What's the reason?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
For Muslims: Is Muhammad the last Prophet from God?
- Thread starter Truthseeker
- Start date
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
..so that would be a 'no' then. It is not possible to know through scientific methodology.
..and that is because science does not measure the existence of non-physical concept.
That does not mean that non-physical concept does not exist .. it does.
Hiding behind the non-existence of physical evidence is a personal choice, and equating
goblins with G-d is nothing more than a childish ploy.
Well first let me be clear; my strongly negative feelings about theocracy are not limited to Islam, I think almost every form of theocracy I can imagine are bad.
The reason is that I believe all religions are man made, and most of them are quite old. So theocracy boils down to using old ideas to run societies, and I think we've learned a lot about morality and ethics since these religions were created. Theocracy ties us to our immature, ignorant, barbaric pasts
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
My original comment was:
Just because I am a Baha'i that does not mean I like religion. I do not like religion because it is so divisive but that's not the only reason.
I am not obligated to provide facts because I am not making an argument or trying to prove anything. I said religion is divisive because it divides people by virtue of there being so many SEPARATE religions, and some of those religions such as Christianity teach that they are the only true religion.
Thus the us vs. them mentality which sickens me to death.
I have a right to feel the way I feel about religion, not liking it, just as you have a right to like religion.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
Always looking for blame .. the blame is with human beings, regardless of religion.Theocracy ties us to our immature, ignorant, barbaric pasts
They love power and wealth .. it's that simple.
SalamWell first let me be clear; my strongly negative feelings about theocracy are not limited to Islam, I think almost every form of theocracy I can imagine are bad.
The reason is that I believe all religions are man made, and most of them are quite old. So theocracy boils down to using old ideas to run societies, and I think we've learned a lot about morality and ethics since these religions were created. Theocracy ties us to our immature, ignorant, barbaric pasts
I think your reasoning is circular. You are saying you think theocracy is false because religion is false, but saying you Islam is problematic/false because it endorses theocracy.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
'God' is ambiguous.
Yusuf Ali: Your Guardian-Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and is firmly established on the throne (of authority): He draweth the night as a veil o'er the day, each seeking the other in rapid succession: He created the sun, the moon, and the stars, (all) governed by laws under His command. Is it not His to create and to govern? Blessed be Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds!
Quran 7:54
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
The language of humanism originated with the Roman statesman Cicero, and was associated with the security relationship between the citizen and the state.
InvestigateTruth
Veteran Member
God had placed His seal on Jesus.
So, if seal denotes Finality, jesus was the Last one:
"Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him."
John 6:27
And the Christians would have been the last Religion:
21"And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, 22and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee."
I think the Muslims just like to feel the latest and greatest. That's why they says, Seal means last.
@Link , @firedragon
What's your take on these verses of the Bible?
Let me try to say this a different way:
I think theocracy is a horrible idea, and therefore I think that any religion that advocates for theocracy is also bad.
It's important to remember that not all religions advocate for theocracy.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
The idea of finality in relation to prophets is expressed in the book of Zechariah, but only in relation to the land of Jerusalem.
And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive:
But he shall say, I [am] no prophet, I [am] an husbandman; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.
And [one] shall say unto him, What [are] these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, [Those] with which I was wounded [in] the house of my friends.
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man [that is] my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.
And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, [that] I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.
Zechariah 13:1-7
The context for this is the crucifixion:
And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive:
But he shall say, I [am] no prophet, I [am] an husbandman; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.
And [one] shall say unto him, What [are] these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, [Those] with which I was wounded [in] the house of my friends.
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man [that is] my fellow, saith YHWH of armies: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
Zechariah 13:4-7
Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.
Matthew 26:31
The differences between the prophetic account of the crucifixion and the Christian account lead to a proof of power that relates to healing and to the exodus from Egypt. The "man" of verse 7 is a warrior/sicarri, and Iscariot is a garbled for of sicarri.
Last edited:
firedragon
Veteran Member
Of course. When you are spreading falsehood towards religions you not don't have to, you can't because since the intent is such, most don't have facts.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
I think the first is in context of Risqallah and everlasting life, so it's more on the line the that Jesus (a) has reached the journey to God and drinks from that and there is nothing more to gain. The Quran talks about the seal/finality of believers in this regard in the next world, and says this is what the competitors should compete upon.
I think the other verse is in context of that as well, and says they've drank from this and reached the fountain of life and eternity with God.
But the meaning of seal is finishing end. Also, recall the lines that to drink of this by the hands of the leader of time, so much so than there is no thirst after this for anything else. Meaning you don't want anything else after this and it's the final completing of the favor of God on a servant.
It's talking about a spiritual experience from God that makes everything in this world nothing. It's saying they've reach the final destination where Risqallah comes intensely. The first God gave directly to Jesus (a) and the latter, was through Jesus (a) to disciples.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
This continues to one of the "I am" claims:
And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
John 6:35
Bread relates to the finality of the prophets via the crucifixon (from my previous post). The thirst of this verse relates to drinking which leads to the bread and wine as symbols of the last supper.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Nope. It says nothing of the sort. Someone made what you said up. Absolutely.
Obviously. Very good observation. You take the cake.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
The fountain is part of the first verse of Zechariah 13, which leads to the prophetic context of the crucifixion.
In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.
Zechariah 13:1
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
If this was the case, Quran would say that Mohammad (s) is the seal of Mutaqeen. As that would take on the form that's absurd that he be the last God-fearing person (since his purpose is to make people gain taqwa), then it would take metaphorical form.
Recall, that metaphors only take place when literal is not plausible. There is nothing to show the literal finality of Prophets (a) as in no more, is implausible.
In fact, the universality of Mohammad's (s) warner position and being sent to all the worlds/nations and to all people all together, all show, no one can abrogate the authority given to Mohammad (s) and his family (a).
It's true God can take that authority and give it to who he pleases, as he done that consistently in the past, but as the world comes to an end, he can also inform us that there is a last Ahlulbayt sent to rest of mankind and jinn.
The Quran shows the world comes to an end it says it's created for ajalan musaman, which means a limited period.
There is nothing absurd with the world coming to an end, and so there is nothing absurd about ending Nubuwa. What is absurd though is that that he puts an end to Imams and Messengers which Quran shows there is need, the latter can suspend in time, but would be needed for the final trials on mankind, while the former there always exist a guide in all time.
The Quran shows there is constantly a mursal, it's been the case always in the past, present and will be in the future, in Surah Dukhan. God never stops sending a person in anytime. The term even if Mursaleen, we would have to assume metaphoric prose because of the contradiction. However, with the word Nabi (plural form), it means it's that which comes to an end through Mohammad (s).
Last edited: