Muslims: The testimony of a man who said he heard an angel while alone in a cave

[1robin]

Do you consider the following excluded from the life of Jesus(pbuh) ?
This is the instruction, according to the Bible(Matthew 10:34-36) , Jesus(pbuh) gave to his twelve disciples :
34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn “‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law— 36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’"

Or was he not a man of his words ?

By the way, I don't believe either Muhammad(pbuh) or Jesus(pbuh) ever taught indiscriminate killing/violence. God allowed war in self defence. But you can't be biased against just one.

I believe you misunderstand what Mathew 10:34-36 means. This was not a passage about physical confrontation. I was about the impact of his message causing division and turmoil. The sword is a metaphor used many times in the bible for aspects or ideological characteristics of the word (message). This verse is not speaking about violence. I believe you are drastically mistaken about Mohammad’s wars. Many scholars suggest that 67 of 68 battles he was involved in were offensive. Even if they are biased and you rule out half then you are still left with many offensives perpetrated by Mohammed.

Muhammad and his successors initiated offensive wars against peaceful countries in order to impose Islam by force as well as to seize the abundance of these lands. Their objective was to capture women and children and to put an end to the poverty and hunger from which Arab Muslims suffered. So, Islam was imposed upon Syria, Jordan, Palestine (Jerusalem), Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Iran, all of North Africa, some parts of India and China, and later Spain.
Undoubtedly, the concept of an offensive war to spread the faith is a genuine Islamic concept; it is known as a Holy War for the sake of God. We will see what Muslim scholars have explicitly determined that this is the essence of Islam. They also indicate that if sufficient military power is available to Islamic countries, they ought to attack all other countries in order to force them to embrace Islam, or pay the poll tax and be subject to Islamic rule. Muhammad (as well as all the Caliphs who succeeded him) called for holy wars . All scholars and lawyers acknowledge that.
Those who say that the Islamic wars were always defensive do not understand Islam and have not read sufficient history. It should be evident that offensive wars to spread Islam are the heart of the entire religion of Islam. They embody the meaning of "Striving for the cause of God"—holy war to make the Word of God supreme over the whole world. Our study will be filled with objective quotes from the statements of scholars, along with a throng of true stories.
In his book, "Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography", the Azhar scholar, Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti says the following (page 134, 7th edition):
"The Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message ..."’
I could supply thousands of statements like this from Muslims that make it clear that Muhammad waged offensive wars continuously.
Trying to compare Muhammad’s life with Christ’s is an act of desperation. Christ’s life demonstrates a love almost beyond comprehension and no wars of any type. Muhammad on the other hand seems to have been an exceedingly sinful man and his life was characterized by continuous violence. The person who posted that a man or religion is more accurately judged by their actions than their words was correct, but by either standard Christ completely outshines Muhammad.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Personally I think you have ignored the last 2-3 pages of exchange in this thread. the point I and others made is really not hard to miss.

No, I read and understood it all. Personally I found it to pointless and off topic.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

personally i believe Mohammed was a false prophet as he did not preform one recorded miracle

Performing "miracles" is not a prerequisite for being a prophet/prophetess.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Keep in mind that the Bible is simply a collection of smaller "books" that the church decided to compile long after each one was originally written. The Gospels were each written by a different author, in a different place, to a different audience.

True, then again, one can shift their view to the OT books of Chronicles and Kings and be faced with inconsistencies as well. Biblical inconsistency isn't isolated to the NT it would appear.

 

[1robin]

Performing "miracles" is not a prerequisite for being a prophet/prophetess.

I am new here and unfamiliar with you. I apologise if you have already mentioned this somewhere. Are you of the opinion that Muhammad is/was a genuine prophet from God/Allah.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Yes they are claims,the Qur'an as we know is written in Arabic,its recited in
Arabic,its not IMO addressed to the world.

Various surahs in their Quran say they are for all of "mankind"....

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Why is it less believable that an angel spoke to Muhammad in a cave with no other witnesses than it is that God spoke to Moses on the top of a mountain with no other witnesses?

Or when Saul/Paul supposedly fell to the ground hearing the voice of Yeshua, a man he never even met in his life, yet no one with him heard or saw anything.....depending on which version of Paul's story one wants to believe.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I am new here and unfamiliar with you. I apologise if you have already mentioned this somewhere. Are you of the opinion that Muhammad is/was a genuine prophet from God/Allah.

I don't have an opinion on that either way. Christians say Yeshua (Jesus) was a prophet and yet the Jews then and today say he wasn't. So Muhammad is just as much a valid prophet to Muslims as Yeshua is to Christianity.

 

[F0uad]

Is checking to see if something makes sense to you the ultimate standard by which we judge truth? You do read the Torah don't you? Remember the sacraficial system God set up with animals? The Christian pov is that God did that precisely to prepare mankind for the concept of sacrafice to pay for sins which we believe the life of Jesus is the ultimate model of.

Thanks for replying, to bad you could only reply this part though.

I really didn't want to go off-topic but you went into it so i will do the same.

1. According to the Biblical Law/Tohra/Commandments its forbidden to Sacrifice a man.

2. Jesus(p) was human and not a animal

3. Only the person who sinned could put up the sacrifice Jesus(p) didn't sin according to the bible.

4. Its unjust to punish a innocent person (who never sinned) for the sins of all others.

5. I can agree that Jesus(p) is a model but for that time, he was only send to the House of Isreal was clearly said in the bible.

6. Did you actually ever took time to study Mohammed(saws)'s live and prophet-hood i am pretty sure you would close this Thread and i even gave you answers with Islamic evidence.

Like i said before the Christians and Jews were the first ones who saw the ''Prophet-hood'' on Mohammed's(saws) shoulders not the Pagans, we can also dig into history and see that Hes Wife and Christian priests assured him the Angel wasn't a devil.

Now if your argument is how can we trust hes wife or the Christian priest its like saying how can i trust the person who canonized the Bible.

If you have questions on how we know this i am also willing to explain everything in detail.

Peace.

 

[1robin]

I don't have an opinion on that either way. Christians say Yeshua (Jesus) was a prophet and yet the Jews then and today say he wasn't. So Muhammad is just as much a valid prophet to Muslims as Yeshua is to Christianity.

Thanks for the candid answer.

 

[loverOfTruth]

I believe you misunderstand what Mathew 10:34-36 means. This was not a passage about physical confrontation. I was about the impact of his message causing division and turmoil. The sword is a metaphor used many times in the bible for aspects or ideological characteristics of the word (message). This verse is not speaking about violence.

So you mean Jesus(pbuh) asked to buy 'the word'(message) in Luke 22:36 ? You can read about Jesus commanding his followers to buy swords: "He said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one". (Luke 22:36) and even after this if you read Mathew 10:34-36 to interpret 'sword' as 'message', since the verse contrasts Sword with Peace, its gotta be a pretty violent 'message'.

What about when Jesus(pbuh) allegedly said he will kill children ? "So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. (From the NIV Bible, Revelation 2:22-23)"
Revelation 2 NIV - To the Church in Ephesus -

So you have to choose one of the following :
a) Either Jesus(pbuh) didn't practice what he preached. So even though he taught his followers to be violent(as shown above), but he never did those himself. That shows a man with a hidden agenda and not a man of his words like a Godly person should be. And not to mention the entire Bible has many more violence stuff (I would really prefer not to go there).

b)Or those violent things in the Bible are actually not true. In that case, we know that some part of the Bible is not accurate which raises the question which parts are ? No body knows. So even the 'Prince of Peace' depiction of Jesus(pbuh) we get from the Bible could be not true.

Either way it doesn't look good.

I believe you are drastically mistaken about Mohammad’s wars. Many scholars suggest that 67 of 68 battles he was involved in were offensive. Even if they are biased and you rule out half then you are still left with many offensives perpetrated by Mohammed.

You mean scholars of the likes of, muslim hater Islamophobe Daniel Pipes ? The only place you find that information is from anti-muslim sources not in authentic history books. On the other hand, this is what unbiased non-muslims think of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh)'s wars : "The theory of Islam and Sword for instance is not heard now frequently in any quarter worth the name. The principle of Islam that there is no compulsion in religion is well known. Gibbon, a historian of world repute says, 'A pernicious tenet has been imputed to Mohammadans, the duty of extirpating all the religions by sword.' This charge based on ignorance and bigotry, says the eminent historian, is refuted by Quran, by history of Musalman conquerors and by their public and legal toleration of Christian worship. The great success of Mohammad's life had been effected by sheer moral force, without a stroke of sword. But in pure self-defense, after repeated efforts of conciliation had utterly failed, circumstances dragged him into the battlefield." [Taken from : http://thesimplemessage.blogspot.com/2006/02/about-prophet-muhammadpbuh-by-non.html]

Orientalists tried hard enough and failed. Now the Islamophobes are doing the same - good luck.

