A hypothetical question for Muslims

[CompSciGuy]

Hi, I have a hypothetical question here.

Suppose that I claimed to be a prophet, and that I claimed to have a revelation from Allah. I write a book, which I call “the fourth revelation,” and in it I write all that Allah has commanded me. A lot of it is recycled texts from the Quran, just changed to fit my own new theology and agenda, along with some additional prophecies and other writings. I claim that the prophet Mohammad was a true prophet, but the Quran, which Muslims have known and trusted for centuries, had been corrupted by Muslim religious leaders over time, and Allah had appointed me to restore his truth and teach it to all men. I would like to know how you, as a Muslim, would respond if I did this? Would you accept my prophecy as true revelation? Would you reject it as heresy?

 

[triumphguy]

You could always fly to Mecca and try it. Hypothetically of course. good luck with that.

 

[meltzerboy]

Hi, I have a hypothetical question here.

Suppose that I claimed to be a prophet, and that I claimed to have a revelation from Allah. I write a book, which I call “the fourth revelation,” and in it I write all that Allah has commanded me. A lot of it is recycled texts from the Quran, just changed to fit my own new theology and agenda, along with some additional prophecies and other writings. I claim that the prophet Mohammad was a true prophet, but the Quran, which Muslims have known and trusted for centuries, had been corrupted by Muslim religious leaders over time, and Allah had appointed me to restore his truth and teach it to all men. I would like to know how you, as a Muslim, would respond if I did this? Would you accept my prophecy as true revelation? Would you reject it as heresy?

I can’t speak for Muslims, but I would assume the “new prophet” would be rejected since Mohammad is thought to be the last and greatest prophet, and I believe (not sure about this) the Qur’an warns about any prophet to come who claims to supersede him.

Catholics don’t accept Mormons and their new prophet and Bible, nor Protestant revelation. Jews don’t accept Jesus as prophet (or Messiah, or Son of G-d) and the apostles’ “New Covenant.” It’s not all that different except that Islam talks about corruption of the Hebrew Bible and the Gospels. Apart from religion, it is rare for the old, established authority to accept the new kid on the block in most domains.

 

[kingal86]

Hypothetically, couldn’t the Jews argue on a similar note that Christians just “borrowed” their Tenakh and added some heretical idolatrous writings about a Trinitarian God and the Incarnation to it?

I’d imagine such a claim would be dismissed as heresy or apostasy - unless a critical mass somehow believed it, thereby resulting in a break-away sect?

Presumably this fourth revelation would state one of the corruptions in Islamic teaching is that Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets, i.e. the last one? Hmm…Has there ever been Muslim claims of further divine revelation?

 

[meltzerboy]

Hypothetically, couldn’t the Jews argue on a similar note that Christians just “borrowed” their Tenakh and added some heretical idolatrous writings about a Trinitarian God and the Incarnation to it?

I’d imagine such a claim would be dismissed as heresy or apostasy - unless a critical mass somehow believed it, thereby resulting in a break-away sect?

Presumably this fourth revelation would state one of the corruptions in Islamic teaching is that Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets, i.e. the last one? Hmm…Has there ever been Muslim claims of further divine revelation?

Your first rhetorical question is not all that hypothetical from the Jewish perspective.

 

[Nine_Two]

Hi, I have a hypothetical question here.

Suppose that I claimed to be a prophet, and that I claimed to have a revelation from Allah. I write a book, which I call “the fourth revelation,” and in it I write all that Allah has commanded me. A lot of it is recycled texts from the Quran, just changed to fit my own new theology and agenda, along with some additional prophecies and other writings. I claim that the prophet Mohammad was a true prophet, but the Quran, which Muslims have known and trusted for centuries, had been corrupted by Muslim religious leaders over time, and Allah had appointed me to restore his truth and teach it to all men. I would like to know how you, as a Muslim, would respond if I did this? Would you accept my prophecy as true revelation? Would you reject it as heresy?

You just described Baha’i.

 

[CompSciGuy]

Hypothetically, couldn’t the Jews argue on a similar note that Christians just “borrowed” their Tenakh and added some heretical idolatrous writings about a Trinitarian God and the Incarnation to it?

I’d imagine such a claim would be dismissed as heresy or apostasy - unless a critical mass somehow believed it, thereby resulting in a break-away sect?

Presumably this fourth revelation would state one of the corruptions in Islamic teaching is that Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets, i.e. the last one? Hmm…Has there ever been Muslim claims of further divine revelation?

