Question on Islam.

[rinnie]

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

Coming at this from the other side, as someone who wishes to practice Islam fully, you have to understand that from the Islamic point of view, what the religion of Islam teaches is NOT new, but in fact the natural, first religion and the true religion of Adam, Eve, Abraham, Moses, Lot and Jesus as well as the Arabic prophets including the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw). Islam actually accepts the Torah and Gospels to be valid revelations from God, albeit corrupted ones. Qur'an is the final revelation of these, not the only revelation.

If Islam isn't new, then why is it Muhammad started it long after the CC? Why is it Muhammad was trying to teach it to Catholic Monks and they made fun of him, because he was contradicitng himself left and right?

Why is it that it was then that he became angry and began his own faith?

By the way Islam was founded 600 years AFTER Christianity. Now if it was the first Religion after adam and eve how was it founded 600 years after Christianity? Could you explain that? Thanks.

[Augustine3]

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

Because as I said before, the Christian Bible has been corrupted. There is evidence in the Bible that says Jesus is NOT God but a mere prophet. These passages/verses are quite clearly backed up with Qur'an verses which state the same thing.

So your incorrect interpretation of the bible and false Quranic teachings that are not been proven to be inspired is evidence the Bible is corrupt? Try again because that is just ridiculous.

Kouyate what’s your story you keep changing your mind about which religion you want to follow. Your actions prove your posts are unreliable.

God bless,

[meltzerboy]

Originally Posted by Augustine3

Yes majority of them do believe in sensual pleasures in the afterlife they call el-janah (paradise). It’s not just sexual pleasure with multiple women, they also will have never ending fruit sweet has honey, the finest wine to drink (that does not make them drunk) and the most comfortable couches etc.

Can I ask you a question? If you don’t believe in the afterlife why do you choose to serve God? What’s the difference if you sin or not?

Interesting...comfortable couches: it's worth it for that alone!

My answer is that virtue is its own reward: it betters oneself, others, and the world. Similar to the Quaker philosophy, I think. I do believe in an afterlife but that's not the main focus of Judaism.

[rinnie]

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

Coming at this from the other side, as someone who wishes to practice Islam fully, you have to understand that from the Islamic point of view, what the religion of Islam teaches is NOT new, but in fact the natural, first religion and the true religion of Adam, Eve, Abraham, Moses, Lot and Jesus as well as the Arabic prophets including the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw). Islam actually accepts the Torah and Gospels to be valid revelations from God, albeit corrupted ones. Qur'an is the final revelation of these, not the only revelation.

This also interests me, if Islam is the True Religion of Jesus then why did Jesus tell us that he would be the last. Why did he say that there would be no new revelation. that you would see him comming back through the clouds the same way as he went back to heaven?

Why did the O.T. give us thousands of claims to Jesus comming but the O.T. never mentioned Muhammad. And why did the N.T. tell us to say away from false teacher claiming to be prophets? And to stay away from false teachings and to stick to the teachings of the early Fathers of the Church.

They tell us there is no one but Christ. Also curious what do you feel that Christ did not do that Muhammad could do for us??

[Wandile]

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

Again, you base all your assertions as to God' nature/personality upon a flawed text. Ditto this for the Jews.
You have to understand that I do not accept the Gospel in its present form to be the original Gospel preached by any of the prophets.

You're free to believe that.

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

Because as I said before, the Christian Bible has been corrupted. There is evidence in the Bible that says Jesus is NOT God but a mere prophet. These passages/verses are quite clearly backed up with Qur'an verses which state the same thing.

These are huge accusations to make. Can you back them up?

1- Any proof of biblical corruption amounting to the doctrines of Trinity and Jesus as Son of God or any corruption at all??

2- please cite the verses indicating that Jesus was not divine

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

Neither Judaism nor Islam accept Jesus as God. But according to Allah, both Jews and Christians have corrupted their scriptures to their own human whims and desires. In the case of Christianity, this has meant Jesus has become God himself and not just the prophet he is.

Ok... but this is circular reasoning

[Sen McGlinn]

Originally Posted by Trebor135

And I've seen a quote from a Bahá'í who was accusing Muslims of corrupting their Scripture to cover up that a new prophet would come after Muhammad. How would you respond?

It sounds as if you have got the wrong end of the stick on this one. Bahais do not say that the Quran is corrupted, they say just the opposite,

"In regard to your question concerning the authenticity of the Qur'án. I have referred it to the Guardian for his opinion. He thinks that the Qur'án is, notwithstanding the opinion of certain historians, quite authentic, and that consequently it should be considered in its entirety by every faithful and loyal believer as the sacred scriptures of the Muhammadan Revelation."
(From a letter dated July 6, 1934 written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi (great-grandson of the founder, and designated Guardian of the Bahai Faith)

The evidence since 1934 supports the substantial authenticity of the Qur'an. There was for example a very very early manuscript found under the eaves of a mosque in Yemen, which does not differ enormously from later versions. There were early texts with slight variants, documented by Jeffrey in his "materials for the history of the Quran" but they are of the order of synonymous words, or whether a fa or a wa (two forms of "and") is used. One of the short surahs appears in a very-short, a longer, and an extra long version in different manuscripts, but the most reasonable explanation for this is that it was revealed early in Muhammad's life, and it raised questions which were answered by another revelation, and then elaborated again later. Ali's version has the longest text, which is the one used in today's Qurans. That figures, because Ali was with Muhammad until the end of his life. The shorter versions would be those remembered and recorded by someone who was with Muhammad in Mecca, and missed out on the later elaborations of the text. So the variant gives us more, not less, confidence in the substantial accuracy of the text.

Where Bahais do differ from traditional Islamic belief, is that while Islamic scholars have generally taught that the Bible has been corrupted, based on a verse in the Quran, Baha'u'llah (founder of the Bahai Faith) said that the verse does not mean that the words of the Biblical text have been corrupted, it means the message has been corrupted by the interpretations of the Islamic scholars.

Baha'u'llah's explanation is:

... by "perverting" the text is not meant that which these foolish and abject souls have fancied, even as some maintain that Jewish and Christian divines have effaced from the Book such verses as extol and magnify the countenance of Muhammad, and instead thereof have inserted the contrary. How utterly vain and false are these words! Can a man who believes in a book, and deems it to be inspired by God, mutilate it? Moreover, the Pentateuch had been spread over the surface of the earth, and was not confined to Mecca and Medina, so that they could privily corrupt and pervert its text. Nay, rather, by corruption of the text is meant that in which all Muslim divines are engaged today, that is the interpretation of God's holy Book in accordance with their idle imaginings and vain desires. And as the Jews, in the time of Muhammad, interpreted those verses of the Pentateuch, that referred to His Manifestation, *87* after their own fancy, and refused to be satisfied with His holy utterance, the charge of "perverting" the text was therefore pronounced against them. Likewise, it is clear, how in this day, the people of the Qur'an have perverted the text of God's holy Book, concerning the signs of the expected Manifestation, and interpreted it according to their inclination and desires.

In yet another instance, He saith: "A part of them heard the Word of God, and then, after they had understood it, distorted it, and knew that they did so."[Q 2:75] This verse, too, indicates that the meaning of the Word of God hath been perverted, not that the actual words have been effaced.
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 86)

It sounds to me as if you've heard part of a conversation between a Muslim (arguing that the Quran verse shows the Bible is corrupted, to remove prophecies of the coming of Muhammad) and a Bahai (arguing the Quran verse doesn't mean that the Bible text was changed).

Bahais do not however believe that the Bible is word for word authentic: the historical evidence doesn't support that.

[manualman]

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

Indonesia has a relatively large Catholic minority population (something like 9% of the population) and has many mosques and churches side-by-side.

Iran also affords legal protection and representation of Jews and Christians as being 'People of the Book'. Iran has also some Jewish and Christian politicians and senior government members.

Azerbaijan also has a significant population of both Jews and Christians, and its move towards secularism ensures that anti-Semitic and anti-Christian attacks rarely happen. There are Orthodox, Catholic, Coptic and other Christian churches in this country.

Egypt has a long history of peaceful Coptic Christianity which largely existed without problem until recently.

Lebanon also has a largely peaceful existence between Muslims and Christians/Jewish people. Politically power is equal between the Islamic and Christian population and Christians hold major power including in the Army.

Syria has also a significant Syriac Christian Church, and given that there is no religious restriction in this country, Christianity has continued to survive peacefully there, present events not withstanding. Possibly the one restrition is that the President of Syria must be a Muslim as per the Syrian constitution.

In Syria in particular, there are Christian/Catholic schools, and Christian Syrians are given the day off to attend church, even though Sunday is a working day in Syrian culture.

Thanks for your response and charitable patience. Threads like this get heated when they take on tones of "Of course you're wrong and I'm right" and you've done a good job of sticking up for your convictions without belligerency. But I do have some quibbles.

Indonesia is hardly a safe place to be a christian. I had Indonesian friends in college including some converts to christianity from Islam. They were VERY concerned about having to go back after college, including two who faced the very real possibility of being killed by their own family members if they found out about the conversion to christianity. Add in the atrocious treatment of the christian East Timorese by their largely muslim neighbors in recent years, I'm not sure how you place Indonesia on the list of places of harmony between christians and muslims. Maybe grading on a curve compared to Saudi Arabia it's good, but it's hardly Milwaukee, is it?

Iran, you have to be kidding. They are in the paper all the time for imprisoning and threatening to execute people 'caught' preaching christianity.

Azerbaijan I know nothing about and will look into, thanks.

Egypt was dominated by secular dictators for decades who used their power to suppress all threats against them. Religious groups were ALL considered potetial threats, so they were marginalized as a matter of government policy. Now that the dictators are gone, aren't we seeing the true character of the people there? Seems like an extermination in progress to me, not an example of how divergent beliefs can live side by side in peace.

Lebanon is one of the most war torn places on earth! There seems to be peace only insofar as each side has their armed groups staking out turf and people have learned where they can safely go and where they can't. But maybe I'm too far removed to understand.

Syria has been dominated by fairly secular rulers for a long time. It remains to be seen how christians will be treated once the 'Arab Spring' throws off that secular leaning authority. I hopy you're right, but based on the Egypt experience, I worry you aren't.

I hope the Azerbaijan example pans out because if the others are the pinnacle of Islamic peace and tolerance, I'm pretty scared of it.

Too much of my inside view of Islamic life comes from outside sources. I enjoyed the novel Kite Runner about life in 80's Afghanistan by someone who lived it, but most of my other reading is by outsiders. Would you care to recommend some reading that you believe would give me a more accurate picture of what life is like in an Islamic society and how that society actually treats non-muslims?

Thanks.

[Kouyate42]

Originally Posted by rinnie

This also interests me, if Islam is the True Religion of Jesus then why did Jesus tell us that he would be the last. Why did he say that there would be no new revelation. that you would see him comming back through the clouds the same way as he went back to heaven?

Actually, according to the Qur'an, he stated quite clearly that he was both merely human and that he was not the last of the prophets, but that there was one to come.v

I suggest you read this: http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/1576/

Why did the O.T. give us thousands of claims to Jesus comming but the O.T. never mentioned Muhammad. And why did the N.T. tell us to say away from false teacher claiming to be prophets? And to stay away from false teachings and to stick to the teachings of the early Fathers of the Church.

This is wrong. The Aramaic Bible actually DOES mention Muhammad's (pbuh) coming. Similarly, the Gospel of John also predicts his coming.

Article source: http://www.answering-christianity.com/prediction.htm

They tell us there is no one but Christ. Also curious what do you feel that Christ did not do that Muhammad could do for us??

Actually, I believe that only God can do anything for me. All the prophets were sent only to warn people and bring them back to the One they should fear and worship alone. In Muhammad (pbuh) there is the best example of what true worship of God is and of a true believer. But I neither worship either 'Isa nor Muhammad (peace be upon them).

If I want something, or wish to ask something, I ask God and God alone.

[Kouyate42]

Originally Posted by Wandile

You're free to believe that.

Yippee!

These are huge accusations to make. Can you back them up?

1- Any proof of biblical corruption amounting to the doctrines of Trinity and Jesus as Son of God or any corruption at all??

2- please cite the verses indicating that Jesus was not divine

I put an article in my last post on the Islamic argument for the non-divinity of Christ and for the story of who the real Jesus is. .

Ok... but this is circular reasoning

I could make an argument purely from the Bible if I so wished.

[Wandile]

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

I put an article in my last post on the Islamic argument for the non-divinity of Christ and for the story of who the real Jesus is. .

I'm sorry but I've read too many of Osama Abdallah's works and to be honest...Answering-Christianity is extremely weak source to be citing as Osama has no knowledge of biblical exegesis. His interpretations are "interesting" to say the least.

Anyway most Muslim sources (Including the ones you cited) seem to be intellectually dishonest and have a tendency to make rather rash and dishonest interpretations of the Bible.

I ask YOU to present your case on the non-divinity of Christ as allegedly taught in the New Testament.

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

I could make an argument purely from the Bible if I so wished.

Please do so?

[PumpkinSeed]

Muslims pop out babies like theres no tomorrow.

And, no, we still beat them by about 1 billion

[rinnie]

Originally Posted by Kouyate42

Actually, according to the Qur'an, he stated quite clearly that he was both merely human and that he was not the last of the prophets, but that there was one to come.v

I suggest you read this: http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/1576/



This is wrong. The Aramaic Bible actually DOES mention Muhammad's (pbuh) coming. Similarly, the Gospel of John also predicts his coming.

Article source: http://www.answering-christianity.com/prediction.htm



Actually, I believe that only God can do anything for me. All the prophets were sent only to warn people and bring them back to the One they should fear and worship alone. In Muhammad (pbuh) there is the best example of what true worship of God is and of a true believer. But I neither worship either 'Isa nor Muhammad (peace be upon them).

If I want something, or wish to ask something, I ask God and God alone.

Please don't tell me you are tying to say Muhammad is the Holy Spirit.

[rinnie]

Originally Posted by Wandile

I'm sorry but I've read too many of Osama Abdallah's works and to be honest...Answering-Christianity is extremely weak source to be citing as Osama has no knowledge of biblical exegesis. His interpretations are "interesting" to say the least.

Anyway most Muslim sources (Including the ones you cited) seem to be intellectually dishonest and have a tendency to make rather rash and dishonest interpretations of the Bible.

I ask YOU to present your case on the non-divinity of Christ as allegedly taught in the New Testament.



Please do so?

Can't wait to hear this one.

[Trebor135]

Sen McGlinn--thanks for your post. I wasn't able to find the passage I remembered having read, so unless or until I'm able to unearth it, I will say that I stand corrected.

What I did find, however, was this:

Let's look at the verse:

And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!" S. 61:6 Yusuf Ali

The problem with the verse is that Jesus never made this prediction. Muhammad made it up. Maybe I can help Zaatari and other Muslim readers to see that there really is a problem by illustrating it with a simple fictitious scenario. Muhammad was not the last one to start a religion claiming that he was announced beforehand by earlier prophets. For example, this is the first paragraph of the Wikipedia entry on Bahá'u'lláh, founder of the Baha'i faith:

He claimed to fulfill the Bábí prophecy of "He whom God shall make manifest", but in a broader sense he also claimed to be the Messenger of God prophesied in all great religious traditions. He said that this day “is the king of days,” for which “the soul of every Prophet of God, of every Divine Messenger, hath thirsted,” and that “In this most mighty Revelation, all the Dispensations of the past have attained their highest, their final consummation.” (Source, accessed on 20 April 2006; bold emphasis mine)

Imagine that in one of Bahá'u'lláh's writings we were to find the statement:

And remember, Muhammad, the son of Amina, said: "O Arabs! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Revelations (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Bahá'u'lláh." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"

Would Muslims be impressed? Would they consider this to be evidence that Bahá'u'lláh is truly a messenger from God and thus convert and join the Baha'i faith? Hardly! Why not?

Given that such an alleged saying by Muhammad is recorded neither in the Qur'an nor in the sahih hadith, the authoritative sources of the religion of Islam, Muslims would conclude that Bahá'u'lláh invented this statement and put it into Muhammad's mouth in order to deceive and mislead people into believing that he is a messenger from God.

Instead of being a reason for believing in Bahá'u'lláh and his message, such a false claim would be a strong reason against believing him. It would not matter at all, if that statement were to be found in the authoritative religious sources of the Baha'is. The fact that it is not recorded in the Islamic sources would be sufficient reason for Muslims (and most other people), to reject such a claim as fabricated.

Baha'i apologists (defenders of the faith) could then counter this embarrassing problem by claiming that the Muslims have corrupted their scriptures by deliberately removing any reference to Bahá'u'lláh, ... but who would consider such a desperate response to be credible? Most everyone would immediately see that it was created merely for the purpose of defending a false claim by their religious founder.

Based on the authoritative Islamic sources, Muslims would easily be able to list half a dozen other reasons why this statement could not even be a lost but authentic statement of Muhammad. The fact that Muhammad explicitly taught to be the final prophet would only be one of them. There would be many others. But I think I have said enough, the reader is getting the point by now.

[Trebor135]

Originally Posted by PumpkinSeed

Muslims pop out babies like theres no tomorrow.

The 2012 edition of the CIA World Factbook (if this link doesn't work, go here) provides data indicating that, of the fifty countries with the highest fertility rate in the world, only fifteen have a strong Muslim majority:

1 Niger 7.52 2012 est.
3 Mali 6.35 2012 est.
4 Somalia 6.26 2012 est.
9 Afghanistan 5.64 2012 est.
17 Guinea 5.04 2012 est.
25 Senegal 4.69 2012 est.
27 Gaza Strip 4.57 2012 est.
30 Yemen 4.45 2012 est.
33 Western Sahara 4.22 2012 est.
34 Mauritania 4.22 2012 est.
35 Sudan 4.17 2012 est.
36 Gambia, The 4.10 2012 est.
38 Comoros 4.09 2012 est.
43 Iraq 3.58 2012 est.
49 Jordan 3.36 2012 est.

The rest have a near-balance between Muslims and non-Muslims (e.g., Nigeria, Burkina Faso), a Muslim plurality (e.g., Sierra Leone, Guinea-Bissau), a notable Muslim presence (e.g., Ethiopia, Togo), a small Muslim minority (e.g., Uganda, Congo-Kinshasa), or virtually no Muslim population to speak of (e.g., Congo-Brazzaville, Angola).

And, no, we still beat them by about 1 billion

How so? Muslims are about 1.5 billion, while Catholics stand at about 1.1 billion.