Christian/Muslim ThreadsWhat qualifies Muhamad as a prophet ?your assertion that the Quran needs the hadiths is false... without it its an engine-less car.. thats false... it is said that the book is understood by God, His Propeht and those who are knowledgable in it... the 3 category of people , we the shia know, refers to the Holy Ahlul-Bayt... the progeny of Prophet Muhammed. now i know it may seem very far fetched to you... but if one were to study its history and principles etc... one would also agree with it. (i.e. if he is unbiased) which is the reason why trinitarians and unitarians still exist today... and the JW and the Mormons and the catholics and the protestents and the tv evangalists etc... all because christianity was sorted out by the early church fathers 300 years after the comming of Jesus at a council headed by a roman emperor who considered himself a god who supproted the trinitarian cause yet died a unitarian... very interesting history... You do realize that islam is as much a christian heresy as mormons and jehova's witnesses. And yes truth is sorted out from error at the very beginning, what Mormons and Jehova's Witnesses claim is exactly the same thing as Islam. hundreds or thousands of years after Jesus lived: "Well yeah the bible is correct, but we have a better book! Including the new and improved latest revelation! With a dangling new prophet to go with it! All in one package! Where do you get a better deal then this?" wheter that be the watchtower, the book of mormon or a quran... a muhammed or a joseph smith, both are mere christian heresies. All heresies have nothing to do with christ, that's why they are called heresies!!! and concerning the many denominations: Jesus predicted division and different opinions from families to entire denominations: Luke 12:51-53 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law." keep in mind the times of Constantine; who got the counsil of nicea together because the roman empire was divided with christian disagreeances... due to the influece of cultures, heretics or false gospels. For that reason he asked all major bishops from the roman empire together to agree with one another. Considering this context you must know, that alltough they came in agreeance concerning christian tradition. That this theology wasn't spread and teached in the same generation as in wich Constantine lived... Constantine still had bishops who preached him other stuff then what was standarized by the council at nicea. Neither is Constantine the embodiement of "christian theology" and was practiclly a pagan all his life. I do not need to defend Constantine his amount of 'christian being', he needs to defend himself on that. As i have already stated... bukhari didnt check the authenticity of each and every hadith... he travelled far and wide to get them.. and compiled it. that is it.. as for why does it still exist??? well... if it were upto me i would scrap all false hadiths... but it isnt upto me... Acctually Bukhari did check the authenticity of the hadiths... Imam Bukhari the collector of the narration lived in a period over 230 years after the death of the prophet. Out of the 600,000 Hadith (narrations) that he collected, which were initially attributed to the prophet, he threw out as fabrication 592,700 of them and kept only 7300 as being genuine. He allready seperated truth from error, why do you cloud his judgement? you missed the point.. your esteemed learned brother in Christ here asserted that the Quran contained certain verses which are of no use ( the word he used was petty squabbles) and these are to be recited at all mosques... my counter was the bible too contains such incidents... which are recited / chanted / recalled at church gatherings etc... are Lots sexual encounters of any significance to the church??? if not then his very same lame argument can be applied here... no i didn't miss any point, since God nowhere approves of such conduct in the bible... Islam is so gullible to believe that Allah is like a mobster and forgives his closest friends (all previous prophets and muhammed) and has a different set of rules for the casual people... that's how dictators work, only the top have priviledges and those that need to follow the leader get all the scraps. While in the OT, you see prophets being punished by God for their sins. you see Adam being expelled from the garden for disobeyence, you see King David being punished for adulatry and you see King Solomon being punished for paganism as well do you see God punishing his chosen people from expelling them from their land. Just because they have sinned! God doesn't look upon sin! neither does God approve of Lot's incest... God didn't adress this, but Lot's sexual escepades are written down in the bible with honesty, doesn't mean they are approved by God just because it's not adressed. so according to you a miracle is something magical... like splitting up the red sea or lazarus or david copperfield snapping his fingers and making an elephant disappear... and you say that i am pathetic... i guess when the first guy who invented the cigerret lighter... people considered it a miracle as well.. wow!!! fire from the fingertips... broaden your scope of vision... and you shall see real miracles. you can twist and turn as you like, a book is not a miracle!! even I can write a book! does that mean i'm able to do miracles? even