It’s quite a different thing, really. You see, in Christianity, Jesus claims to be the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophets. We believe him to be the very messiah whom the Jewish people had been expecting for so many thousands of years, not some unexpected prophet who comes out of nowhere, changes all the writings of the prophets and rewrites them. On the other hand, Islam comes along and says “you’ve got it partly right, but here’s the real scoop. By the way, none of this comes from any existing writing, I’m just writing it down as Allah tells me.” It claims a corruption of the scriptures in which we take a great deal of confidence, scriptures which have been guarded by the church against heresy throughout the centuries. I am pointing this out to show that, just as Muslims have reason to believe that their Quran comes from Mohammad (which I do not doubt, it certainly does) we have just as good reason to believe that the gospels came straight and unadulterated from Christ and his apostles, the epistles from St. Paul, and the Old Testament from the prophets of Old. There just isn’t good enough reason to question their origins and authenticity in regard to who wrote them or whether they’ve been changed. By describing “the fourth revelation,” I am showing Muslims what the Quran looks like from our perspective.

 

[Bezant]

CompSciGuy

Addressing your hypothetical question it doesn’t work very well, because Abrahamic religions tend to like being first.

It’s quite a different thing, really.

Not for Jews.

You see, in Christianity, Jesus claims to be the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophets.

They would likely say, amongst other things, that the Torah never needed to be fulfilled.

We believe him to be the very messiah whom the Jewish people had been expecting for so many thousands of years…

The problem with this argument, is that the messiah at the time of Christ was thought to be a sort of military-political leader who would, according to Jews, fulfill certain messianic tasks that Jesus had to do in his lifetime (e.g., gather the Jews back to sovereignty in Israel, bring peace on earth, the world makes God king). In Christ’s time it meant someone who could one-up the Romans. The most famous messianic candidate in Jesus’ time, who came close (but failed) to achieve these criteria, was Bar Kochba.

…not some unexpected prophet who comes out of nowhere, changes all the writings of the prophets and rewrites them.

But the response to this is that there are many things in Christianity that contradict Judaism, and one of those objections is a Triune God. Jews may reject Muhammed’s prophecy or the idea that the Torah was corrupted but most agree that Islam is more like Judaism in its view of God than Christianity.

On the other hand, Islam comes along and says “you’ve got it partly right, but here’s the real scoop. By the way, none of this comes from any existing writing, I’m just writing it down as Allah tells me.”

As another poster said, this argument opens Christianity to the same criticism: Like Islam, Christianity wants to build its foundation on the Hebrew Bible to give itself legitimacy, replacing the good but flawed Torah with a New Covenant; of course, why would God make a flawed covenant? If the Torah was flawed, then Christianity is flawed.

These are responses Jews usually give when Christians explain the New Testament, Jesus, and the Torah. And for the most part the debate either stops there, or it stops soon. I’ve seen very few Christians try to answer them, and while I’ve read a handful of decent to half-decent responses to minor objections to Jesus, I’ve never read a good Christian response to the major objections.

I am pointing this out to show that, just as Muslims have reason to believe that their Quran comes from Mohammad (which I do not doubt, it certainly does) we have just as good reason to believe that the gospels came straight and unadulterated from Christ and his apostles, the epistles from St. Paul, and the Old Testament from the prophets of Old.

No problem, but if you defend Christianity with the approach you used, it can become problematic.

 

[John_Paul_Jones]

You just described Baha’i.

Maybe ComSciGuy is Bahá’u’lláh reincarntated?

Your first rhetorical question is not all that hypothetical from the Jewish perspective.

The flip side to that hypothetical is that Jesus Christ is True and He is made to appear to be a heresy.

 

[hamba2han]

Hi, I have a hypothetical question here.

Suppose that I claimed to be a prophet, and that I claimed to have a revelation from Allah. I write a book, which I call “the fourth revelation,” and in it I write all that Allah has commanded me. A lot of it is recycled texts from the Quran, just changed to fit my own new theology and agenda, along with some additional prophecies and other writings. I claim that the prophet Mohammad was a true prophet, but the Quran, which Muslims have known and trusted for centuries, had been corrupted by Muslim religious leaders over time, and Allah had appointed me to restore his truth and teach it to all men. I would like to know how you, as a Muslim, would respond if I did this? Would you accept my prophecy as true revelation? Would you reject it as heresy?

How would Muslims respond, you ask?

First, the Qur’an states that there will be no new prophet to come after Prophet Muhammad (pbuh):

Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things. … {Al-Qur’an, 33:40}

And so, Muslims should respond by following what the Qur’an teaches them to do in such cases:

And they say: “None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian.” Those are their (vain) desires. Say: “Produce your proof if ye are truthful.” … {Al-Qur’an, 2:111}

Those who give partners (to Allah) will say: “If Allah had wished, we should not have given partners to Him nor would our fathers; nor should we have had any taboos.” So did their ancestors argue falsely, until they tasted of Our wrath. Say: “Have ye any (certain) knowledge? If so, produce it before us. Ye follow nothing but conjecture: ye do nothing but lie.” … {Al-Qur’an, 6:148}

Islam teaches it’s followers to demand to see the proof of his “prophet-hood” if there is anyone who claims to be a new prophet.

 

[maximus]

It’s quite a different thing, really. You see, in Christianity, Jesus claims to be the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophets. We believe him to be the very messiah whom the Jewish people had been expecting for so many thousands of years, not some unexpected prophet who comes out of nowhere, changes all the writings of the prophets and rewrites them. On the other hand, Islam comes along and says “you’ve got it partly right, but here’s the real scoop. By the way, none of this comes from any existing writing, I’m just writing it down as Allah tells me.” It claims a corruption of the scriptures in which we take a great deal of confidence, scriptures which have been guarded by the church against heresy throughout the centuries. I am pointing this out to show that, just as Muslims have reason to believe that their Quran comes from Mohammad (which I do not doubt, it certainly does) we have just as good reason to believe that the gospels came straight and unadulterated from Christ and his apostles, the epistles from St. Paul, and the Old Testament from the prophets of Old. There just isn’t good enough reason to question their origins and authenticity in regard to who wrote them or whether they’ve been changed. By describing “the fourth revelation,” I am showing Muslims what the Quran looks like from our perspective.

Well said, Jesus satisfies about over 70 Old Testament predictions of the coming Messiah and his coming was announced in the stars. Which was a clear sign for the people of that time. It brought Magi from the East and prompted St. Peter to make statements in Acts Chapter two about things that would happen during the Messiah’s time. With Islam you have the testimony of one man in a region where there was a particular heresy I believe it was the Monophysites that was in the region where Mohammad lived. On top of that he proclaims that the Old Testament and New testament are false.

 

[CompSciGuy]

CompSciGuy

Addressing your hypothetical question it doesn’t work very well, because Abrahamic religions tend to like being first.

Not for Jews.

They would likely say, amongst other things, that the Torah never needed to be fulfilled.

The problem with this argument, is that the messiah at the time of Christ was thought to be a sort of military-political leader who would, according to Jews, fulfill certain messianic tasks that Jesus had to do in his lifetime (e.g., gather the Jews back to sovereignty in Israel, bring peace on earth, the world makes God king). In Christ’s time it meant someone who could one-up the Romans. The most famous messianic candidate in Jesus’ time, who came close (but failed) to achieve these criteria, was Bar Kochba.

But the response to this is that there are many things in Christianity that contradict Judaism, and one of those objections is a Triune God. Jews may reject Muhammed’s prophecy or the idea that the Torah was corrupted but most agree that Islam is more like Judaism in its view of God than Christianity.

As another poster said, this argument opens Christianity to the same criticism: Like Islam, Christianity wants to build its foundation on the Hebrew Bible to give itself legitimacy, replacing the good but flawed Torah with a New Covenant; of course, why would God make a flawed covenant? If the Torah was flawed, then Christianity is flawed.

These are responses Jews usually give when Christians explain the New Testament, Jesus, and the Torah. And for the most part the debate either stops there, or it stops soon. I’ve seen very few Christians try to answer them, and while I’ve read a handful of decent to half-decent responses to minor objections to Jesus, I’ve never read a good Christian response to the major objections.

No problem, but if you defend Christianity with the approach you used, it can become problematic.

None of what you said applies. I have said, Jesus never claimed the Torah to be “flawed” as you have claimed, he never came to replace the Torah.

 

[Bezant]

None of what you said applies. I have said, Jesus never claimed the Torah to be “flawed” as you have claimed, he never came to replace the Torah.

But the catechism does say that the Torah is imperfect–so does almost every other Christian community, in different wording, by implication or directly.

And everything I’ve said–whether you like it or not–may very well come up. You cannot say that Islam is wrong because it came with a new scripture, a new theology, etc., and not anticipate the same criticism to be leveled against Christianity.

 

[CompSciGuy]

But the catechism does say that the Torah is imperfect–so does almost every other Christian community, in different wording, by implication or directly.

And everything I’ve said–whether you like it or not–may very well come up. You cannot say that Islam is wrong because it came with a new scripture, a new theology, etc., and not anticipate the same criticism to be leveled against Christianity.

Tell me where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church it says that the Torah is imperfect.

Also I didn’t say that it is wrong because it created a new theology, I am saying it is not credible because it takes an existing person, that of Jesus Christ, whose teachings have been clearly written in the gospels, and claims that he taught something completely different. It would be like me standing up and saying “American history is all wrong, Lincoln was not an anti-slavery president, he was actually very pro-slavery, and fought to keep slavery alive. I know because God told me this.”

 

[Frere]

Hi, I have a hypothetical question here.

Suppose that I claimed to be a prophet, and that I claimed to have a revelation from Allah. I write a book, which I call “the fourth revelation,” and in it I write all that Allah has commanded me. A lot of it is recycled texts from the Quran, just changed to fit my own new theology and agenda, along with some additional prophecies and other writings. I claim that the prophet Mohammad was a true prophet, but the Quran, which Muslims have known and trusted for centuries, had been corrupted by Muslim religious leaders over time, and Allah had appointed me to restore his truth and teach it to all men. I would like to know how you, as a Muslim, would respond if I did this? Would you accept my prophecy as true revelation? Would you reject it as heresy?

Actually such a person who claim about that did exist. His name is Baha’u’llah founder of the Bahai religion.

 

[Bezant]

Tell me where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church it says that the Torah is imperfect.

1963 According to Christian tradition, the Law is holy, spiritual, and good, yet still imperfect. Like a tutor it shows what must be done, but does not of itself give the strength, the grace of the Spirit, to fulfill it. Because of sin, which it cannot remove, it remains a law of bondage. According to St. Paul, its special function is to denounce and disclose sin, which constitutes a “law of concupiscence” in the human heart. However, the Law remains the first stage on the way to the kingdom. It prepares and disposes the chosen people and each Christian for conversion and faith in the Savior God. It provides a teaching which endures for ever, like the Word of God.

Also I didn’t say that [Islam] is wrong because it created a new theology, I am saying it is not credible because it takes an existing person, that of Jesus Christ, whose teachings have been clearly written in the gospels, and claims that he taught something completely different.

Nevertheless, you’ll need to anticipate the same logic, put one way or another, that Christians changed the original spirit of the Old Testament: Christians took one God and made him into a Trinity. I’m not saying however that you should accept that argument.

It would be like me standing up and saying “American history is all wrong, Lincoln was not an anti-slavery president, he was actually very pro-slavery, and fought to keep slavery alive. I know because God told me this.”

You could, if Lincoln was indifferent to slavery or showed anti-slavery tendencies (and from what little I know arguably he did).

Things in literature, history, religion are rarely clear-cut and we will always argue in circles around them anyway so debating it for the sake of believing it (or not believing it) isn’t a good idea IMO.

 

[meedo]

Hi, I have a hypothetical question here.

Suppose that I claimed to be a prophet, and that I claimed to have a revelation from Allah. I write a book, which I call “the fourth revelation,” and in it I write all that Allah has commanded me. A lot of it is recycled texts from the Quran, just changed to fit my own new theology and agenda, along with some additional prophecies and other writings. I claim that the prophet Mohammad was a true prophet, but the Quran, which Muslims have known and trusted for centuries, had been corrupted by Muslim religious leaders over time, and Allah had appointed me to restore his truth and teach it to all men. I would like to know how you, as a Muslim, would respond if I did this? Would you accept my prophecy as true revelation? Would you reject it as heresy?

Well… it depends on your argument… if you are convincing… may be i will believe in you … if you are not then i won’t.

I mean … seriously… you don’t need a new faith after Islam to get Muslims to convert to other religions. All people from all faiths convert to all sort of other faiths all the time everywhere and for all types of reasons.

 

[manualman]

Hypothetically, couldn’t the Jews argue on a similar note that Christians just “borrowed” their Tenakh and added some heretical idolatrous writings about a Trinitarian God and the Incarnation to it?

I’d imagine such a claim would be dismissed as heresy or apostasy - unless a critical mass somehow believed it, thereby resulting in a break-away sect?

And, really, the Jews were never criticized by Christ for being skeptical of his claims. He criticised certain Jews who were hypocrites. Jesus knew well that a good and righteous Jew who knew his faith would find him a hard nut to swallow, which may be why he told his disciples to keep mum on the his identity for so long. Of course the story doesn’t end there. Christians have this handy thing called the Passion, death and resurrection to point to as evidence that Jesus wasn’t just the latest phony religious self promoter. Muhammed need not apply.

Any prophet who claims to trump Christ as source of revelation had better rise from the dead first before he’ll get my ear.