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

[prodromos]

Where is this explained in the Bible?

It isn’t. Do you have a problem with that?

 

[Thorolfr]

You also need to point out that Jacob and Heli were born to the same mother with different fathers, their mother remarrying after the death of her first husband

Can you give me some sources for all of this?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Can you give me some sources for all of this?

post #307.

Many thanks to my EO brother in Christ, prodromos, who first brought this to my attention.

:tiphat:

 

[Thorolfr]

In the genealogies of Matthew and Luke…and by reason.

The Genealogies of Jesus
straightforward.wikidot.com/matthew-1-1-16-bc

One of the most widely held theories suggests that Matthew’s account follows the lineage of Joseph, while Luke’s genealogy is that of Mary, the mother of Jesus. This interpretation would mean that Jacob was Joseph’s biological father, and Heli (Mary’s biological father) became Joseph’s surrogate father, thus making Joseph Heli’s heir through his marriage to Mary. If Heli had no sons, this would have been the normal custom.

Also, if Mary and Joseph lived under the same roof with Heli, his “son-in-law” would have been called “son” and considered a descendent. Although it would have been unusual to trace a genealogy from the maternal side, there was nothing usual about the virgin birth. Additionally, if Mary (Jesus’ blood relative) was indeed a direct descendant of David, this would make her son “the seed of David” in keeping with Messianic prophecies.(1)
(Solving: 2, 3, and 4)

According to one of the oldest theories, some scholars assign the differences in genealogies to the “Levirate marriage” tradition. This custom said that if a man died without bearing any sons, his brother could then marry his widow, and their sons would carry on the dead man’s name. For this theory to hold up, it would mean that Joseph, the father of Jesus, had both a legal father (Heli) and a biological father (Jacob), through a Levirate marriage.

The theory suggests that Joseph’s grandfathers (Matthan according to Matthew; Matthat according to Luke) were brothers, both married to the same woman, one after the other. This would make Matthan’s son (Jacob) Joseph’s biological father, and Matthat’s son (Heli) Joseph’s legal father. Matthew’s account would trace Jesus’ primary (biological) lineage, and Luke’s record would follow Jesus’ legal lineage.(2)

• See more at: straightforward.wikidot.com/matthew-1-1-16-bc#sthash.Uau0gPmm.dpuf

Not authorized

All of this is just a theory that is used in an attempt to reconcile what appears to be a contradiction in the Bible. Well, some Muslims who are uncomfortable with abrogation do the same kind of thing in trying to reconcile what appear to be contradictions in the Qur’an.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

The topic please

 

[Nektarios_Lady]

Where is this explained in the Bible?

I don’t know all the places this practice of Mosaic Law is mentioned in the Bible, but Chapter 38 of Genesis & Luke 20:28-33 is a place to start - these show it was practiced by God’s People even before Moses and up to & including Jesus’ time on earth Before He established the Church.

 

[Randy_Carson]

All of this is just a theory that is used in an attempt to reconcile what appears to be a contradiction in the Bible. Well, some Muslims who are uncomfortable with abrogation do the same kind of thing in trying to reconcile what appear to be contradictions in the Qur’an.

Does it explain an apparent contradiction?

 

[famdigy]

Do Shia and Sunni Muslims really practice two different forms of Islam, and, if so, is one form more aggressive and violent than the other?

Meltzerboy - I’ve been on both sides of the fence as a former Sunni and a convert to Shia Islam.

Yes Sunni and Shia muslims practice two different forms of Islam. On the surface both claim to be Muslims, both rely on the Qur’an and the Prophetic traditions for their understanding.

as you may be aware already, the sunni shia divide started right after Muhammad (pbuh&hf) passed away. Shias believe that Ali (as) was appointed successor to Muhammad (pbuh&hf), while Sunnis believe that this issue was left for the community to determine who the successor should be.

In Shia beliefe the successor to the Prophet is not just a ruler or a king but is also a spiritual successor refereed to as the Imam. He is the physical manifestation of the Qur’an, divinely appointed by God himself, The Imam is seen as being infalliable, he does not sin or make mistakes in anything both knowingly and unknowingly. Shias take all of their islamic education from the Imams, who are the direct descendants of Muhammad.

Sunnis believe the successor was left up to the community to decide on and they also believe this successor is a worldly leader and that everything revealed to Muhammad can be collectively learned and understood by following his companions, those people who were close to him.

Because we follow the Imams and they follow the companions we naturally have 2 different streams of recorded traditions (hadiths). We disagree with each other on many cases, everything from our ideas of God and his nature, to the Qur’an and its interpretation to Muhammad (pbuh&hf) and his character are very different from one another.

Aisha according Shia belief is a criminal, shias accuse her of administering the poison that killed the prophet. She also led a rebellion that resulted in the first ever civil war in Islam where 30,000 people died as a result. She fabricated many hadiths and attributed them to the Prophet. In popular Shia thought, all the terrorists you see today are collectively described as Aisha’s children because the root of terrorism in Islam was founded by her

Sunnis regard Aisha very highly and even believe they should learn half their religion from her. They believe insulting her is blasphemous.

 

[famdigy]

I’ve asked this question before and have yet received an answer from our muslim members.

It is claimed by Islam/Muslims that the Quran existed in heaven with Allah since the beginning of creation.

If that is the case, why would Allah need to abrogate any verses?

If Allah is all-knowing all-seeing, didn’t he see the future and not have to abrogate anything?

that’s a good question - this is an entirely sunni belief. Shia Muslims believe the Quran did not pre-exist with Allah. It was created just like everything else.

 

[jakasaki]

that’s a good question - this is an entirely sunni belief. Shia Muslims believe the Quran did not pre-exist with Allah. It was created just like everything else.

Wow Fammy ~

Where have you been dear old friend?

Nice to see you here again. Did you read this entire thread from this 23 year old muslim?

What are your thoughts?

 

[jakasaki]

that’s a good question - this is an entirely sunni belief. Shia Muslims believe the Quran did not pre-exist with Allah. It was created just like everything else.

Also Famdigy, according to Shia what is the understanding of Allah creating the Quran and when.

Did Allah do this from the beginning as he he created Adam & Eve, before or after?

 

[Nektarios_Lady]

Where there any witnesses that said they saw Mohammed pass the torch to Ali? If so, what lead to the wiggle-room of confusion which created the Shia/Sunni divide?

Is the Hand symbol used by Shia really supposed to be the hand of the Virgin Mary?

Do the Shia really pray to it’s Martyrs? If so, would it be fair to say that there is a difference in the understanding of the pre-Judgement After-Life?

During the Iran/Iraq War, wasn’t it the Shia that forced their own children hand-in-hand across the Mine Fields to blow themselves up as Martyrs to clear the way fort the Iranian Soldiers? I remember hearing that on the News, I think it was CNN, when I was young. Isn’t it the Shia that on a holiday have the tradition to cut the foreheads of their sons, even babies, and make boys cut & whip themselves on that day until the streets are a bloody mess? I saw the photo, I think it was in Time Magazine, still can’t get the bleeding screaming infant being cut by his mother out of my mind. Do Shia treat their children this way to incite fear in their enemies, “if we do this to our children, can you imagine how much worse we’ll treat you” OR is their some other reasoning behind these very bloody practices?

Is it true that one-evening “marriages” in exchange for a sum of $ (dowry) permitted in Shia? If so, how is that different than prostitution?

Meltzerboy - I’ve been on both sides of the fence as a former Sunni and a convert to Shia Islam.

Yes Sunni and Shia muslims practice two different forms of Islam. On the surface both claim to be Muslims, both rely on the Qur’an and the Prophetic traditions for their understanding.

as you may be aware already, the sunni shia divide started right after Muhammad (pbuh&hf) passed away. Shias believe that Ali (as) was appointed successor to Muhammad (pbuh&hf), while Sunnis believe that this issue was left for the community to determine who the successor should be.

In Shia beliefe the successor to the Prophet is not just a ruler or a king but is also a spiritual successor refereed to as the Imam. He is the physical manifestation of the Qur’an, divinely appointed by God himself, The Imam is seen as being infalliable, he does not sin or make mistakes in anything both knowingly and unknowingly. Shias take all of their islamic education from the Imams, who are the direct descendants of Muhammad.

Sunnis believe the successor was left up to the community to decide on and they also believe this successor is a worldly leader and that everything revealed to Muhammad can be collectively learned and understood by following his companions, those people who were close to him.

Because we follow the Imams and they follow the companions we naturally have 2 different streams of recorded traditions (hadiths). We disagree with each other on many cases, everything from our ideas of God and his nature, to the Qur’an and its interpretation to Muhammad (pbuh&hf) and his character are very different from one another.

Aisha according Shia belief is a criminal, shias accuse her of administering the poison that killed the prophet. She also led a rebellion that resulted in the first ever civil war in Islam where 30,000 people died as a result. She fabricated many hadiths and attributed them to the Prophet. In popular Shia thought, all the terrorists you see today are collectively described as Aisha’s children because the root of terrorism in Islam was founded by her

Sunnis regard Aisha very highly and even believe they should learn half their religion from her. They believe insulting her is blasphemous.

 

[meltzerboy]

Meltzerboy - I’ve been on both sides of the fence as a former Sunni and a convert to Shia Islam.

Yes Sunni and Shia muslims practice two different forms of Islam. On the surface both claim to be Muslims, both rely on the Qur’an and the Prophetic traditions for their understanding.

as you may be aware already, the sunni shia divide started right after Muhammad (pbuh&hf) passed away. Shias believe that Ali (as) was appointed successor to Muhammad (pbuh&hf), while Sunnis believe that this issue was left for the community to determine who the successor should be.

In Shia beliefe the successor to the Prophet is not just a ruler or a king but is also a spiritual successor refereed to as the Imam. He is the physical manifestation of the Qur’an, divinely appointed by God himself, The Imam is seen as being infalliable, he does not sin or make mistakes in anything both knowingly and unknowingly. Shias take all of their islamic education from the Imams, who are the direct descendants of Muhammad.

Sunnis believe the successor was left up to the community to decide on and they also believe this successor is a worldly leader and that everything revealed to Muhammad can be collectively learned and understood by following his companions, those people who were close to him.

Because we follow the Imams and they follow the companions we naturally have 2 different streams of recorded traditions (hadiths). We disagree with each other on many cases, everything from our ideas of God and his nature, to the Qur’an and its interpretation to Muhammad (pbuh&hf) and his character are very different from one another.

Aisha according Shia belief is a criminal, shias accuse her of administering the poison that killed the prophet. She also led a rebellion that resulted in the first ever civil war in Islam where 30,000 people died as a result. She fabricated many hadiths and attributed them to the Prophet. In popular Shia thought, all the terrorists you see today are collectively described as Aisha’s children because the root of terrorism in Islam was founded by her

Sunnis regard Aisha very highly and even believe they should learn half their religion from her. They believe insulting her is blasphemous.

Thanks for all this interesting information, famdigy! I must admit to being surprised that Shia Muslims believe the Imams infallible and incapable of sin. I thought (Shia) Islam was more similar to Judaism on that point.

 

[famdigy]

Also Famdigy, according to Shia what is the understanding of Allah creating the Quran and when.

Did Allah do this from the beginning as he he created Adam & Eve, before or after?

I’ve been well Pam, keeping busy with work and family. I have not been following this thread from the beginning. Your thread and a few others stuck out

Based on the hadith below I would say the Quran was created before Adam but after Muhammad.

Narrated Muhammad ibn Ziyad:
Ibn Mahran asked Abdullah ibn Abbas about the meaning of the the verses

"And most surely we are they who draw themselves out in ranks, And we are most surely they who praise the glory (of Allah). Qur’an 37:165-166

Ibn Abbas says, we were in the company of the messenger of Allah (s) and Ali ibn Abi Talib approached, when the messenger saw him, a smile appeared on his face and he said
“greetings to the one whom God created before his father Adam by 40,000 years” Ibn Abbas asks, "Oh messenger of Allah, is it possible the son to be before the father? "

The messenger answered "Yes, Allah created me and Ali before creating Adam by this length of time (40,000 years). He created divine light and split it into two. Created me from one half and Ali from the other half before creating anything else. Thus the light of all the creations is from my and Ali’s light. Then He placed us to the left of the throne. Then He created the angels, so we praised His glory, the angels also praised his glory.

We praised His greatness, the angels also praised His greatness. This (action of praising God) was from myself and Ali’s teaching. It was in God’s knowledge that the angels would learn from us how to praise and glorify Him, and everything else that praises God is from our teaching.

It is also in God’s knowledge that He would not punish with the fire those who love me and Ali, and he would not allow into heaven those who hate me and Ali."

Biharul Anwar Vol.36 Chapter 8 Hadith #18

I forgot to also mention that the idea of abrogation is another area that Sunnis and Shias follow differently.

As I mentioned before Sunnis have a very literal interpretation of the Qur’an for example take Surah 2:106

[Yusufali 2:106] None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?

the arabic word for revelations here is Ayah (singular) or Ayaat (plural). In the context of the Quran “ayah” is used to mean “verse”, i.e. each statement or paragraph marked by a number.

If you read 2:106 literally you would understand that some verses of the Quran could be abrogated and substituted for others

Shias on the other hand have a much broader scope to interpret the Quran. Abrogation is defined as a change in God’s will. Here it is only limited to legislative orders i.e. the dos and the don’ts because the arabic word used for legislative abrogation here is “Naskh”. the word Ayah in 2:106 here also means “evidence” or “sign” or “revelation” but it’s not limited to the revelations in the Qur’an. It also includes all of God’s revelations throughout history from Adam to Muhammad. Abrogation becomes necessary due to the gradual development of human society. Though the spirit might have been the same but the laws and teachings for mankind in a developed society had to be other than what they were in the primitive age.

One example may the manner in which we pray to God in Jesus time has been abrogated and replaced by new revelation with the 5 daily prayers.

 

[thetazlord]

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.

I know Muslims believe Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. Do Muslims believe Mary was a “perpetual” virgin? IOW, do they believe that she remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus? Is this stated in the Qur’an?

 

[Thorolfr]

I know Muslims believe Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. Do Muslims believe Mary was a “perpetual” virgin? IOW, do they believe that she remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus? Is this stated in the Qur’an?

There is nothing in the Qur’an about Mary being a perpetual virgin and that is not an important belief for Muslims.

 

[thetazlord]

Just curious, because by the time of Muhammad, the PVM was a well-established dogma in the Catholic church, & much of the Qur’an was taken from the Bible & Catholic belief. I was just wondering if something as significant as the PVM was something that Muhammad & Muslims believed and/or was stated in the Qur’an.

 

[Dpoc41]

In Koran 7:125, death by crucifixion is stated to exist at the time of Moses in 1500BC. All records of history, reports that crucifixion did not exist any earlier than 500 BC. My question is: to how do you explain this blaring historical error

 

[Dpoc41]

If that is the case how can you explain moments in history when Islam was a relatively peaceful force? Like for example, when Islam was spread in South-east Asia through trade and contact with merchants?

Was it really spread through trade and contact? I’m no expert but this free book says - Another surprise that Khans book springs is the myth that Islam came to South East Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia, Southern Thailand and Southern Philippines) through peaceful traders. Based on authentic sources, Khan convincingly proves that propagation of Islam in South East Asia was not as peaceful as it is usually thought to be. It was mainly jihad by stealth, coercion, intrigue and deceit, and in many instances bloodshed. On the propagation of Islam in Indonesia, Khan writes: archive.org/details/IslamicJihadALegacyOfForcedConversionImperialismAndSlavery

 

[Dpoc41]

Many people make claims against Islam. He is allowed his view but I wonder what his motives are. I believe he is a zionist.

I have never seen anyone defeat Robert Spencer in a debate on Islam, I don’t know if he is a zionist or not, but can you point out any inaccuracies in his claims about Islam?