Muhammad and his successors initiated offensive wars against peaceful countries in order to impose Islam by force as well as to seize the abundance of these lands. Their objective was to capture women and children and to put an end to the poverty and hunger from which Arab Muslims suffered. So, Islam was imposed upon Syria, Jordan, Palestine (Jerusalem), Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Iran, all of North Africa, some parts of India and China, and later Spain.
Undoubtedly, the concept of an offensive war to spread the faith is a genuine Islamic concept; it is known as a Holy War for the sake of God. We will see what Muslim scholars have explicitly determined that this is the essence of Islam. They also indicate that if sufficient military power is available to Islamic countries, they ought to attack all other countries in order to force them to embrace Islam, or pay the poll tax and be subject to Islamic rule. Muhammad (as well as all the Caliphs who succeeded him) called for holy wars . All scholars and lawyers acknowledge that.
Those who say that the Islamic wars were always defensive do not understand Islam and have not read sufficient history. It should be evident that offensive wars to spread Islam are the heart of the entire religion of Islam. They embody the meaning of "Striving for the cause of God"—holy war to make the Word of God supreme over the whole world. Our study will be filled with objective quotes from the statements of scholars, along with a throng of true stories.
In his book, "Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography", the Azhar scholar, Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti says the following (page 134, 7th edition):
"The Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message ..."’
I could supply thousands of statements like this from Muslims that make it clear that Muhammad waged offensive wars continuously.
Trying to compare Muhammad’s life with Christ’s is an act of desperation. Christ’s life demonstrates a love almost beyond comprehension and no wars of any type. Muhammad on the other hand seems to have been an exceedingly sinful man and his life was characterized by continuous violence. The person who posted that a man or religion is more accurately judged by their actions than their words was correct, but by either standard Christ completely outshines Muhammad.

Nice try. First of all, you copied information from anti-islamic websites without giving them proper credit (Offensive War to Spread Islam). Wow.

May be you didn't think of it - but just google 'Offensive War to Spread Islam ' and all sorts of hate filled bigoted websites will popup with that same information. And I'll point out just one of those. Publications On Islam - go ahead visit the site. 'aggressivechristianity' and 'In The War Against The False Religion Of Islam' - yet wow again. Did you get the training material from them ?

Now let me give you some facts. Just to quote a few, you can read the rest @ Was Islam Spread by the Sword? - The Religion of Islam

* "Indonesia is the country that has the largest number of Muslims in the world, and the majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. But, no Muslim army ever went to Indonesia or Malaysia."
* "Muslims ruled Spain (Andalusia) for about 800 years. During this period the Christians and Jews enjoyed freedom to practice their respective religions, and this is a documented historical fact."
* "Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years, and therefore had the power to force each and every non-Muslim of India to convert to Islam, but they did not, and thus more than 80% of the Indian population remains non-Muslim."
* "An article in Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, yearbook 1986, gives the statistics of the increase of the percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in The Plain Truth magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, while Christianity had increased by 47%. During this fifty-year period, there was no “Islamic conquest” yet Islam spread at an extraordinary rate."

And just in case you are too keen to compare the actions of the successors of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) to the followers of Jesus(pbuh) :
Christian Violence in History
Jesus Loves His Enemies…and Then Kills Them All | loonwatch.com

Now, the most important one since this is the most relevant for the current time. Could you please tell me which 'offensive war by the muslims' are making all these people of different background, faith, race, life style accept Islam in the US?
The Deen Show ~ It's a way of life.
Must be this : "Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: For thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance." (The Noble Quran, 16:125) because neither the God of the Qur'an or Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) preached unjust and indiscriminate violence and you would never find a command like 'striking a child dead'. That should say it all.

 

[loverOfTruth]

You've got to understand that the Gospels aren't presented in the same way as the Koran. The Koran was allegedly dictated to Mohammed by an angel. The Gospels on the other hand are presented as eyewitness accounts of Jesus' life.

Actually, your assumptions regarding eyewitness accounts of Jesus' life and your comparison of it to the Qur'an is quite erroneous. Let me explain why by starting from the basics. Honestly, if a person who doesn't believe in God stated what you have stated in the OP, I wouldn't be surprised but you being a follower of an Abrahamic faith certainly does surprise me.

If you are saying that everything in the Bible is eyewitness accounts of Jesus's life - you are wrong. Where is the eyewitness account of the Story of Adam and Eve's creation, Noah's flood and so many more similar events ?

Next, your rejection of the notion that God can send messages via Angels to his Prophets is also problematic. And in fact, if you don't believe in that concept, the entire story of Jesus's(pbuh) birth 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 how similar it is to the story of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) ? So in order for you to reject Prophet Muhammad's story, you have to reject all those other stories in the Bible as well.

So now that I have shown you that everything in the scriptures is not eyewitness account and the fact that God did communicate to His messengers via Angel Gabriel even before Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) - the only remaining issue is all about the message and how well the message have been passed on generations after generations till the current time.

For the muslims, whatever message(verbatim word of God) God gave to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) had been preserved in the form of the Qur'an both orally and in written form since the time of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh). For more information on the way the Qur'an was preserved, please visit: Proof of The Preservation of the Quran

The notable difference between the Bible and the Qur'an is that The Qur'an doesn't even have Muhammad's(pbuh) words or his own account of events. Everything in it is directly from GOD uncontaminated by any human alteration. The Bible is more comparable to the Hadith, which illustrates Muhammad's(pbuh) life and his sayings as reported by his companions/eyewitnesses.

Yet when you compare it to the bible, Encyclopedia Britannica notes that none of the sources of Jesus's life and work can be traced to Jesus himself. What can be established about the historical Jesus depends almost without exception on Christian traditions, especially on the material used in the composition of the Gospels which are essentially copies of copies of copies of copies of ... from few centuries after Jesus(pbuh) left the world. So you see, you cannot really call that 'eyewitness account'.

That being the case it could be argued that small divergences on minor details indicates that there was no conspiring among the eyewitness to create a hoax.

So you are saying it is good to have mistakes and inconsistencies so people cannot call it a hoax ? Are you serious ? If it is from God, it shouldn't have any contradiction or inconsistencies let alone attempts to hide some facts. And minor divergences ? There are inconsistencies related to some of the major doctrinal concept. I will give you one example here. This is related to how the translations have been manipulated and how they are inconsistent in different versions. The scenario(Matthew 27) occurs before the crucifixion and most of the Bible translations read as follows :

17 So when they had gathered, Pilate said to them, “Whom do you want me to release for you: Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?”
...
20 Now the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and destroy Jesus. 21 The governor again said to them, “Which of the two do you want me to release for you?” And they said, “Barabbas.” 22 Pilate said to them, “Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?” They all said, “Let him be crucified!”

However, in NIV translation, it reads as follows :
17 So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?”
...
20 But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed. 21 “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” asked the governor. “Barabbas,” they answered. 22 “What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Pilate asked.They all answered, “Crucify him!”

From : From Jesus to Muhammad: A History of Early Christianity - YouTube (min 19)

Points to note:
1. 'Barabbas' in the first translation and 'Jesus Barabbas' in 2nd translation
2. Jesus who is called 'the Christ' in the first translation and the Jesus who is called 'the Messiah' in the 2nd translation.

So what's the difference ? Huge difference. See the NIV translation : “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?” So there were actually two people named Jesus ?

Jesus Barabbas means - Jesus "son of the father". Barabbas in hebrew is not a name but means 'son of father'. On the other hand, Jesus the Messiah simply means ' Jesus' the anointed one and that word is used for others in the Bible (notice it didn't say Christ) also.
So read the verses from the 2nd translation again and you'll find out that they released 'Jesus the son of the Father' and crucified 'Jesus the anointed one'.

If you don't believe me, take it to one of your Christian Scholars who knows the language and familiar with earlier manuscripts. And the reason, NIV at least uses Jesus Barabbas because it goes to a earlier manuscript for translation.

Luke 1:1-4 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

“‘How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,” when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?" (Jeremiah 8:8)
Jeremiah 8 NIV -

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Actually, your assumptions regarding eyewitness accounts of Jesus' life and your comparison of it to the Qur'an is quite erroneous. Let me explain why by starting from the basics. Honestly, if a person who doesn't believe in God stated what you have stated in the OP, I wouldn't be surprised but you being a follower of an Abrahamic faith certainly does surprise me.

