Claiming belief as fact. Seems dangerous
|
Claiming belief as fact. Seems dangerous
Way too hostile and arrogant
Arrogant
Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
Telling the differences between two religions constitutes cheering for one and bad-mouthing denigration of one or the other? Please point out where in my post I denigrated Islam. Actually, the essence of what you are saying is don't discuss the subject forcing me to remind you respectfully that this is a discussion forum
BTW
As much as I try to see the point of the original post as having the malicious intent you accuse it of having, I just can't detect it. All I see is a person seeking a discussion. Maybe we aren't reading the same original post.
As for scorning, scoffing, or mocking from unbelievers, that's to be expected:
KJV
Jude 1:18
How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
2TIMOTHY 3:3-4.
Knowing this first: that scoffers (mockers) will come in The Last Days, walking according to their own lust, and saying, "where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell aspleep (God's chosen prophets of old died) all things continued as they were from the beginning of creation."
As Morganite said, the question you asked is a valid one. It's the misundersandings of your question that make it seem invalid. For example, you merely asked whether Christians and Moslems worship the same God. Or whether Allah is Jehovah. But this was misunderstood as a call to Christian arms based on the following perception of your question.
"How is Jehovah better than Allah? Can you please provide examples?"
kiwimac misses the point. The question is not what Muslims think of the Bible or vice versa, but are the two deities the same person by different names. By the way, why is it that some folks can't stand to be disagreed with? Calling someone arrogant or pompous is abusive. Can it be that they have no intelligent argument to offer?Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwimac
Just a question to help further the discussion:
If Allah and the Christian God are the same, why would they tell two prophets (Muhammad and Jesus) to worship him in separate ways?
Does merely a name change who he is, What if in my personal relationship I feel lead to call God "NORM" is that wrong, God of the Old Testment had many names, depending on the relationship of God to man at that time, or expressing a relatonship.
We have to look past ( esp the English) words, since this language while believing it has some special control on Christianity is not, The God of the Spanish translated bible, or the Russian bible or the Greek bible or the Arabic bible are all the same God.
Differences of name pronunciation are irrelevant to identity. It's what the believers claim their deity requires of us that matters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
When the true aim of Islam is to convert all Christians to Islam or kill them, then you can bet some Christian folks are going to get riled. If you think this is a simple, peacfull discussion between two peacful religions then you are delusional. All I can tell you is that we need to kill them before they try to kill us and I will be the first in the trench to do just that. If Islam is such a wonderful, peaceful religion, then why don't all of the peacful ones do something to stop this mess? They do not want to simply because they all believe Christians should convert to Islam , what they call the one true religion, or die. Tell me, when did you ever hear of Christians giving them the same ultimatum? You haven't. The Christian GOD and the Islam god are not the same in the hearts of the two different believers. Now you can sit here and argue that point until hell freezes over and you will just continue to show how uninformed you truly are.
Sorry Mag, but I don't think any American Indians will go along with that considering they were heathens to be converted. The rhetoric you hear from parts of Islam are really no different than what some Christians have done in the name of God. From the Inquisition to the settling of America conversion was through killing and torture.
If both believe that they should kill each other in the name of religion, where's the difference? Sounds exactly the same to me. Of course, the likes of magprob and the jihadis are (praise be to God/Allah) a tiny minority in both religions.Quote:
Originally Posted by magprob
Perhaps you might consider gently that you are wrong. I have studied Islam for over 25+ and disagree with you completely.Quote:
Originally Posted by magprob
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwimac
So you will agree that the people who did the terrorist acts on 911 were wrong and it was terrorism or political attack, not a good thing, I just have had trouble myself finding a Muslim that would speak out against the 911 attacks and also the current killing from BOTH sides of the killings in Iraq.
I have talked to many and they see to fall short calling what their fellow Muslims did was wrong and against their faith
So I am assuming you are telling us all of the killing on 911 and all of the different sects killing each other now in Iraq is against their religious teachings ?
Please give me a break with the broad brush opinion, by your way of thinking all priests are pedophiles and perverts. I submit many are here in the US just to get away from what you speak of and because YOU don't know any why assume they don't exist.:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
No, honestly I have asked this question 100's of time, and I have never, not once had a Muslim tell them that these attacks and killing were wrong.
Sorry, you will find priests that tell you the truth about the small number and that the news shows the history going back 20 years. And that more school teachers molest than preists every year.
But I hear people say they have studed this or that, or that they are Muslim and they are peaceful but when I ask them to denouce what happened and tell me that these people were wrong, I have never had a Muslim tell me that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by magprob
True, if I thought that Christendom and "Islamdom" ever have been or are now in good terms with one another then I would definitely be delusional and uninformed.
I have. And I know for a fact that just as there are many branches of Christendom so it is in the Muslim world. To judge another because he will not act or behave or speak as you would wish is... not good for a man of the cloth or anyone else, in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
To put it correctly Christians are not in tune with each other as are Muslims not in complete harmony either, so if they are differences among them, then there are bound to be differences between them. In my opinion they are both more alike than either cares to admit... As in DENIAL of the real truth... They are closely alike. None no righter than the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starman
Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
First I would like to clarify:
We are not in any position to condemned anyone to eternal damnation based on his or her present beliefs. God values sincerity and understands when one is mislead and he doesn't destroy based on ignorance but gives each person a chance to make an INFORMED decision. From a Christian viewpoint that informed decision is based on the certain knowledge that Jesus died for our sins and that salvation comes only by accepting it and taking the necessary action to avail ourselves of the benefits.
About similarities and differences between and among:
True, there are certain doctrinal differences within the Christian ranks. But ultimately, all Christians acknowledge Jesus as savior and that is the unifying factor. In short, when the time comes for God to begin doctrinal clarification, Christians will not have to begin to accept Jesus-since they already have. In contrast, Buddhists, Shintoists, Moslems, and all other nonChrisatians will have to make a complete doctrinal about face.
So from a Christian standpoint, it is primarily that crucial fact--the acceptance or rejection of the Ransom Sacrifice which drastically separates Christian from Moslems.
Are we worshipping the same God? I would say that barring such practices as human sacrifices and other such obviously demonic things, it depends on how God views each person's heart. The intention might be honest and pure and it is appreciated. But the manner might need some adjustments. In his mercy God is just and it's best to let him decide that on an individual basis. But ultimately he will require that we listen to what he tells us is the WAY to worship and our reaction to that requirement will determine whether we gain eternal life.
Christians: One GOD is revealed in scripture as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Islam: There is no god but allah.
Christians:Jesus is the Son of GOD, one with the Father, sinless redeamer of sinful man through his vicarious death on the cross and resurection from the dead.
Islam: Jesus was only a man, a prophet equal to Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses, all of whom are below Muhammed in importance. Christ did not die for man's sins; in fact Judas, not Jesus, died on the cross.
Christians: Sin is proud, independent rebellion against GOD in active or passive form.
Islam: Sin is falure to do allah's will, falure to do one's religious duties as outlined in the "five pillars of faith."
Christians: Christ-GOD's Son-died for our sins (on the cross) according to the inspired
Word of GOD.
Islam: Man earns his own salvation, pays for his own sins.
I haven't studied Islam for 25 years since it took me only a few hours to see the truth.
All I am saying is that the facts represent the truth, they are very different indeed. If you are a muslem then good for you, as a matter of fact, isn't it time for you to squat facing Mecca and pray? Well, chop chop, better get to it or you know what, no twenty seven virgins for you! Oh, and by the way, if you attack my country again, I'll see you in the trenches.
So how about you, Friar, are you willing to call what your fellow Christian magprob advocates wrong, and against the Christian faith? Or should we interpret your silence to mean that you agree?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
Quote:
Originally Posted by magprob
And there it is there!Quote:
Originally Posted by Starman
No, there is only one true faith, which is Christianity, and in the end as Rev and other bible prophecy tells us ( heck even the Quran tells us) there will be a final great War between beleivers and non believers, nothing can stop that day from coming.
So you promote a passive stance yet defend Islam. That's it, I am through with this post as I see what we're up against... argument simply for the sake of argument with people ill equipped to argue. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
Starman-First I would like to clarify:
We are not in any position to condemned anyone to eternal damnation based on his or her present beliefs. God values sincerity and understands when one is mislead and he doesn't destroy based on ignorance but gives each person a chance to make an INFORMED decision. From a Christian viewpoint that informed decision is based on the certain knowledge that Jesus died for our sins and that salvation comes only by accepting it and taking the necessary action to avail ourselves of the benefits.
That's your version and your welcome to it
About similarities and differences between and among:
True, there are certain doctrinal differences within the Christian ranks. But ultimately, all Christians acknowledge Jesus as savior and that is the unifying factor. In short, when the time comes for God to begin doctrinal clarification, Christians will not have to begin to accept Jesus-since they already have. In contrast, Buddhists, Shintoists, Moslems, and all other nonChrisatians will have to make a complete doctrinal about face.
Because one believes differently do we have to fight about it, lets do lunch, I can wear red you can wear blue. What difference does it make?
So from a Christian standpoint, it is primarily that crucial fact--the acceptance or rejection of the Ransom Sacrifice which drastically separates Christian from Moslems.
So thats an excuse to fight instead of break bread?
Are we worshipping the same God? I would say that barring such practices as human sacrifices and other such obviously demonic things, it depends on how God views each person's heart. The intention might be honest and pure and it is appreciated. But the manner might need some adjustments. In his mercy God is just and it's best to let him decide that on an individual basis. But ultimately he will require that we listen to what he tells us is the WAY to worship and our reaction to that requirement will determine whether we gain eternal life.
By your own words their is only one God so no matter the rest he will judge as he does and we can only succumb to that judgement
The KORAN and the BIBLE are books, Man is FLESH, God is SPIRIT and all religions come from that. That is the only true faith. What you have going is a branch in the tree, and if you step back you would see that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
He will not answer, Yet he expects answers from others.Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
Perhaps the following sites might help allay your fears?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
Scholars of Islam & the Tragedy of Sept. 11th
Statements Against Terror
Muslims Condemn Terrorist Attacks
The American Muslim (TAM)
One quote:
Ray McIntyreQuote:
Mustafa Mashhur, General Guide, Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt; Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Pakistan; Muti Rahman Nizami, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Bangladesh; Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, Founder, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Palestine; Rashid Ghannoushi, President, Nahda Renaissance Movement, Tunisia; Fazil Nour, President, PAS - Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Malaysia; and 40 other Muslim scholars and politicians:
“The undersigned, leaders of Islamic movements, are horrified by the events of Tuesday 11 September 2001 in the United States which resulted in massive killing, destruction and attack on innocent lives. We express our deepest sympathies and sorrow. We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks on innocents. God Almighty says in the Holy Qur'an: 'No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another' (Surah al-Isra 17:15).”
MSANews, September 14, 2001, http://msanews.mynet.net/MSANEWS/200109/20010917.15.html;
Arabic original in al-Quds al-Arabi (London), September 14, 2001, p. 2, http://www.alquds.co.uk/Alquds/2001/09Sep/14%20Sep%20Fri/Quds02.pdf
Priest
Anglican Church International
Random thoughts: The inquisition was not Christian. The crusades were military and prevented Islam from covering Europe, though presented as religious. The best way to defuse the strain between Christianity and Islam is to let Muslims freely hear the Gospel and freely choose which way they want to go. (Ain't likely to happen!) Christians have had the freedom to hear about Mohammed for a long time. I am convinced that the reason that Muslims do not have access to the teachings of Christ in those coutries that they rule is because Islam fears the Gospel.
Hard to hear when your hollering at each other. As to the other events the church specifically the pope raised the money to pay for an army during the crusades and the last time I looked catholics were Christians. There is no evidence to support the notion that Islam fears the gospel and why should they since they both are but branches of the same tree. I think its so stupid that Christians and Muslims think there branch goes higher than the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
The crusades were to stop the crazy fools from doing then, what they are doing now.
What do you want to do tonight Brain?
What do we do every night Pinky... take over the world!
Pinky and the Brain, Pinky and the Brain, One is a genius and the others insane!
Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
You are entitled to your opinion that all religions are equally acceptable to God and that He hasn't communicated with mankind via his written word. But that's neither a Christian nor a Moslem view.
1. My version? Not at all. The biblical version supported by both OT and NT scriptures.
2. Yes, there is only one God. But the rest does matter.
2. I never said we should fight about it nor hold one another in utter contempt because of it. If I did show me where.
4. The analogy between wearing different colors and practicing different religions is a
False one. One is a moral matter and the other isn't.
BTW
Sorry about the delay in responding to your question. I am not always here nor using the computer so immediate responses are impossible in my case.
Actually it was about control over the trade routes, Mo money,Mo money. Its always been about the money and really nothing else. There is no God when money is involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by magprob
Quote=Starman You are entitled to your opinion that all religions are equally acceptable to God and that He hasn't communicated with mankind via his written word. But that's neither a Christian nor a Moslem view.
I am neither a christian nor muslim either.
1. My version? Not at all. The biblical version supported by both OT and NT scriptures.
Which means nothing to me as I am not christian, Neither was Christ
2. Yes, there is only one God. But the rest does matter.
2. I never said we should fight about it nor hold one another in utter contempt because of it. If I did show me where.
Honestly Starman, I respect you and what you believe, you may quote a lot of book but I've yet to see you make people feel inferior because they may disagree, I concede the point.
4. The analogy between wearing different colors and practicing different religions is a
False one. One is a moral matter and the other isn't.
I disagree, the point was people of differences can enjoy lunch together. We should try sometime, my treat. How about the branches of an oak tree are oak.(Different religons same faith)
BTW
Sorry about the delay in responding to your question. I am not always here nor using the computer so immediate responses are impossible in my case
No sweat I been babysitting anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
The reason I pointed out that my beliefs have scriptural support is because what I said was referred to as My Version. That's called heresy. Please consider that the only way for a Christian can defend himself against that accusation is to provide scriptural support . Therefore my reference to scripture. The alternative would be to agree via silence.
My reference to Christians and Moslems was meant as a reminder that these are the two religions being contrasted and compared and that both are similar in their belief in divine revelation via the written word.
Christ was under the Mosaic Law and expected all those who were under the Mosaic law to follow it while it was still in force. That included his Apostles and disciples who were all Jews. However, he came as a mediator of a New Covenant which would be made legal before God via his death. Once that New Covenant took effect then his followers would no longer have to feel bound by the ceremonial requirements of the Mosaic Law.
In short, Jesus came to establish an approach to God with himself as mediator which later came to be called Christianity. He prepared the foundation of Christianity by teaching his Apostles what the Christian requirements would be. There are many scriptures prior to his death in which he explicitly tells his followers the details of what Christanity would be based upon--his ransom sacrifice for forgiveness of sins being the most important.
BTW
I agree with you on the getting along with people of other faiths.
Discussion is good. Is not diplomacy based on it? In sifting through the posts, I see people on both sides of this, so it raises further interest on the subect, to wit:
Let's assume for the moment that both Jehovah and Allah are the God revealed in the Old Testament. (Personally, I don't think they are in any way related, but let's assume so for a moment.)
1. Judaism accepts Jehovah, but does not accept Jesus as His Son. They believe that the Messiah (anointed one) will come some day. Do they believe that Messiah will be the Son of God? (Maybe someone of the Jewish faith will answer this)
2. Islam denies the idea that Allah would have a son.
3. Christianity believes that Jesus is the Son of God.
Now:
1. Judaism tolerates Christianity pretty well.
2. Christianity, for the most part tolerates Judaism and most other religions because Jesus taught us to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. A non-violent approach based on persuasion is the tool of Christian growth.
1. Islam tolerates no other religion, and aims for world domination enforced by might, this is proven by history and current events. Perhaps some Muslim will explain the differences within Islam, and identify whether these intolerant, violent, members are mainstream, or what?
Doesn't all of this suggest a different tree, rather than different branches of the same one?
Just for clarification. I said what I said because "Allah" is a name that a faith group calls God (aka the Creator of All, who is Omnipotent, Omniscient, etc.).Quote:
Originally Posted by Morganite in response to RickJ saying "I don't think it's a valid question."
Another faith group describes/defines God the same way.
... so instead of saying "I don't think it is a valid question", I should have said "By definition (that is agreed upon by both groups) God and Allah are one and the same"
Does that make sense?
Here's something interesting I found about this topic and the discussion going on here.
"1. QUR’AN PLAGIARIZED FROM THE BIBLE :
Question
Is it not true that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) has copied the Qur’an from the Bible?
Answer
Many critics allege that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) himself was not the author of the Qur’an but he learnt it and/or plagiarised (copied or adapted) it from other human sources or from previous scriptures or revelations.
1. MUHUMMAD LEARNT THE QUR’AN FROM A ROMAN BLACKSMITH WHO WAS A CHRISTIAN
Some Pagans accused the Prophet of learning the Qur’an from a Roman Blacksmith, who was a Christian staying at the outskirts of Makkah. The Prophet very often used to go and watch him do his work. A revelation of the Qur’an was sufficient to dismiss this charge - the Qur’an says in Surah An-Nahl chapter 16 verse 103:
"We know indeed that they say, ‘It is a man that teaches him,’ The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear."
[Al-Qur’an 16:103]
How could a person whose mother tongue was foreign and could hardly speak little but of poor broken Arabic be the source of the Qur’an which is pure, eloquent, fine Arabic? To believe that the blacksmith taught the Prophet the Qur’an is some what similar to believing that a Chinese immigrant to England, who did not know proper English, taught Shakespeare.
2. MUHUMMAD (PBUH) LEARNT FROM WARAQA - THE RELATIVE OF KHADIJAH (RA)
Muhummad’s (pbuh) contacts with the Jewish and Christian Scholars were very limited. The most prominent Christian known to him was an old blind man called Waraqa ibn-Naufal who was a relative of the Prophet’s first wife Khadijah (r.a.). Although of Arab descent, he was a convert to Christianity and was very well versed with the New Testament. The Prophet only met him twice, first when Waraqa was worshipping at the Kaaba (before the Prophetic Mission) and he kissed the Prophet’s forehead affectionately; the second occasion was when the Prophet went to meet Waraqa after receiving the first revelation. Waraqa died three years later and the revelation continued for about 23 years. It is ridiculous to assume that Waraqa was the source of the contents of the Qur’an.
3. PROPHET’S RELIGIOUS DISCUSSIONS WITH THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS
It is true that the Prophet did have religious discussions with the Jews and Christians but they took place in Madinah more than 13 years after the revelation of the Qur’an had started. The allegation that these Jews and Christians were the source is perverse, since in these discussions Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was performing the roles of a teacher and of a preacher while inviting them to embrace Islam and pointing out that they had deviated from their true teachings of Monotheism. Several of these Jews and Christians later embraced Islam."
second part of the quesion above.
". THE PROPHET LEARNT THE QUR’AN FROM THOSE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS THAT HE MET OUTSIDE ARABIA
All historical records available show that Muhummad (pbuh) had made only three trips outside Makkah before his Prophethood:
At the age of 9 he accompanied his mother to Madinah.
Between the age of 9 and 12, he accompanied his uncle Abu-Talib on a business trip to Syria.
At the age of 25 he led Khadija’s Caravan to Syria.
It is highly imaginary to assume that the Qur’an resulted from the occasional chats and meetings with the Christians or Jews from any of the above three trips.
5. LOGICAL GROUNDS TO PROVE THAT THE PROPHET DID NOT LEARN THE QUR’AN FROM JEWS OR CHRISTIANS
The day-to-day life of the Prophet was an open book for all to see. In fact a revelation came asking people to give the Prophet (pbuh) privacy in his own home. If the Prophet had been meeting people who told him what to say as a revelation from God, this would not have been hidden for very long.
The extremely prominent Quraish nobles who followed the Prophet and accepted Islam were wise and intelligent men who would have easily noticed anything suspicious about the way in which the Prophet brought the revelations to them - more so since the Prophetic mission lasted 23 years.
The enemies of the Prophet kept a close watch on him in order to find proof for their claim that he was a liar - they could not point out even a single instance when the Prophet may have had a secret rendezvous with particular Jews and Christians.
It is inconceivable that any human author of the Qur’an would have accepted a situation in which he received no credit whatsoever for originating the Qur’an.
Thus, historically and logically it cannot be established that there was a human source for the Qur’an.
6. MUHUMMAD (PBUH) WAS AN ILLITERATE
The theory that Muhummad (pbuh) authored the Qur’an or copied from other sources can be disproved by the single historical fact that he was illiterate.
Allah testifies Himself in the Qur’an
In Surah Al-Ankabut chapter no.29 verse 48
"And thou was not (able) to recite a Book before this (Book came), nor art thou (able) to transcribe it with thy right hand: in that case, indeed, would the talkers of vanities have doubted."
[Al-Qur’an 29:48]
Allah (swt) knew that many would doubt the authenticity of the Qur’an and would ascribe it to Prophet Muhummad (pbuh). Therefore Allah in His Divine Wisdom chose the last and final Messenger to be an ‘Ummi’, i.e. unlettered, so that the talkers of vanity would not then have the slightest justification to doubt the Prophet. The accusation of his enemies that he had copied the Qur’an from other sources and rehashed it all in a beautiful language might have carried some weight, but even this flimsy pretence has been deprived to the unbeliever and the cynic.
Allah reconfirms in the Qur’an in Surah Al A’raf chapter 7 verse 157:
"Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures) in the Law and the Gospel"
The prophecy of coming of the unlettered Prophet (pbuh) is also mentioned in the Bible in the book of Isaiah chapter 29 verse 12.
"And the book is delivered to him that is not learned."
[Isaiah 29:12]
The Qur’an testifies in no less than four different places that the Prophet (pbuh) was illiterate. It is also mentioned in Surah A’raf chapter 7 verse 158 and in Surah Al-Jumu’a chapter 62 verse 2.
7. ARABIC VERSION OF THE BIBLE WAS NOT PRESENT"
More on that
"7. ARABIC VERSION OF THE BIBLE WAS NOT PRESENT
The Arabic version of the Bible was not present at the time of Prophet Muhummad (pbuh). The earliest Arabic version of the Old Testament is that of R. Saadias Gaon of 900 C.E. - more than 250 years after the death of our beloved Prophet. The oldest Arabic version of the new Testament was published by Erpenius in 1616 C.E. - about a thousand years after the demise of our Prophet.
8. SIMILARITIES IN THE QUR’AN AND THE BIBLE DUE TO COMMON SOURCE
Similarities between the Qur’an and the Bible does not necessarily mean that the former has been copied from the latter. In fact it gives evidence that both of them are based on a common third source; all divine revelations came from the same source - the one universal God. No matter what human changes were introduced into some of these Judeo-Christian and other older religious scriptures that had distorted their originality, there are some areas that have remained free from distortion and thus are common to many religions.
It is true that there are some similar parallels between the Qur’an and the Bible but this is not sufficient to accuse Muhummad (pbuh) of compiling or copying from the Bible. The same logic would then also be applicable to teachings of Christianity and Judaism and thus one could wrongly claim that Jesus (pbuh) was not a genuine Prophet (God forbid) and that he simply copied from the Old Testament.
The similarities between the two signify a common source that is one true God and the continuation of the basic message of monotheism and not that the later prophets have plagiarised from the previous prophets.
If someone copies during an examination he will surely not write in the answer sheet that he has copied from his neighbour or Mr. XYZ. Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) gave due respect and credit to all the previous prophets (pbut). The Qur’an also mentions the various revelations given by Almighty God to different prophets.
9. MUSLIMS BELIEVE IN THE TAURAH, ZABOOR, INJEEL AND QUR’AN
Four revelations of Allah (swt) are mentioned by name in the Qur’an: the Taurah, the Zaboor, the Injeel and the Qur’an.
Taurah, the revelation i.e. the Wahi given to Moosa (a. s.) i.e. Moses (pbuh).
Zaboor, the revelation i.e. the Wahi given to Dawood (a.s.) i.e. David (pbuh).
Injeel, the revelation i.e. the Wahi given to Isa (A.S.) ie. Jesus (pbuh).
‘Al-Qur’an’, the last and final Wahi i.e. revelation given to the last and final Messenger Muhammad (pbuh).
It is an article of faith for every Muslim to believe in all the Prophets of God and all revelations of God. However, the present day Bible has the first five books of the Old Testament attributed to Moses and the Psalms attributed to David. Moreover the New Testament or the four Gospels of the New Testament are not the Taurah, the Zaboor or the Injeel, which the Qur’an refers to. These books of the present day Bible may partly contain the word of God but these books are certainly not the exact, accurate and complete revelations given to the prophets.
The Qur’an presents all the different prophets of Allah as belonging to one single brotherhood; all had a similar prophetic mission and the same basic message. Because of this, the fundamental teachings of the major faiths cannot be contradictory, even if there has been a considerable passage of time between the different prophetic missions, because the source of these missions was one: Almighty God, Allah. This is why the Qur’an says that the differences which exist between various religions are not the responsibility of the prophets, but of the followers of these prophets who forgot part of what they had been taught, and furthermore, misinterpreted and changed the scriptures. The Qur’an cannot therefore be seen as a scripture which competes with the teachings of Moses, Jesus and the other prophets. On the contrary, it confirms, completes and perfects the messages that they brought to their people.
Another name for the Qur’an is the ‘The Furqan’ which means the criteria to judge the right from the wrong, and it is on the basis of the Qur’an that we can decipher which part of the previous scriptures can be considered to be the word of God.
10. SCIENTIFIC COMPARISON BETWEEN QUR’AN AND BIBLE
If you glance through the Bible and the Qur’an you may find several points which appear to be exactly the same in both of them, but when you analyse them closely, you realise that there is a difference of ‘chalk and cheese’ between them. Only based on historical details it is difficult for someone who is neither conversant with Christianity or Islam to come to a firm decision as to which of the scriptures is true; however if you verify the relevant passages of both the scriptures against scientific knowledge, you will yourself realize the truth.
"
Creation of the Universe in Six Days
As per the Bible, in the first book of Genesis in Chapter One, the universe was created in six days and each day is defined as a twenty-four hours period. Even though the Qur’an mentions that the universe was created in six ‘Ayyaams’, ‘Ayyaam’ is the plural of years; this word has two meanings: firstly, it means a standard twenty-four hours period i.e. a day, and secondly, it also means stage, period or epoch which is a very long period.
When the Qur’an mentions that the universe was created in six ‘Ayyaams’, it refers to the creation of the heavens and the earth in six long periods or epochs; scientists have no objection to this statement. The creation of the universe has taken billions of years, which proves false or contradicts the concept of the Bible which states that the creation of the Universe took six days of twenty-four hour durations each.
Sun Created After the Day
The Bible says in chapter 1, verses 3-5, of Genesis that the phenomenon of day and night was created on the first day of creation of the Universe by God. The light circulating in the universe is the result of a complex reaction in the stars; these stars were created according to the Bible (Genesis chapter 1 verse 14 to 19) on the fourth day. It is illogical to mention the result that is the light (the phenomenon of day and night) was created on the first day of Creation when the cause or source of the light was created three days later. Moreover the existence of evening and morning as elements of a single day is only conceivable after the creation of the earth and its rotation around the sun. In contrast with the contents of the Bible on this issue, the Qur’an does not give any unscientific sequence of Creation. Hence it is absolutely absurd to say that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) copied the passages pertaining to the creation of the universe from the Bible but missed out this illogical and fantastic sequence of the Bible.
Creation of the Sun, The Earth and the Moon
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 9 to 13, the earth was created on the third day, and as per verses 14 to 19, the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day. The earth and the moon emanated, as we know, from their original star, the Sun. Hence to place the creation of the sun and the moon after the creation of the earth is contrary to the established idea about the formation of the solar system.
Vegetation Created on the third day and Sun on the fourth day
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 11-13, vegetation was created on the third day along with seed-bearing grasses, plants and trees; and further on as per verses 14-19, the sun was created on the fourth day. How is it scientifically possible for the vegetation to have appeared without the presence of the sun, as has been stated in the Bible?
If Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) was indeed the author of the Qur’an and had copied its contents from the Bible, how did he manage to avoid the factual errors that the Bible contains? The Qur’an does not contain any statements which are incompatible with scientific facts.
The Sun and the Moon both Emit light
According to the Bible both the sun and the moon emit their own light. In the Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verse 16 says, "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night".
Science tells us today that the moon does not have its own light. This confirms the Qur’anic concept that the light of the moon is a reflected light. To think that 1400 years ago, Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) corrected these scientific errors in the Bible and then copied such corrected passages in the Qur’an is to think of something impossible."
There's a lot more about this, I think I already posted more then enough I supposed to. Sorry for that.
Where does that come from?
Here is one source that has it verbatim:Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJ
Da'wah Training Programme
Instead of copy and pasting the whole text perhaps linking to it would have been preferable.
Yeah sorry, was too late, 'll be careful next time, sorry about that again.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
hadi88-
Isn't it true that Muslims do not believe the Holocaust took place? If they believe the Old Testament, there is a prophecy that has been fulfilled, the grimmest imaginable outworking of the ancient curse.
Deuteronomy 28:64-67- Then the Lord will scatter you among all nations, from one end of the earth to the other. There you will worship other gods-gods of wood and stone, which neither you nor your fathers have known. Among these nations you will find no repose, no resting place for the sole of your foot. There the Lord will give you an anxious mind, eyes weary with longing, and a despairing heart. You will live in constant suspence, filled with dread both night and day, never sure of your life. In the morning you will say,"if only it were evening!"and in the evening,"if only it were morning!"- because of the terror that will fill your hearts and the sights that your eyes will see.
And if so close to the Old Testament, why do the Palestinians ignore the fact that the early Israelites BOUGHT those tracts of land from the people living there at the time? Free & clear!
Just a couple of questions I have for today!
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:10 PM. |