Allah's promise to Jews the Land of Israel

[PerryJ]

The second thing and the most important is tha The Quran my dear sir was not preserved by writing at all. It was preserved by memorization of thousands of people around the prophet muhammed .

They simply did that with the Quran . Scribes ofcourse wroote the Quran at the time of the prophet muhammed and later compiled it into one book after he died . if the Quran that teh scribes written was different from teh Quran that the thosuands of Companions memorized how on earth did they pray togeather ion teh mosque 5 times a day reciting different quorans , ?! there would have been quarells to high heavens .

It is sadly people who don’ know how the islamic society functioned at the time of the prophet that are easy to decieve .

The compilation of the Quran was done by contrasting the Quran with all believers and everybody agreed and consented to the compilation made by uthman .

I find your thougts very interesting. As your statement really applies more to the Jewish people than the Islamic. The Jewish people memorized the Torah as they predate Muhammed by thousands of years. The custom you speak of really was a Jewish custom. Not to say that Arabs did not also use this concept; however, Isalmic thought was not created until Muhammed. Prior to this the Arab Penisula was not monotheistic. As can be seen by the past use of the Kabul. The ability to write and preserve these writing were quite a bit more advanced by the time of Muhammed.

I do not wish to put words in your mouth; yet, I have to ask a question. Why do you believe that Muslims were able to recite the Koran without error; yet, Muslims believe that the Jewish and Christian faiths could not do this memorization. The Jewish had mastered this memorization thousands of year before Muhammed. If Islamic followers could do it. Why couldn’t the Jewish and Christian faiths? How did our writing become corrupt yet yours did not?

I am also curios how Muhammed came to the conclusion that our writings were corrupt. He did not meet any true Christians when he was alive. He met apostate Christians that did not understand Christs message. In fact we would not call most of these religions Christian at all. This can be verified by history.

 

[meedo]

meedo;4729143:

Repost:

Yusuf Ali changes the word to “Samiri” and Pickthall to “As Samirii.” Arberry

in the English, and Kasimirski in the French both correctly translate it “Samaritan.” Yusuf Ali tries to state that the word could be “Shemer,” which denotes a stranger, or “Shomer,” which means a watchman, the equivalent of “Samara” in Arabic, which he implies is close enough to the Samari he is looking for. The Arabic correctly spelled and translated means Samaritan. If it is the word of God one should not have to change his word. As you have stated God put it in a form that man can understand. Did you not state this about the Prophets being from their own people and the use of the plural of God to make it majestic. Yet here two of the people you use to support your claims change the very text of God.

err… do you really read what i write!!! or you just post your old posts back?

dear Sir,

I am not even getting any English translation here . I am refering to the arabic and hebrew which both are spelled the same!!! i am not using any middle language. So forget about this whole Yusuf Ali hoax.

 

[meedo]

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Sana’a manuscripts: uncovering a treasure of words
2007 - number 5

"A journey through time, not places, is what is traced in these excerpts from the Koran dating back to the first centuries of the Hijrah (7th and 8th centuries of our era) found by chance in the Great Mosque of Sana’a (Yemen)
What a surprise for the workers in the Great Mosque of Sana’a, rebuilding a wall that had collapsed after heavy rains in 1972, to find thousands of parchments and pieces of paper hidden in the ceiling. These manuscripts had been slumbering there for centuries. They are fragments of the Koran written in the oldest Arabic alphabet, and when they were first found no one could guess their exceptional value.

In 1984, the House of Manuscripts (Dar al Makhtutat) was founded close to the Grand Mosque, as part of a cooperation project between Yemeni and German authorities. An enormous endeavor was begun to restore the Koranic fragments. Between 1983 and 1996, approximately 15,000 out of 40,000 pages were restored, specifically 12,000 fragments on parchment and manuscripts dating back to the 7th and 8th centuries.

Some fragments were written in Hijazi, the oldest calligraphy of the Koran, used in texts long before Kufic, which is the writing most often found in the Koranic manuscripts. Hijazi is a cursive calligraphy, in which accents and points are not indicated and short vowels inexistent. It is difficult to read, requiring complete mastery of the language. Since the launching of the Memory of the World programme, UNESCO has shown its interest in the Sana’a manuscripts by providing the House of Manuscripts with conservation materials."

It would appear that even the UN is involved in its restoration.

Great. Now do they have a copy or pictrue of them any where that is publsihed ? can they show us teh change!!!

 

[meedo]

I find your thougts very interesting. As your statement really applies more to the Jewish people than the Islamic. The Jewish people memorized the Torah as they predate Muhammed by thousands of years. The custom you speak of really was a Jewish custom. Not to say that Arabs did not also use this concept; however, Isalmic thought was not created until Muhammed. Prior to this the Arab Penisula was not monotheistic. As can be seen by the past use of the Kabul. The ability to write and preserve these writing were quite a bit more advanced by the time of Muhammed.

.

I don’t care about Jewish stuff. This is arabia and they wre mostly illiterate and full of poetry. The commandement was that the Quran is learnt and momorized. if the jews do that also then fine . It is the saem God that revealed the Torah and teh Quran any way.

 

[PerryJ]

I don’t care about Jewish stuff. This is arabia and they wre mostly illiterate and full of poetry. The commandement was that the Quran is learnt and momorized. if the jews do that also then fine . It is the saem God that revealed the Torah and teh Quran any way.

I am not sure I asked the question correctly. Tell me if I am wrong. I thought that the Jewish and Christian Bibles are supposed to have been corrupted. How or why I do not know. This is my understanding of your belief. Is this true?

My question is that the Jews and Christians used the same memorization as the Arabs did. Why would our thoughts be wrong if we used the same memorization as the Arabs? Was there an event that caused our memorization of scripture to fail?

I believe you realize that the Old Testament for Jews and Christians are the same. How did two civilizations that did not get along, after Christ died, keep the same scriptures. How did we both become corrupted exactly the same when we did not get along. Shouldn’t the Jewish Bible be different than our Old Testament? Does this make sense as a question?

 

[meedo]

I am not sure I asked the question correctly. Tell me if I am wrong. I thought that the Jewish and Christian Bibles are supposed to have been corrupted. How or why I do not know. This is my understanding of your belief. Is this true?

My question is that the Jews and Christians used the same memorization as the Arabs did. Why would our thoughts be wrong if we used the same memorization as the Arabs? Was there an event that caused our memorization of scripture to fail?

I believe you realize that the Old Testament for Jews and Christians are the same. How did two civilizations that did not get along, after Christ died, keep the same scriptures. How did we both become corrupted exactly the same when we did not get along. Shouldn’t the Jewish Bible be different than our Old Testament? Does this make sense as a question?

Hi,

I am not going to discuss the Christian bible now .

The Quran explicily says that there is human editing that got mixed with teh current scripture of the jews .

The current Torah says that Moses Died. Can you tell me how the Torah says that moses died while the Torah decended on Moses?

myjewishlearning.com/texts/bible/What_is_the_Torah/Torah_authorship920.htm

An intriguing approach expounded by the contemporary scholar David Halivni is that God indeed revealed a complete Torah to the people, but Israel sinned. Immediately upon receiving the Torah, the Israelites fell into the idolatry of the golden calf, and not until the return from the Babylonian exile under Ezra did Israel re-affirm its commitment to God. From Moses to Ezra, the Torah was preserved in a fragmentary state, but under Ezra, revelation was restored. The Torah that Ezra restored, however, has all of the signs of imperfection and human composition that the critics have identified, but the Torah is nonetheless the best restoration possible. Halivni’s solution acknowledges the arguments of the critics, while affirming a faith in God’s revelation of real objective content to the people of Israel.

This is from jewish sources.

 

[PerryJ]

Hi,

I am not going to discuss the Christian bible now .

The Quran explicily says that there is human editing that got mixed with teh current scripture of the jews .

The current Torah says that Moses Died. Can you tell me how the Torah says that moses died while the Torah decended on Moses?

myjewishlearning.com/texts/bible/What_is_the_Torah/Torah_authorship920.htm

An intriguing approach expounded by the contemporary scholar David Halivni is that God indeed revealed a complete Torah to the people, but Israel sinned. Immediately upon receiving the Torah, the Israelites fell into the idolatry of the golden calf, and not until the return from the Babylonian exile under Ezra did Israel re-affirm its commitment to God. From Moses to Ezra, the Torah was preserved in a fragmentary state, but under Ezra, revelation was restored. The Torah that Ezra restored, however, has all of the signs of imperfection and human composition that the critics have identified, but the Torah is nonetheless the best restoration possible. Halivni’s solution acknowledges the arguments of the critics, while affirming a faith in God’s revelation of real objective content to the people of Israel.

This is from jewish sources.

The reason for all of these questions is that to present some background for my real question. I now come to my point. Muhammed rejected the teachings of the Jews and Christians and he was right. The problem is he did not learn the true Christianity from true Christians. He learned it from heretical Christians that refused the word of Jesus. Now we have a Muslim religion that appears to reject true Christianity because Muhammed was surrounded by apostate Christians that did not present Christianity correctly. Why does Islam not recognize that Muhammed rightly rejected heretical Christianity that even the true Christian faith denounced at the time? If we both denounce the same teachings why can we not come together now?

Historically you can verify that true Christians rejected the same teachings of Christianity that existed around the Arab Pennisula.

 

[PerryJ]

Hi,

I am not going to discuss the Christian bible now .

The Quran explicily says that there is human editing that got mixed with teh current scripture of the jews .

The current Torah says that Moses Died. Can you tell me how the Torah says that moses died while the Torah decended on Moses?

myjewishlearning.com/texts/bible/What_is_the_Torah/Torah_authorship920.htm

An intriguing approach expounded by the contemporary scholar David Halivni is that God indeed revealed a complete Torah to the people, but Israel sinned. Immediately upon receiving the Torah, the Israelites fell into the idolatry of the golden calf, and not until the return from the Babylonian exile under Ezra did Israel re-affirm its commitment to God. From Moses to Ezra, the Torah was preserved in a fragmentary state, but under Ezra, revelation was restored. The Torah that Ezra restored, however, has all of the signs of imperfection and human composition that the critics have identified, but the Torah is nonetheless the best restoration possible. Halivni’s solution acknowledges the arguments of the critics, while affirming a faith in God’s revelation of real objective content to the people of Israel.

This is from jewish sources.

Let us reflect on my other post.

I think we can both post sources to refute the credibility of the others book. I am sure you know I can post many secular source to deny the lineage of Moses versus Jesus’ relations in the Koran. This is a problem for Muslims as the Koran is supposed to be the direct word of God; yet, historically the confusion of these sisters is almost irrefutable that the Koran has it wrong. Of course Muhammed would have to have it wrong because he learned from heretical Christians.

I would like to focus on both people rejecting the same Christian heretics and why we can not overcome both of us rejecting the same teachings.

 

[meedo]

The problem is he did not learn the true Christianity from true Christians.  He learned it from heretical  Christians that refused the word of Jesus.  Now we have a Muslim religion that appears to reject true Christianity because Muhammed was surrounded by apostate Christians that did not present Christianity correctly.  Why does Islam not recognize that Muhammed rightly rejected heretical Christianity that even the true Christian faith denounced at the time?  If we both denounce the same teachings why can we not come together now?

Historically you can verify that true Christians rejected the same teachings of Christianity that existed around the Arab Pennisula.

Hello again,

listen , whoever you are getting yoru information from doesn’t know about the basic history of Islam.

Muhammed wasn’t surrouneded by Chrisians , and if he was he would have been exposed by his own people. We have the islamic history itself written by people eho narrate their period before Islam and after Islam . Many Muslims knew muhammed personally before he had revelations from God . Mecca is no bigger in space than Vatican city , if somebody was attending regular clases in ‘’ heretical or non heretical Christianity ‘’ it would have been known in no time. You woudl never hear anything of that sort from the testemony of arabs.

You can see their previous hatred . You can see their plots, you can see their jelousy , you can see their disagreement, their confessions fo killing their own daughters out of shame , etc etc .

But NEVER they accused him of bieng an imposter or dishonest .

let me quote you an incident i will write it in a separate post because it is long.

It is mentioned in one of teh most authenticated books of islam

Sahih Al Bukhari

 

[meedo]

(1) Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas: Abu Sufyan bin Harb informed me that Heraclius had sent a messenger to him while he had been accompanying a caravan from Quraish. They were merchants doing business in Sham (Syria, Palestine, Lebanon and Jordan), at the time when Allah’s Apostle had truce with Abu Sufyan and Quraish infidels. So Abu Sufyan and his companions went to Heraclius at Ilya (Jerusalem). Heraclius called them in the court and he had all the senior Roman dignitaries around him. He called for his translator who, translating Heraclius’s question said to them,

“Who amongst you is closely related to that man who claims to be a Prophet?” Abu Sufyan replied, “I am the nearest relative to him (amongst the group).” Heraclius said, “Bring him (Abu Sufyan) close to me and make his companions stand behind him.” Abu Sufyan added,

Heraclius told his translator to tell my companions that he wanted to put some questions to me regarding that man (The Prophet) and that if I told a lie they (my companions) should contradict me." Abu Sufyan added, "By Allah! Had I not been afraid of my companions labeling me a liar, I would not have spoken the truth about the Prophet.

The first question he asked me about him was: ‘What is his family status amongst you?’ I replied, ‘He belongs to a good (noble) family amongst us.’

Heraclius further asked, ‘Has anybody amongst you ever claimed the same (i.e. to be a Prophet) before him?’ I replied, ‘No.’ He said, ‘Was anybody amongst his ancestors a king?’ I replied, ‘No.’ Heraclius asked, ‘Do the nobles or the poor follow him?’ I replied, ‘It is the poor who follow him.’

He said, ‘Are his followers increasing decreasing (day by day)?’ I replied, ‘They are increasing.’ He then asked, ‘Does anybody amongst those who embrace his religion become displeased and renounce the religion afterwards?’ I replied, ‘No.’ Heraclius said, ‘Have you ever accused him of telling lies before his claim (to be a Prophet)?’ I replied, 'No. ’

Heraclius said, ‘Does he break his promises?’ I replied, ‘No. We are at truce with him but we do not know what he will do in it.’ I could not find opportunity to say anything against him except that. Heraclius asked, ‘Have you ever had a war with him?’ I replied, ‘Yes.’ Then he said, ‘What was the outcome of the battles?’ I replied, ‘Sometimes he was victorious and sometimes we.’ Heraclius said, ‘What does he order you to do?’ I said, ‘He tells us to worship Allah and Allah alone and not to worship anything along with Him, and to renounce all that our ancestors had said. He orders us to pray, to speak the truth, to be chaste and to keep good relations with our Kith and kin.’

Heraclius asked the translator to convey to me the following, I asked you about his family and your reply was that he belonged to a very noble family. In fact all the Apostles come from noble families amongst their respective peoples.

I questioned you whether anybody else amongst you claimed such a thing, your reply was in the negative. If the answer had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man was following the previous man’s statement. Then I asked you whether anyone of his ancestors was a king. Your reply was in the negative, and if it had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man wanted to take back his ancestral kingdom.

I further asked whether he was ever accused of telling lies before he said what he said, and your reply was in the negative. So I wondered how a person who does not tell a lie about others could ever tell a lie about Allah.

I, then asked you whether the rich people followed him or the poor. You replied that it was the poor who followed him. And in fact all the Apostle have been followed by this very class of people. Then I asked you whether his followers were increasing or decreasing. You replied that they were increasing, and in fact this is the way of true faith, till it is complete in all respects.

…

 

[meedo]

I further asked you whether there was anybody, who, after embracing his religion, became displeased and discarded his religion. Your reply was in the negative, and in fact this is (the sign of) true faith, when its delight enters the hearts and mixes with them completely.

I asked you whether he had ever betrayed. You replied in the negative and likewise the Apostles never betray. Then I asked you what he ordered you to do. You replied that he ordered you to worship Allah and Allah alone and not to worship any thing along with Him and forbade you to worship idols and ordered you to pray, to speak the truth and to be chaste.

If what you have said is true, he will very soon occupy this place underneath my feet and I knew it (from the scriptures) that he was going to appear but I did not know that he would be from you, and if I could reach him definitely, I would go immediately to meet him and if I were with him, I would certainly wash his feet.'

Heraclius then asked for the letter addressed by Allah’s Apostle which was delivered by Dihya to the Governor of Busra, who forwarded it to Heraclius to read. The contents of the letter were as follows: "In the name of Allah the Beneficent, the Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad the slave of Allah and His Apostle to Heraclius the ruler of Byzantine. Peace be upon him, who follows the right path. Furthermore I invite you to Islam, and if you become a Muslim you will be safe, and Allah will double your reward, and if you reject this invitation of Islam you will be committing a sin by misguiding your Arisiyin (peasants). (And I recite to you Allah’s Statement ‘O people of the scripture! Come to a word common to you and us that we worship none but Allah and that we associate nothing in worship with Him, and that none of us shall take others as Lords beside Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims (those who have surrendered to Allah).’ (3:64).

Abu Sufyan then added, “When Heraclius had finished his speech and had read the letter, there was a great hue and cry in the Royal Court. So we were turned out of the court. I told my companions that the question of Ibn-Abi-Kabsha) (the Prophet Muhammad) has become so prominent that even the King of Bani Al-Asfar (Byzantine) is afraid of him. Then I started to become sure that he (the Prophet) would be the conqueror in the near future till I embraced Islam (i.e. Allah guided me to it).”

The sub narrator adds, "Ibn An-Natur was the Governor of llya’ (Jerusalem) and Heraclius was the head of the Christians of Sham. Ibn An-Natur narrates that once while Heraclius was visiting ilya’ (Jerusalem), he got up in the morning with a sad mood. Some of his priests asked him why he was in that mood? Heraclius was a foreteller and an astrologer. He replied, ‘At night when I looked at the stars, I saw that the leader of those who practice circumcision had appeared (become the conqueror). Who are they who practice circumcision?’ The people replied, 'Except the Jews nobody practices circumcision, so you should not be afraid of them (Jews). ‘Just Issue orders to kill every Jew present in the country.’ While they were discussing it, a messenger sent by the king of Ghassan to convey the news of Allah’s Apostle to Heraclius was brought in.

Having heard the news, he (Heraclius) ordered the people to go and see whether the messenger of Ghassan was circumcised. The people, after seeing him, told Heraclius that he was circumcised. Heraclius then asked him about the Arabs. The messenger replied, ‘Arabs also practice circumcision.’ (After hearing that) Heraclius remarked that sovereignty of the 'Arabs had appeared. Heraclius then wrote a letter to his friend in Rome who was as good as Heraclius in knowledge. Heraclius then left for Homs. (a town in Syrian and stayed there till he received the reply of his letter from his friend who agreed with him in his opinion about the emergence of the Prophet and the fact that he was a Prophet. On that Heraclius invited all the heads of the Byzantines to assemble in his palace at Homs. When they assembled, he ordered that all the doors of his palace be closed.

Then he came out and said, ‘O Byzantines! If success is your desire and if you seek right guidance and want your empire to remain then give a pledge of allegiance to this Prophet (i.e. embrace Islam).’ (On hearing the views of Heraclius) the people ran towards the gates of the palace like onagers but found the doors closed. Heraclius realized their hatred towards Islam and when he lost the hope of their embracing Islam, he ordered that they should be brought back in audience. (When they returned) he said, ‘What already said was just to test the strength of your conviction and I have seen it.’ The people prostrated before him and became pleased with him, and this was the end of Heraclius’s story (in connection with his faith). (Book #1, Hadith #6)

 

[meedo]

The above story shows you how keen the Arab pagans to descridet Muhammed except when they knew that they will be shamed by others confessing they were lying.

This story is a confession by a former pagan who bluntly says that he wishes he could have lied .

If Muhammed was learning from Christians that were in palestine Hurculese as the emperor fo Palestine would have known about him. The fact is that Muhammed was not known among palestine and they had no record of him learnig from them any scripture .

if Muhammed was really learning from Arab Christians it would have been news all over arabia.

The thing is that , he wasn’t below i show you a further proof from Christians who are Arabs themselves

btw here is the link for the long hadeeth that i quoted above

searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=Abu+Sufyan&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all

below i am showing you another incident with Arab Christians

 

[meedo]

witness-pioneer.org/vil/Articles/companion/25_ali_bin_talib.htm

Christians tribes
When Islam began to spread there were some tribes which professed Christianity. After the expedition to Tabuk some Christian tribes were converted to Islam. Some Christian tribes chose not to change their faith, but they accepted the suzerainty of the Muslims and agreed to pay them an annual tribute.

Christians of Najran
There was a large Christian community in Najran. In 631 C.E., The Holy Prophet invited them to accept Islam. In response, they challenged the Holy Prophet to a Mubahila. The Mubahila was an ancient way of ascertaining the truth. In a religious contest, each of the disputing parties was required to take a solemn oath that they were right and true, and called on God to wreak His vengeance on them if they lied. It was believed that in such cases, the liar was visited by the wrath of God and was destroyed. The Holy Prophet accepted the challenge and asked the Christians of Najran to send a deputation to Madina.

The Christian deputation
A deputation of the Christian priests headed by their chief Aqib accordingly arrived in Madina. They were dressed in fine silken robes, and wore golden rings on their fingers. When dressed thus, they waited on the Holy Prophet in the mosque, the Holy Prophet did not pay any attention to them, and did not even return their salutation. Greatly puzzled they left the mosque, and upon meeting Othman complained to him that the Prophet of Islam had invited them to Madina, but he had paid no attention to them when they had visited him in the mosque. Othman took them to Ali, he told them that indifference of the Holy Prophet was due to the fact that they were dressed in silk finery, and were loaded with jewelry. He advised them to cast off their jewelry and be dressed in simple cotton robes. When they had changed their dress, Ali took them to the Holy Prophet in the mosque.

Dispute with the Christians
This time, the Holy Prophet welcomed them and made them sit near him. He told them that when they had first come to him, he had turned his head away because Satan accompanied them with finery and jewelry. Thereafter the Holy Prophet entered into the discourse with them, and the talk centered round the personality of Jesus Christ. The Christians wanted to know what was his opinion about Jesus Christ. The Holy Prophet said that like other Prophet he was a Prophet of God. The Christians next asked whether he regarded Jesus Christ as a son of God. The Holy Prophet said the God is far above having a wife or a son, and as such Jesus is not a son of God. The Christians then posed the question: if Jesus had no father and his mother Mary had not sinned, what then is the status of Jesus if he is not the son of God. The Holy Prophet said that they would have their answer the following day. At night the Holy Prophet had a revelation about the true nature of Jesus. When the Christians met the Holy Prophet the following day, he told them that the likeness of Jesus with Allah is as the links of Adam. Adam was born without a father and so was Jesus born without a father, but neither Adam nor Jesus was the son of God.

The Mubahila
At this reply of the Holy Prophet, the Christians priests felt stranded, but to keep up appearances, they desired that a Mubahila be held. The Christians named five priests who were to take part in the Mubahila. The Holy Prophet nominated five persons who were to take part in the Mubahila on behalf of the Muslims. These included the Holy Prophet himself, Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain. The Holy Prophet did not dominate any of his wives in this behalf. The nomination was confined to such persons who had blood relation with him. The Holy Prophet declared that the Mubahila would be held the following day. At night, the Christians could get no sleep. They felt that truth shone in the eyes of the Holy Prophet and to invoke the curse of God with people like these would invite destruction for the Christians. The following day when the Christian priests waited on the Holy Prophet, they said that they had neither the conviction to profess Islam, nor the strength to enter into any disputation or fight with the Muslims. They said that while maintaining their own faith, they would accept the dominance of the Muslims and pay an annual tribute. The Holy Prophet accepted the offer, entered into a treaty with them, and allowed them to return to Najran. The way in which the Christians gave the challenge of Mubahila in the first instance, and then backed out of it, was a confession of failure on the part of the Christians, and their acknowledgment of the supremacy of Islam as a faith.

Volume 5, Book 59, Number 663:
Narrated Hudhaifa:

Al-'Aqib and Saiyid, the rulers of Najran, came to Allah’s Apostle with the intention of doing Lian one of them said to the other, “Do not do (this Lian) for, by Allah, if he is a Prophet and we do this Lian, neither we, nor our offspring after us will be successful.” Then both of them said (to the Prophet ), “We will give what you should ask but you should send a trustworthy man with us, and do not send any person with us but an honest one.” The Prophet said, “I will send an honest man who Is really trustworthy.” Then every one of the companions of Allah’s Apostle wished to be that one. Then the Prophet said, “Get up, O Abu 'Ubaida bin Al-Jarrah.” When he got up, Allah’s Apostle said, “This is the Trustworthy man of this (Muslim) nation.”

usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/059.sbt.html

 

[meedo]

Note these were ‘‘ARAB Christians’’ . If Muhammed has taken his message or has been studying with other arab christians wouldnt they have known??!!!

 

[cathopologist]

What a wonderful tale to make Christians sound weak in their faith and theology. This also explains why Mohammad disallowed Muslim men to wear gold jewellery and silk. He would be disappointed if he visited Malaysia or Indonesia and even China where Muslim men wear gold jewellery and silk.

 

[cathopologist]

Note these were ‘‘ARAB Christians’’ . If Muhammed has taken his message or has been studying with other arab christians wouldnt they have known??!!!

Of course they knew:

Rabi’ah ‘ibn ‘Ubbad (who lived at the same time as Mohammed) wrote:
"I saw the prophet when I was a pagan. He was saying to the people, ‘if you want to save yourselves, accept that there is no God but Allah’ At this moment I noticed a man behind him saying ‘he is a sabi.’ When I asked somebody who he was he told me he was ‘Abu Lahab, his uncle." (96)

Both ‘Ibn Jurayi (d. 767) and ‘Ata ‘ibn Abi Rabah (d.732) wrote:
"I saw the prophet when I was a pagan. He was saying to the people, ‘if you want to save yourselves, accept that there is no God but Allah’ At this moment I noticed a man behind him saying ‘he is a sabi.’ When I asked somebody who he was he told me he was ‘Abu Lahab, his uncle’ Of the relationship between the Sabians who lived in Sawad (in Iraq ) and Mohammed it is mention that the polytheists of Mecca were heard to say of Mohammed "he has become a Sabian." (97)

‘Abd ‘Allah ‘ibn al-‘Abbas (lived about 650 AD) wrote:
The religion of the Sabians is a sect of Christianity. (114)

‘Ata ‘ibn ‘Abi Rabah (d732 AD) wrote:
The Sabians live in “Sawad” and are not identical with the Magians, Christians, or Jews. (121)

‘Ibn Jurayi (who lived in the 8th century) also wrote:
The Sabians are in Sawad and are between the Magians, Christians, or Jews. He also wrote that the polytheists said of Mohammed “He is a Sabian”. (122)

‘Abdul al-Zanad (d.747 AD) wrote:
The Sabians are from “Kutha” in Iraq, they believe in prophets, fast 30 days in a year, and pray 5 times daily towards Yaman. (124)

Khalil ‘ibn Ahmad (d. 786-787 AD) who was in Basra before his death, wrote:
The Sabians believe they belong to the prophet Noah, they read zabur, and their religion looks like Christianity. He also states that they worship the angels. (128)

 

[meedo]

What a wonderful tale to make Christians sound weak in their faith and theology. This also explains why Mohammad disallowed Muslim men to wear gold jewellery and silk. He would be disappointed if he visited Malaysia or Indonesia and even China where Muslim men wear gold jewellery and silk.

It is not Muslims fault if Christians feel weak. This is a part of arab histiory and written in one of the most authentciated books. If they didn’t feel weak may be they should have taken teh chanllenge.

Muslims can sin and wear Gold and silk and Muhammed wouldn’t have a problem . He Ddid his part. If muhammed wanted to own Gold and silver he would have been the richest man because the arabs offered him that in exchnage to not preach islam .

He refused.

 

[meedo]

Of course they knew:

They seem to diagree with you because if hey kew they would have said that .

But they didn’t.

O and by the way , he word ‘‘Sabi’’ in arabic means ‘’ a person who left somthing’’ it doesnt mean the Christian sect or whatever you are talking about .

Just klike the word Hasheesh ‘’ means grass, the word Hasshasheen ( Assassins ) doesnt really mean the people of teh grass!!!

Sabi = Person who leaves or renounces somthing

sabeen = a sect between syria and iraq

Your Christian polemic teachers are ignorant of arabic and they cause you shame. Change them.

 

[meedo]

The reason for all of these questions is that to present some background for my real question. I now come to my point. Muhammed rejected the teachings of the Jews and Christians and he was right. The problem is he did not learn the true Christianity from true Christians.

Muhammed met Christians with traditional beliefs as mentioned earlier in my posts

He learned it from heretical Christians that refused the word of Jesus.

there si no proof or even a remote naration or traditioon that muhammed has been learning under any one. Moreever, muhammed could not read nor write.

Now we have a Muslim religion that appears to reject true Christianity because Muhammed was surrounded by apostate Christians that did not present Christianity correctly. Why does Islam not recognize that Muhammed rightly rejected heretical Christianity that even the true Christian faith denounced at the time? If we both denounce the same teachings why can we not come together now?

Historically you can verify that true Christians rejected the same teachings of Christianity that existed around the Arab Pennisula.

herecies re declared herecies by the winner . who knows how many interpretations and sects early chritianity had ? God knew that this is not the way to go anymore and he sent a final messenger to the whole world to correct things

 

[meedo]

I think we can both post sources to refute the credibility of the others book.

Every body can post anything. There are peopel who read and make sense of what we write.

I am sure you know I can post many secular source to deny the lineage of Moses versus Jesus’ relations in the Koran. This is a problem for Muslims as the Koran is supposed to be the direct word of God; yet, historically the confusion of these sisters is almost irrefutable that the Koran has it wrong. Of course Muhammed would have to have it wrong because he learned from heretical Christians.

Umm no … because the confusion is not with Muhammed it is with how missionaries interpret the verse.

I am very amazed at how they do poor research work. they take already so long refuted claims and publish ito unsuspecting people like you who would think they have done good work. Turns out that their claim was refuted at the tiem of Muhammed himself!!

Christian missionaries have been calling Mary addressed as Sister of Aaron(P) a contradiction. Below is the verse:

At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: "O Mary! truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! “O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!” [Qur’an 19:27-28]

---

It turns out that Christians in Najran during the time of the Prophet(P) raised a similar objection and it was answered by the Prophet(P). In Sahih Muslim, the hadith related by Mughirah ibn Shu`bah [5326] says:

When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read “O sister of Harun” (i.e. Maryam) in the Qur’an, whereas Moses was born much before Jesus. When I came back to Allah’s Messenger(P) I asked him about that, whereupon he said: The (people of the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostle and pious persons who had gone before them.

This claim of contradiction is apparently mistaken because it disregards both the Arabic idiom and the context of the verse. In Arabic the word akhun or ukhtun (Underlined with Red colour in the images) carries two meanings.

Blood brother or sister and
Brotherhood/sisterhood in clan and faith.

QUOTE]
islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/mary.html
continued…