If you are saying that everything in the Bible is eyewitness accounts of Jesus's life - you are wrong. Where is the eyewitness account of the Story of Adam and Eve's creation, Noah's flood and so many more similar events ?

-

I didn't realize that the stories of Adam and Eve as well as Noah are found in the Gospels. This comes back to my statement that the Bible really is a collection of smaller independant works. It means that there are many types of literary genres in the Bible. There's poetry, narrative, apocalyptic, prophecy, epistles, law, wisdom, parables, etc.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Next, your rejection of the notion that God can send messages via Angels to his Prophets is also problematic. And in fact, if you don't believe in that concept, the entire story of Jesus's(pbuh) birth 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

-

How you can possibly claim that I reject the possibility that God can send angelic messengers is mind boggling.

 

[1robin]

So you mean Jesus(pbuh) asked to buy 'the word'(message) in Luke 22:36 ? You can read about Jesus commanding his followers to buy swords: "He said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one". (Luke 22:36) and even after this if you read Mathew 10:34-36 to interpret 'sword' as 'message', since the verse contrasts Sword with Peace, its gotta be a pretty violent 'message'..

If you will re-read my statement you will see that I said it is used a metaphor in certain places. That means that it is also literal in places. Please read carefully as you write so many points that have obvious answers addressing many would be redundant.

What about when Jesus(pbuh) allegedly said he will kill children ? "So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. (From the NIV Bible, Revelation 2:22-23)"

As you should know, revelations is primarily symbolic. This scripture doesn't speak of a physical death, it is referenceing the second death at the judgement. If you read a decent commentary on it you would have realised that you are using an argument to discredit Christianity that applys equally to Islam, as Islam also has a judgment and a hell. This was a self defeating point. It hurts your credability when you try to attack the most sinless being that ever existed and defend Muhammad a man more sinful than most. If I was a Muslim, I would just admit to what most people and every unbiased scholar knows. That muhammad was an excedingly sinful and violent man. By doing so you would gain credability and trust and then you could justify your faith in some other way. I will address your other points shortly. Please try to reduce your points to what you believe to be the most valid, as answering many points reduces the quality of the individual relevant points.

 

[loverOfTruth]

If you will re-read my statement you will see that I said it is used a metaphor in certain places. That means that it is also literal in places. Please read carefully as you write so many points that have obvious answers addressing many would be redundant.

So the point is Jesus(pbuh) did ask people to buy Swords in its literal sense (according to the Bible). And I hope you know the use of 'swords'.

As you should know, revelations is primarily symbolic. This scripture doesn't speak of a physical death, it is referenceing the second death at the judgement. If you read a decent commentary on it you would have realised that you are using an argument to discredit Christianity that applys equally to Islam, as Islam also has a judgment and a hell. This was a self defeating point.

I never denied the existence of 'judgment', 'resurrection', 'hell' etc. in Islam- you are just falsely stating that. Now if you read the entire passage related to Revelation 2:21-23, you still could not pull the 'second death' just out of the blue. Now let's look at the following commentaries of the Bible and see if it really means 'the second death' as you have suggested.

From : Revelation 2:22 (King James Version) :: Forerunner Commentary :: Bible Tools
"Revelation 2:21-23
God mercifully provides time and opportunity for repentance from idolatry and spiritual fornication with this world (II Peter 3:9). If He does not receive a proper response, He promises great tribulation and martyrdom—not necessarily as punishment, but as an inducement to repent."

and again From : Notes
"Revelation 2:21-23
They needed to act immediately, not only for their own sake but for the sake of the prophetess and her followers. She and her group were about to undergo severe discipline. Contagious disease and even death would race through their numbers because of their actions (vs 22, 23). By confronting them it was possible that at least some might repent and be spared all this."

"The severe penalties listed here are not coming without prior warning. Adequate time has been given in which to repent, so it’s only because the group stubbornly refuses to change that such threats are necessary."

So clearly the above commentaries make it very clear that it is talking about 'death' and that the threats are very real. Or do we need commentaries of commentary to make it look like a 'second death' as you have claimed.

It hurts your credability when you try to attack the most sinless being that ever existed and defend Muhammad a man more sinful than most. If I was a Muslim, I would just admit to what most people and every unbiased scholar knows. That muhammad was an excedingly sinful and violent man. By doing so you would gain credability and trust and then you could justify your faith in some other way. I will address your other points shortly. Please try to reduce your points to what you believe to be the most valid, as answering many points reduces the quality of the individual relevant points.