the dictionary agrees by my definition of miracle, your the one making up entire new ones! miracle: NOUN: 1. An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God Malachi had a prophecy. John the Baptist claimed it for himself. so once again i ask who vouched for John while John was alive??? did you know that prophecies can be interpreted in many ways??? Are you aware of nostradamus?? a french or italian soothsayer... did you know that he too made many prophecies??? which are documented and you can find it at any avg. bookstore... he made prophecies that came true.. is he also a divine prophet??? Oh yea no one vouched for him... but mind you he too had quite a few true future seeings... so does he qualify?? okay, first you ask their prophecies, and then when i give them... you say you don't believe in prophecies anymore... if your prophet wants to be of the same judo-christian lineage he has to fullfill requirements of prophethood. wheter you like that or not. Jesus who was an obvious prophet, due to his prophecies and miracles... vouched for John saying that he is a real prophet. John The baptist didn’t have to proof that Jesus was a prophet, Jesus could do that by himself... John the baptist his duty was to lay the way open for the Lord and with that confirmed indirectly that Jesus was the foretold prophet. Secondly are you willing to contradict yourself in order to make points?: 1. Nostradamus made no prophecy whatsoever that came true (if you claim otherwise, give me the prophecy with the quatrin!), it's even wrong to think to think that Nostradamus is the prime example of prophecy, when all he did was write down puzzled bilangual mumbo jumbo, wich is undecodable... and in wich people only see stuff untill after it happens. It's like trying to see figures in clouds... if you'll look hard enough you'll always see something. 2. Proving that this alchemist Nostradamus can do prophecy, proofs he has divine revelation, cause only God grants prophecy to people... and Nostradamus claimed his prophecies came from no other then Jesus Christ. If you proof Nostradamus to be a prophet, then your doing Christianity a favor and not islam. Yet even in my opinion nostradamus isn’t a christian, cause his prophecies didn’t come true... you want to make him a christian, by all means go ahead! 3. The prophecies of the bible, are not cryptic and they are told what they are about (Nostradamus is the total opposite). You cleary see when the bible talks about The Messiah, Israel or the end times (excluding the end time prophecies wich are cryptic, but wich are decodable to some extent). The prophecies are so obvious that the people in jesus times asserted the deuteronomoy 18:18 verse directly to christ when he was alive. 4. John the Baptist didn't claim it for himself, John the baptist fulffilled that prophecy!! and was asserted to him! not claimed by him! plus Malachi is the last prophet of the OT... John the Baptist only make sence to be the one promised in Malachi. 5. Still, were is Muhammed's prophecy? so you agree that there is a possibility of a self proclaimed prophet??? the need for vouching is ... well.. irrelevent.. right?? wel.. doesnt that just change the entire situation??? At first it was .. well.. he has to be prophecised ... someone has to vouch for him... and now it has been reduced to ok..no need for the vouching... he just has to do some great supernatural earth shaking miracle to prove himself.. what next??? no need to have any miracles as well??? this is what i have been trying to say all along... the requirements to be a prophet isnt an exacting science... not all can be categorised in the same class.. there are the prophecised one... and the self proclaimed one.. there are the miracle performers and the non miracle performers.. there are the minor one and there are the major ones... etc... well he was the first, it's not like there was any other option! When Muhammed came around, their was allready tons of inspired scripture... yet not one mentions anything about him. Moses fullfilled other requirements to proof his prophethood: - the miracles he gave in the name of the lord - and the prophecies he gave came true At least two things that could convince a sceptic... where does Muhammed come anywhere near this? You must at least, have some thing! In your opinion a prophet (like muhammed) just has to be no more then you and me and a great speaker.... you don't even rule out the option that a great speaker could be a mass deceiver... why don't you seek prophethood or divinity?? how do you trust a man blind folded? when he has nothing to proof for it? I have as much prophethood signs as muhammed, why don’t you follow me? Why don't you become a Baha'i ? because they said to be the last revelation ! and baha'lul'llah also has no miracles, no prophecies, etc... !! you don't need this in a prophet, so why not follow him? He says he speaks from Allah !! surely you do NOT want to insult Allah. Isnt it said in the OT that the adultress should be stoned to death??? or did Jesus abolish that law?? when he said "he has no sin can cast the first stone" tell me is this true or not? ok how about what is the punishment for adultery??? or are you gonna say a good christian doesnt commit adultery?? which is the reason i asked liberate ... is there such a thing as a sin free reborn christian??? i assume you too are a reborn christian.. are