean when he said that a Muslim eats with one intestine and a non-Muslim with seven?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

If I'm not mistaken was Muhammad(SAW) not referring to that very incident where the non-muslim ate more than them? I don't remember the hadith you posted.


Here they are:

Book 49, Number 49.6.9:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zinad from al-Araj that Abu Hurayra said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'The muslim eats in one intestine, and the kafir eats in seven!' "


Book 49, Number 49.6.10:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Suhayl ibn Abi Salih from his father from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, gave hospitality to a kafir guest. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered a sheep to be brought for him and it was milked. He drank its milk. Then another came, and he drank it. Then another came and he drank it until he had drunk the milk of seven sheep. In the morning he became muslim, and the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered a sheep for him. It was milked and he drank its milk. Then he ordered another for him and he could not finish it. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "The mumin drinks in one intestine, and the kafir drinks in seven intestines."

http://malikmuwatta.blogspot.ca/2008/03/book-49-description-of-prophet-may.html



Originally posted by TG12345


Jesus being the Son of God does not conflict with Him being God and that does not conflict with Him being man. As the New Testament points out, Jesus was both God and man... the Word of God made flesh.

If you believe that parts of the Bible are parts of God's word and his prophets are others are not, then obviously you must believe it is corrupted.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

So you believe God supposedly gave birth to himself through a virgin but he came out human? That doesn't make sense.

Why not? He chose to make Himself incarnate in the world, and this is how He chose to do it.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  Wouldn't corrupted imply that they were aware they were "corrupting" it.

Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn ‘Abbas said that the Ayah means they alter and add although none among Allah’s creation CAN REMOVE THE WORDS OF ALLAH FROM HIS BOOKS, THEY ALTER AND DISTORT THEIR APPARENT MEANINGS. Wahb bin Munabbih said, "The Tawrah and Injil REMAIN AS ALLAH REVEALED THEM, AND NO LETTER IN THEM WAS REMOVED. However, the people misguide others by addition and false interpretation, relying on books that they wrote themselves." 

Nothing was removed but additions(such as the crucifixion account added to the written gospels) were made and meanings were changed.

If nothing was removed, then where is Muhammad mentioned in the Bible, Old Testament or New Testament?


Originally posted by TG12345

I have a NIV Bible at home, as well as an NIV. When I used to be a Catholic Christian, I would read the NRSV. The differences are so minor in most cases one can barely notice them. Theologically, they make no real difference.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You have a NIV Bible as well as an NIV? What?LOL


Oops I meant NIV and ESV. Embarrassed


Originally posted by TG12345


I am reading through the links you posted in your last reply, I have to admit I haven't seen the one you are referring to yet.

Where do you think Muhammad is mentioned in the Torah or Prophets?

Where do you think he is mentioned in the Gospels or New Testament? I am glad you realize He is not the Comforter. Smile

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  The hadith implies Prophets as in Isaiah 42(?):

Narrated Ata bin Yasar:

I met Abdullah bin 'Amr bin Al-'As and asked him, "Tell me about the description of Allah's Apostle which is mentioned in Torah (i.e. Old Testament). He replied, 'Yes. By Allah, he is described in Torah with some of the qualities attributed to him in the Quran such as: "O Prophet ! We have sent you as a witness  and a giver of glad tidings, and a warner (Qur'an 48:8) and guardian of the Ummiyyeen. You are My Servant and My http://www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa/# - by CouponDropDown">messenger (i.e. Apostle). I have named you "Al-Mutawakkil" (who depends upon Allah). You are neither discourteous, harsh nor a noise-maker in the markets And you do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness. Allah will not let him (the Prophet) die till he makes straight the crooked people by making them say: "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah," with which will be opened blind eyes and deaf ears and enveloped hearts."
[Bukhari Kitaab al-Buyu' (Book of Sales and Trade) Chapter 50 (The dislike of raising voices in the market)]

Read my links for more info on this.

Please show me which part of Isaiah 42 you believe prophesies of Muhammad.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  The only accounts in the New Testament for Jesus' life are the Gospels are they not? So the Prophecy of Muhammad would be in the Gospel.

If that is the case, where is he prophesied in the Gospels?


Originally posted by TG12345


I asked because previously you wrote that there is a Shia Quran. So you do not believe this to be the case?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  I do not know much about Shia Islam.

Then why did you say there is a Shia Quran?


Originally posted by TG12345


Yet if the Gospel = New Testament, it clearly states that Jesus was crucified. Can you please show me the hadith you are referring to? I guess I haven't gotten to it yet.
If you believe that the Bible is not corrupted, then the Quran and the Bible conflict since the Bible does state clearly that Jesus was crucified. Interestingly, the authors of "unchanging word" also believe He was crucified, though not that He is God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  There are different books in the New Testament, not just the Gospels.

Yes, that is true. Do you believe all the New Testament is the Injil and from God as the authors of "unchanging word" do, or just the Gospels?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%60Abd_Allah_ibn_%60Abbas -
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%60Abd_Allah_ibn_%60Abbas - Ibn Abbas said, "Just before Allah raised Jesus to the Heavens, Jesus went to his disciples, who were twelve inside the house. When he arrived, his hair was dripping with water (as if he had just had a bath) and he said, 'There are those among you who will disbelieve in me twelve times after you had believed in me.' He then asked, 'Who among you will volunteer for his appearance to be transformed into mine, and be killed in my place. Whoever volunteers for that, he will be with me (in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise - Paradise ).' One of the youngest ones among them volunteered, but Jesus asked him to sit down. Jesus asked again for a volunteer, and the same young man volunteered and Jesus asked him to sit down again. Then the young man volunteered a third time and Jesus said, 'You will be that man,' and the resemblance of Jesus was cast over that man while Jesus ascended to Heaven from a hole in the roof of the house. When the Jews came looking for Jesus, they found that young man and crucified him. Some of Jesus' followers disbelieved in him twelve times after they had believed in him. They then divided into three groups. One group, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Baradaeus - Jacobites , said, 'Allah remained with us as long as He willed and then ascended to Heaven.' Another group, the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_East - Nestorians , said, 'The son of Allah was with us as long as he willed and Allah took him to Heaven.' Another group, the Muslims, said, 'The servant and Messenger of Allah remained with us as long as Allah willed, and Allah then took him to Him.' The two disbelieving groups cooperated against the Muslim group and they killed them. Ever since that happened, Islam was then veiled until Allah sent Muhammad."


I don't know how authentic this


I do not know how authentic this is either, but for the sake of Ibn Abbas' credibility I hope he didn't actually state this. Even if we disregard the claim that Jesus was not crucified and that someone offered to take his place (which I do not believe of course), the claim that there were the mentioned three groups of disciples and that two of the groups killed the third group is not only offensive to the disciples but false... and I will show you why.

The Nestorians were a Christian sect that came in existence in the 5th century, started by a bishop called Nestorius.
http://www.everyculture.com/Africa-Middle-East/Nestorians-History-and-Cultural-Relations.html

The Jacobites came into existence in the 4th century.
http://www.everyculture.com/Africa-Middle-East/Jacobites-History-and-Cultural-Relations.html

As you and I know, Jesus lived on earth in the first century.


Can you please provide the source from where you got the commentary? Thanks.
 

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

   Crucifixion followed by a resurrection in the Quran is still possible as it says ".....for of a surety they killed him not:-"
—Qur'an, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sura - sura 4 157 Could mean they did not kill him for good or definite as Jews and other non believers think they did.

Of course Jesus was not killed "for good". He rose from the dead!

Praise God!

The verse you cited says though very clearly that Muslims believe Jesus was not only not killed, but also not crucified.

4:157

And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.



Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

   But in Islam whether he was killed or not is not that important but that he is alive in Heaven and there will be a Second Coming.

The fact however is that He was both crucified and died on the cross... and then He came back to life. He is alive in Heaven and there will be a second coming. On that we agree.

Originally posted by TG12345


These passages do not contradict the crucifixion. The angels would have protected Jesus from falling if He jumped, it doesn't say He would be protected from the crucifixion.

Jesus could have called on angels to have protected Him from crucifixion.


Matthew 26:53

53 Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?

Instead, He chose to suffer. He could have escaped from all this, but chose not to.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

   That contradicts Matthew 27:46:

46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, "#fen-NIV-24176c" - c ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+27&version=NIV#fen-NIV-24176c - c ] lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).

Where is the contradiction? Jesus knew it was the will of the Father that He die.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

   Also, you believe Jesus to be God yet he's calling out to his God!?

On earth, He made Himself voluntarily inferior to the Father, as the passages I cited previously in other threads already show.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

   And in the verses where Satan tells Jesus (who you believe to be God) to worship but Jesus(who you believe to be God) says he serves and worships the Lord his God only!?

Satan called on Jesus to worship him. Jesus was both man and God, and as man worshiped the Father.

Originally posted by TG12345

Please show me some of the science claims, let's look at them together.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

   Why? You do not think so? [/QUOTE]

Feel free to show them and let's examine them together. I believe there are some scientific truths in the Quran, as there are some in the Bible. There are also scientific truths in other religious texts of belief systems we both acknowledge to be false.

Originally posted by TG12345

Notice that this was Jesus talking about Himself. When He returns, He will judge the world and send many people to hell.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  
Did Jesus himself say will judge to send people to either Heaven or Hell? [/QUOTE]

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

   
Doesn't that contradict his teaching to condemn not?

It doesn't because unlike us, Jesus is God. God has the right to condemn and judge others. We do not.

Originally posted by TG12345


This was a parable describing what will happen to those who reject God. It was not Jesus giving His disciples permission to fight their enemies.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  
Is this an actual interpretation or just your opinion?

I believe that the fact that the disciples never attacked those who were persecuting them in the early church, that Jesus rebuked Peter for cutting off the ear of one of the men who arrested Christ, that Jesus taught love for enemies and turning the other cheek as a response to violence, that on the cross He Himself prayed for His enemies... means that it is what He meant.
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  
The Pope and Crusaders in the middle ages thought otherwise. But then again Suicide Bombers go against the teachings of Muhammad(PBUH) and Quran.

Exactly. Jesus never allowed the use of violence, and taught us to respond to it with love.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  
Oh and Messengers all taught that G-d alone should be worshiped but had different laws but always had the Seven Laws of Noah at least in their laws.

But would one messenger's instructions to his followers contradict the instructions of another?

Originally posted by TG12345


LOL maybe it would be best to keep it on the forum. I am engaged in a very long discussion with another Muslim friend via email (we debate, and our debates have ran into hundreds of pages on MS Word) and am not sure if I can keep up with more than one like that.

I am looking through your links, though slowly as I am also involved in other things.

What is Ilm al Kalam?

Allah Akhbar!


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  
Ilm al Kalam is the "science of speech" interpreted as Attempting to gain unknowable knowledge especially through debate, it is Haram. For  example, early muslims debated whether the Quran is created or uncreated since it is G-d's word. And whether Allah speaks or has speech?

Thanks for explaining.

[QUOTE=786SalamKhan]   Only Allah knows best.

Indeed.

[QUOTE=786SalamKhan]   Allahu Akbar!


Blessed be His Name!

 Sorry for the length of time in response my friend. Looking forward to reading your answer and will respond to it when I can.


Peace in Christ.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 08 February 2013 at 12:09pm
Wa Alaikum,

Originally posted by TG12345


And where are the 5 pillars mentioned?...

Why are you complicating things when you and I both know that the 5 pillars are obligatory upon every muslim.

Originally posted by TG12345


Are you saying that his teachings are not from God? I would actually agree with you if you did, but somehow doubt that to be the case.

Now you are trying to twist my words.
You think every one of his words were Allah's? Even before his Prophethood was revealed to him? Didn't think so....

Originally posted by TG12345


Why not? He chose to make Himself incarnate in the world, and this is how He chose to do it.

You believe that God reveals himself more over time as explanation for the trinity doctrine yet the Hindus worship the Trimurti and believe Krishna as avatar much before this. Understandable since the doctrine of Trinity was thought up by former pagan Romans.

Originally posted by TG12345


Then why did you say there is a Shia Quran?

This shows that you do not fully read my posts, in one of my replies I said that some sunnis believe that Shias have a different Quran but that is unlikely.

Originally posted by TG12345


I do not know how authentic this is either, but for the sake of Ibn Abbas' credibility I hope he didn't actually state this. Even if we disregard the claim that Jesus was not crucified and that someone offered to take his place (which I do not believe of course), the claim that there were the mentioned three groups of disciples and that two of the groups killed the third group is not only offensive to the disciples but false... and I will show you why.


I already knew who the Nestorians and Jacobites were before I posted the hadith. Remember in one of my very first replies I said to read beyond the text:
1. The hadith is not talking about Jesus' disciples but his "followers" if I said that I follow Muhammad(SAW) it does not make me a Sahaba.
2. In the hadith, Jacobites is obviously a reference to Trinitarians, Nestorians is obviously a reference to those who believe the Sonship of Jesus and Muslims is obviously a reference to Unitarians.
3. The reason the hadith mentions the groups is that both Syriac sects may have at one point persecuted Unitarians as heretics. Only Allah knows.

Again you do not read all of my posts. I already provided links for your sources.

Originally posted by TG12345


On earth, He made Himself voluntarily inferior to the Father, as the passages I cited previously in other threads already show.

You admit that they are separate and not equal yet you worship them. Indeed Trinitarians are polytheists cloaked as Monotheists or "Wolves in Sheep's clothing".

Originally posted by TG12345


Feel free to show them and let's examine them together. I believe there are some scientific truths in the Quran, as there are some in the Bible. There are also scientific truths in other religious texts of belief systems we both acknowledge to be false.

