Jesus in the Qur'an and the Bible

[YmirGF]

In that case I could be visited by God and write down what he says and you could not refute it because it doesn't matter when it is written as long as it is from God. There is no reason why God couldn't do this and in fact there is no way you could prove that he didn't do this. After all, contradiction of earlier writings are allowed because God did that when he dictated the Quran and made the Bible and Torah obsolete. So there is no reason why he will not come to me 1400 years after the Quran and say that it was not right and that it was filtered incorrectly and then proceed to give me the correct version. After all, God can do that if he wants to.

Hence the famous so-called "challenge" in the Qur'an which Muslims believe is proof of its authenticity.

 

[challupa]

Hence the famous so-called "challenge" in the Qur'an which Muslims believe is proof of its authenticity.

Exactly, but the "proof" they use can also be used by anyone who comes along and says that God talks to him/her and told them to write things down because times have changed and well, we need an update, just like in the time of Muhammed.

 

[ayani]

Exactly, but the "proof" they use can also be used by anyone who comes along and says that God talks to him/her and told them to write things down because times have changed and well, we need an update, just like in the time of Muhammed.

and this is exactly what, in essence, the Baha'i Faith claims. that the Baha'i scriptures were revealed for this age by this age's current prophet, Baha'u'llah. to build on and reveal further what was revealed in and through the Quran, and Islam, and through previous prophets and scriptures.

now, Muslims do not see Baha'u'llah as a successor to Mohammad's prophethood. they would argue that Mohmmad is the last prophet, and that no one is coming after him. so this difficulty of "is my prophet also your prophet?" is shared in a number of faiths.

 

[challupa]

and this is exactly what, in essence, the Baha'i Faith claims. that the Baha'i scriptures were revealed for this age by this age's current prophet, Baha'u'llah. to build on and reveal further what was revealed in and through the Quran, and Islam, and through previous prophets and scriptures.

now, Muslims do not see Baha'u'llah as a successor to Mohammad's prophethood. they would argue that Mohmmad is the last prophet, and that no one is coming after him. so this difficulty of "is my prophet also your prophet?" is shared in a number of faiths.

Yes that is the most unfortunate aspect to religion. Everyone has to be the one that is "right" or everything they believe is compromised. I believe there are many ways to the same "truth" I guess. I see most of the religions as being very unloving which is what I have always thought spirituality was about!??

 

[Fatihah]

I agree; if it came from God, then it is reliable - but unfortunately, most don't believe it is; and you don't have any actual evidence that it was. All you have is the Qur'an to prove the Qur'an, and vague passages in the Qur'an that are used to show "scientific miracles". That's all very nice and good for you as a Muslim, but for non-Muslims, it's not very convincing.

Response: It's not convincing to you because you chose not to accept it. But that does not make it unconvincing because you say so. There are over 1 billion muslims in the world. Many were non-muslims at one point. So it is obviously convincing. You just choose not to accept it.

Quote: Odion
And what if it wasn't? If it was from God, then that would be great. Unfortunately it's not so convincing. It's up to you to prove it is, just repeating "it came from Allah" does not make it so. Until you can prove it is, this is a baseless statement. As I said, you have to judge it from a non-religious point of view. For someone who doesn't believe the Qur'an from God, how is its conception of Jesus more reliable than the Bible?

Response: That is right. We do need evidence to prove it is true. My point though is before the evidence is presented, we first have to dismiss the claim that the qur'an is less reliable because it came centuries later as you say. The time of it's arrival has nothing to do with it's reliability. Once you are able to let go of that, then you will be better able to view the evidence.

There are many ways to approach this as for the proof of the authenticity of the qur'an. I've dealt with it many times. My whole argument can probably be summed up in post 181 of page 19 and post 288 of page 29 in the "Propaganda: Why it is necessary for islam" thread.

However. Since the topic is about Jesus in the qur'an and the bible, it is worth noting that even from the bible and from the mouth of Jesus himself in the bible, we have evidence on the authenticity of the qur'an.

