Christian/Muslim Threadsa must readIt has fallacies and yet is more reliable than the gospels in describing Jesus' days before his ascension. I don't use it to support the true account, I said it at least doesn't contradict the Qur'an account, which is something we can't say about the gospels. So they won't lose their lineage. How do you know the Jewish Laws were the Mosaic Laws? And what do you mean "why stop at pigs?" So how does one acquire a slave in Islam? Do you know what diacritics are? The Qur'an was revealed in the same way throughout. However, the qur'an can be recited in 7 variant readings. The text itself is the same, but the pronunciations are a function of the dotting on the letters. But everything on those links is relevant. I wish you'd read it all. I wouldn't care if you referred me to links if you thought they were all relevant. If you don't want to read, don't. I think that's the major problem here. I'm not bogging you down with links, I'm handpicking the ones that you should most read. Why is that? What in the sites forces you to think from a Muslim's perspective? Except for the fact that you'd have to drop your idle suspicion? Ok let me summarize for you exactly what's happening. Every post you ask a series of questions, most of which require some serious background information, little of it is theological, and MUCH of it is historical and technical (regarding hadith transmission or diacritics for example). I give you reliable links which basically tell you everything you'd ever want to know, which if read, answer all your questions. You don't read them, and post the same questions, or other questions answered on the sites. Mostly because the site I gave tries to cover what answering-islam asks, which is where you're coming from. Take a look at what was revealed. I can't believe you seriously entertain the thought that a malicious being was revealing the Qur'an. This is one of the more unique polemics I've heard. Well then bring the hadith, and we'll examine its authenticity. How many times do I have to tell you that there were people who disbelieved, like yourself, during and after the time of the Prophet, who when asked if they had heard the Prophet say anything, they would make something up. Nobody is stopping anyone from doing it, in fact there are institutes in Britain dedicated to it, and just because people were offended doesn't mean the challenge was remotely met. Well to be honest with you, I know that verse. And what I should have said was, why wasn't any proof presented then? The accusations were as idle then as they are now. How did the plagiarism take place and when. What was the scenario? This is what we have to ask when we want to present an alternative to the proposed explanation. This is good, and it's a quick and easy read: http://www.ymofmd.com/books/prophethood ... mproph.htm They also don't believe in God to believe in upholding His laws. If you were commanded by God to do something, a law ordaining a punishment for a crime, would you or would you not obey it? Keep in mind you are sure it is from God. You mean this? Or something else? http://www.jews-for-allah.org/jewish-my ... killed.htm Wait, so what did you think the Muslims said about Hajar? And why are you giving so much importance to the "mother of all arabs," a term I've never heard and don't even use? The Qur'an will talk about Jesus (pbuh) then later talk about Lot for example. The stories themselves will be in chronological order, but between themselves they are not. You'd be right, if I was just claiming this. But the proof is the Qur'an itself. The day you can show it is manmade or can even be emulated and ignore its miracles is the day you make your case, bro. I spend time to pick links that, if you read them, would have answered every single one of your questions. Instead, you don't even read them, assume they wouldn't have helped, then wonder why your questions aren't answered. You basically paraphrase rebuttals from the answering-islam website. Well you might as well link me then because that's not useful. I don't mind being linked and will read what you post as long as you do the same. It's not stealing when it's the spoils of war against people who are trying to destroy God's religion and God commanded it. And where did the Prophet distribute it? Go read how poorly the Prophet chose to live and read about where these spoils all went. Isn't that basically what you're suggesting, that the Prophet was rich or something? With God, it's always a win-win situation. Especially for the poor to whom the booty is distributed. I still don't see how this differs from the "Pharoah's armies" parallel. If God had ordained Moses should take the Egyptians' spoils of war, would you be equally horrified? And I ask you, what did the Prophet do with this booty? It means "ta'abbud" devotional exercises. The devotional exercises of the pagans were called "devotional exercises" as are the "devotional exercises" of any other religion. That's what happens with Arabic words, they carry through with their meanings. Or are you suggesting that the Prophet was once a pagan but then become the most devout Muslim? What exactly is your allegatoin against the Prophet. You've almost been through every single possible polemic raised, they can't all have happened simultaneously, so what exactly is your version of the story? Piece together what it is you want to say. Just post your links, it makes it easier for me to understand what you're saying. Peace |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame