Been a Muslim for 23 years, I would like to clear misconceptions you have

[jakasaki]

Question:

It is claimed that Allah had created the Quran, in the heavens, from the beginning of time, therefore it had existed before creation.

Why did Allah wait thousand upon thousands of years to reveal it to a nomad in the Arabian peninsula and not issue it from the beginning of Hebrew scripture time and would have avoided all of these “corrupted” holy books?

Why did Allah send 124,000 prophets on earth to spread the message of Islam and they all failed? Why didn’t he just send Mohammad right from the beginning?

Since Allah is all-knowing, all-seeing and his Quran was heaven before creation, why did he need to “abrogate” the Quran muslims have today? Did he not know the future of events to come?

Yes you are right there were many prophets sent to earth. This is the same in Christianity and Judaism also. Of course it was not intended for books to be corrupted. Prophets were sent to give messages and pass on the word of God and help civilization develop. Eventually there was a final messenger a final prophet and we believe that to be Muhammad(pbuh) you believe it to be Jesus(Isa)

The Hebrew scripture for that time was meant correctly. Allah chose the children of Israel but Ismael was of the Arabs and that was the prophecy that the final messenger would be from the Arabs and this is Muhammad(pbuh)

It is a gradual process and took many years. We say that Moses(pbuh) delivered the message correctly like all prophets but it got corrupted over time in the books. So this is why Muhammad(pbuh) was needed after all the prophets to deliver the final word of Allah & for Muslims to make sure the word was never corrupted or changed like before.

You didn’t answer my questions, you tip-toed around them.

Please address them one by one.

I feel like you are giving me lip service and flapping your gums.

It would be beneficial if you cite your sources from Islamic & NON ISLAMIC.

 

[jakasaki]

Is it possible in your understanding of Islam for a believer to become a martyr by strapping himself full of explosives and shrapnel and walking into a crowded public place populated by civilian, unbelieving non-muslims? Does that glorify Allah?

Does it matter if the crowd is, say, Hindus versus Christians?

Does it bother you at all that pretty much every other religion in the world uncategorically considers suicide bombing a barbaric atrocity? (Possible exemption of now nearly extinct WW2 era Shintoism…)

Interesting question:

To the OP ~

Hadith: Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 54:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "By Him in Whose Hands my life is! Were it not for some men amongst the believers who dislike to be left behind me and whom I cannot provide with means of conveyance, I would certainly never remain behind any Sariya’ (army-unit) setting out in Allah’s Cause.

By Him in Whose Hands my life is!

I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then get resurrected and then get martyred, and then get resurrected again and then get martyred and then get resurrected again and then get martyred.

It sounds like your prophet wanted to be martyred for Allah, come back to earth to be martyred again, only to come back and do it over and over again!!!

Quran 004.074
YUSUFALI: Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value).

PICKTHAL: Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.

SHAKIR: Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world’s life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.

~
So you see… if you fight in the way of Allah, this world means nothing because you will have a “mighty reward” in the afterlife

 

[meltzerboy]

Yes you are right there were many prophets sent to earth. This is the same in Christianity and Judaism also. Of course it was not intended for books to be corrupted. Prophets were sent to give messages and pass on the word of God and help civilization develop. Eventually there was a final messenger a final prophet and we believe that to be Muhammad(pbuh) you believe it to be Jesus(Isa)

The Hebrew scripture for that time was meant correctly. Allah chose the children of Israel but Ismael was of the Arabs and that was the prophecy that the final messenger would be from the Arabs and this is Muhammad(pbuh)

It is a gradual process and took many years. We say that Moses(pbuh) delivered the message correctly like all prophets but it got corrupted over time in the books. So this is why Muhammad(pbuh) was needed after all the prophets to deliver the final word of Allah & for Muslims to make sure the word was never corrupted or changed like before.

Are you aware of how meticulously transcribed the Torah (the first five Books of the Hebrew Bible) has been from generation to generation? How did those Books become corrupted?

 

[TarkanAttila]

It is true many Muslims believe Islamic rules are above all and refuse to accept anything else no matter where they live.

I understand.

Yes Mohammedan is not the correct term because we are followers of Allah not Muhammad. Muhammad was the messenger of Allah.

I won’t contend to call you Mohammedans if you don’t want. On the other hand, we don’t think Zoroastrians worship Zoroaster, Jews or atheists worship themselves, or Mormons worship the angel Moroni. So I don’t see the inherent problem.

Now, please, set the record straight: a lot of old history textbooks refer to “Muslims” as “Moslems”. Is there a difference between those two terms?

Criticism of Islam is very difficult because it is blasphemy to question Allah. For non Muslims of course it is allowed but lots of Muslims do not like it. For Muslims no it will not happen.

OK. I understand that you cannot reject a dogma of your religion and still consider yourself faithful to that religion. That’s common sense.

Would you say any and all human intellects are capable of perfectly understanding Moslem dogma and doctrine? Or is it really only necessary to see God is God, and what He says is true because of that?

 

[joe371]

Are you aware of how meticulously transcribed the Torah (the first five Books of the Hebrew Bible) has been from generation to generation? How did those Books become corrupted?

:yup:

 

[Efnouti_Nai_Nan]

Now, please, set the record straight: a lot of old history textbooks refer to “Muslims” as “Moslems”. Is there a difference between those two terms?

The word written in Arabic is مسلم MSLM which has no long vowels, so the way that you fill in the short vowels can be different. Moslem, Muslim makes no difference, because the consonants are the same. Arabic words are built with consonants.

 

[TarkanAttila]

Are you aware of how meticulously transcribed the Torah (the first five Books of the Hebrew Bible) has been from generation to generation? How did those Books become corrupted?

Yeah. And the New Testament as well. No disrespect to the OP, but probably the hardest thing to believe about Islam is that the Old and New Testaments are corruptions of God’s “real” word, the Koran.

As a Catholic, that argument impacts me like Mormon or Protestant restorationism. The underlying premise of these and of Islam is that there is a good reason to believe God’s revelation was corrupted - usually historical evidence. Recent arguments supposedly in favour of Protestantism include Bauer’s “heresy precedes orthodoxy” argument. I don’t think Moslem scholars wish to walk down this road.

This kind of goes back to a question I asked: Does Allah think it is important for us to know Him through human intellect? Human reasoning, while not the be-all and end-all of Christianity, is still admitted to be important. We do not think God would oppose reason, even though He may know things our human reason cannot know. Do Moslems think God gives people good evidence to believe His claims?

 

[Randy_Carson]

I believe there is a lot of misinformation about Islam in the world, so please ask any questions, I studied very hard theologically about Islam so I can answer almost anything accurately.

Jakubb-

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. You definitely have many posts to address.

I have read a bit about Islam, and a number of years ago, I had a business associate who was a Muslim. One of his first questions to me on the subject of religion had to do with the “corruption” of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian New Testament. It seems to be a common understanding among Muslims that our Bible is corrupted from the originals.

I won’t deal with the translation issues or how we actually CAN be certain that we know what the originals said in THIS post, but I can demonstrate why the Bible is accurate if you have questions. The idea that our Sacred Scriptures are somehow corrupted simply because we don’t have the original manuscripts is EASILY refuted. Let me know if you want more on this.

My question for you is this: if you, Jakubb, had been given the personal responsibility for copying the Qur’an by hand with no computer or other technology to assist you, how careful would you be when making that hand-written copy? Would you work slowly, maybe only a few hours a day, double-checking your work, etc?

If you and a group of other Muslims needed to make hand-written copies that would be sent to a mosque in another country, would you simply knock it out as quickly as possible or, knowing that your copies would be used for many years to come, would you establish strict guidelines about how much of a text each copyist could reproduce in each sitting to avoid errors due to fatigue, etc.?

I’m guessing that you would be EXTREMELY CONSCIENTIOUS in your work because you would want your copy to be an EXACT reproduction of the Word of Allah with no errors.

Is that correct?

Then, Jakubb, isn’t it reasonable to assume that Jews and Christians have been just as painstakingly careful with their sacred texts as Muslims have been with theirs and for all the same reasons?

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Are you aware of how meticulously transcribed the Torah (the first five Books of the Hebrew Bible) has been from generation to generation? How did those Books become corrupted?

Isn’t the Torah like one of the most well preserved works and well documented works in regards to its preservation in the history of the world?

 

[Jakubb]

Jakubb-

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. You definitely have many posts to address.

I have read a bit about Islam, and a number of years ago, I had a business associate who was a Muslim. One of his first questions to me on the subject of religion had to do with the “corruption” of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian New Testament. It seems to be a common understanding among Muslims that our Bible is corrupted from the originals.

I won’t deal with the translation issues or how we actually CAN be certain that we know what the originals said in THIS post, but I can demonstrate why the Bible is accurate if you have questions. The idea that our Sacred Scriptures are somehow corrupted simply because we don’t have the original manuscripts is EASILY refuted. Let me know if you want more on this.

My question for you is this: if you, Jakubb, had been given the personal responsibility for copying the Qur’an by hand with no computer or other technology to assist you, how careful would you be when making that hand-written copy? Would you work slowly, maybe only a few hours a day, double-checking your work, etc?

If you and a group of other Muslims needed to make hand-written copies that would be sent to a mosque in another country, would you simply knock it out as quickly as possible or, knowing that your copies would be used for many years to come, would you establish strict guidelines about how much of a text each copyist could reproduce in each sitting to avoid errors due to fatigue, etc.?

I’m guessing that you would be EXTREMELY CONSCIENTIOUS in your work because you would want your copy to be an EXACT reproduction of the Word of Allah with no errors.

Is that correct?

Then, Jakubb, isn’t it reasonable to assume that Jews and Christians have been just as painstakingly careful with their sacred texts as Muslims have been with theirs and for all the same reasons?

Since many people are asking this.

Let me try to address the point. First we say the bible is corrupted, now when we say corrupted we do not just mean interpolation. But corrupted by the writers of the bible. The Qur’an is from God directly through revelation to the prophet & recited by others. Where as the bible is not like this.

We do not believe Paul is a prophet. We say between Jesus & Muhammad there were no other prophets in between. So we reject everything that comes from Paul.

We also think there was interpolation also. There are many many different bibles. Some are 60 books some are 70 books, some say different chapters in different places. There are clear man made influences.

We say Jesus was a Muslim. We believe Jesus lived like a Muslim today. We believe he spoke in Aramaic & he also used the word Allah. The bible was written a long time after Jesus and we think it is not accurate. We believe the followers of Jesus practiced Islam and only after the bible was written did Christianity/Catholicism become widespread particularly with Constantine.

 

[Jakubb]

Interesting question:

To the OP ~

Hadith: Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 54:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "By Him in Whose Hands my life is! Were it not for some men amongst the believers who dislike to be left behind me and whom I cannot provide with means of conveyance, I would certainly never remain behind any Sariya’ (army-unit) setting out in Allah’s Cause.

By Him in Whose Hands my life is!

I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then get resurrected and then get martyred, and then get resurrected again and then get martyred and then get resurrected again and then get martyred.

It sounds like your prophet wanted to be martyred for Allah, come back to earth to be martyred again, only to come back and do it over and over again!!!

Quran 004.074
YUSUFALI: Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value).

PICKTHAL: Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.

SHAKIR: Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world’s life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.

~
So you see… if you fight in the way of Allah, this world means nothing because you will have a “mighty reward” in the afterlife

Yes this life is all about the next life.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Since many people are asking this.

Let me try to address the point. First we say the bible is corrupted, now when we say corrupted we do not just mean interpolation. But corrupted by the writers of the bible. The Qur’an is from God directly through revelation to the prophet & recited by others. Where as the bible is not like this.

We do not believe Paul is a prophet. We say between Jesus & Muhammad there were no other prophets in between. So we reject everything that comes from Paul.

We also think there was interpolation also. There are many many different bibles. Some are 60 books some are 70 books, some say different chapters in different places. There are clear man made influences.

We say Jesus was a Muslim. We believe Jesus lived like a Muslim today. We believe he spoke in Aramaic & he also used the word Allah. The bible was written a long time after Jesus and we think it is not accurate. We believe the followers of Jesus practiced Islam and only after the bible was written did Christianity/Catholicism become widespread particularly with Constantine.

So Muslims claim Jesus was a prophet for Islam even if he was Jewish?
So there are Muslim scholars who study the Bible and study the Old Testament and New Testament or do they study the Tanakh in Hebrew?

 

[Efnouti_Nai_Nan]

Since many people are asking this.

Let me try to address the point. First we say the bible is corrupted, now when we say corrupted we do not just mean interpolation. But corrupted by the writers of the bible. The Qur’an is from God directly through revelation to the prophet & recited by others. Where as the bible is not like this.

We do not believe Paul is a prophet. We say between Jesus & Muhammad there were no other prophets in between. So we reject everything that comes from Paul.

We also think there was interpolation also. There are many many different bibles. Some are 60 books some are 70 books, some say different chapters in different places. There are clear man made influences.

We say Jesus was a Muslim. We believe Jesus lived like a Muslim today. We believe he spoke in Aramaic & he also used the word Allah. The bible was written a long time after Jesus and we think it is not accurate. We believe the followers of Jesus practiced Islam and only after the bible was written did Christianity/Catholicism become widespread particularly with Constantine.

First you say you don’t believe that St. Paul the apostle was a prophet. Than you say the followers of Jesus practiced Islam. But St. Paul was one of the followers of Jesus. He was accepted by the other apostles as an apostle himself following his conversion. How does this work? One of the followers of Jesus corrupted Christianity, made it un-Islamic (even though Islam did not exist yet), but was accepted by the other followers who were good followers of Islam according to you? This is like saying that the companions of Mohammed ruined Islam but were at the same time good Muslims who upheld Islam. How does this work?

 

[prodromos]

Let me try to address the point. First we say the bible is corrupted, now when we say corrupted we do not just mean interpolation. But corrupted by the writers of the bible. The Qur’an is from God directly through revelation to the prophet & recited by others. Where as the bible is not like this.

Regarding the bolded text, was it not claimed to be from the archangel Gabriel and therefore not directly from God as you claim?
Also, how did Mohammed test that it truly was the archangel Gabriel and not a djinn (what we would term a demon)?

 

[prodromos]

Yes this life is all about the next life.

So why is the next life for Moslems so completely carnal?

 

[TypesAndShadows]

It is made clear that the man is the head of the house so to speak. He is the authority which may explain the question you ask.

A Muslim girl can be single if she chooses but we believe marriage is very important and every man should have a wife and every woman a husband. He is not permitted to hit her if she argues too much. There is a 3 step process only in extreme circumstances and to strike is only the last step and it cannot be with real force or leave a mark.

Islam’s sisterhood is very strong. A woman has many rights in a relationship. If you see an Islamic relationship while the man is the authority on many occasions he is doing all he can to please his wife and she has a huge say on almost everything.

Yes she can separate with no problem but it is advised they have a period where they talk while separated to try and resolve the issues. If it cannot be resolved she will be granted a divorce.

Thank you for these clear answers.

Can I suggest that, if you don’t know what other religions say about women and their roles, you be careful when telling proponents of those religions that the Islamic position is empowering to women? Because what I’m hearing you say (and this may be completely unfair) is that Islam isn’t as oppressive to women as some people think, and that therefore it is empowering women. And of course this all depends on what your baseline is: I’m sure, compared to some cultures, it is empowering. But it carries within it, on the level of religious doctrine and teaching, assumptions about the lives women should lead which appear oppressive even compared to the lives Catholic saints were living before the rise of Islam.

Perhaps you were under the impression that Christian teaching was more oppressive, in general?

What’s your view on husbands hitting their wives? I know that there are Christian groups who teach that it is acceptable or even a good thing, and I personally have no compunction in saying that I believe them to be not only wrong, but wickedly wrong, in saying that. I believe it goes against the correct Christian understanding both of the dignity of humans created in God’s image, and of the correct Christian understanding of marriage, and so I have no fear in saying such Christians are wrong. Do you agree with the idea that (and you did actually say this might be in response to a woman arguing too much, in an earlier post) a husband, having ‘rebuked’ his wife, and turned her out of the marriage bed, is then justified (even correct) in hitting her, to try to make her do what he wants?