 

[Fatihah]

In that case I could be visited by God and write down what he says and you could not refute it because it doesn't matter when it is written as long as it is from God. There is no reason why God couldn't do this and in fact there is no way you could prove that he didn't do this.

Response: The fact that you couldn't prove that God did visit you and you wrote down what he says is evidence enough that it didn't happen.

Quote: challupa
After all, contradiction of earlier writings are allowed because God did that when he dictated the Quran and made the Bible and Torah obsolete. So there is no reason why he will not come to me 1400 years after the Quran and say that it was not right and that it was filtered incorrectly and then proceed to give me the correct version. After all, God can do that if he wants to.

Response: True. God can come along and deliver you a message and say that the qur'an is wrong. However, that did not and will not happen. But if you have proof on the contrary, then I will throw away my kufi and follow you.

 

[Breathe]

Response: It's not convincing to you because you chose not to accept it. But that does not make it unconvincing because you say so. There are over 1 billion muslims in the world. Many were non-muslims at one point. So it is obviously convincing. You just choose not to accept it.

Argumentum ad populum? Just because it's convincing to 1 billion Muslims does not imply it's true. The Bible is convincing to 2.3 billion Christians. Does that make the Bible more true than the Qur'an? There were many non-Christians at one point. There are 5 billion non-Muslims, so the Qur'an must be false? It doesn't work like that, so sorry.

It's not that I choose not to accept it, thank you for not generalizing me, it's that it isn't convincing - one author appearing out of the blue in another nation hundreds of years later and saying "This isn't what Jesus taught, what I say Jesus said is true!" "How do you know?" "God told me!" - can you see how that is unreliable as evidence from a non-Muslim point of view when it goes against the testimonies of the direct ancestors (I'm not someone who believes the apostles wrote the Bible ) of those who were around in Jesus' time would have less reliability?

Response: That is right. We do need evidence to prove it is true. My point though is before the evidence is presented, we first have to dismiss the claim that the qur'an is less reliable because it came centuries later as you say. The time of it's arrival has nothing to do with it's reliability. Once you are able to let go of that, then you will be better able to view the evidence.

In other words: "I can't argue if it's not reliable, because I have no evidence except itself"? Even without time

However. Since the topic is about Jesus in the qur'an and the bible, it is worth noting that even from the bible and from the mouth of Jesus himself in the bible, we have evidence on the authenticity of the qur'an.

Go on then, I'm intriegued; how are Jesus' words in the Bible evidence of the Qur'an?

 

[challupa]

In that case I could be visited by God and write down what he says and you could not refute it because it doesn't matter when it is written as long as it is from God. There is no reason why God couldn't do this and in fact there is no way you could prove that he didn't do this.

Response: The fact that you couldn't prove that God did visit you and you wrote down what he says is evidence enough that it didn't happen.

Quote: challupa
After all, contradiction of earlier writings are allowed because God did that when he dictated the Quran and made the Bible and Torah obsolete. So there is no reason why he will not come to me 1400 years after the Quran and say that it was not right and that it was filtered incorrectly and then proceed to give me the correct version. After all, God can do that if he wants to.

Response: True. God can come along and deliver you a message and say that the qur'an is wrong. However, that did not and will not happen. But if you have proof on the contrary, then I will throw away my kufi and follow you.

Well that's just the thing, if I do you would not believe that I have. You have put all your "faith" in what you believe and nothing will persuade you that a new update has been received. The Bahai faith is an example of this inability to accept new teachings. I would say that Muhammed couldn't prove that what he got was from God and not just ramblings of his mind. No one, not any religion can claim to know for sure and be honest in doing so.

 

[YmirGF]

Well that's just the thing, if I do you would not believe that I have. You have put all your "faith" in what you believe and nothing will persuade you that a new update has been received. The Bahai faith is an example of this inability to accept new teachings. I would say that Muhammed couldn't prove that what he got was from God and not just ramblings of his mind. No one, not any religion can claim to know for sure and be honest in doing so.

In my mind, this is where the fallacy of the "challenge" comes in. It is to be expected that virtually ANYTHING you wrote would be rejected as being proof UNLESS it directly supported the Qur'an. The trouble with that is that if you are directly supporting the Qur'an then you have already shot your theological toes off. It's a small minded catch-22, really.

 

[challupa]

In my mind, this is where the fallacy of the "challenge" comes in. It is to be expected that virtually ANYTHING you wrote would be rejected as being proof UNLESS it directly supported the Qur'an. The trouble with that is that if you are directly supporting the Qur'an then you have already shot your theological toes off. It's a small minded catch-22, really.

Exactly. When I read the Quran and the Bible and other books, I see many things I know are wrong. Where does this "knowing" come from. But if I said to anyone that I have access to knowledge that is from God because I was chosen to be the next prophet, I would not be taken seriously and probably labelled mentally unstable. Yet people take the words of men of old to be the infallible truth when they say God spoke through them or that they were the son of God. Why don't we see them as mentally unstable if anyone who says what they said now is considered mentally unstable and not credible?

 

[Fatihah]

[QUOTE:Odion]Argumentum ad populum? Just because it's convincing to 1 billion Muslims does not imply it's true. The Bible is convincing to 2.3 billion Christians. Does that make the Bible more true than the Qur'an? There were many non-Christians at one point. There are 5 billion non-Muslims, so the Qur'an must be false? It doesn't work like that, so sorry.

Response: You're right. It doesn't. However, no one said it did. It was said only to point out that the scientific miracles are proof because people do in fact embrace islam because of it and were non-muslims just like you.

Quote: Odion
It's not that I choose not to accept it, thank you for not generalizing me, it's that it isn't convincing - one author appearing out of the blue in another nation hundreds of years later and saying "This isn't what Jesus taught, what I say Jesus said is true!" "How do you know?" "God told me!" - can you see how that is unreliable as evidence from a non-Muslim point of view when it goes against the testimonies of the direct ancestors (I'm not someone who believes the apostles wrote the Bible ) of those who were around in Jesus' time would have less reliability?

Response: To say it's true and the only argument is because God said so without proof is unreliable. I agree. If muslims have said this to you than that is unfortunate. However I've never done such things and have provided the scientific miracles as well as direct challenges to prove it's authenticity. Verses 4:82 and 2:23 are direct challenges for the non-muslim to find any discrepancy in the qur'an and to produce a chapter like it. Neither has ever been the case, thus proving the qur'an's authenticity.

Quote: Odion

Go on then, I'm intriegued; how are Jesus' words in the Bible evidence of the Qur'an?

Response: There are many. From the book of Isaiah 29:12 we read, "And the Book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, 'Read this, I pray thee': And he saith, 'I am not learned".

Here we read that "the book" will be delivered to someone and when asked to read he will say "I am not learned". Now if you were to go ask any muslim how the revelation of the qur'an was revealed, even ayani herself should be able to tell you, that while Muhammad (pbuh) was meditating in the cave of Mt Hiraa, the angel Gabriel came to him suddenly and said "Read"! And Muhammad, who was illiterate said, "I am not learned". Practically word for word, this incident is the fulfillment of the prophecy written in the previous scriptures as seen in Isaiah 29:12. Subhan Allah. These are not Jesus's words himself but I will provide them. This is just perhaps my favorite prophecy in the bible and goes to show that they are throughout the bible and not just from Jesus.

 

[Fatihah]

[QUOTE:challupa]

Well that's just the thing, if I do you would not believe that I have. You have put all your "faith" in what you believe and nothing will persuade you that a new update has been received. The Bahai faith is an example of this inability to accept new teachings. I would say that Muhammed couldn't prove that what he got was from God and not just ramblings of his mind. No one, not any religion can claim to know for sure and be honest in doing so.

Response: On the contrary, I would. If the Bahai have proof, let them provide evidence so we can know. If you know of this evidence, then kindly present it to us.

 

[YmirGF]

You're right. It doesn't. However, no one said it did. It was said only to point out that the scientific miracles are proof because people do in fact embrace islam because of it and were non-muslims just like you.

You couldn't provide proof of this assertion could you Fatihah?

However I've never done such things and have provided the scientific miracles as well as direct challenges to prove it's authenticity.

And your so-called "scientific miracles" were proven to be rubbish and yet you proudly champion on as if nothing had happened to your arguments. How fascinating is that?

Verses 4:82 and 2:23 are direct challenges for the non-muslim to find any discrepancy in the qur'an and to produce a chapter like it. Neither has ever been the case, thus proving the qur'an's authenticity.

It proves nothing of the sort, Fatihah. As with the "scientific miracles" drivel you submitted, the so-called "challenge" was also put into a realistic perspective by showing it to be a completely unrealistic challenge. Again, I ask you, Fatihah, "Who judges if the challenge has been met? Therein lays the fallacy of the challenge. Seriously, one would expect god to do just a little better than that, but considering Muhammad wrote it, his faux pas isn’t much of a surprise.

There are many. From the book of Isaiah 29:12 we read, "And the Book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, 'Read this, I pray thee': And he saith, 'I am not learned".

Here we read that "the book" will be delivered to someone and when asked to read he will say "I am not learned". Now if you were to go ask any muslim how the revelation of the qur'an was revealed, even ayani herself should be able to tell you, that while Muhammad (pbuh) was meditating in the cave of Mt Hiraa, the angel Gabriel came to him suddenly and said "Read"! And Muhammad, who was illiterate said, "I am not learned". Practically word for word, this incident is the fulfillment of the prophecy written in the previous scriptures as seen in Isaiah 29:12. Subhan Allah. These are not Jesus's words himself but I will provide them. This is just perhaps my favorite prophecy in the bible and goes to show that they are throughout the bible and not just from Jesus.

Doesn’t it strike Muslims as being ironic that a text they endlessly proclaim as being corrupted is used to verify the status of their illustrious leader? Surely reasoning can’t get much sadder than that.

Can you, Fatihah, give us one REPUTABLE Christian scholar who supports the musings of Muslims that Muhammad is spoken of in the texts of the Bible? Take your time on that one small point.

 

[Fatihah]

You couldn't provide proof of this assertion could you Fatihah?

And your so-called "scientific miracles" were proven to be rubbish and yet you proudly champion on as if nothing had happened to your arguments. How fascinating is that?

It proves nothing of the sort, Fatihah. As with the "scientific miracles" drivel you submitted, the so-called "challenge" was also put into a realistic perspective by showing it to be a completely unrealistic challenge. Again, I ask you, Fatihah, "Who judges if the challenge has been met? Therein lays the fallacy of the challenge. Seriously, one would expect god to do just a little better than that, but considering Muhammad wrote it, his faux pas isn’t much of a surprise.

Doesn’t it strike Muslims as being ironic that a text they endlessly proclaim as being corrupted is used to verify the status of their illustrious leader? Surely reasoning can’t get much sadder than that.

Can you, Fatihah, give us one REPUTABLE Christian scholar who supports the musings of Muslims that Muhammad is spoken of in the texts of the Bible? Take your time on that one small point.

Response: Refer to post 180

 

[YmirGF]

Response: Refer to post 180

:thud:

 

[Breathe]

Response: You're right. It doesn't. However, no one said it did. It was said only to point out that the scientific miracles are proof because people do in fact embrace islam because of it and were non-muslims just like you.

I've checked out these before, but I've never been really amazed by them. As I mentioned, they're often vague statements. If they were real scientific miracles, one would have expected these to have been discovered by Muslims at least a thousand years ago? It seems more as though the truth is these phrases are so vague, so ambiguous, that they can mean virtually anything you would like them to. To me, it's pretty much similar to Bible code, trying to make something awesome out of something, and you get something like "George Bush, Pretzel, Choke" on a page of the Bible or something.

Response: To say it's true and the only argument is because God said so without proof is unreliable. I agree. If muslims have said this to you than that is unfortunate. However I've never done such things and have provided the scientific miracles as well as direct challenges to prove it's authenticity. Verses 4:82 and 2:23 are direct challenges for the non-muslim to find any discrepancy in the qur'an and to produce a chapter like it. Neither has ever been the case, thus proving the qur'an's authenticity.

