Farouk said:
Woh we have just started and you want to throw in the towel.
No you are definately not off-topic.Every thing that is being discussed is about Muhammad(PBBUH) and so long as we are discussing about Muhammad(PBBUH) then the discussion is about weather Muhammad(PBBUH) was a good man.
It is a topic about whether Muhammad is a good man or not, it is not about whether he appear as in the prophecy of the bible.
Farouk said:
If Muhammad(PBBUH) coming was prophesied in your scriptures then definately he has to be a good man and if anyone thinks otherwise then its obvious they are ignorant of who he was or maybe they just suffer from islamophobia.
Let's get one thing straight: I am an agnostic.
I'm neither Christian, nor Jewish, or any of the variants of the abrahamic religions. So the Christian Bible or Jewish Tanakh are not my scriptures.
I read religious texts (not just Hebrew and Christian scriptures, but all different religious literature, including even the Qur'an), as I would with any book, in the context they were written in.
For example, the Book of Isaiah was written by Hebrew-speaking person or people (I think and believe that the book may, and I must stress on the word - MAY - so may or may not be written by Isaiah himself) for a specific audience - the Hebrew, Israelite or Jewish people. Although, Christians may have included in their collection of books, called the Bible, it is not a Christian book, nor meant for Christian audience. The only Christian books are what the Christians labelled as the New Testament, hence the gospels, letters, Acts & Revelation, as well as some non-canonical books, listed under the NT apocrypha.
Similarly, you may quote various and specific parts of Isaiah, doesn't make it a Islamic book, nor for Muslim audience.
Do you understand what I am saying?
I am trying to understand each and every book (that I have personally read) in the context of the specific audience they were written for.
So the Tanakh for the Jewish audience, the gospels (and other NT books) for Christians, the Qur'an and Hadiths for Muslims, Vedas (and other Hindu texts) for Hindus, etc, etc, etc.
I have even read the Pyramid Texts, Coffin Text, the Book(s) of the Dead, and they written specifically for Egyptian audience. And the Sumerian hymns for the Sumerian audience, and so on.
Keeping in mind who they written for, hopefully allow me to understand the minds of the authors and their targeted audience.
The Book of Isaiah was meant for the 2 Israelite kingdoms - Israel and Judah - for their kings and subjects. Although, at time, the book was written to rebuke and punish the Israelites, and prophecies for their fall, it was a book of reconciliation and restoration for these same people.
You may quote whatever you like in Isaiah, and say "Muhammad" this or "Muhammad" that, but all you are doing is giving your biased interpretations and biased opinions - nothing more, nothing less.
You, and others like you, like loveroftruth, feargod and scimitar are only stating your only personal opinions, but you all stating these opinions as if they were facts and dismissing other related chapters, only show that you are using nothing more than shameless propaganda OT make your points.
Your opinions are just opinions, not facts.
That loveroftruth continually ignore other verses from other chapters of Isaiah, only showed that he has already closed his mind on the issue, in what we were debating. This only demonstrated his shoddy attempts at biblical scholarship and biases, when he refused to look at other verses (supposedly) written by Isaiah.
Tell me, Farouk. If I quote any single Islamic verse of a single chapter, and argue with you over certain issue that disagree with you, and dismissing all related verses in that chapter, wouldn't you consider that absence of scholarship and my interpretation/opinion to be biased?
So far, I have not found a single argument about Muhammad in Isaiah's passages from you and other Muslims, to be even remotely challenging. Frustrating, :yes:. Knowledgable or enlightening, :no:.
