Quran and Bible debateKoran confirms Jesus Crucifixion...
Ddin't you say: Now you are telling me the Aaronites did not marry other Levites, considering they were also descendants of Levi, do you see why I seriously doubt you were ever jewish? The descendants of Aaron that performed the majority of temple sacrifices alone stem from his son Kohen. Other Levites who did not descend from Kohen were also allowed to perform temple services. Would you care to cite for us which biblical verses you are reading that states the Aaronites and the 'Levites' did not intergrate? The biblical passage that deals with marriages of Kohenites states: Leviticus 21 6 They must be holy to their God and must not profane the name of their God. Because they present the offerings made to the LORD by fire, the food of their God, they are to be holy. 7 " 'They must not marry women defiled by prostitution or divorced from their husbands, because priests are holy to their God. This is the only restriction imposed upon Kohenites the sons of Aaron on whom they married, again would you care to cite for us which biblical passages prove otherwise? Both genealogies of Matthew and Luke trace all the way to Judah the son of Jacob and not to Levi the son of Jacob, if either of them were a Levite you would expect the genealogies to trace to Levi. If Mary is a Levite, Jesus is not a descendant of David, a descendant from the tribe of Judah, hence He cannot be the Messiah even in your own koran, does it not bother you that you are contradicting what the koran says of Jesus being the Messiah. Jesus was from the tribe of Judah where the secular world obtains the word jew, you might as well say Jesus was not a jew. Where does it contradict the koran or any other hadith you have shown so far?, you spout off that it contradicts with no basis if it does and you have proof you would be more than happy to show your readers, where does it state that Aisha was not six years old when the prophet engaged her? This is the reason why I read hadiths: Take for example sura 33:59: ""O prophet, tell your wives and daughters and the believing women that they should cast their outer garments over their bodies (when abroad) so that they should be known and not molested" (Quran, 33:59). " Did somebody molest the wives of the prophet?, what is the basis of this?, How come none of the other prophets gave such an edict? on the face of it it seems the reason is entirely noble if we put aside the discomfort the poor woman will feel with her sight, hearing and smell impeded by the hijab. But when we go over to the hadith to find the context we find this: Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 10: Narrated Anas: Umar said, "I agreed with Allah in three things," or said, "My Lord agreed with me in three things. I said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Would that you took the station of Abraham as a place of prayer.' I also said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Good and bad persons visit you! Would that you ordered the Mothers of the believers to cover themselves with veils.' So the Divine Verses of Al-Hijab (i.e. veiling of the women) were revealed... It then becomes clear that the catalyst and motive for this verse was not divine but came from one of Mohammed's friends worried that someone would molest the wives of the prophets, it is a damning indictment that the men of that era were incapable of self control, and Mohammed did not want anybody touching his 'property', his 'tilth' his 'goods'. The same fellow Umar was also responsible for sura 66:5 From the same hadith: I came to know that the Prophet had blamed some of his wives so I entered upon them and said, 'You should either stop (troubling the Prophet ) or else Allah will give His Apostle better wives than you.' When I came to one of his wives, she said to me, 'O 'Umar! Does Allah's Apostle haven't what he could advise his wives with, that you try to advise them?' " Thereupon Allah revealed:-- "It may be, if he divorced you (all) his Lord will give him instead of you, wives better than you Muslims (who submit to Allah).." (66.5) The first few verses of Sura 66 are very interesting indeed: On reading this you are left wondering what exactly is the prophet trying to please his consorts about?. What oath did allah admonish him for? What matter did the prophet disclose to one of his wives?. What did the wives do that they should turn in repentance to him? This is supposed to be a simple religion even a child can understand, why all the cloak and dagger? If we were to look at the hadith: Bukhari vol 3 43 648:... The Prophet did not go to his wives because of the secret which Hafsa had disclosed to 'Aisha, and he said that he would not go to his wives for one month as he was angry with them when Allah admonished him (for his oath that he would not approach Maria) It then becomes clear the prophet was having an extra marital affair, Hafsah found out about it, he promised her it wouldn't happen again, and she should keep it a secret, she naturally told one of her close confidants, then allah admonished him from his oath that he would not approach Maria.(Why on earth would God Almighty sanction your adultery?) This is not the behaviour befitting a prophet, it is an insult to say this was sanctioned by God. There are plenty more ahadith that shed light on this supposed "last revelation for all mankind for eternity", none of it is contradicted in the koran.
The difference is my scriptures specifically say that the Messiah is a son of David, and a descendant of Judah, who are you to tell me it says otherwise? On the other hand your scriptures say Aisha was six, who am I to argue otherwise? All the hadiths I have shown you are sahih meaning their isnads have been rigorously authenticated they are sound, if you reject them you reject them as a fringe islamic group, a cult. Sorry but the whole religion frivolously duping 1.6 billion souls is my criticism against islam (hadiths and koran included). I believe you are in here because you realise there are certain aspects of islam that you do not feel comfortable with, you need to debate and 'feel' secure that you have chosen the right path (even if it means you have to write them off as forgeries, being interpreted wrong e.t.c), you are still searching for a path; being able to debate someone and come off as the winner I am sure you realise is not an assurance that you are on the right path. If you have ever met and spoken to a truly born again christian as opposed to a nominal one you would realise what it is to be assured of salvation instead of bowing down five times a day to the east and hoping you have done enough for entry into jannah.
My point exactly. What you fail to bring into the context is the people who wrote those hadiths were muslims themselves, if you read them in their proper context you would realise they did not think they were doing islam any harm, if anything I fail to see why they would make them up, it is only recently with the translation of those hadiths that the moral flaws in Mohammed's character are shown for the world to see, you are simply biting the hand that feeds you when you claim they are forgeries or being interpreted wrong. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame