My first post

[Audie]

@Audie I'm aware that there's a lot of misinformation out there, and I do my best to verify as much as possible.

From what I've gathered, there is more reason to believe that there is a source to our existence compared to there not being one.

"Source" is so vague that it has no meaning.

As for misinformation- the word was
" evidence", and quality thereof, plus a persons
capacity to apply it.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

These are not the same because The Bible is listing a lineage and both lineages don't add up nor are the names all the same, nor is the direct father the same. This is called a contradiction.

I believe even in lineages they are not all biological. It is spiritual and also more about order of righteous men or chosen ones who came after another, rather than biological lineage.

In the Quran, the person was calling out to Mary in a surprised manner, and thus used the name of Aaron because he was righteous and of their family. So this clearly shows two completely different approaches.

I understand your view on this.
And I agree.
But what I am saying is, the reason you do not think Quran is wrong is because you are a Muslim. But if someone was an atheist or a Christian they still could think Quran is wrong and you are just trying to somehow justify it.
The way you treat Bible is just as how atheists treat the Quran.

That is why, i believe we cannot judge if scriptures is wrong or right with our fallible human minds.
Remember the Bible itself says, all scriptures (Bible) is inspired by God.

Thus we need to ask Allah, if Bible lineage is wrong or it means spiritual successorship of righteous men.
But since there is no direct communication with Allah we cannot prove or disprove.

But as I said before, there is no verse in Quran that Allah said the Gospel or Torah are corrupted.
And in fact almost in all verses of Quran which talks about corruption, it is specifically talking about Torah (not Gosple), and it is speaking corruption in the meanings and interpretation.

One is listing out the lineage
The other is a rhetorical device.

OK, I understood your view.

They can, but the contradiction here is quite clear. They'll have to jump through hoops to find contradictions in the Quran. Here's another one for you.

Matthew 27:5 states Judas took the money he had received for betraying Jesus, threw it down in the temple, and “went and hanged himself.”

Acts 1:18 claims Judas used the money to purchase a field and “falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.”

So two clear conflicting accounts. He either threw the money down or he bought a field. And he either hanged himself or fell on his head directly and gushed out his guts.

Not everything in the scriptures are literal. In scriptures there are symbolic expressions.
They are not meant as literal history. So, both accounts are true if we interpret it symbolically.

This is clear as day.



Anyone that holds a belief and starts to see evidence that points against that belief and still chooses to believe is just delusional.

None of the Gospel authors are known and none of them are first account witnesses to the events that happened. So why trust it?

The scriptures itself says, they are inspired by God. That's what matters. Do you know which verse or you want me to quote?
See, scriptures is not like a ordinary book that needs to say who wrote it. It says all scriptures is inspired by God, so, this is how God wanted to be known.
Can we say to God, why you did not include the name of disciples who wrote the Book?
I dont think we can treat scriptures like that.

First seven ecumenical councils - Wikipedia

Check out the topics as the years went on. Clear innovation. Anyone that didn't follow their way of Christianity was killed. History tells us this quite clearly.

This cannot mean the Bible is changed.
See, the Bible was spread among many people in many cities and nations. It is not like, there was a single copy, that one can go and alter it.
The Christians were believers. They believed Bible is Word of God.
Can a person who believes a Book is word of God, change it?

He says that it was entrusted to them.

How does that mean it was corrupted?
Quran was given to Muslim men too.
it was memorized by some men. Does that mean they corrupted it?

We revealed the Torah with guidance and light, and the prophets, who had submitted to God, judged according to it for the Jews. So did the rabbis and the scholars in accordance with that part of God’s Scripture which they were entrusted to preserve, and to which they were witnesses. So [rabbis and scholars] do not fear people, fear Me; do not barter away My messages for a small price; those who do not judge according to what God has sent down are rejecting [God’s teachings]. 5:44

The Rabbis misinterpreted the Book. They didn't change the text.

People can still allude to Muhammad being in the Bible today. OT & NT. So not sure what you are talking about. And not sure if I said this to you or another member, but the corruption doesn't only have to come in text form, it can be teaching and practice too.

I am talking about 7:157

"Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful."

According to this verse, Muhammad can be found in Torah and Gospel which is with the people.
So, it means:
1. Allah is confirming the Gospel and Torah are truth from God, because Allah had revealed in them about Muhammad. It does not say that the Gospel or Torah were corrupted. It does not day that they removed verses about Muhammad from the Gosple and Torah.

2. Those verses are allusions to Muhammad. It does not mean, that they actually have the name of Muhammad in the Scriptures explicitly.
Thus, if Quran does not explicitly names the 12 Imams or successors, this is the way of Allah. He did not want to explicitly reveal their name for a wisdom.

Back then it was like a game of telephone. Various ideas were going around about who Jesus was and those that held to the core monotheistic message were good to go. Those that weren't, have gone astray.

Again you are coming with your own explanation.
If we are talking about Islam, you need to back it up by Scriptures and Hadithes.
How do I know your explanation is what Allah says?

The Bible says that God has multiple sons. Adam, David (begotten), Solomon, Israel (firstborn), and many more! Paul says anyone that is led by the spirit of God is the son of God (Romans 8:14)
So clearly you have fallen into the deception as well. Jesus can't be the only son as we can see clearly from the Bible that there are more sons and another begotten son too! This is embarrassing honestly, please show some intellectual integrity.

Exactly. So, you are saying Bible is true and legitimate because you are using Bible to prove your point.
I am glad you believe the Bible is true from God.

It means when you go and examine Mosaic law, you'll see that it is a strict law with countless things forbidden to them. Jesus clarified a lot of these malpractices and brought the believers back to true submission to God.

Exactly, so those clarifications are written in the Gospel which is with Christians. So, it is a legitimate Book. If it was a corrupted Book, it would have misguided Christians rather than guiding them.

There were a few that were Hunafa, which are monotheists.



This hadith is considered weak for starters. Secondly, plain Arabic is there and the ayah is clear. Don't be amongst those that are looking into the ambiguities.

When did Allah say this Hadith is weak?
This is what your scholars say when they don't like a Hadith.
Allah did not instruct your scholars to say this Hadith is weak when they don't like it.
It is consistent with the Quran.
When a people divided their religion to many sects, that religion is no longer the original Religion Allah revealed. Just like what Christians and Jews did.

Where does it say that Allah communicated with them? Don't get it twisted.

Oh, so, King David was not a Prophet and one of the 12 leaders?
You were saying Allah told them (see your own post). Allah told them, means He communicated with them.

As I clearly said, Islam is not a religion for a particular group, but for everyone, having this concept of twelve leaders doesn't apply. The ayah I showed you about Moses was clear that each house from the son of Israel was a group and each group had a spring just for them.



I probably would have followed each one of them honestly. Since they were of the lineage of the Prophet, then they have a special place in my heart. Something you need to understand though is that the past is the past and whatever happened then doesn't concern me in my road to salvation. They have their account with Allah and I have mine. This too is clearly taught in the Quran. (2:134)



Exactly, they follow conjecture as you are doing. You ignore the plain text and stick to the ambiguities. Were you once a Christian?



This hadith is quite specific and a prophecy. It has nothing to do with what you are trying to portray. It is telling us that the Muslims will be in such a weak position that they will be the imitators rather than the pioneers. And this imitation will be so detrimental to ourselves to the extent that we will follow others into a hole. And the Prophet (saw) speaks the truth because we see this clearly today where Muslims have lost their identities. Just like a lot of the Jews and Christians sold out to secularism.



This ayah still applies today. And it doesn't have to mean the Arabs only, rather Islam saved countless of people since the Prophet's days. More non-Arabs than Arabs I might add.

According to the Quran Every people have an End (verse 7:34).
Hadithes in sunni collections says, lifespan of Muslims is 1000 years. So, that is already passed!. This is consistent with the Quran, as it also makes an allusion to a 1000 years period, and then end comes!

 

[QuestioningMind]

Those that claim that God is apparent as the sun, either doesn't know what apparent means or they have deluded themselves.

Had God been apparent as the sun, the sincerity of everyone will be compromised. For example, no one will rob a bank knowing for sure that they will get caught. Unless they want to get caught, then that's a different story.

So God lets us act as if we will never get caught (by Him). Only those that believe in God and a Judgement Day will have this concept of getting caught, while those that don't, will not.

And if they believe in God and a Judgement Day and have this concept of getting caught then god cannot ever know if they're truly moral individuals, because they'd not doing wrong out of fear, not because it's simply the right thing to do.

And yes, I agree they're deluding themselves... just like I said in my last post they're just PRETENDING to know that god is real.

 

[Audie]

And if they believe in God and a Judgement Day and have this concept of getting caught then god cannot ever know if they're truly moral individuals, because they'd not doing wrong out of fear, not because it's simply the right thing to do.

And yes, I agree they're deluding themselves... just like I said in my last post they're just PRETENDING to know that god is real.

Its a example of the intellectual
integrity that our seeker doth seek.

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

Yes, and because Allah says He will protect it, while the protection of those messages was entrusted to the rabbis and monks.

The Enjeel and the Torah also say they would be protected. Why did Rabbi and Monks fail this protection and not the Imams. What did they do that was different? Why did God protect one and not the others?

 

[Daniel Nicholson]

A lot going on in this thread!
@Come2thelight
I made some comments earlier you had follow up questions.
In short, I think the Qu'ran is man-made and not the words of Allah. If it were the perfect word of God, there would not be mistakes, misconceptions, repetitions, misogyny, self serving verses, etc.
The beautiful thing about Islam is that one only has to point out a single mistake and the whole concept of "the perfect word of God" collapses.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Just answer that question please Tony and we can part ways. Don't leave now when it is getting good

Yes I see you wanted to make a point.

I have been doing this long enough to know that In the aim to make that point we have skipped the part where it was offered, not one but two Messages from Allah were given in Persia in the 1800's, starting from the year 1260 of Islam.

I would offer, what is any discussion on the understanding of the Quran going to produce, in the light that Allah has sent two more Messengers?

Also I wonder if you asked your question of the Diciples of Jesus, or even of the first peoples to embrace Muhammad, how relevant it would be to ask them if they understood the previous messages, "by understanding the morphology, semantic, and syntax of the text"? They would offer the Light of Allah is our sure guide, and our understanding of the morphology, semantic, and syntax of the text is prone to failure, if we do not embrace the Light of Allah that has now dawned in a New Day of Allah, a new day of Judgement.

They would most likely offer as I now do.

All the best, may peace be with you and may the light of Allah always be your guide.

Regards Tony

 

[Redemptionsong]

No.
..because you have changed the meaning of the word "saviour" from its original context in the OT.
i.e. the role of Messiah becomes a dying G-d

No, I've not changed the meaning.

Most Jews understand salvation to be connected to the land of Israel. Salvation for the nation of Israel occurs when the Messiah delivers Israel from its enemies, and brings peace to the world.

The salvation of the nation of Israel, however, also entails the salvation of individual souls within Israel. This is not so much a matter of being Jewish, as being righteous. Salvation from sin and death, which can only happen if one is righteous in the eyes of God, is a spiritual and eternal matter for each individual.

Psalm 24:3-5. 'Who shall ascend into the hill of the LORD? or who shall stand in his holy place?
He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.
He shall receive the blessing from the LORD, and righteousness from the God of his salvation'.

How does a Muslim achieve righteousness?

 

[muhammad_isa]

The Enjeel and the Torah also say they would be protected. Why did Rabbi and Monks fail this protection and not the Imams. What did they do that was different? Why did God protect one and not the others?

I would have thought it has something to do with the printing press.
G-d used to send prophets on a regular basis.
Different times call for different approaches.

 

[muhammad_isa]

No, I've not changed the meaning.

Well that's OK then. Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah/saviour.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Well that's OK then. Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah/saviour.

Is God not the only saviour? Isaiah 43:11.

Do you agree that Jesus Christ is both fully man and fully God?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Do you agree that Jesus Christ is both fully man and fully God?

G-d is not a person .. never was .. never will be.

A person cannot create a universe and be aware of each and every leaf that falls.
G-d created people. G-d created Jesus.
G-d has no need to pretend to be a person.
G-d has no need to die in order to forgive His creatures.
G-d cannot die. G-d does not sleep. G-d does not eat.

 

[stevecanuck]

Lol, you have no idea what you are talking about.

The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of the Holy Quran

Right you are. I misread that. I admit that the Qur'an was referring to the Muslims in general rather than to Mohamed specifically when it spoke of the slaughter of the Banu Quraiza after they had surrendered without a fight. That makes it so much better.

What it does not change is that Mohamed was in favor of the mass beheadings, enslavement, and theft of everything the Banu Quraiza owned. The following hadith describes how Mohamed said that the judgement would be favored by Allah (You know - The Merciful, The Compassionate).

Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:
When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad's judgment, Allah's Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah's Apostle said (to the Ansar), "Stand up for your leader." Then Sad came and sat beside Allah's Apostle who said to him. "These people are ready to accept your judgment." Sad said, "I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280).

Any claim that the Muslims didn't kill innocent civilians is shown to be a bare-faced lie by their actions here.

Is there a hadith that in any way says the Banu Quraiza deserved that fate?

 

[stevecanuck]

No, taking half of a verse is despicable and you knew that it kills the message you were dishonestly trying to portray. You aren't fooling anyone here with this.

***MOD EDIT***

It clearly says. Whoever is an enemy of Allah and His angels, then know that Allah is an enemy back to them. Anyone that wants to pick a fight with Allah, be my guest (so to speak)

As I said, that only makes it worse. It describes "whoever is an enemy of Allah" as being a disbeliever. Otherwise, referring to them would be a non sequitur. Do you really not see that? Keep reading it until it sinks in.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes .. love your enemies for the sake of G-d.
That does not mean that you should turn your back on them.
..any decent Christian soldier will tell you that.

Loving your enemies means feeding them for the sake of G-d .. not maltreating them for the sake of G-d.

It doesn't include pacifism.
That is not what G-d wants from us.
..to let evil predominate in the world.

The early history of those who followed Jesus especially before Constantine shows that they often gave up their lives rather than persecute or get even with their enemies. Things changed as time went on, and they will continue to change as time marches on.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes .. love your enemies for the sake of G-d.
That does not mean that you should turn your back on them.
..any decent Christian soldier will tell you that.

Loving your enemies means feeding them for the sake of G-d .. not maltreating them for the sake of G-d.

It doesn't include pacifism.
That is not what G-d wants from us.
..to let evil predominate in the world.

Pacifism is not what Jesus and his followers were really about. Jesus basically did not shut his mouth, killing him shut his mouth for a while. Then things happened after that. As an example, one might brush away the death penalty today but -- juries and judges can be wrong about innocence OR guilt. Well, let's see what the future brings, ok?

 

[Sedim Haba]

Source to what?

I can understand you forgetting, it's been twenty-some pages ago.

The name of my thread was 'Koran and Hadith in plain English?' (or something like that)

I really was expecting a link or other recommendation to some beginners book/WWW.
Even one designed for students, I would gladly begin like one who has no knowledge.

The fact that no one did so, to me, indicated that no one really cared enough to help.
OR even more disturbing, there ARE no such materials, and if that's the case...
I simply do not understand why not. Goes against every norm I've seen in religion.

 

[Redemptionsong]

G-d is not a person .. never was .. never will be.

A person cannot create a universe and be aware of each and every leaf that falls.
G-d created people. G-d created Jesus.
G-d has no need to pretend to be a person.
G-d has no need to die in order to forgive His creatures.
G-d cannot die. G-d does not sleep. G-d does not eat.

The question is, 'Can God dwell on earth amongst men without taking the form of a man?'

Without coming to earth as a man, God cannot deal justly with the problem of sin.

Solomon believed that he was building God's temple on earth. Yet, he wondered whether a temple built with hands could possibly contain Almighty God [see 2 Chronicles 6:18] Solomon was right to ask this question because the stone temple was only a figure of the true temple, the body of Christ. [Try reading 2 Chronicles 6:10, replacing 'l am' with 'Jesus Christ']

Jesus Christ, in Christian belief, is the cornerstone of the temple, and it is he who builds God's eternal temple. God's eternal temple is the spiritual body of Christ. A person cannot enter this temple without the Spirit of Christ, the baptism Jesus came to give.

According to Christian belief, the Holy Spirit was lost by Adam, and is received through faith in Jesus Christ.

What is the Holy Spirit to a Muslim? Is it an angel?

 

[muhammad_isa]

The question is, 'Can God dwell on earth amongst men without taking the form of a man?'

Makes no sense to say that G-d could "dwell" anywhere.
It makes G-d sound like an alien from another planet.

Without coming to earth as a man, God cannot deal justly with the problem of sin.

I don't know what you are talking about. We all have a soul from G-d within us.
G-d is of infinite nature.
A man is not of infinite nature..

 

[joelr]

Hello Ella, thank you for your question.

I do have to clarify that Allah (God) does not directly reveal Himself to anyone in a physical sense. Rather specific individuals have been selected to share the information they've received from Allah via an angel or in the case of Moses (pbuh), through direct speech. So just to be clear, Allah is always unseen. (And this is a different discussion in itself)

In the historicity field Moses it is consensus that he is a mythical construct. As are all the supernatural stories. So why would you believe a later version of a similar revelatory religion.
Paul claimed to speak to Jesus from heaven and Muhammad claimed to speak with the angel Gabrielle. We don't believe when people make claims to have spoken with deities so what is special about these?