It is unfortunate that people have said it, but life goes on.

Have you ever seen this website? suralikeit.com - this website is from people who have taken the "Produce a chapter like it" - but, the most important question is: who is going to judge, and what are the criteria for something to be judged on?

If an Orthodox Muslim, or even in a lot of cases, a liberal Muslim, looks at these, they are immediately going to say "They are terrible! Awful! They are so bad it's unreal!".

Response: There are many. From the book of Isaiah 29:12 we read, "And the Book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, 'Read this, I pray thee': And he saith, 'I am not learned".

Here we read that "the book" will be delivered to someone and when asked to read he will say "I am not learned". Now if you were to go ask any muslim how the revelation of the qur'an was revealed, even ayani herself should be able to tell you, that while Muhammad (pbuh) was meditating in the cave of Mt Hiraa, the angel Gabriel came to him suddenly and said "Read"! And Muhammad, who was illiterate said, "I am not learned". Practically word for word, this incident is the fulfillment of the prophecy written in the previous scriptures as seen in Isaiah 29:12. Subhan Allah. These are not Jesus's words himself but I will provide them. This is just perhaps my favorite prophecy in the bible and goes to show that they are throughout the bible and not just from Jesus.

It seems a little hypocritical for Muslims to use the Bible, which they claim is corrupt by man, as a means of proving that the Qur'an is from God; if this passage was truly about Muhammad, then there would be no doubt; however, the passage doesn't quite say that; it has to be read in more context - it's about the Messiah, not an illiterate man.

I have been told that the angel could have been saying "Recite!" as opposed to 'Read!'. This has been said by quite a few Muslim scholars; what do you make of this?

By the way...I think I've forgot to mention something.. let me know if I have.

 

[Fatihah]

[QUOTE:Odion]I've checked out these before, but I've never been really amazed by them. As I mentioned, they're often vague statements. If they were real scientific miracles, one would have expected these to have been discovered by Muslims at least a thousand years ago? It seems more as though the truth is these phrases are so vague, so ambiguous, that they can mean virtually anything you would like them to. To me, it's pretty much similar to Bible code, trying to make something awesome out of something, and you get something like "George Bush, Pretzel, Choke" on a page of the Bible or something.

Response: But that's the whole issue. Many non-muslims don't understand what a "sign" is or expect things to be completely mapped out in perfect detail for them and when it isn't, they feel they have the right to reject them. It's like me saying to a cop that I shouldn't be locked up for constantly running red lights because it didn't say stop. The red light is a sign which says to stop. Surely no law official will let me off the hook.

The signs in the qur'an are not supposed to be very descriptive or detailed. It defeats the purpose of life. We are given insights which are clear and we are given signs to test are soul. It is for you and I to humble ourselves and pay attention to those signs. Just because something is presented to you ambiguously doesn't mean that you shouldn't find out it's meaning. Allah makes some of his signs seem ambiguous just to see what you will do. But once you humble yourself and search for it's meaning, the ambiguity goes away and becomes clear and then you'll realize that it was only made to appear ambiguous. Trust me, I was like you myself and couldn't understand many things. But I didn't jump to conclusions. I continued to ask questions and gather understanding and now nothing is ambiguous to me anymore.

Quote: Odion
Have you ever seen this website? suralikeit.com - this website is from people who have taken the "Produce a chapter like it" - but, the most important question is: who is going to judge, and what are the criteria for something to be judged on?

Response: I guess I will have to produce my same argument over again from previous threads but I would like to make a suggestion of dealing with one at a time. We can start with the qur'an and then the bible or vice versa. I say this because I know what's going to happen. Everytime I present this evidence, it becomes the main theme of the thread and we suddenly get off of topic. However, here it is:

The challenge is to produce a chapter "like" the qur'an. Therefore, it does not mean to simply write something in arabic and think you've accomplished something. What is the qur'an? Well what is any religous scripture? It is supposed to be inspiration from God. It's purpose is to inspire people to follow its teachings. So to produce a chapter like the qur'an means to produce a chapter as inspirational and as successful as the qur'an.

So what's the purpose of that? Well by doing so, you learn the miracle of the qur'an. And what is that miracle? The miracle is the following:
It is impossible for a person/s to create their own religion and use their made up religion to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation.

This is the miracle of the qur'an. This is the miracle of Muhammad. This is a challenge for those who claim that the religion of islam is man made. Muhammad used a religion to inspired enough followers to conquer a nation. So to those who claim that this was the act of a man made religion, then why don't you do the same? Why don't you create your own religion and see how far you get? And when you do, you will fail. Not only will you will fail, you will fail miserably. Muhammad conquered Arabia. I guarantee you, you won't even be able to conquer your own neighborhood. And once you fail, you will be forced to ask yourself the question "why was it possible for Muhammad but impossible for me and anyone else?" That is when you will come to realize that it was the help of Allah that made it possible for Muhammad. Without Allah, even Muhammad would have failed. You disagree, the 1400+ year challenge still stands.

Quote: Odion
It seems a little hypocritical for Muslims to use the Bible, which they claim is corrupt by man, as a means of proving that the Qur'an is from God; if this passage was truly about Muhammad, then there would be no doubt; however, the passage doesn't quite say that; it has to be read in more context - it's about the Messiah, not an illiterate man.

Response: The passage does speak of a messiah and specifically says that the person will respond with "I am not learned" when presented the book and asked to read. You see, and this is what I talk about. The prophecy fits Muhammad (pbuh) like a glove and yet people still deny. So what comes next? The usual: "It's out of context", "his name is not mentioned","I thought the bible was corrupted?",etc. So once again, another clear sign is not acknowledged.

Yes the bible has been corrupted but no one says that it has been completely tampered. There are passages in the bible that we muslims consider may be true but when a book is tampered, it's hard to credit something as reliable. However, we can use what is reliable which is the qur'an and sunnah to confirm the reliability in previous scriptures.

Quote: Odion
I have been told that the angel could have been saying "Recite!" as opposed to 'Read!'. This has been said by quite a few Muslim scholars; what do you make of this?

Response: The angel said "Iqraa" which means to "read", "recite", "rehearse" and "repeat". The prophet thought that the angel meant for him to read which is why he said, "I am not learned". But after the third time, the prophet finally realized that the angel means for him to repeat after him and not read.

 

[Breathe]

Response: But that's the whole issue. Many non-muslims don't understand what a "sign" is or expect things to be completely mapped out in perfect detail for them and when it isn't, they feel they have the right to reject them. It's like me saying to a cop that I shouldn't be locked up for constantly running red lights because it didn't say stop. The red light is a sign which says to stop. Surely no law official will let me off the hook.

Well, I wouldn't say perfect detail, but a bit of detail wouldn't hurt.

The signs in the qur'an are not supposed to be very descriptive or detailed. It defeats the purpose of life. We are given insights which are clear and we are given signs to test are soul. It is for you and I to humble ourselves and pay attention to those signs. Just because something is presented to you ambiguously doesn't mean that you shouldn't find out it's meaning.

If this passage was detailed it would be a lot easier for people though, because although there would be no compulsion in religion, there would be no doubt in anyone's mind except those with the hardest of hearts, correct?

Allah makes some of his signs seem ambiguous just to see what you will do. But once you humble yourself and search for it's meaning, the ambiguity goes away and becomes clear and then you'll realize that it was only made to appear ambiguous. Trust me, I was like you myself and couldn't understand many things. But I didn't jump to conclusions. I continued to ask questions and gather understanding and now nothing is ambiguous to me anymore.

The whole reason I give religions a grilling is to see how truthful they are. Would you say I jump to conclusions?

Response: I guess I will have to produce my same argument over again from previous threads but I would like to make a suggestion of dealing with one at a time. We can start with the qur'an and then the bible or vice versa. I say this because I know what's going to happen. Everytime I present this evidence, it becomes the main theme of the thread and we suddenly get off of topic. However, here it is:

The challenge is to produce a chapter "like" the qur'an. Therefore, it does not mean to simply write something in arabic and think you've accomplished something. What is the qur'an? Well what is any religous scripture? It is supposed to be inspiration from God. It's purpose is to inspire people to follow its teachings. So to produce a chapter like the qur'an means to produce a chapter as inspirational and as successful as the qur'an.

Then what about the Babi and Baha'i texts? These are both supposed to be divinely inspired? What about the Guru Granth Sahib? The Guru Granth Sahib is one of the most amazing religious texts I've ever read.

So what's the purpose of that? Well by doing so, you learn the miracle of the qur'an. And what is that miracle? The miracle is the following:
It is impossible for a person/s to create their own religion and use their made up religion to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation.

This is the miracle of the qur'an. This is the miracle of Muhammad. This is a challenge for those who claim that the religion of islam is man made. Muhammad used a religion to inspired enough followers to conquer a nation. So to those who claim that this was the act of a man made religion, then why don't you do the same? Why don't you create your own religion and see how far you get? And when you do, you will fail. Not only will you will fail, you will fail miserably. Muhammad conquered Arabia. I guarantee you, you won't even be able to conquer your own neighborhood. And once you fail, you will be forced to ask yourself the question "why was it possible for Muhammad but impossible for me and anyone else?" That is when you will come to realize that it was the help of Allah that made it possible for Muhammad. Without Allah, even Muhammad would have failed. You disagree, the 1400+ year challenge still stands.

Not everyone who would create a religion would like to conquer an area. But, supposing so..

1. Mormonism "took over" Utah,
2. Sikhism the Punjab region,
3. the Babi faith was very successful and fought back against Islam (until Baha'u'llah decreed no a lack of aggression),
4. Protestantism conquered and took hold in many countries where Catholicism was once powerful,
5. the Church of England managed to fight against Catholicism in its nation and become an Anglican nation as opposed to a Catholic one,
6. the Early church managed to take control of the Holy Roman Empire without attacking or usurping the throne (pretty much, not quite true entirely).

Does this mean God was protecting all of them or that they are all from the same God in your eyes?

But, people can create a religion, most definitely. In years gone by, I suppose it would have been easier to convert people. We live in a much more secular society and where atheism is rampant. Isn't there a reason why so many Jews and Christians at the time of Muhammad didn't convert?

Response: The passage does speak of a messiah and specifically says that the person will respond with "I am not learned" when presented the book and asked to read. You see, and this is what I talk about. The prophecy fits Muhammad (pbuh) like a glove and yet people still deny. So what comes next? The usual: "It's out of context", "his name is not mentioned","I thought the bible was corrupted?",etc. So once again, another clear sign is not acknowledged.

Because ... it's not. It quite clearly states that in those days, that people will be unable to understand, like a sealed scroll.

Yes the bible has been corrupted but no one says that it has been completely tampered. There are passages in the bible that we muslims consider may be true but when a book is tampered, it's hard to credit something as reliable. However, we can use what is reliable which is the qur'an and sunnah to confirm the reliability in previous scriptures.

Isn't that considered cherry-picking though?

Response: The angel said "Iqraa" which means to "read", "recite", "rehearse" and "repeat". The prophet thought that the angel meant for him to read which is why he said, "I am not learned". But after the third time, the prophet finally realized that the angel means for him to repeat after him and not read.

Ahh, I see, Ididn't know it meant all those. Once again, another thing that's difficult for those poor Qur'an translators.

 

[Fatihah]

[QUOTE:Odion]Well, I wouldn't say perfect detail, but a bit of detail wouldn't hurt.

If this passage was detailed it would be a lot easier for people though, because although there would be no compulsion in religion, there would be no doubt in anyone's mind except those with the hardest of hearts, correct?

Response: Yes. There would be no doubt. But again, that defeats the purpose of life. Life was not meant to be a cake walk. You are going to be challenged and tested and Allah will judge you according to how you respond. I don't know if you know this, but the qur'an itself says that it makes ambiguous verses on purpose just for this matter. In chapter 3:7 we read:
"He it is Who sent down to thee the Book; in it there are verses that are decisive in meaning-they are the basis of the Book- and there are others that are susceptible of different interpretations. But those in whose hearts is perversity pursue such thereof as are susceptible of different interpretations, seeking discord and seeking (wrong) interpretation of it. And none knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge; they say, 'We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord'. And none take heed except those gifted in understanding".

Quote: Odion
The whole reason I give religions a grilling is to see how truthful they are. Would you say I jump to conclusions?

Response: Not at all. In fact, I insist you grill and grill and grill. How else does one come to know the truth. Look at the conversation between myself and ayani earlier in the thread. My consistant line of questioning was to understand the logic behind why a person accepts the bible as truth and not the qur'an. Never once was I ever in an attack mode or telling her how she is wrong. I sincerely wanted to understand. However, I sincerely hope that you are doing so to know the truth and not just to catch a person off guard. If you are honestly being open minded and constantly asking questions at the same time, then there's nothing wrong with that. I insist you do so with me and anyone else you speak with. But like I said, with a sincere an opened mind.

Quote: Odion
Then what about the Babi and Baha'i texts? These are both supposed to be divinely inspired? What about the Guru Granth Sahib? The Guru Granth Sahib is one of the most amazing religious texts I've ever read.

Not everyone who would create a religion would like to conquer an area. But, supposing so..

1. Mormonism "took over" Utah,
2. Sikhism the Punjab region,
3. the Babi faith was very successful and fought back against Islam (until Baha'u'llah decreed no a lack of aggression),
4. Protestantism conquered and took hold in many countries where Catholicism was once powerful,
5. the Church of England managed to fight against Catholicism in its nation and become an Anglican nation as opposed to a Catholic one,
6. the Early church managed to take control of the Holy Roman Empire without attacking or usurping the throne (pretty much, not quite true entirely).

Does this mean God was protecting all of them or that they are all from the same God in your eyes?

Response: You seem to have misunderstood. Notice the way I phrased the challenge. Sure it's possible for nations to conquer other nations that are not islamic. That is not the challenge. I specifically said that the "person who created the man-made religion" could not inspire people to follow him or her and use these inspired followers to conquer a nation. That's the difference and in none of your examples above did this take place.

Quote: Odion
But, people can create a religion, most definitely. In years gone by, I suppose it would have been easier to convert people. We live in a much more secular society and where atheism is rampant. Isn't there a reason why so many Jews and Christians at the time of Muhammad didn't convert?

Response: Yes. It's the same reason as today. They do not wish to do so. They like there lifestyle and religion and don't want to change it.

Quote: Odion
Because ... it's not. It quite clearly states that in those days, that people will be unable to understand, like a sealed scroll.

Response: And it also clearly says that the Book will be delivered to him that is not learned saying "read" and he will say "I am not learned", which is what happened between Muhammad (pbuh) and Gabriel.

 

[love]

Trust me, I was like you myself and couldn't understand many things. But I didn't jump to conclusions. I continued to ask questions and gather understanding and now nothing is ambiguous to me anymore.

Fatihah, These words could have come out of my own mouth.
I was in my early twenties headed down a dead end road and didn't even know it. I hadn't been to church since I was a small child.
Scripture started coming to me that I hadn't thought of in years. "Seek and you shall find, knock and the doors shall be opened for you."
I started seeking. I started reading the Bible and praying. I felt God calling me.
I felt compelled to find my dad who I had not seen or heard from since I was twelve years old. With practically no money but a pocket over-flowing with faith I set off on my journey. I knew he would be somewhere in Chattanooga, Tenn.. I don't remember all the circumstances I went through to find him but I did.
He lived in a small one bedroom apartment on Duncan Avenue. He was almost completely blind and had as little money as I had but he made room for me.
Two blocks from his apartment was Tennesee Temple University. There were hundreds and hundreds of Christian students my age who lived all around me. I knew God had brought me there.
I was Baptized in the Holy Spirit on Feb. 14, 1974. In the twinkling of an eye my life was changed forever.