Mohammad's Message vs Jesus' Message

[Muffled]

Mohammad’s story is very charismatic in that it describes an illiterate man who ultimately conquers and converts the entire Middle East and northern Africa to his religious beliefs. Mohammad’s doctrine is similar to Moses’ in carry out punishments. Mohammad claims Jesus as a prophet but unlike Mohammad Jesus never outlined punishments for sins, in fact it is the opposite Jesus states a sinner cannot punish a sinner, only god can punish sins. This message is exemplified by the story of the woman that was about to be stoned for adultery and Jesus intervened to prevent it.

Muslims argue that Jesus foretells of Mohammad’s coming in the New Testament in the Gospel of John as the “Paraclete”. How can Muslims cite the New Testament foretelling the coming of Mohammad as prophetic and yet reject those very same texts becasue they are in conflict with Islamic teacings?

I believe You managed to miss the essential message of both Mohammed and Jesus.

I believe if Muslims argue in that way that they have no evidence to support their argument. I believe not only that but that Mohammed did not have the Paraclete ie that He was only Islamic.

I believe it is called believing what you want to believe without having any evidence that the belief is true.

 

[Muffled]

The same way Christians can cite the Tanakh as proof of Jesus and yet reject it when it conflicts with Christian teachings.

I just chalk it up as a "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" kind of situation.

On the contrary, I believe Christians bring cogent evidence that the Tanakh predicts the coming of the Messiah in such a way that it can only be Jesus.

 

[Muffled]

Where did Mohammed(saws) conquer whole the middle-east and north Africa i think i have missed that part? Its the later expansions after hes Death. Jesus(p) didn't interfere with the stoning since it was the law he was upholding according to Matthew 5:17 he knew she was innocent read the story with Matthew 5 in your mind.

The Islamic idea is that there are truths in the bible but also errors so someone can cite what he considers as the truth to proof hes case.


O and the title is misleading since muslims belief the message was the same only in different times.

O believe the seeds were sown by Mohammed. He fought his battles so his followers decided that fighting battles was a good thing.

I believe the woman wasn't innocentl she was being accused unjustly. There is a difference. I believe it is like OJ Simpson. There wasn't enough evidence to convict him but that doesn't mean that he wasn't guilty. The woman was caught in the act but the man wasn't accused, therefore an injustice was being done to the woman because she was not receving equal treatment under the law (something guaranteed by our constitution). We had a murderer acquitted because he claimed he wasn't doing anything different than doctors doing abortions which are legal even though they are unconstitutional.

I don't believe there is any evidence that the messages are the same.

 

[allright]

Ah no Mather 5 doesn't even describe the event but it is in John 8:3-11 and she is not innocent! So here the message is not to judge rather than enforce a cruel law.

Jesus did not tell them to not carry out the law, but those who were without sin (faithfully following the law) should throw the first stone.
They were just a bunch of game players trying to use the law to test Jesus.
This is shown because they said she was caught in the very act Wheres the man?
The law says the man and woman should both be put to death

 

[Falvlun]

Ah...you seem to have left out the last sentence: “Go now and leave your life of sin.” She was not innocent. The others could not pass sentence on her because they all had their own sins. This is obivious from the text. I think you should read it carefully without bias...

Sin usually was not punishment for death. To just take someone accused of sin and kill them was against Jewish law. More so, Jesus never would have had the authority to condemn someone anyway. That simply is not how Jewish law worked.

I agree with Leonardo's interpretation here, and not quite understanding how fallingblood's response relates to the woman's innocence or guilt.

The woman's guilt wasn't the focus of the passage; for all intents and purposes, she was guilty. The focus was on the idea that we shouldn't be so swift to pass judgement when we ourselves are also guilty. It's just part and parcel of the whole "remove the plank out of your own eye before you try to get the splinter out of your brother's" mantra.

He in fact states clearly that his followers are supposed to follow the Jewish law to the T. Therefore, Jesus never had to outline anything as he was still Jewish, and the Jewish law still applied.

Where specifically does Jesus say that the Jewish law should be followed to a T? In general, Jesus seemed pretty radical in his non-observance of many Jewish rules and customs.

And while I understand your point, in that Jesus did not create a completely new religion, like Muhammed, I think it is taking it a bit too far to claim that Jesus never outlined anything. He reinterpreted a lot of stuff, and came out with this whole new "love your neighbor as yourself" line, in contrast with the more hardline God that was the norm.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

The message of Mohammed consisted of the words of an alleged angel 600 years after Jesus' life. The Gospels, at the very least, attempt to pass themselves off as a historical record of the life of Jesus. It attempts to rely the testimony of eyewitness of his life death and resurrection. The message of Mohammed consists of the alleged angel simply saying "God did not ave a son" and "Jesus did not die". Also, the letters of Paul contain an early creed of the church that can be dated to around 2 years after the death of Jesus.

1 Corinthians 15:3–4
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

 

[loverOfTruth]

The message of Mohammed consisted of the words of an alleged angel 600 years after Jesus' life. The Gospels, at the very least, attempt to pass themselves off as a historical record of the life of Jesus. It attempts to rely the testimony of eyewitness of his life death and resurrection.

I don't even know how you claim the 'Gospels' as an 'eyewitness account' while nobody really knows for sure who wrote them and where and also since the originals don't exist. So how can you trust an anonymous author to write an accurate account of events that happened centuries before ? That is not 'eye witness' account under any standard.

From : Gospel of Mark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The Gospel According to Mark does not name its author.[2] A 2nd century tradition ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist (also known as John Mark), the companion of Peter,[7] on whose memories it is supposedly based.[1][8][9][10] but the author's use of varied sources tells against the traditional account and according to the majority view the author is unknown.

From: Gospel of Matthew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The Gospel of Matthew does not name its author. The Christian bishop, Papias of Hierapolis, about 100–140 AD, in a passage with several ambiguous phrases, wrote: "Matthew collected the oracles (logia—sayings of or about Jesus) in the Hebrew language (Hebraïdi dialektōi—perhaps alternatively "Hebrew style") and each one interpreted (hērmēneusen—or "translated") them as best he could."[4] On the surface this implies that Matthew was written in Hebrew and translated into Greek, but Matthew's Greek "reveals none of the telltale marks of a translation."
They don't even know for sure which language Matthew was written in.

From: Gospel of Luke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Although the Gospel survives in anonymous form, it is considered that the name was known to the addressee, Theophilus.[38] The author was probably a Gentile Christian.[13] "

"Most modern scholars agree that Luke used the Gospel of Mark as one of his sources.[29] The understanding that Mark was the first of the synoptic gospels and that it served as a source for Matthew and Luke is foundational to modern critical scholarship."

Again the supposed Gospel of Luke is also a copy of a material with unknown source(Mark).

From: Gospel of John - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The gospel identifies its author as "the disciple whom Jesus loved." The text does not actually name this disciple, but by the beginning of the 2nd century a tradition began to form which identified him with John the Apostle, one of the Twelve (Jesus's innermost circle). Today the majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it,[12][13][14][15][16][17] and trace it instead to a "Johannine community" which traced its traditions to John; the gospel itself shows signs of having been composed in three "layers", reaching its final form about 90-100 AD."

And these are your eyewitness accounts ? Now compare that to the real 'eyewitness account' of the scriptures of Islam.
Qur'an - the eyewitnesses (companions of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)) wrote and memorized it as the Qur'an was being revealed over 23 years of Prophet's(pbuh) life and then passed down in the original language generations after generations.
Hadith - eyewitness account of events with unbroken chain of reporters going all the way back to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)
That's what you call verifiable eyewitness account.

The message of Mohammed consists of the alleged angel simply saying "God did not ave a son" and "Jesus did not die". Also, the letters of Paul contain an early creed of the church that can be dated to around 2 years after the death of Jesus.

Now if you question the method of revelation from God to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) via angel Gabriel, the entire story of Jesus's(pbuh) birth in the Bible will come crushing down. Why ?
" 26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”
29 Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30 But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. 31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus" (Luke 1:26-31)
Luke 1:26-38 NIV - The Birth of Jesus Foretold - In the - Bible Gateway

See the above verses ? It is no different than the story of how angel Gabriel came to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and how he was troubled by this unusual experience at first.

You want more stories of Angel Gabriel and prophets in the Bible ? Here it is :
"11 Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right side of the altar of incense. 12 When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and was gripped with fear. 13 But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to call him John." (Luke 1:11-13)
Luke 1 NIV - Introduction - Many have undertaken to - Bible Gateway

Again, you see that's how God sent messages to the Messengers. So in order for you to reject Prophet Muhammad's story of getting revelation via Angel Gabriel, you have to reject all those other stories in the Bible as well.

 

[Ingledsva]

On the contrary, I believe Christians bring cogent evidence that the Tanakh predicts the coming of the Messiah in such a way that it can only be Jesus.

Where doesTanakh have a prohecy of Jesus?

 

[Ingledsva]

The message of Mohammed consisted of the words of an alleged angel 600 years after Jesus' life. The Gospels, at the very least, attempt to pass themselves off as a historical record of the life of Jesus. It attempts to rely the testimony of eyewitness of his life death and resurrection. The message of Mohammed consists of the alleged angel simply saying "God did not ave a son" and "Jesus did not die". Also, the letters of Paul contain an early creed of the church that can be dated to around 2 years after the death of Jesus.

1 Corinthians 15:3–4
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

However if you read the NT in the Greek - no verse has to be read as saying Jesus as an ACTUAL SON of God/or God. He can be a special teacher and sacrifice without being God.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

I don't even know how you claim the 'Gospels' as an 'eyewitness account' while nobody really knows for sure who wrote them and where and also since the originals don't exist. So how can you trust an anonymous author to write an accurate account of events that happened centuries before ? That is not 'eye witness' account under any standard.

From : Gospel of Mark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The Gospel According to Mark does not name its author.[2] A 2nd century tradition ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist (also known as John Mark), the companion of Peter,[7] on whose memories it is supposedly based.[1][8][9][10] but the author's use of varied sources tells against the traditional account and according to the majority view the author is unknown.

From: Gospel of Matthew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The Gospel of Matthew does not name its author. The Christian bishop, Papias of Hierapolis, about 100–140 AD, in a passage with several ambiguous phrases, wrote: "Matthew collected the oracles (logia—sayings of or about Jesus) in the Hebrew language (Hebraïdi dialektōi—perhaps alternatively "Hebrew style") and each one interpreted (hērmēneusen—or "translated") them as best he could."[4] On the surface this implies that Matthew was written in Hebrew and translated into Greek, but Matthew's Greek "reveals none of the telltale marks of a translation."
They don't even know for sure which language Matthew was written in.

From: Gospel of Luke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Although the Gospel survives in anonymous form, it is considered that the name was known to the addressee, Theophilus.[38] The author was probably a Gentile Christian.[13] "

"Most modern scholars agree that Luke used the Gospel of Mark as one of his sources.[29] The understanding that Mark was the first of the synoptic gospels and that it served as a source for Matthew and Luke is foundational to modern critical scholarship."

Again the supposed Gospel of Luke is also a copy of a material with unknown source(Mark).

From: Gospel of John - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The gospel identifies its author as "the disciple whom Jesus loved." The text does not actually name this disciple, but by the beginning of the 2nd century a tradition began to form which identified him with John the Apostle, one of the Twelve (Jesus's innermost circle). Today the majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it,[12][13][14][15][16][17] and trace it instead to a "Johannine community" which traced its traditions to John; the gospel itself shows signs of having been composed in three "layers", reaching its final form about 90-100 AD."

And these are your eyewitness accounts ? Now compare that to the real 'eyewitness account' of the scriptures of Islam.
Qur'an - the eyewitnesses (companions of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)) wrote and memorized it as the Qur'an was being revealed over 23 years of Prophet's(pbuh) life and then passed down in the original language generations after generations.
Hadith - eyewitness account of events with unbroken chain of reporters going all the way back to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)
That's what you call verifiable eyewitness account.



Now if you question the method of revelation from God to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) via angel Gabriel, the entire story of Jesus's(pbuh) birth in the Bible will come crushing down. Why ?
" 26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”
29 Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30 But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. 31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus" (Luke 1:26-31)
Luke 1:26-38 NIV - The Birth of Jesus Foretold - In the - Bible Gateway

See the above verses ? It is no different than the story of how angel Gabriel came to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and how he was troubled by this unusual experience at first.

You want more stories of Angel Gabriel and prophets in the Bible ? Here it is :
"11 Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right side of the altar of incense. 12 When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and was gripped with fear. 13 But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to call him John." (Luke 1:11-13)
Luke 1 NIV - Introduction - Many have undertaken to - Bible Gateway

Again, you see that's how God sent messages to the Messengers. So in order for you to reject Prophet Muhammad's story of getting revelation via Angel Gabriel, you have to reject all those other stories in the Bible as well.

The difference between what Mohammed claims he heard and stories you quoted here is that in the instances of Gabriel speaking in the Bible, action is accompanied which CONFIRMS what he said.

Also, just out of curiosity not that it's a big deal, did you copy and paste this?:


"And these are your eyewitness accounts ? Now compare that to the real 'eyewitness account' of the scriptures of Islam.
Qur'an - the eyewitnesses (companions of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)) wrote and memorized it as the Qur'an was being revealed over 23 years of Prophet's(pbuh) life and then passed down in the original language generations after generations.
Hadith - eyewitness account of events with unbroken chain of reporters going all the way back to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)
That's what you call verifiable eyewitness account."


I have read this apologetic before and I seem to remember it being worded exactly the same.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

However if you read the NT in the Greek - no verse has to be read as saying Jesus as an ACTUAL SON of God/or God. He can be a special teacher and sacrifice without being God.

Do you read Greek?

 

[loverOfTruth]

The difference between what Mohammed claims he heard and stories you quoted here is that in the instances of Gabriel speaking in the Bible, action is accompanied which CONFIRMS what he said.

What a non-sense !!! Were you(or anyone for that matter) there when Mary gave birth to Jesus ? How do you know if it was really a virgin birth ? You believe because X,Y,Z tells you in the Gospel that person/prophet A,B,C said that Gabriel came to Mary and blah blah blah happened. And in your case those X,Y,Z never met person/prophet A,B,C rather they wrote from memory what they heard about what was told/happened centuries before.

Where as in the case of the Qur'an, Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) told his companions that Gabriel came and said blah blah blah and the companions memorized and wrote that down to pass it on. So the difference is that we have the unbroken chain of narration all the way back to the source and you don't.

Also, just out of curiosity not that it's a big deal, did you copy and paste this?:


"And these are your eyewitness accounts ? Now compare that to the real 'eyewitness account' of the scriptures of Islam.
Qur'an - the eyewitnesses (companions of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)) wrote and memorized it as the Qur'an was being revealed over 23 years of Prophet's(pbuh) life and then passed down in the original language generations after generations.
Hadith - eyewitness account of events with unbroken chain of reporters going all the way back to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)
That's what you call verifiable eyewitness account."


I have read this apologetic before and I seem to remember it being worded exactly the same.

Really, that's all you could come up with ? I could have pointed you to the thread where I wrote that sometime in the past. Instead, I decided to copy/paste it so we could have the discussion here. I don't see any issue with copy/pasting my own writing from a different thread.

And you can call it 'apologetic' or whatever, but the facts are facts.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

What a non-sense !!! Were you(or anyone for that matter) there when Mary gave birth to Jesus ? How do you know if it was really a virgin birth ? You believe because X,Y,Z tells you in the Gospel that person/prophet A,B,C said that Gabriel came to Mary and blah blah blah happened. And in your case those X,Y,Z never met person/prophet A,B,C rather they wrote from memory what they heard about what was told/happened centuries before.

Where as in the case of the Qur'an, Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) told his companions that Gabriel came and said blah blah blah and the companions memorized and wrote that down to pass it on. So the difference is that we have the unbroken chain of narration all the way back to the source and you don't.

You fail to realize that much of the Bible is not prophecy. It's filled with many types of genres. Much of it at least attempts to be a record of historical events. Now you can argue whether the authors lied about these events or if it's a forgery, or whatever else you want to argue about but we don't believe God or some angel dictated every biblical story to the author. This is a more natural process, like a news report. Now the book of Revelation is how I think you treat the Koran. This book is a prophetic oracle given to the author.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

I
"

And these are your eyewitness accounts ? Now compare that to the real 'eyewitness account' of the scriptures of Islam.
Qur'an - the eyewitnesses (companions of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)) wrote and memorized it as the Qur'an was being revealed over 23 years of Prophet's(pbuh) life and then passed down in the original language generations after generations.
Hadith - eyewitness account of events with unbroken chain of reporters going all the way back to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)
That's what you call verifiable eyewitness account.


.

Exactly how does the Quran's recording of whatever Mohammed claims to have heard from an angel function as an eyewitness account? Perhaps you can say that it functions as such in the sense that we know several people were witnesses to the fact that Mohammed claimed to hear an angel but that's a little different than what I'm talking about. Luke for instance says he was interested in recording what the PEOPLE who claimed to have witnessed Jesus' life had to say about it. Luke did not attempt to listen to the voice of an angel and just write down verbatim what it had to say.

Luke 1

"1:1 Since many have undertaken to arrange in proper order an account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as from the beginning the eyewitnesses and those becoming ministers of the Word handed down to us, 3 so also it seemed good to me, accurately following and investigating everything from the first, to write to you in order (an account), most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the words (of the gospel) you have been taught.*"

 

[Ingledsva]

Do you read Greek?

I personally translate all verses that I am interested in. That is how I know when they have been tweaked/fudged.

I started studying Greek after I learned Russian, and found I could read some of the Greek. I was invited to a Christian meeting of some sort. I glanced down at a pamplet on the chair and saw the word Sophia. I then realised it wasn't in English or Russian. It was Greek. Apparently I slept through the class saying they were related Krylic languages. LOL!

 

[loverOfTruth]

You fail to realize that much of the Bible is not prophecy. It's filled with many types of genres. Much of it at least attempts to be a record of historical events. Now you can argue whether the authors lied about these events or if it's a forgery, or whatever else you want to argue about but we don't believe God or some angel dictated every biblical story to the author. This is a more natural process, like a news report. Now the book of Revelation is how I think you treat the Koran. This book is a prophetic oracle given to the author.

I don't fail to realize any of that. In fact, that's what I have been trying to tell the Christians all along - that you cannot claim that the entire Bible is from God; so don't even compare the message in the Bible to the message in the Qur'an (which is entirely verbatim word of God).

 

[loverOfTruth]

Exactly how does the Quran's recording of whatever Mohammed claims to have heard from an angel function as an eyewitness account? Perhaps you can say that it functions as such in the sense that we know several people were witnesses to the fact that Mohammed claimed to hear an angel but that's a little different than what I'm talking about.

Luke for instance says he was interested in recording what the PEOPLE who claimed to have witnessed Jesus' life had to say about it. Luke did not attempt to listen to the voice of an angel and just write down verbatim what it had to say.

Luke 1

"1:1 Since many have undertaken to arrange in proper order an account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as from the beginning the eyewitnesses and those becoming ministers of the Word handed down to us, 3 so also it seemed good to me, accurately following and investigating everything from the first, to write to you in order (an account), most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the words (of the gospel) you have been taught.*"

You are right, that's what I mean by eye witness account as far as the Qur'an is concerned. The only thing in the Bible that is comparable to the Qur'an is the narration of stories from the past such as Adam/Eve stories or stories which I mentioned related to Angel Gabriel which could not have been witnessed by men but rather told by God to Prophets via Angel or any other mean God chose. But even there since the authors are unknown and they are narrating these stories without being able to go back all the way to the source with an unbroken chain of narration, sometimes they don't remain as pure as they were first told.

And that's exactly why I also mentioned the Hadith which is more comparable to the Biblical narration. But the difference being Hadith is the eyewitness account of way of life, sayings and events related to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) with unbroken chain of reporters going all the way back to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) where as the story of Jesus(pbuh) in Bible is the narration of events by unknown authors centuries after the events took place.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

You are right, that's what I mean by eye witness account as far as the Qur'an is concerned. The only thing in the Bible that is comparable to the Qur'an is the narration of stories from the past such as Adam/Eve stories or stories which I mentioned related to Angel Gabriel which could not have been witnessed by men but rather told by God to Prophets via Angel or any other mean God chose. But even there since the authors are unknown and they are narrating these stories without being able to go back all the way to the source with an unbroken chain of narration, sometimes they don't remain as pure as they were first told.

And that's exactly why I also mentioned the Hadith which is more comparable to the Biblical narration. But the difference being Hadith is the eyewitness account of way of life, sayings and events related to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) with unbroken chain of reporters going all the way back to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) where as the story of Jesus(pbuh) in Bible is the narration of events by unknown authors centuries after the events took place.

From a Christian perspective, the defining characteristic of the Bible is that it contains the truth (about God, his character, and his plan for humanity etc). A truthful message does not have to be dictated by God word for word in order for it to maintain its truthfulness.

 

[seeking4truth]

"From a Christian perspective, the defining characteristic of the Bible is that it contains the truth "

How do you decide what is the truth?

 

[loverOfTruth]

From a Christian perspective, the defining characteristic of the Bible is that it contains the truth (about God, his character, and his plan for humanity etc). A truthful message does not have to be dictated by God word for word in order for it to maintain its truthfulness.

And How do you know if it is the Truth if you are not sure that it is from God but rather they are narrated by anonymous authors ?