you sin free since your re-birth? you do not need to answer this... as i am in no position to judge you.. this is a personal reflection question.. think about what i said... no, nobody is free from sin... and every christians sins, even when he is re-born. and Jesus fullfilled the laws of old ! noone has to be stoned to death for sin anymore... Jesus died for all those that sinned in this life and the next. Forgiveness is what the last covenant teaches and that's what matters, the last covenant. do you know that as per God's justice system in christianity even a minor trivial sin intentional or otherwise is an infinite sin against God??? wether reborn or not... it still is a huge deal... unless you are saying that ...well.. Jesus paid the price so the later on sins (intentional or otherwise ) will be overlooked??? No christian is sin free and no sins will not be 'overlooked' . if you live your life in Christs your sins will be forgiven... but ONLY in christ. if you don't accept his sacrifice, then you don't get the benefits of the sacrifice, simple as that. I’ll let the bible do the talking: No christian is sinless!: I John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. Ecclesiastes 7:20 Indeed, there is not a righteous man on earth who continually does good and who never sins. We need to convess our sins in order to become sinless: I John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Acts 17:30 Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, A christian is to strive for spiritual perfection... a christian who stills confines to do major sins or has a habit of sinning isn’t a christian. When you sin you stop being a christian, and you need to return to christ and ask His forgiveness again and again. Ezekiel 18:4 that, "...the soul that sinneth, it shall die." there is no immortality for a sinner A muslim can get sinless trough ramadan, praying under a water spout at the ka’abe, jihad, or outdoing good deeds over your bad ones... and in the end it may even not be enough... because God grants you only forgiveness if he wills. pretty chaotic system isn't it? As well can a muslim murder and still be a muslim... how does that work? Since it’s only a bad deed, and every muslim has bad deeds. seems that you overlooked my response to Suran 17:1... plz read it.. i didn't overlook your response, your explenation just doesn't make sence mindless vain gossip/chitchat is frowned upon... tell me would you like it if you invite your friend and he starts gossiping about other people or starts asking stupid questions??? plz re-read the verses... the stress is laid on vain talk... oh pleasse... who are you to judge wich is vain and what it isn't? and that verse doesn't talk about gossip or slander! but about chatting at a table! and if a friend is talking silly, i will gladly tell him with all do respect to stop that, but i will never ask my guests to shut up while your at my place, because "you" will slander people, before they said something... that's prejuicing people on evil intents before they did a thing. Ok... did any of the OT Prophets' wives remarry after they died? Moses' wife or David's or Solomon's?? or Noah or Abraham or anyoneelse?? i was pointing out Muhammed's hypocrisy Anyhow if you insist on asking the bible's point of view concerning remarriage are you then willing again to make a point by contradicting your own faith? - That Muhammed did something in disagreeance with the bible? and i don't know what all the wives did of Moses, David, Solomon, Noah or Abraham, they certainly did not forbid them to remarry when they died at the authority of Allah.... such egomania is bound to man's will only, when God gives commandments it's for all people to uphold, not just prophets. - secondly that all muslims are to agree with the bible by allowing remarriage? when muhammed doesn't? still makes him a hypocrit. (yet the bible gives certain standards on when remarriage is allowed en when not) i understand the verses you quoted... its something like satan going against satan... i.e. the divide and conquer rule employed by the western world... anyways.. my point was... if the devil can take possession of one.. cna he not leave also ?? can a possessed person drive out another possessed person? Is that your question? Like Jesus explains, if possessed devils start driving out other possessed devils how can they rule, how can they share the same goal, if they obstruct each other all the time ? the muslims revieced prophecies from Prophet Muhammed... eg the roman-persian war... Sura 30:2-4 ... as predicted the roman won later on. despite their initial defeat... Prophet Muhammed had split the moon in two ref : sura 54... oh please, you are gonna tell me you seriously believe the moon was split ? The Roman Conquest of Persia "The Roman Empire has been defeated - in a land close by: But they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs, will soon be victorious - within a few years." Sura. 30:2-4 - According to Yusuf Ali the Arabic word for "a few years," Bidh'un, signifies a period of three to nine years; yet according to the historical records the victory did not come until nearly fourteen years later. The Persians defeated the Byzantines and captured Jerusalem at about A.D. 614 or 615. The Byzantine counter-offensive did not begin until A.D. 622 and the victory was not complete until A.D. 628, making it a period