Actually, on the contrary, it hurts your credibility when you attack Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) with baseless claims from anti-islam websites without any evidence . And I have shown you unbiased non-muslim accounts of what they think of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) from historically established events. Now, on the other hand, all I have done is shown you from your own Bible, not outside books, that there are stuff related to Jesus(pbuh) and violence. Now do I believe all those false allegations against Jesus(pbuh) or God in the Bible to be true - of course not. But that's precisely what brings me to conclude that some part of the Bible is not accurate which raises the question which parts are ? Who knows ?

Finally, please note that I did not start threads demonstrating how Jesus(pbuh) is depicted as brandishing a sword in the Bible or how the Bible has inaccurate informaton. On the contrary, christians in the forum, started accusing Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) falsely without any evidence and with some baseless claims. So all I was doing is just showing you guys, that look into your own scripture first before you point fingers at others. And actually you can't even point fingers at our scripture, cause those allegations don't exist in our scripture.

Please try to reduce your points to what you believe to be the most valid, as answering many points reduces the quality of the individual relevant points.

All of them are extremely valid . Since you came up with some baseless false accusations from anti-islamic sources, I had to respond in depth. If you can't handle it, that's your problem.

 

[loverOfTruth]

I didn't realize that the stories of Adam and Eve as well as Noah are found in the Gospels.

If you didn't realize something so basic from your own scripture, what are you doing blaming some other scripture ? And that is precisely what my point is. You don't even know the basics of what is in your Bible(eyewitness account or not and many other things such as major contradictions, inconsistencies) and you come here point fingers at Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and the Qur'anic revelation ? That just shows the intention behind starting this thread.

This comes back to my statement that the Bible really is a collection of smaller independant works.It means that there are many types of literary genres in the Bible. There's poetry, narrative, apocalyptic, prophecy, epistles, law, wisdom, parables, etc.

And your point is ? So is a collection of smaller books/works with full of contradictions and inconsistencies, and written by many authors centuries after the actual events is supposed to be better than One book without any contradictions/errors which is preserved in pristine condition since the time of the revelation ? What an argument.

How you can possibly claim that I reject the possibility that God can send angelic messengers is mind boggling.

Same here. But I got that idea from your statement "The Koran was allegedly dictated to Mohammed by an angel. " Typically, people use the word 'allegedly' when they doubt something.

And if you have no objection to the fact that Angel Gabriel can come with the revelation - then congratulation, you just agreed with me as I have shown you that the Story of Adam and Eve's creation, Noah's flood and so many more similar events as well as story of Jesus's(pbuh) birth announcement to Mary and the story of Zechariah (just to name a few of the so many) were all revealed to the messengers of God exactly the same way as was the Qur'an to Prophet Muhammad(pbuh). And no, the angel didn't show up in front of a crowd full of people even in those stories.

 

[1robin]

So the point is Jesus(pbuh) did ask people to buy Swords in its literal sense (according to the Bible). And I hope you know the use of 'swords'. .

As I said if you have read either of the the replies. Yes swords are Literal sometimes, as in this case. I believe Jesus wanted his disciples to stand guard as he prayed. If your point is Jesus was violent then this was a bad scripture to point to. Later on in the garden things got out of hand peter cut off a guys ear. Now we see Jesus true character. He rebuked peter and told him to put the sword up and he then healed the man's ear. This is an example that exhibits Christ's mercy and I have no idea why you would bring it up. I thought this thread was about muhammad not Jesus anyway.

I never denied the existence of 'judgment', 'resurrection', 'hell' etc. in Islam- you are just falsely stating that. Now if you read the entire passage related to Revelation 2:21-23, you still could not pull the 'second death' just out of the blue. Now let's look at the following commentaries of the Bible and see if it really means 'the second death' as you have suggested..

I did not suggest that you denied anything I said that ISLAM has the exact same types of judgements so I the points against each religion are a wash.

Revelation 2:21-23
God mercifully provides time and opportunity for repentance from idolatry and spiritual fornication with this world (II Peter 3:9). If He does not receive a proper response, He promises great tribulation and martyrdom—not necessarily as punishment, but as an inducement to repent."

and again From :
"Revelation 2:21-23
They needed to act immediately, not only for their own sake but for the sake of the prophetess and her followers. She and her group were about to undergo severe discipline. Contagious disease and even death would race through their numbers because of their actions (vs 22, 23). By confronting them it was possible that at least some might repent and be spared all this."

"The severe penalties listed here are not coming without prior warning. Adequate time has been given in which to repent, so it’s only because the group stubbornly refuses to change that such threats are necessary."

So clearly the above commentaries make it very clear that it is talking about 'death' and that the threats are very real. Or do we need commentaries of commentary to make it look like a 'second death' as you have claimed...

For the sake of time I will agree with your commentaries as I don't have time to search this again. However the point that I made above about this still stands. Maybe I missunderstood your point, both religions have this type of judgement in common so what are you saying. It would be more valid to compare Christs judgement with Allah's not Muhammad's.

Actually, on the contrary, it hurts your credibility when you attack Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) with baseless claims from anti-islam websites without any evidence . And I have shown you unbiased non-muslim accounts of what they think of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) from historically established events. Now, on the other hand, all I have done is shown you from your own Bible, not outside books, that there are stuff related to Jesus(pbuh) and violence. Now do I believe all those false allegations against Jesus(pbuh) or God in the Bible to be true - of course not. But that's precisely what brings me to conclude that some part of the Bible is not accurate which raises the question which parts are ? Who knows ?

Finally, please note that I did not start threads demonstrating how Jesus(pbuh) is depicted as brandishing a sword in the Bible or how the Bible has inaccurate informaton. On the contrary, christians in the forum, started accusing Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) falsely without any evidence and with some baseless claims. So all I was doing is just showing you guys, that look into your own scripture first before you point fingers at others. And actually you can't even point fingers at our scripture, cause those allegations don't exist in our scripture..

WRONG
Most reputable scholars consider the bible as being 95% accurate, and I can and will give you a endless sea of information concerning Muhammads malevolence and violence. However I will predict how this will go because I have followed these dabates for a long time. I will give you an endless supply of facts concerning Muhammad. You will respond that It came from a muslim hate group (done), or If a Hadith then it's the wrong Hadith, If it's the right Hadith then it's the wrong part, or if a biography then the wrong biographer, or the wrong part, or the wrong translation of the Quran, or etc............ I will give you the benifit of the doubt and see what happens. The only thing more rediculous than defending Muhammmad's record of sinfulness is attacking Christ's sinlessness as exhibited by the two swords reference..even if you do find a verse where Christ exhibits judgement. It is consistent with his role as God not as a petty tribal leader trying to keep a band of raiders together by force and the promise of booty so the comparison is not valid.

All of them are extremely valid . Since you came up with some baseless false accusations from anti-islamic sources, I had to respond in depth. If you can't handle it, that's your problem.

I want you to respond in depth but to only a few points at a time. If you cover a bunch at once the quality of the discussion is less than if you and I cover a few at a time more in depth. As I review this I have to apolagise for my language. It's seems a bit harsh. I am supposed to defend Christianity with love, however these issues are well known and obvious and it gets frustratting dealing with what are well proven to be incorrect claims. I will try try to be a little more thoughtful in the future. I well check to see if you responded in the morning.

God Bless

 

[England my lionheart]

England, you are trying to make the verse mean more than what it actually does. I know that Allah preferred some nations and some families and some individuals over others. This verse doesn't mention that Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed were the most preferred individuals. But you can make it mean that.

Anyways, the family of Abraham was chosen over all other families at the time, Allah gave him Prophet-hood and not someone else, and he continued choosing Prophets out of his descendants while those Prophets and their people were the chosen people up until the choosing of Muhammed as the last Prophet. The Qur'an mentions that Allah favored the Children of Israel over all other nations that lived at the time.

Now though, Muhammed is a direct descendant of Ishmael and your claim of this being a great something is true, but to say that Arabs are chosen over all other people is not supported by Islamic writings nor it's scholars. You could argue that Allah chose them to spread the message of Islam, then you'd make a point and I would have to agree.

Many Muslims highly regard Ibn Taymiyyah,was he a scholar ?,is he influential ? :

“…The superiority of the Arab race and then (the superiority of) Quraish and then (the superiority of) Bani Haashim, is not simply due to the fact the Prophet (peace be upon him) is from them – even though this is (a point) of superiority – but instead, they themselves are superior within themselves“. Iqtidaa As-Siraatil-Mustaqeem 2/420

 

[loverOfTruth]

As I said if you have read either of the the replies. Yes swords are Literal sometimes, as in this case. I believe Jesus wanted his disciples to stand guard as he prayed. If your point is Jesus was violent then this was a bad scripture to point to. Later on in the garden things got out of hand peter cut off a guys ear. Now we see Jesus true character. He rebuked peter and told him to put the sword up and he then healed the man's ear. This is an example that exhibits Christ's mercy and I have no idea why you would bring it up. I thought this thread was about muhammad not Jesus anyway.

I was just pointing to the verse related to 'not peace but sword' and demonstrating that you can actually interpret it either way. And by the way, I didn't start talking about Jesus(pbuh). It was in response to someone comparing Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) vs. Jesus(pbuh). So I had to respond. See here: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2864114-post110.html

I did not suggest that you denied anything I said that ISLAM has the exact same types of judgements so I the points against each religion are a wash.

For the sake of time I will agree with your commentaries as I don't have time to search this again. However the point that I made above about this still stands. Maybe I missunderstood your point, both religions have this type of judgement in common so what are you saying. It would be more valid to compare Christs judgement with Allah's not Muhammad's.

The point is, its not the same 'judgement'. According to Islam only the adulterer gets the severe punishment - the one who sins and not anyone else. But according to Revelation 2:21-23 in the Bible, even the innocent children of the adulterer gets the death penalty - and that even from a supposedly All Loving God. These 'judgements' are in sharp contrast of each other and in no way the same 'judgement'.

WRONG
Most reputable scholars consider the bible as being 95% accurate,

Just listen to Dr. Jerald Dirks [youtube]2m4KW-dysKk[/youtube]
From Jesus to Muhammad: A History of Early Christianity - YouTube
and you'll know how divided even the early christians were on major doctrinal concepts and how inaccurate the translations are. Dr. Dirks has a Master of Divinity from Harvard Divinity School.

and I can and will give you a endless sea of information concerning Muhammads malevolence and violence.
However I will predict how this will go because I have followed these dabates for a long time. I will give you an endless supply of facts concerning Muhammad. You will respond that It came from a muslim hate group (done), or If a Hadith then it's the wrong Hadith, If it's the right Hadith then it's the wrong part, or if a biography then the wrong biographer, or the wrong part, or the wrong translation of the Quran, or etc............ I will give you the benifit of the doubt and see what happens.

Sure. Just so we don't derail this thread and since another of your fellow christian brother already started a similar thread, could you post the information there : http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/129980-mohammed-man-peace-his-last-words.html
and I will respond to your false allegations about Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) there. And by the way, you still didn't respond to some of the points I made in my earlier post regarding how come Islam is spreading without any war now (I have provided facts)?

The only thing more rediculous than defending Muhammmad's record of sinfulness is attacking Christ's sinlessness as exhibited by the two swords reference..even if you do find a verse where Christ exhibits judgement. It is consistent with his role as God not as a petty tribal leader trying to keep a band of raiders together by force and the promise of booty so the comparison is not valid.

"And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess, that thou mayest inherit his land. 32 Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz. 33 And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. 34 And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain. 36 From Aroer, which is by the brink of the river of Arnon, and from the city that is by the river, even unto Gilead, there was not one city too strong for us: the LORD our God delivered all unto us" Deuteronomy, Chapter 2 : 32-37

Lord/God (aka Christ for you) commanding the killing of babies and you call that God exhibiting good judgement ? I seriously don't know what else to tell you other than May God help you to see through the falsehood and to distinguish the truth from it.

And again, I am not attacking Jesus(pbuh) here. And note that I am not quoting stuff from anti-christian websites or any other external sources. I am quoting straight out of the Bible. In an attempt to disprove the notion that "Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) is a warlord whereas Jesus(pbuh) 'of the Bible' is a prince of peace", all I am doing is showing what some of the horrible things your own Bible attribute to Jesus(pbuh) and God. Because that is quite a contrast from what I believe about Jesus(pbuh). What I believe about Jesus(pbuh) and Mary is this :

"...O Mary, indeed Allah has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above the women of the worlds. " Al Qur'an (3:42)

"..O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary - distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah ]. He will speak to the people in the cradle and in maturity and will be of the righteous." Al Qur'an (3:45-46)

You are most welcome to accept what I believe if you don't believe the stuff straight from the Bible. Peace unto you as well.