 

[dronald]

Thank you for these clear answers.

Can I suggest that, if you don’t know what other religions say about women and their roles, you be careful when telling proponents of those religions that the Islamic position is empowering to women? Because what I’m hearing you say (and this may be completely unfair) is that Islam isn’t as oppressive to women as some people think, and that therefore it is empowering women. And of course this all depends on what your baseline is: I’m sure, compared to some cultures, it is empowering. But it carries within it, on the level of religious doctrine and teaching, assumptions about the lives women should lead which appear oppressive even compared to the lives Catholic saints were living before the rise of Islam.

Perhaps you were under the impression that Christian teaching was more oppressive, in general?

What’s your view on husbands hitting their wives? I know that there are Christian groups who teach that it is acceptable or even a good thing, and I personally have no compunction in saying that I believe them to be not only wrong, but wickedly wrong, in saying that. I believe it goes against the correct Christian understanding both of the dignity of humans created in God’s image, and of the correct Christian understanding of marriage, and so I have no fear in saying such Christians are wrong. Do you agree with the idea that (and you did actually say this might be in response to a woman arguing too much, in an earlier post) a husband, having ‘rebuked’ his wife, and turned her out of the marriage bed, is then justified (even correct) in hitting her, to try to make her do what he wants?

This was essentially my point that you’ve articulated well. He said that Islam empowers women then says it can be okay to strike one under certain circumstances. Therefore my Christian beliefs are far more empowering than the Islamic ones. Under no circumstances will I strike my wife; that’s disgusting. Therefore the Qur’an has disgusting elements.

 

[dronald]

Since many people are asking this.

Let me try to address the point. First we say the bible is corrupted, now when we say corrupted we do not just mean interpolation. But corrupted by the writers of the bible. The Qur’an is from God directly through revelation to the prophet & recited by others. Where as the bible is not like this.

So then who were the good Muslim Disciples who practiced what Jesus preached, and what happened to them? What were the names of the original Disciples and where did they go? What did they do?

We do not believe Paul is a prophet. We say between Jesus & Muhammad there were no other prophets in between. So we reject everything that comes from Paul.

If Paul was lying, what was he trying to gain? He was murdered for his beliefs and he knew the other Disciples of Jesus. We know what happened to Paul, John, James, Peter; what do you know happened to them? Early evidence please.

We also think there was interpolation also. There are many many different bibles. Some are 60 books some are 70 books, some say different chapters in different places. There are clear man made influences.

The Bible is the most attested to document in the entire world; this is not me saying this, this is fact. The Bible has thousands of early century documents and quotes from Early Church Fathers.

You’ve been deceived.

We say Jesus was a Muslim. We believe Jesus lived like a Muslim today. We believe he spoke in Aramaic & he also used the word Allah. The bible was written a long time after Jesus and we think it is not accurate. We believe the followers of Jesus practiced Islam and only after the bible was written did Christianity/Catholicism become widespread particularly with Constantine.

More lies. Nothing you said (except for Jesus speaking Aramaic) is accurate. I don’t know if you’re intentionally lying or if you’ve been lied to and believe it. Please give evidence (not conspiracy theories) for your claims.

History is against you on every point.

The Bible was written closer to the time of Jesus than the Hadith’s were written to the time of Muhammad; much of it by eye witnesses. Constantine had nothing to do with doctrine as he wanted the Arian interpretation to prevail; the Bishops widely agreed that it was heresy.

Oh, and try to find something for 600 years AD that says Jesus was not crucified; you can’t.

If you have time then I highly recommend you (and highly to the posters here) watch this video; if I could recommend only one video, it would be this one:

The reliability of the NT

 

[eddie_too]

who defines authentic muslim religious’ teachings?

we hear and read people, who claim to be muslim, say that their islam is the authentic islam while others, who also claim to be muslim, say that their islam is the authentic islam even though both sets of people say different things.

 

[7_Sorrows]

If Islam empowers women why can’t women in Saudi Arabia drive?