between thirteen to fourteen years, not "a few years" alluded to in the Quran. - The original Quranic text had no vowel marks. Thus, the Arabic word Sayaghlibuna, "they shall defeat," could easily have been rendered, with the change of two vowels, Sayughlabuna, "they (i.e. Romans) shall be defeated." Since vowel points were not added until some time after this event, it could have been quite possible for a scribe to deliberately tamper with the text, forcing it to become a prophetic statement. The splitting of the moon: "The Hour has drawn near, and the moon has been cleft asunder (the people of Makkah requested Muhammad to show them a miracle, so he showed them the splitting of the moon)" [54] - The incident of the splitting of the moon that has been mentioned determines its period of revelation precisely. The traditionists and commentators are agreed that this incident took place at Mina in Makkah about five years before the Holy Prophet's hijra (immigration) to Madinah (about 565 AD). Nowhere has modern astronomy acctually proven that the moon splitted in two. - The witnesses were simply NOT impressed... these were sceptics, not people who were seeking blind faith. Otherwise they wouldn't of questioned 'the prophet's' authority in the first place. And obviously just as Muhammed says alot of times in his scripture, when you don't get it. Your obviously stupid (without knowledge) or not wanting to believe in what he says (don't wanna be guided) and sometimes threats them with Hell (when the days of near they will repent when it's too late) if all previous doesn't work. - Why isn't the moon still split? It would of been a much bigger miracle if the moon was still split, so the whole world could see and investigate that in 565 AD, the moon splitted in half for no apparent reason, and that we can only assume that Muhammed did it. But no Allah, wanted to keep the miracle with the 'preservation of a book' because Allah thought a mere book sounds convincing enough. - Best of all since that this is a miracle wich would be viewable to the whole world, why did only 3 people notice it? Who were coincidently muslims that knew muhammed? Aren’t you a bit to naieve? - I'm not even mentioning the catastrophic global issues such hazardous 'miracle' would cause if it occured. You might want to re-think this or re-phrase it... the jews dont accept the NT coz it preaches a triune god.. they consider it to be of demonic origin. the christians like wise saythe Quran is of demonic origin mainly because just as the jews say they say the Quran corrupts the NT. So... what is there to do now??? unless there is a common established method of revelation i'd have to say your assertion is false that the mode of Islamic revelation is demonic. The jews don’t think the NT to be of demonic origin. They only see christ as a intelligent rabbi but not as the messiah and certainly not as God incarnate. The NT doesn’t corrupt the OT it adds unto it... if finishes the book. The quran utterly destroys the NT and the OT’s revelations, it slanders and deminishes it’s prophets, it's teachings and even the son of God himself. and it gives an entirly new theology, a new genesis and a new apocalyps. If one things sounds demonic it’s this! did you read my post or not? the question was "is a stepson / adopted son the same as biological son? plz answer this. Does that matter? Your stealing the wife of someone else, home wrecking is home wrecking... it’s allready horrible that it’s from his own stepson, let alone if it was his real son. The trinity is judeo-christian??? you sure about this??? coz i have yet to hear form a jew that he believes in trinity... unless you can bring a jew who says this.. trinity is just christian... jews and christians read the same OT .. yet both come up with different answers... one is monotheistic.. and the other claims monotheism thru trinity... as for the Mary part... are you familiar with the catholic prayer .... i cant remember it all but one line goes like this "Holy Mary mother of god.. pray for us sinners .. now and at the hour of our death"... so ?? what does this 21st century prayer say??? Mary?? is mother of God??? Or will you just discount it as heretic catholic doctrine??? Yes the trinity is judo-christian, the jews don’t accept Jesus, and are equally wrong as muslims in nothing accepting this. As well are we both monotheistic religions regardless of what your book claims, the NT is full of claiming one God only. The trinity is as much in the OT as in the NT, the jews are just not willing to accept the last revelation wich explains this nature of God but it's in their book as well. Hail Mary full of grace. The Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou Among women, and Blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God Pray for us sinners, Now and at the hour of our death. Amen. the catholics have numerous of christians they glorify... hundreds of saints and people in the bible wich are adressed in prayers, thanking them for what they've done. there's no problem with that, christ remains the head of all those saints and people, marry nor any other person is included in the trinity. interestingly the false belief about God, Mary and Jesus making up the trinity was also peddled by a heretical sect called the Choloridians which had been banished to Arabia at the time of Muhammed. maybe... but fact still stands.. Peter