I agree but like I said before the Quran contains much more.

Why do you respond if you do not fully read the content of my post such as the links?
I'm not gonna reply anymore as I've pretty much already input my answers and we are just repeating ourselves. I don't have time for this.

Much before I said what's the point? This is true.
And here I thought that the Jews were stiff necked. Christians like Sam Shamoun, David Wood and Nabeel Qureshi are the most stiff necked people I've ever seen. But unlike you they are dishonest.



-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 08 February 2013 at 11:01pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

Wa alaikum salaam.

Originally posted by TG12345


And where are the 5 pillars mentioned?...

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Why are you complicating things when you and I both know that the 5 pillars are obligatory upon every muslim.

Can you please show me where they are mentioned? Is there a verse in the Quran that states there are 5 pillars of Islam and describes them?

Shukran.

Originally posted by TG12345


Are you saying that his teachings are not from God? I would actually agree with you if you did, but somehow doubt that to be the case.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Now you are trying to twist my words.

Please read what I said:

Are you saying that his teachings are not from God? I would actually agree with you if you did, but somehow doubt that to be the case.

How is that twisting your words?
 
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You think every one of his words were Allah's? Even before his Prophethood was revealed to him? Didn't think so....

Do you believe the hadiths contain things that Muhammad said before he was a prophet?

Do you believe the hadiths we have examined thus far were his words before he knew he was a prophet?

I am not trying to twist your words but I have a hard time believing that Muslims think the hadiths are Muhammad's sayings before he even met God.

Originally posted by TG12345


Why not? He chose to make Himself incarnate in the world, and this is how He chose to do it.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You believe that God reveals himself more over time as explanation for the trinity doctrine yet the Hindus worship the Trimurti and believe Krishna as avatar much before this.


You either misunderstand the Christian belief about God, or the Hindu belief about their gods.

trimurti, ( Sanskrit: “three forms”)  http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/media/100921/Trimurti-stone-relief-in-a-cave-temple-on-Elephanta-Island">%20%5bCredit:%20Atlantide%20Phototravel/Corbis%5d in http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/266312/Hinduism - Hinduism , triad of the three great gods http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/77028/Brahma - Brahma , http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/630506/Vishnu - Vishnu , and http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/546894/Shiva - Shiva . Scholars consider the doctrine of the trimurti to be an attempt to reconcile different approaches to the divine with each other and with the philosophical doctrine of ultimate reality ( http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/77039/brahman - brahma ). The doctrine was given classical expression in http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/310169/Kalidasa - Kalidasa ’s poem Kumarasambhava (“Birth of the War God”; c. 4th–5th century ce). In trimurti symbolism, the three gods are collapsed into a single form with three faces. Each god is in charge of one aspect of creation, with Brahma as creator, Vishnu as preserver, and Shiva as destroyer.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/605418/trimurti



Trinity,  http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/media/93918/The-Trinity-represented-by-Christ-as-a-man-the-Holy">%20%5bCredit:%20Ara%20Guler,%20Istanbul%5d in Christian doctrine, the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead.

Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/303091/Jesus-Christ - Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Hebrew Scriptures: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). The earliest Christians, however, had to cope with the implications of the coming of Jesus Christ and of the presumed presence and power of God among them—i.e., the http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/269934/Holy-Spirit - Holy Spirit , whose coming was connected with the celebration of the Pentecost. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were associated in such http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/412114/New-Testament - New Testament passages as the Great Commission: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19); and in the apostolic benediction: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2 Corinthians 13:14). Thus, the New Testament established the basis for the doctrine of the Trinity.

The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. Initially, both the requirements of monotheism inherited from the Hebrew Scriptures and the implications of the need to interpret the biblical teaching to Greco-Roman religions seemed to demand that the divine in Christ as the Word, or Logos, be interpreted as subordinate to the Supreme Being. An alternative solution was to interpret Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three modes of the self-disclosure of the one God but not as distinct within the being of God itself. The first tendency recognized the distinctness among the three, but at the cost of their equality and hence of their unity (subordinationism); the second came to terms with their unity, but at the cost of their distinctness as “persons” (modalism). It was not until the 4th century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons.

The http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/413817/Council-of-Nicaea - Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is “of the same substance [homoousios] as the Father,” even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit. Over the next half century, Athanasius defended and refined the Nicene formula, and, by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since. It is accepted in all of the historic confessions of Christianity, even though the impact of the Enlightenment decreased its importance.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/605512/Trinity


The Trimurti doctrine teaches there are three gods who exist in one form. The Trinity doctrine teaches that one God exists as three persons.




Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Understandable since the doctrine of Trinity was thought up by former pagan Romans.

The idea was in the Bible all along.

Originally posted by TG12345


Then why did you say there is a Shia Quran?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

This shows that you do not fully read my posts, in one of my replies I said that some sunnis believe that Shias have a different Quran but that is unlikely.


How does this indicate I did not read your posts? I asked you why you said there is a Shia Quran... which is something you did say, before afterwards claiming this is not the case and admitting you do not know much about Shia Islam... neither do I btw.

I am curious why, if you state that you do not know much about Shia Islam and believe it is untrue that Shias have their own Quran, you previously stated there is a Shia Quran like there is a Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Greek, etc. Bible.

If it was a mistake it's OK. Like every other human being, we have made our share of mistakes. I was curious, that's all.

I don't see how me asking you why you stated that there is a Shia Quran indicates I haven't read your posts. I am pasting our discussion on this for your convenience.

786SalaamKhan: Ah, I no longer believe the Bible is corrupted. I apologize, you were right when you posted hadith about Waraqa proving the existence of the Injil; I was just too stiff-necked. It was Salafi scholars like Ahmad Deedat and Zakir Naik that borrowed the ideas from the Qadianis.   http://unchangingword.com/
While I do not 100% agree with the above website, I agree with most and I'm sure you will as well so please your time and read through it. However I believe that anything in the Bible that differs from the Quran is because of the long passage of time where it was mistransmitted, mistranslated, misinterpreted but maybe a few deliberate/accidental changes. That is why there are many versions and I do not mean translations like King James but I mean Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Greek etc. Similar to how there is a Shia Quran.
http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24591&KW=786salaamkhan+shia+quran&PN=6

TG12345:
Hold on... now I am confused. Are you saying that the Shias use a different Quran than Sunni Muslims do?
Can you show me any evidence for such a claim? I have to admit I am blown away by this allegation. I am curious to see any proof of such a statement. Thanks.

786SalaamKhan: Some Sunnis suggest that they use a different Quran but this is unlikely so they use the same Quran but have a different opinion. The truth is that Shias deny that Uthman compiled the Quran and believe that the Quran was actually compiled by Muhammad(SAW) during his lifetime. Some suggest that the Shias believe that Muhammad(SAW) gave the True Quran to Ali and it is actually three times longer and that a future Imam(Mahdi?) will return this Quran but this view is apparently a misconception to discredit them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_view_of_the_
Quran

http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24591&KW=786salaamkhan+shia+quran&PN=6

TG12345: I asked because previously you wrote that there is a Shia Quran. So you do not believe this to be the case?
http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24591&KW=786salaamkhan+shia+quran&PN=6

786SalaamKhan:

I do not know much about Shia Islam.
http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24591&KW=786salaamkhan+shia+quran&PN=6

TG12345: Then why did you say there is a Shia Quran?
http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24591&KW=786salaamkhan+shia+quran&PN=8

Originally posted by TG12345

I do not know how authentic this is either, but for the sake of Ibn Abbas' credibility I hope he didn't actually state this. Even if we disregard the claim that Jesus was not crucified and that someone offered to take his place (which I do not believe of course), the claim that there were the mentioned three groups of disciples and that two of the groups killed the third group is not only offensive to the disciples but false... and I will show you why.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

I already knew who the Nestorians and Jacobites were before I posted the hadith. Remember in one of my very first replies I said to read beyond the text:
1. The hadith is not talking about Jesus' disciples but his "followers" if I said that I follow Muhammad(SAW) it does not make me a Sahaba.

Are we discussing a hadith or are we discussing tafsir? You didn't post a link to the source, can you please do that? I asked you this before, I am asking again.

I apologize for misunderstanding your interpretation of the verse, to me it sounded like it stated Jesus' disciples were the ones who divided into three groups and two of the groups killed the last group.
 

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

2. In the hadith, Jacobites is obviously a reference to Trinitarians, Nestorians is obviously a reference to those who believe the Sonship of Jesus and Muslims is obviously a reference to Unitarians.

The Nestorians believe God is a Trinity, like the Jacobites (and most Christians) did and do.

The Church of the East faithful to the command of our Lord, and the teaching and practice of the early church, has maintained this Apostolic Succession throughout the trials and tribulations of its nearly twenty centuries-long history.

Its theology is Apostolic and Catholic, and has remained unchanged throughout its history. Its doctrine of the Holy Trinity is in conformity with that of the Council of Nicea, at which it was represented.

http://www.nestorian.org/history_of_the_nestorian_churc.html

The Syrian Orthodox church  accepts only three Ecumenical Synods namely Nicea (A.D.325), Constantinople (A.D. 381) and Ephesus (A. D. 431) as the universal Synods. The Church meticulously observe all faith declaration of the Nicean Creed. The western church at a later stage appended a statement to this creed attributing the Holy Ghost to be originating from Son also, (Filioque) which we do not accept. The Church was totally merged with the divine element and became one (Monophysite).

http://www.jacobitesyrianchurch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=49&Itemid=60


At the Council of Nicea, the idea of the Trinity was defined officially. The Trinity being "the deity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit under one Godhead in three co-equal and co-eternal persons"

As you can see, this definition includes both the Sonship of Jesus and the Trinity... and the Jacobites and Nestorians both accepted these things.

Question: "What occurred at the Council of Nicea?"

Answer:
The Council of Nicea took place in 325 A.D. by the order of the Roman Emperor Caesar Flavius Constantine. Nicea was located in Asia Minor, east of Constantinople. At the Council of Nicea, Emperor Constantine presided over a group of Church bishops and leaders with the purpose of defining the true God for all of Christianity and eliminating all the confusion, controversy, and contention within Christ’s church. The Council of Nicea affirmed the deity of Jesus Christ and established an official definition of the Trinity—the deity of The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit under one Godhead, in three co-equal and co-eternal Persons

...


(article is continued)
http://www.gotquestions.org/council-of-Nicea.html

Both groups believed Jesus is God and both believed He is the Son of God. As a Christian I believe Jesus is both God and the Son of God.

The author of the tafsir (or hadith, if this is what you claim it is but I'd like to see evidence for that if that is the case) clearly misunderstood the beliefs of the Nestorian and Jacobite Christian groups.

 
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

3. The reason the hadith mentions the groups is that both Syriac sects may have at one point persecuted Unitarians as heretics. Only Allah knows.

If you can find evidence for this viewpoint, please show it to me.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Again you do not read all of my posts. I already provided links for your sources.

I really apologize, but I do not see what you are talking about here.
Do you mean the list of links you presented for me to read? I am still going through them. I am involved in several debates simultaneously with different people, as well as with life outside of the forums.

It would save us both a lot of time if you could please provide the relevant link. I will look at it as soon as you do so.
 

Originally posted by TG12345


On earth, He made Himself voluntarily inferior to the Father, as the passages I cited previously in other threads already show.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You admit that they are separate and not equal yet you worship them.

Where did I say the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not equal? The Bible states Jesus made Himself voluntarily inferior to the Father. He is equal to the Father but chose to make Himself unequal for a while.

I worship God, who exists as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Just like you worship one God who you believe has 99+ different attributes. When you call on AlRahman and AlRaheem you are calling on one God, not two different Gods.

When I call on the Father, Son and Holy Spirit I do not call on three different Gods but on one God who exists as three persons.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Indeed Trinitarians are polytheists cloaked as Monotheists or "Wolves in Sheep's clothing".

Indeed many Muslims grossly misunderstand what others believe, and then attack them for believing something they don't.


Originally posted by TG12345


Feel free to show them and let's examine them together. I believe there are some scientific truths in the Quran, as there are some in the Bible. There are also scientific truths in other religious texts of belief systems we both acknowledge to be false.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

I agree but like I said before the Quran contains much more.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Why do you respond if you do not fully read the content of my post such as the links?
I'm not gonna reply anymore as I've pretty much already input my answers and we are just repeating ourselves. I don't have time for this.

Whether you respond or not is your choice. I have read your links. I agree with some of what they have to say, and disagree with a lot of what is in them. Forgive me, but I do not have the time or energy to refute every single one of them, if that is what you are asking me to do.

I have not seen any of the links below discussing science:

Originally posted by 786SalaamKhan

   http://www.heaven.net.nz/answers/answer08.htm
http://www.earthsmightiest.com/fansites/BlasphemousRumors/news/?a=5690
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3957
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3938
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3956
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/3939

Addressing other issues:
http://www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?53815-Does-the-Quran-say-that-Ishmael-was-sacrificed-instead-of-Issac/#10
http://www.anusha.com/jesuspaul.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k94n1GfBbcw&list=LLCTZqIQFXzgBrH8RHH5q1tA
http://arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA2N2Iz5ExM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtEpM9BqvQI
http://www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Jesus%27_death#Substitution_interpretation

Regarding the source for the passage quoting Ibn Abbas on Jesus' followers dividing into three groups and persecuting one of the groups, I see you got that from a wikipedia source that says it is from Ibn Kathir without giving sources to back that up. I try to back up what I say with sources that are not wikipedia since as you probably know the stuff on there is often not reliable.

Regarding Muhammad being prophesied in the Injil, I see you believe this is in Isaiah 42, and provide a source

http://www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa/

.

I will briefly present some of the evidence that does not make it possible that Muhammad is referred to in that passage.

Isaiah 42:1-4


Behold my servant, whom I uphold,
    my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my Spirit upon him;
    he will bring forth justice to the nations.
He will not cry aloud or lift up his voice,
    or make it heard in the street;
a bruised reed he will not break,
    and a faintly burning wick he will not quench;
    he will faithfully bring forth justice.
He will not grow faint or be discouraged "#fen-ESV-18485a" - a ]">[ http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah%2042&version=ESV#fen-ESV-18485a - a ]
    till he has established justice in the earth;
    and the coastlands wait for his law.

Has Muhammad established justice in the earth? He established his interpretation of God's law in Arabia, but not beyond its borders.

Will he come again to judge the earth?

Jesus will.

Even the source you cited acknowledges that Muhammad established justice in Arabia.

Transliteration

 la  yiḵ·heh  wə·la  yā·rūṣ,  ‘aḏ-  yā·śîm  bā·’ā·reṣ  miš·pāṭ;  ū·lə·ṯō·w·rā·ṯōw  ’î·yîm  yə·ya·ḥê·lū.  p̄ 

English Translation (New King James Version)

He will not fail nor be discouraged,
till He has established justice in the earth;
And the coastlands shall wait for His law.”

Fulfillment

The hadith confrims this with the words ولن يقبضه الله حتى يقيم به الملة العوجاء بأن يقولوا لا إله إلا الله ويفتح "Allah will not let him (the Prophet) die till he makes straight the crooked people by making them say: "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah," The Prophet was given a detailed Law (Shariah) by Allah, which is based on supreme justice, a Law similar to the Law of Moses in its comprehensiveness. Prior to the advent of Prophet Muhammad (sws), total anarchy had gripped Arabia, lewdness was rampant; slavery, usury, bloodshed, and tribal feuds was the order of the day. When the Noble Prophet commenced his mission of reforming his society based on the message of monotheism, he faced stiff opposition from the Pagans. When all the lucrative offers made to him to abandon his preaching did not work, the pagans of Makka resorted to torture and severe persecution. In the face of this stiff opposition an ordinary man might be discouraged, but the Noble Prophet (sws) struggled on. His mesage of equality of all humans was attractive for the slaves and the downtrodden. Many such as Bilal, Khabbab ibn al-Aratt, Yasir and Sumayya embraced Islam. These new converts suffered the most. But I only want to point out the grand prophecy which Prophet Muhammad (sws) made in these testing times. Following is the account given in Bukhari,

سمعت خبابا يقول أتيت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وهو متوسد بردة وهو في ظل الكعبة وقد لقينا من المشركين شدة فقلت يا رسول الله ألا تدعو الله فقعد وهو محمر وجهه فقال لقد كان من قبلكم ليمشط بمشاط الحديد ما دون عظامه من لحم أو عصب ما يصرفه ذلك عن دينه ويوضع المنشار على مفرق رأسه فيشق باثنين ما يصرفه ذلك عن دينه وليتمن الله هذا الأمر حتى يسير الراكب من صنعاء إلى حضرموت ما يخاف إلا الله زاد بيان والذئب على غنمه

Narrated Khabbab:

I came to the Prophet while he was leaning against his sheet cloak in the shade of the Ka'ba. We were suffering greatly from the pagans in those days. I said (to him). "Will you invoke Allah (to help us)?" He sat down with a red face and said, "(A believer among) those who were before you used to be combed with iron combs so that nothing of his flesh or nerves would remain on his bones; yet that would never make him desert his religion. A saw might be put over the parting of his head which would be split into two parts, yet all that would never make him abandon his religion. Allah will surely complete this religion (i.e. Islam) so that a traveler from Sana'a to Hadramawt will not be afraid of anybody except Allah." [Bukhari, Kitab Manaqib al-Ansar (Merits of the Helpers in Madinah) 63, Chapter 29, Hadith 191]

Notice the underlined words. The Prophet is predicting this at a time when there were hardly 150 Muslims in the whole of Arabia. Khabbab (ra) saw these words fulfilled in his lifetime. Is this not the fulfillment of the words "He will not fail nor be discouraged, till He has established justice in the earth"?

http://www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa/

Muhammad did not bring justice (or his version of it) to the world, he brought it to Arabia.

Jesus on the other hand, will return and judge the world. Obviously Isaiah 42 is about Him.
The source you does not answer the question where is Muhammad mentioned in the Injil, since, as the author realizes, Isaiah 42 is in the Torah.

The prophecy I am referring to is mentioned in the Old Testament book of Isaiah and its 42nd chapter. Let me first share with you the narratives from Muslims traditions of how early Muslims saw the mention of Prophet Muhammad (sws) in the Torah.

عن عطاء بن يسار قال لقيت عبد الله بن عمرو بن العاص رضي الله عنهما قلت أخبرني عن صفة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في التوراة قال أجل والله إنه لموصوف في التوراة ببعض صفته في القرآن يا أيها النبي إنا أرسلناك شاهدا ومبشرا ونذيرا وحرزا للأميين أنت عبدي ورسولي سميتك المتوكل ليس بفظ ولا غليظ ولا سخاب في الأسواق ولا يدفع السيئة بالسيئة ولكن يعفو ويغفر ولن يقبضه الله حتى يقيم به الملة العوجاء بأن يقولوا لا إله إلا الله ويفتح بها أعينا عميا وآذانا صما وقلوبا غلفا- تابعه عبد العزيز بن أبي سلمة عن هلال وقال سعيد عن هلال عن عطاء عن ابن سلام غلف كل شيء في غلاف سيف أغلف وقوس غلفاء ورجل أغلف إذا لم يكن مختونا  [صحيح البخاري » كتاب البيوع » باب كراهية السخب في السوق]

Narrated Ata bin Yasar:

I met Abdullah bin 'Amr bin Al-'As and asked him, "Tell me about the description of Allah's Apostle which is mentioned in Torah (i.e. Old Testament). He replied, 'Yes. By Allah, he is described in Torah with some of the qualities attributed to him in the Quran such as: "O Prophet ! We have sent you as a witness  and a giver of glad tidings, and a warner (Qur'an 48:8) and guardian of the Ummiyyeen. You are My Servant and My messenger (i.e. Apostle). I have named you "Al-Mutawakkil" (who depends upon Allah). You are neither discourteous, harsh nor a noise-maker in the markets And you do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness. Allah will not let him (the Prophet) die till he makes straight the crooked people by making them say: "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah," with which will be opened blind eyes and deaf ears and enveloped hearts."
[Bukhari Kitaab al-Buyu' (Book of Sales and Trade) Chapter 50 (The dislike of raising voices in the market)]

A similar hadith is mention at another place in Bukhari as follows,

Narrated Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-As:

This Verse: 'Verily We have sent you (O Muhammad) as a witness, as a bringer of glad tidings and as a warner.' (48.8)

Which is in the Qur'an, appears in the Torah thus: 'Verily We have sent you (O Muhammad) as a witness, as a bringer of glad tidings and as a warner, and as a protector for the Ummiyyeen (i.e., the Arabs.) You are My Servant and My Apostle, and I have named you Al-Mutawakkil (one who depends upon Allah). You are neither hard-hearted nor of fierce character, nor one who shouts in the markets. You do not return evil for evil, but excuse and forgive. Allah will not take you unto Him till He guides through you a crocked (curved) nation on the right path by causing them to say: "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah." With such a statement He will cause to open blind eyes, deaf ears and hardened hearts.'
[Bukhari Kitaab at-Tafseer' (Commentary of the Qur'an) Surah 48 (Fath), Chapter 3 (Verily We have sent you  as a witness, as a bringer of glad tidings and as a warner)]

... (continued)

http://www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa/

So as to where Muhammad is described in the Injil, there is still no answer to that.


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Much before I said what's the point? This is true.

No one is forcing you to be part of this discussion. I will respond to every point that you make and I will read the links... but I will not refute each and every single one of them... unless you bring them up yourself (and by bring up I mean actually state your argument and provide reasons for it that I can address instead of telling me to read a dozen different articles). I am not trying to be rude or offensive, but am just honest about how I approach discussion.
 
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

And here I thought that the Jews were stiff necked. Christians like Sam Shamoun, David Wood and Nabeel Qureshi are the most stiff necked people I've ever seen. But unlike you they are dishonest.

 I have responded to every one of the points you have made and have read your links even if I have not responded to them all.

I do not know Shamoun, Wood and Qureshi so I cannot comment too  much on them. I have read some of Shamoun's articles, he at times does misquote the Quran and hadiths. Whether this is intentional on his part or mistakes I don't know.

You mistakenly said that Timothy was circumcised by having his penis in another man's mouth, you then apologized and admitted you got that from an unBiblical source. Zakir Naik misquoted a verse from the passage of Gospel of John in the video that Rational posted. It's OK, we all make mistakes.

I don't know whether what Sam Shamoun writes when he is mistaken is from a willfull dishonesty or ignorance. Either way, it makes his arguments unreliable. I check out his site sometimes, and am very careful to cross-reference every claim that he makes.

I would recommend every Muslim do the same for Zakir Naik's presentations on what according to him the Bible teaches.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

But unlike you they are dishonest.

Thank you for these kind words, and for not calling me one of the "professional liars" as the gentleman who goes by the name "truthnowcome" has so eloquently stated.

If you want to discuss more, I look forward to reading your response. If you want to end all discussion with me, it is your choice. Either way, I will continue to wish the very best for you and to keep you in my prayers.

Allahu Akhbar.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 09 February 2013 at 12:07am
Wa Alaikum,
Originally posted by TG12345


Please read what I said:

Are you saying that his teachings are not from God? I would actually agree with you if you did, but somehow doubt that to be the case.

How is that twisting your words?

I apologise I took it out of context.

Originally posted by TG12345


Do you believe the hadiths contain things that Muhammad said before he was a prophet?

Do you believe the hadiths we have examined thus far were his words before he knew he was a prophet?

I am not trying to twist your words but I have a hard time believing that Muslims think the hadiths are Muhammad's sayings before he even met God.

You misunderstood me, does every word need to be from Allah for the Prophet to even speak? How about when Jesus called the Gentiles as dogs, was it God's word?

Originally posted by TG12345


The Trimurti doctrine teaches there are three gods who exist in one form. The Trinity doctrine teaches that one God exists as three persons.

Many others say Trinity is 3 in 1 also.

Originally posted by TG12345


If it was a mistake it's OK. Like every other human being, we have made our share of mistakes. I was curious, that's all.

Yeah it was a mistake, sorry. I meant to say Shia view not version.

Originally posted by TG12345


Are we discussing a hadith or are we discussing tafsir? You didn't post a link to the source, can you please do that? I asked you this before, I am asking again.

I did, but here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Jesus'_death#Substitution_interpretation

Originally posted by TG12345


Just like you worship one God who you believe has 99+ different attributes. When you call on AlRahman and AlRaheem you are calling on one God, not two different Gods.

You think 99 names for ONE GOD is similar to the concept THREE separate persons?

Originally posted by TG12345


Indeed many Muslims grossly misunderstand what others believe, and then attack them for believing something they don't.

Other Christians and Jews also attack Trinitarians as polytheists and Idol Worshippers, usually directed at Roman Catholics.

Originally posted by TG12345


Muhammad did not bring justice (or his version of it) to the world, he brought it to Arabia.

Jesus did not bring justice to the world, but you believe it to be his second coming. Muhammad also informed other Nations with letters and his Sahaba about the religion of Islam.
Another link I had supporting Muhammad in Isaiah 42 is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtEpM9BqvQI
Also here is a Jewish answer to any prophecies about Jesus in Isaiah:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68iabTXx1wY
Also a Jewish opinion on Islam:
http://www.thesanhedrin.org/en/index.php?title=Hachrazah_5769_Kislev_15b

Originally posted by TG12345


So as to where Muhammad is described in the Injil, there is still no answer to that.

I said that it would be in the context of speaking to the Jews not his disciples but I would have to know Aramaic, Arabic or Koine Greek to read those Gospels as the English translations could be wrong.

Originally posted by TG12345


I do not know Shamoun, Wood and Qureshi so I cannot comment too much on them. I have read some of Shamoun's articles, he at times does misquote the Quran and hadiths. Whether this is intentional on his part or mistakes I don't know.

You mistakenly said that Timothy was circumcised by having his penis in another man's mouth, you then apologized and admitted you got that from an unBiblical source. Zakir Naik misquoted a verse from the passage of Gospel of John in the video that Rational posted. It's OK, we all make mistakes.

I don't know whether what Sam Shamoun writes when he is mistaken is from a willfull dishonesty or ignorance. Either way, it makes his arguments unreliable. I check out his site sometimes, and am very careful to cross-reference every claim that he makes.

Here is an example of Nabeel Qureshi's dishonesty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHu_WipSyUQ



-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 09 February 2013 at 4:13pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Wa Alaikum,

Alaikum Salaam.

Originally posted by TG12345


Please read what I said:

Are you saying that his teachings are not from God? I would actually agree with you if you did, but somehow doubt that to be the case.

How is that twisting your words?

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

I apologise I took it out of context.

Thank you for that. No problem at all. Smile

Originally posted by TG12345


Do you believe the hadiths contain things that Muhammad said before he was a prophet?

Do you believe the hadiths we have examined thus far were his words before he knew he was a prophet?

I am not trying to twist your words but I have a hard time believing that Muslims think the hadiths are Muhammad's sayings before he even met God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You misunderstood me, does every word need to be from Allah for the Prophet to even speak? 

I think that if these words are recorded and are on matters of faith then yes, they need to be from God.

Here are some links arguing that to reject the hadiths is to reject the Quran.

http://www.islamicity.com/forum/printer_friendly_posts.asp?TID=16302
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=83766


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

How about when Jesus called the Gentiles as dogs, was it God's word?

As Jesus was God then yes, everything He said is His word.

Originally posted by TG12345


The Trimurti doctrine teaches there are three gods who exist in one form. The Trinity doctrine teaches that one God exists as three persons.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Many others say Trinity is 3 in 1 also. 

Three persons in one God, not three gods in one god.

Originally posted by TG12345


If it was a mistake it's OK. Like every other human being, we have made our share of mistakes. I was curious, that's all.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Yeah it was a mistake, sorry. I meant to say Shia view not version.

Thanks for clarifying. No problem, let's move on.

Originally posted by TG12345


Are we discussing a hadith or are we discussing tafsir? You didn't post a link to the source, can you please do that? I asked you this before, I am asking again.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

I did, but here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_Jesus'_death#Substitution_interpretation

Thanks. Other than Wikipedia, can you find a source for this?

Originally posted by TG12345


Just like you worship one God who you believe has 99+ different attributes. When you call on AlRahman and AlRaheem you are calling on one God, not two different Gods.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You think 99 names for ONE person is similar to the concept THREE separate persons?

Do you describe Allah as a person?

I think 99 separate names for one God is similar to the concept of one God existing as three persons.

Originally posted by TG12345


Indeed many Muslims grossly misunderstand what others believe, and then attack them for believing something they don't.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Other Christians and Jews also attack Trinitarians as polytheists and Idol Worshippers, usually directed at Roman Catholics.

And there are Muslims who attack Hadith followers as innovators.

What's your point?

Originally posted by TG12345


Muhammad did not bring justice (or his version of it) to the world, he brought it to Arabia.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Jesus did not bring justice to the world, but you believe it to be his second coming. Muhammad also informed other Nations with letters and his Sahaba about the religion of Islam.

Jesus did not bring justice to the world in His first coming, but He will in His second... and both Muslims and Christians believe He will come again. Do you believe in the second coming of Muhammad?

Muhammad may have informed other nations about Islam, but there is no proof that they followed. Neither the Persians or Romans were won over by his letters. King Negus allegedly became a Muslim, but there is no proof that he ruled Ethiopia according to Islamic Law.
 
Muhammad's Sahaba were informed about the religion of Islam but Isaiah 42 states the messenger will not rest until he has established justice in the earth.

Muhammad clearly did not do this. He may have done so in Arabia, but not anywhere else during his lifespan.

Also Isaiah 42:1 states that the servant will bring justice to the nations.

Behold my servant, whom I uphold,

    my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my Spirit upon him;
    he will bring forth justice to the nations.

What nation other than Arabia did Muhammad bring "justice" to?

The word used for nations... lag·gō·w·yim... can also mean "Gentiles".
http://biblesuite.com/hebrew/laggoyim_1471.htm

If this were the case, this would also not be true of Muhammad, since he judged the Jews as well several times according to the hadiths. He judged people regardless if they were Jewish or Gentile, unlike the prophet in Isaiah 42 who is identified as coming to judge "the Gentiles"... if that is the translation you want to use.

Regardless if whether the word in Isaiah 42:1 is "nations" or "Gentiles", it does not describe what Muhammad did as a prophet.

Isaiah 42 is not a reference to him.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Another link I had supporting Muhammad in Isaiah 42 is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtEpM9BqvQI


The video argues that the word "etmak" should actually be "ahmad" and that it has been tampered with. This is the author's view but I see no evidence that this is the case.

Even if the word is indeed "ahmad" it couldn't be true of Muhammad since he died long before justice is established in the earth and he did not bring justice to the nations... only one nation. He also did not bring justice to Gentiles, he brought justice (or his understanding of it) to both non-Jews and Jews alike.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Also here is a Jewish answer to any prophecies about Jesus in Isaiah:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68iabTXx1wY

I know that Jews do not believe Jesus is prophesied in Isaiah. They believe the prophecy is about Israel, if I am not mistaken.

This does not however help back your assertion that Isaiah 42 is about Muhammad.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Also a Jewish opinion on Islam:
http://www.thesanhedrin.org/en/index.php?title=Hachrazah_5769_Kislev_15b

Thanks for sharing. The link says that like Judaism, Islam is a monotheistic religion and that Jews and Muslims can be inspired to do good deeds when seeing the other doing so. As a Christian I also believe in this.

The link does not say anything about Muhammad being prophesied in Isaiah 42.

I don't see how either the 2nd or 3rd link is relevant to our discussion on Isaiah 42, unless you brought them up to show some interesting things outside of our debate, which is cool. Smile

Originally posted by TG12345


So as to where Muhammad is described in the Injil, there is still no answer to that.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

I said that it would be in the context of speaking to the Jews not his disciples but I would have to know Aramaic, Arabic or Koine Greek to read those Gospels as the English translations could be wrong. 

I'm not sure what you mean here by stating the things Jesus said in the Injil would be in the context of speaking to the Jews not His disciples.

www.bible.cc has Greek and Hebrew translations of the words in each passage if you want to check them out.

Originally posted by TG12345


I do not know Shamoun, Wood and Qureshi so I cannot comment too much on them. I have read some of Shamoun's articles, he at times does misquote the Quran and hadiths. Whether this is intentional on his part or mistakes I don't know.

You mistakenly said that Timothy was circumcised by having his penis in another man's mouth, you then apologized and admitted you got that from an unBiblical source. Zakir Naik misquoted a verse from the passage of Gospel of John in the video that Rational posted. It's OK, we all make mistakes.

I don't know whether what Sam Shamoun writes when he is mistaken is from a willfull dishonesty or ignorance. Either way, it makes his arguments unreliable. I check out his site sometimes, and am very careful to cross-reference every claim that he makes.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Here is an example of Nabeel Qureshi's dishonesty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHu_WipSyUQ



Thanks for sharing. He doesn't sound any better than the dishonest Zakir Naik.

Blessed be the Name of the Lord.


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 10 February 2013 at 2:03am
I do not consider Allah as a person(as in human) but an entity similar to how you consider the Heavenly Father and Holy Spirit as persons but not human.

You say to me to reject hadith is to reject the Quran but not once did I say that I completely reject the hadith. What's also funny is that in our past conversations you try get me to believe a hadith and when I do you try to disprove that hadith?

For the sake of argument, consider Muhammad(SAW) as the Servant in Isaiah 42. Not only that but consider the servant(s) as Muhammad(SAW) and the religion of Islam(which Jesus will follow in his second coming). And then attribute Isaiah 42 to during and after Muhammad's life.

Try to imagine it from the other side of the argument, just consider Muhammad(SAW) as a Prophet. I would sometimes imagine without taking Quran and Muhammad into consideration(May Allah forgive me) that Jesus did die on the cross for our sins and that would not convince me. But I would never believe in the Trinity as there is not enough evidence to imagine that. Although Satan would try to force the idea into my head when I wake up before Fajr, but he would also try to force idolatry such as the Moabite "god" Chemosh, Praise Allah that I would fight off these thoughts.
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/4101
http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/4133

We cannot convince each other but we must take the information and try to convince ourselves. Life is really simple but men insist on making things complicated.

May Allah Guide us all and grant us Jannah through his mercy only.


-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 10 February 2013 at 12:43pm
Assalamu Alaikum, 786SalaamKhan,

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

I do not consider Allah as a person(as in human) but an entity similar to how you consider the Heavenly Father and Holy Spirit as persons but not human. 

Fair enough. I believe Allah is God, and He reveals Himself to humanity as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

You say to me to reject hadith is to reject the Quran but not once did I say that I completely reject the hadith. What's also funny is that in our past conversations you try get me to believe a hadith and when I do you try to disprove that hadith? 

I apologize to you, 786SalaamKhan. I have to say that I am unclear about what you believe and do not believe about the hadiths, and I am afraid I have misinterpreted your words at times.

If you are ok with it, I would like to ask you some questions.

1) Do you believe that the things Muhammad said as a prophet that are recorded in sahih hadiths... about God, humanity, the prophets of God, how Muslims are to live, creation... were given to him by God or are they the words of a human being who spoke from his own knowledge and whose words can be either true or false?

2) As a Muslim, are you allowed to believe some of the things Muhammad said in the sahih hadiths and acknowledge them to be true and allowed to disbelieve other things he said and state they are false?


Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

For the sake of argument, consider Muhammad(SAW) as the Servant in Isaiah 42. Not only that but consider the servant(s) as Muhammad(SAW) and the religion of Islam(which Jesus will follow in his second coming). And then attribute Isaiah 42 to during and after Muhammad's life.

For the sake of argument (and only for that reason), I can assume Muhammad was a prophet of God and that he spread God's justice.

I cannot assume he is the Servant in Isaiah 42, because to do this would require either changing what Isaiah 42 says or adding to what Islam teaches.

To the best of my knowledge, Islam does not teach that Muhammad established justice in the earth. He established Islam in Arabia, he did not establish it in either the Persian or Byzantine Empire. Although he preached to the rulers of both powers, they rejected his teaching. Muhammad died before Islam was established in Persia, and long before that was the case on the Byzantine Empire.

The Servant in Isaiah 42 is prophesied to establish justice in the earth.

This is something that Jesus will do in His second coming.


Even Muhammad taught this!


(1) Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, surely (jesus,) the son of Mary will soon descend amongst you and will judge mankind justly (as a Just Ruler); he will break the Cross and kill the pigs and there will be no Jizya (i.e. taxation taken from non Muslims). Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it, and a single prostration to Allah (in prayer) will be better than the whole world and whatever is in it." Abu Huraira added "If you wish, you can recite (this verse of the Holy Book): -- 'And there is none Of the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (i.e jesus as an Apostle of Allah and a human being) Before his death. And on the Day of Judgment He will be a witness Against them." (4.159) (See Fateh Al Bari, Page 302 Vol 7)  (Book http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=55&translator=1&start=0&number=657 - #55 , Hadith http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=55&translator=1&start=0&number=657#657 - #657 )

http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=jesus+mankind&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0
 
The Servant in Isaiah 42 will not grow faint or be discouraged until he has established justice in the earth. Muhammad did not establish justice in the earth. Jesus will.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Try to imagine it from the other side of the argument, just consider Muhammad(SAW) as a Prophet. I would sometimes imagine without taking Quran and Muhammad into consideration(May Allah forgive me) that Jesus did die on the cross for our sins and that would not convince me. But I would never believe in the Trinity as there is not enough evidence to imagine that.

Why would you not believe Jesus died on the cross for your sins?

In regards to the Trinity, the Bible makes clear that Jesus is God, that the Father is God and that the Holy Spirit is God. Jesus then states that we are to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

Although Satan would try to force the idea into my head when I wake up before Fajr, but he would also try to force idolatry such as the Moabite "god" Chemosh, Praise Allah that I would fight off these thoughts.

Unlike Chemosh, Jesus is God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/4101

I don't think the Trinity is any more "unacceptable to the mind" than the idea that God would send 124,000 prophets and all of theirs except one's message would be changed or added to or lost.

As we both know, for many people, the very idea of God existing at all is unacceptable!

I do not know God is capable of being three persons while simultaneously being one. Do you know how He is capable of knowing everything, even our thoughts? Or do you just accept He is capable of anything, even if His greatness is too amazing for our human minds to comprehend?
 
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

http://knowingallah.com/index.php/en/articles/article/4133 

I haven't explored the other religions listed, although I have already demonstrated that the Hindu Trimurti (belief in three gods being one) is not like the Trinity (belief in one God who exists as three persons).

Even if other religions believed in a pagan god existing as three persons (which I still have to see evidence of) it does not show "the pagan roots" of Christianity anymore than the fact that the pagan Greeks believed in an all-powerful deity named Zeus shows "the pagan roots" of Islam because like the pagan Greeks, Muslims also believe there is an Almighty God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

We cannot convince each other but we must take the information and try to convince ourselves.

Agreed. And the information does not point to Islam being true. No offense intended.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

  Life is really simple but men insist on making things complicated.

I think like can be complicated if we follow our own thoughts and desires and values. It is more simple when we turn to God.

Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

May Allah Guide us all and grant us Jannah through his mercy only.

InshAllah.

Blessed be His Name. It is by His grace that we have any chance of salvation.


PS I will be probably again taking a few days break, perhaps a week, from the forum so when you post your response it will take me a while to respond but inshAllah I will. Smile


Posted By: 786SalamKhan
Date Posted: 13 February 2013 at 9:30am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fyy4q8z4us&list=WLFHdUBKWxT2GrSQs5SIbA2wS6QDa3W4VJ

-------------
www.inter-islam.org
knowingallah.com
www.anusha.com/isaac.htm
www.mushafiqsultan.com/isaiah-42-describes-prophet-muhammad-al-mustafaa
arabicpaper.tripod.com/prophecy.html
www.tafseer-raheemi.com


Posted By: TG12345
Date Posted: 02 April 2013 at 7:50pm
Originally posted by 786SalamKhan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fyy4q8z4us&list=WLFHdUBKWxT2GrSQs5SIbA2wS6QDa3W4VJ


Salaam Alaikum, 786Salaam Khan.

My deepest apologies for taking so long, it's been (and still is) quite busy. I have watched the debate a few days ago, it was good, thank you for showing it to me. When I have time I will watch the other discussions also.

Take care, I hope all is well with you.

TG12345



Print Page | Close Window