rebuked the son of God!!!! So, what’s your point? peter denied Jesus by fear, and he wasn't proud of it. Agreeance with previous covenant : completely in line with Jewish OT as for Jewish approval... i do not think it is of any importance... as you said.. they didnt accept Jesus.. similarly you do not accept Muhammed on the basis of false accusations... No it's not, Christianity is completely in line with Judaism, Jews were muhammed his buddies that he tagged along during his time of revelation, no wonder Judaism is the quran's main influence. Yet he totally destroys the whole concept of Judaism as well, and as with christianity, muhammed totally gets his facts wrong too. it only has it's agreeance that both religions (islam and judaism) are chauvinistic and have a religion wich emphasis on social order. like a law religionized. I do not accept Muhammed, because i as a christian must test prophets... and i test all prophets who proclaim to speak of God, and Muhammed failed miserably... surely your not asking me to accept any prophet without question? i might as well believe Joseph Smith then, cause he said he was the last prophet of christianity, and that his book is the real deal. and he has no signs of prophethood either. did anyone hear from a 3rd person that John was the one??? without having ever heard it from John himself??? Malachi had never heard of John, yet he confirmed him to be who he was. As did a man who had authority to drive out devils, to forgive sins, to raise people and himself from the dead confirmed john to be a prophet. You must be a very stubborn sceptic if you still think this is not convincing to proofs John's prophethood. and why do you ask proof wich you don't need? you believe John the baptist to be a prophet, just because a man says so 600 years after it happend. your easily convinced... but when it commes down to christianity you get sceptic? No promise of protection .. the only alleged promise here is that it will be preached in hte world ... (and that too it was said after the death of Jesus.. Jesus himself never approached / preached to any non jew which is interesting) and the part about "and then the end will come".. end?? which end? Judgment day? end of Christianity?? or end of 600 odd years?? obscure verse.. and no promise of protection.... are you aware of the verse where the person who adds even one word will have tons of pain added and one who removes one word will hav tons of good removed... i think its in revelations... dont know the exact number... if there was a promise for protection then there will be no possibility of corruption... the validity f this verse is under question then.. why have a verse for punishment of verse changers???? if it will be divinely protected??? that verse clearly says: THE gospel not A gospel.... and Jesus clearly said numerous of times that he was to preach to the gentiles as well as Jesus himself said: "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations...." -- Matthew 28:18,19 the theme in the NT was always First the Children of Israel and then the Gentiles. the end means: the second comming of christ... the rapture, as what's being extensivly revealed in the apocalyps the people adding unto the books, and distorting the message are people like joseph smith, marcion, muhammed, etc... prophets who say they have better revelations in addition to the bible. so yeah people can add to the bible at a high cost as the bible says... but that does not mean the bible in itself will not be preserved. I think history has allready proven it's preservation in the midst of prophets like wich i just mentioned. Actually he was speaking from experience.. ref : his vision of light or was it sound or was it both???? on the road to damascus. That's wishfull thinking isn't it you and i both know that Paul isn't eternally condeming himself, especially when he begins Galatians by affirming that his message came from no other then Jesus himself. which is one of the reasons why there are still unitarians today... did you know that the entire north africa part was unitarian??? The Unitarian movement in South Africa was founded in 1867 by the Reverend Dawid Faure... such a late heresy can hardly be called rightful christian tradition can it? the man even said to bring a 'new theology'. How can it be an old correct one then? They UU's deny the deity of Jesus Christ. Their belief on the nature of Jesus pretty much parallels that of the New Age -- that Jesus was an example of a good and moral man. Nothing more, nothing less. In light of this, it would be hard to call the UU cult Christian. the UU cult believes in anything, it is everything, and it stands for nothing. but the Quran didnt become some man-god entity. it is not a living entity. there is a difference between the Word of God changing into Jesus and teh Word of God being written down in a book.... this is an early Quranic problem you know, this duality. How can the Qur'an be uncreated and eternal? This was an important question in the early development of the religion of Muhammad. This conundrum arose because, if the Qur'an were uncreated and eternal, there would be two eternal and uncreated entities: Allah and Al-Qur'an. This duality shatters the concept of One Eternal and Uncreated Being. the trinity explain its itself, how do you explain this duality?? |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame