Comparing the Koran with the Bible

[viveret]

Originally Posted by elwill
you are right , then he never said i’m prophet nor did he said i’m God . what he said exactly many times in the bible is that everything he said, everything he spoke was not of his own but of the ONE WHO SENT HIM, which is the Father.
Jesus was sent, he did not send himself.

Again, these are matters of faith, not matters of reason.
I see no resolution to any of these differences at all.
Both religions are holy in the eyes of their adherents, and yet the content of neither can be holy in the eyes of the other.
As I pointed out in a private message I’ve written, we have our humanity and our monotheism.
We have our sciptures, which we interpret according to our faiths.
Each is entitled to the integrity of his own faith.
We should argue to inform each other, let’s not do so in order to persuade in this case. I don’t think agreement is possible.

 

[elwill]

To elwill:

Allow me to respond to your points one by one…

First, you again run away from the intellectual dishonesty in claiming Jesus never said He was God. You jump again, pointing to passages where Christ gives credit to the Father to something. Aside from the fact that’s misunderstanding the roles of the Trinity, you’re again ignoring the passages wherein Christ gives Himself power that only God can have, and credits Himself something only God could. You’re simply picking and choosing scripture while ignoring the focus of the argument. I’m sorry - to argue Christ never said He was God while at the same time admitting Christ never said He was prophet or messenger but claiming that proves your point is to be intellectually dishonest and is further proof of eisegesis.

Second, in response to the quotation of John 8:58, you ask “is ‘i am’ a name or present tense?” With all due respect, I’ve explained that ad nauseum so that even a five-year old can understand. You have been given all the facts before you, now it is your God-given duty to respond. To respond with more questions is, I think every one can see, is to avoid giving a response to what you know deep down is true.

Third, you respond to Christ’s statement regarding Himself in John 6 with: “maybe he meant his divine massage and teaching and wisdom.” That’s a common tactic by some Muslim apologists to put the words “his message” in there…but the text never does that. Christ never says “My message came down from heaven,” He says in the text “I came down from heaven.” While it is true He was born in the Virgin Mary’s womb, that was how the Eternal Word entered into creation (John 1:1-5, 14). Again, what prophet would ever speak in such a way as Christ does there?

Fourth, in response to Christ’s reference to Himself as the resurrection, you, quite frankly, blow a gasket. And I think you know why - because you can’t argue with it. Christ isn’t saying, “belief in me as a prophet,” nor “belief in my message.” He is quite literally saying, “I am the resurrection.” Again, Jews like Martha would have believed this to be something only associated with God, and Christ here associates it with Himself. Therefore, to throw out a bunch of questions, jump to other passages, and declare “it’s not clear for me!” is simply blustering because deep down you know the truth and are trying to conceal it.

Fifth, you say that you have no problem Jesus was a great prophet, but you seem unable to understand that no great prophet ever claimed the power to forgive sins. Even your own prophet Mohammad taught a doa wherein it is said that only God had the power to forgive sins. Therefore when you say you have no problem that Christ has authority, you seem to forget that this authority (which He claims for Himself) is something that only God had. Either the Pharisees were right and Christ was blaspheming against God, or Christ had good reason to say what He did because as fully man and fully God He had the power to forgive sins.

Sixth, you say that I quoted a verse of Jesus praying to God - but therein you show basically that you covering your eyes and ears and ignoring everything we’re saying. Let’s review the passage again:

“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” [John 17:5; NASB]

Again, Christ is asking the Father to glorify Him with Himself, and with the glory which Christ had with the Father before the world was. Name me one prophet which not only asked for equal glory with God, but claimed to have had that glory before the world even existed. I think you will find none, because if a mere prophet had ever said such a thing, he would have been a great blasphemer.

Seventh…well, when you suddenly use caps, punctuation and perfect English I can tell you are merely copying and pasting from a website. I really wish you’d give the original source credit rather than trying to pass it off as your own (especially since I didn’t mention Matt 28:17 at all, which gives it away). As it stands, your argument says “check Strong’s concordance!” and gives a link. You should have probably checked the link first, however, because do you know what the first word in Strong’s concordance on the link supplied is?

worship.

The word you refer to is only the root word, and from there come the various different forms, all of which mean worship. And those forms, often said in reference to God (Rev 11:16), are also said in reference to Christ (Matt 14:33). Yet the only people to refuse such worship are Peter, the angel, and generally people we know weren’t God. Either Christ was like Satan and enjoyed basking in the worship meant for God, or He accepted worshiped meant for God because, as the Incarnate Word, He was fully God and deserved such worship.

Also, I’m curious if you’ve looked into Christ’s quotation of Daniel yet, and what your thoughts on it are.

well, now we discussed the verses which proof that jesus is God , i got what you mean and i understood your way in understanding the divinty of jesus

is it my turn to discuss with you the verses from the bible which proof to me that jesus not God ? are you ready for that ?

 

[elwill]

Also, I’m curious if you’ve looked into Christ’s quotation of Daniel yet, and what your thoughts on it are.*

yes , and i found nothing suggest deity

 

[elwill]

To elwill:

Allow me to respond to your points one by one…

you’re again ignoring the passages wherein** Christ gives Himself power that only God can have, and credits Himself something only God could.**

i believe that only God can rise the deads , and i believe either that one of miracles of jesus is to rise the deads , and i know from both quran and words of jesus himself in the bible that with his ownself he can do nothing from these things and that it’s the power of his father
i conclude from this that God alone can raise the deads , and God alone can give the permission to whoever he wants from his creation to use this power

Second, in response to the quotation of John 8:58, you ask “is ‘i am’ a name or present tense?” With all due respect, I’ve explained that ad nauseum so that even a five-year old can understand. You have been given all the facts before you, now it is your God-given duty to respond. To respond with more questions is, I think every one can see, is to avoid giving a response to what you know deep down is true.

it’s just sometimes christians says that " i am " is the name of God , i wanted to be sure that you believe the same
may be you just believe it is present tense

Third, you respond to Christ’s statement regarding Himself in John 6 with: “maybe he meant his divine massage and teaching and wisdom.” That’s a common tactic by some Muslim apologists to put the words “his message” in there…but the text never does that. Christ never says “My message came down from heaven,” He says in the text “I came down from heaven.” While it is true He was born in the Virgin Mary’s womb, that was how the Eternal Word entered into creation (John 1:1-5, 14). Again, what prophet would ever speak in such a way as Christ does there?

i will make it simple , i believe that all prophets came from heavin even if all of them including jesus (pbuh) birthed in the womb of their mothers

Fourth, in response to Christ’s reference to Himself as the resurrection, you, quite frankly, blow a gasket. And I think you know why - because you can’t argue with it. Christ isn’t saying, “belief in me as a prophet,” nor “belief in my message.” He is quite literally saying, “I am the resurrection.” Again, Jews like Martha would have believed this to be something only associated with God, and Christ here associates it with Himself. Therefore, to throw out a bunch of questions, jump to other passages, and declare “it’s not clear for me!” is simply blustering because deep down you know the truth and are trying to conceal it.

actually i have nothing to ad according to this issue , you present your understnading and i present mine

Fifth, you say that you have no problem Jesus was a great prophet, but you seem unable to understand that no great prophet ever claimed the power to forgive sins. Even your own prophet Mohammad taught a doa wherein it is said that only God had the power to forgive sins. Therefore when you say you have no problem that Christ has authority, you seem to forget that this authority (which He claims for Himself) is something that only God had. Either the Pharisees were right and Christ was blaspheming against God, or Christ had good reason to say what He did because as fully man and fully God He had the power to forgive sins.

i have nothing to say but this verse
john 5 :30
By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me.

what you can’t understand that jesus repeatedly say that his power isn’t his own , and he only say what he hears

Sixth, you say that I quoted a verse of Jesus praying to God - but therein you show basically that you covering your eyes and ears and ignoring everything we’re saying. Let’s review the passage again:

“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” [John 17:5; NASB]

yeah , he prays to God

Again, Christ is asking the Father to glorify Him with Himself, and with the glory which Christ had with the Father before the world was. Name me one prophet which not only asked for equal glory with God, but claimed to have had that glory before the world even existed. I think you will find none, because if a mere prophet had ever said such a thing, he would have been a great blasphemer.

Narrated by Maysara (ra), I asked: “O Messenger of Allah, when were you [first] a Prophet?” He replied: “When Allah created the earth ‘Then turned He to the heaven, and fashioned it as seven heavens’(2:29), and created the Throne, He wrote on the leg of the Throne: “Muhammad the Messenger of Allah is the Seal of Prophets” (Muhammadun Rasûlullâhi Khâtamu al-Anbiyâ’). Then Allah created the Garden in which He made Adam and Hawwa’ dwell, and He wrote my name on the gates, its tree-leaves, its domes and tents, at a time when Adam was still between the spirit and the body. When Allah Most High instilled life into him he looked at the Throne and saw my name, whereupon Allah informed him that 'He [Muhammad SAWS] is the liege-lord of all your descendants.'When Satan deceived them both, they repented and sought intercession to Allah “WITH MY NAME”.”[Ibn Jawzi in Al Wafa bi Ahwaal lil Mustafa, Page No. 26, Published by Dar ul Kutab al Ilmiyyah]

worship.
The word you refer to is only the root word, and from there come the various different forms, all of which mean worship. And those forms, often said in reference to God (Rev 11:16), are also said in reference to Christ (Matt 14:33).

that’s what i define as a selective translation

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

well, now we discussed the verses which proof that jesus is God , i got what you mean and i understood your way in understanding the divinty of jesus

is it my turn to discuss with you the verses from the bible which proof to me that jesus not God ? are you ready for that ?

I wonder if you fully do. I say that not to be condescending, but because I feel that you are in essence simply throwing my opinion out. Your response is similar to, “Yeah yeah whatever, now I’m gonna say this.” These are things you cannot run away from, elwill. They confirm Christ’s deity. To say that it is just a “way in understanding” is to ignore what is given before you. You have a responsibility to either accept the truth or reject it. In any case, if you’re going to throw “verses from the Bible” at me, I would want you to first admit this statement:

The scripture of the New Testament is trustworthy and has not been corrupted.

If you deny that statement, then any scripture you quote will only prove your entire argument inconsistent. You’ll be quoting scripture to us that you don’t believe in the first place, and you’ll be shown to be intellectually dishonest and upholding double standards. If, however, you accept that statement, then you can use those verses freely, however you must then recognize that any Islamic arguments that the Bible has been corrupted is wrong, and admit that the Quran must therefore be held up to the same standards as the New Testament.

Whether or not you can agree to this statement will decide whether or not you can quote verses from the NT for this discussion. We are not simply placing demands, we are making a call for consistent intellectual honesty.

yes , and i found nothing suggest deity

Then you haven’t studied it at all, I’m afraid. Let’s look at the full reference in Daniel:

“I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.” [Daniel 7:13-14; ESV]

Here we see “one like a son of man” (the future messiah) coming before the “Ancient of Days” (God the Father) and then given all the authority and power of God. This was not only an early Messianic prophesy, but one that spoke of deity, because the character of the Messiah had power equal to that of God.

This is why when Christ replies to the Sanhedrin with the quotation from this, all accounts say that the high priest tore at his robes. When could the high priest do this? When he heard blasphemy - he didn’t do it for fun or simply because he disagreed with another person. What Christ said was blasphemous against God because, in quoting this passage, He made Himself equal with God. It was this statement, in fact, which sealed Christ’s death on the cross.

Therefore to say that this doesn’t suggest deity is to not fully understand what is happening here.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

OK, seriously dude, what the heck? At least number the responses so we can give you time to respond fully, especially if you’re going to make several posts. Let’s try this again …

First, you again say that there are passages wherein Christ attributes some power to the Father. Aside from the fact that you’ve just repeated your argument and are ignoring my counterpoint that this is a misunderstanding of the role of the Trinity, you’re also ignoring what I said myself, which is that many times Christ gives Himself attributes. He doesn’t say that the Father gave it to Him, but that He alone has that authority.

Second, I have to admit that you are really, really, really, really, really dodging giving any real response to John 8:58. I hope you recognize that people will notice that, and that this does not help the cause of Islam in any way, shape or form. The text is clear: Christ is speaking of a past event wherein He existed, yet speaks of His existence in the present tense. Was this a title of God? Yes, because it denoted eternity. This is, again, why the Jews picked up stones to throw at him. Instead of asking over and over again “Um…is he speaking in the present tense?” actually respond to what is given to you.

Third, you say “i believe that all prophets came from heaven.” That’s wonderful, elwill, but what does scripture say? Does any prophet in the Bible say he came down from heaven? Does any prophet compare himself with something that actually did come down from heaven? The manna in the wilderness came down from heaven because God directly supplied it to the Hebrews. Christ compares Himself to this manna. Name me one mere prophet who ever did this.

Fourth, in response to the quotation regarding the resurrection, you say, “you present your understanding and i present mine.” Actually, no, I’m simply repeating scripture. You’re avoiding responding to it, because the text is clear. Christ is affirming Himself as the resurrection and the life. He’s not saying His teachings, but He Himself is. Again, He is applying Himself to a concept that is only attributed to God. No prophet has ever done this because to do so would have been blasphemous.

Fifth, you respond with the issue of who can forgive sins with: “what you can’t understand that Jesus repeatedly say that his power isn’t his own.” I’ve already replied to this ad nauseum, therefore I can only assume you have no other argument and are just repeating what you have at this point. I already illustrated that Christ associates this power with Himself and not God, and elsewhere that He associates other powers with Himself. I will ask you this: name me one mere prophet who ever forgave sins and said that this power was his alone.

Sixth…well, I have to be very frank here. Elwill, at this point you’re just hunkering down in your box and pretending that what is in front you isn’t there. You keep saying, “HE’S PRAYING TO GOD!!” Tell me…what is His prayer? Tell me what prophet ever prayed this. Your quotation isn’t at all related to this topic, because it doesn’t show a prophet telling God, “Glorify me equally, and oh yeah with the glory that I had with you before anything existed!” I don’t think any mere prophet would have ever said this without the expectation of getting struck by lightning.

Seventh, you respond to the citation of Strong (not even repenting for your blatant plagiarism) with: “that’s what i define as a selective translation.” Aside from the fact that the first word that comes to mind is “projection,” I also don’t see how that’s a response. I quoted from the very source you were citing, and then provided scriptural examples. You’re tossing your hands in the hair and saying, “Whatever. You’re just picking verses.” Demonstrate how.

 

[sedonaman]

… I don’t think agreement is possible.

Agreement is not possible when, as this thread has shown, there is a big difference in the basic beliefs, i.e., in the nature of God, man, and the universe.

Christianity teaches that while God is all-powerful, He can do nothing contrary to his nature, which is at least partially knowable. He can even bind himself to a covenant with man.

Islam holds that the only thing knowable about Allah’s nature is that he can do anything. Oddly enough, for a god who can do anything, Allah, for some reason, cannot manifest himself in more ways than one, like God of the Bible vis-à-vis the Christian concept of the Trinity. For a god to be able to change his will at any time, it is unusual that Allah sent down a book that states what his will is for all time. How do Muslims know what Allah’s will will be tomorrow in order to conform to it? The Muslim response is that Allah confuses whom he wills to be confused. This way of reasoning is completely alien to Judeo-Christian thought.

Which brings us around to the nature of man. According to Judeo-Christian scripture, God created man in His own image and likeness because God loves all equally [hence the Judeo-Christian concept of equality before the law]. Muslims tell us that this is not an Islamic belief; in fact, one said in another thread that they were told not even to say it. In the Qur’an, we find that Allah loves those who do good and hates his enemies. These are human failures, not characteristics of a deity.

So, why did Allah create enemies?

The nature of the universe. One of the most quoted verses of the Bible in the Catholic Middle Ages was: God “has ordered all things in measure, number and weight.” As such, it is knowable. Historians R.R. Palmer and Colton observe that “the culture of Islam decided it was not okay to analyze the world in rational terms. Use of reason and its effectiveness in understanding this world were ultimately against the culture, for according to Islam, Allah is sovereign in a sense that excludes secondary causes; according to that culture, Allah’s activity is completely inscrutable to man.” – Palmer and Colton, A History of the Modern World.

 

[LutheranDK]

Their God is our God. The God of Abraham.
.

The “god” in Islam is an idol.
Simple logic: Either God is Triune, or He isn’t. = either they’re worshipping an idol, or we are. I know it’s very modern to try to lump everything together, but it isn’t gonna fly.
The fact that the people in which islam arose also descend from Abraham is of no consequence. It’s still idolatry, and denying the Lord Jesus the honor and worship that is due to Him.

Or in other words: If A, then not B.

 

[rinnie]

The “god” in Islam is an idol.
Simple logic: Either God is Triune, or He isn’t. = either they’re worshipping an idol, or we are. I know it’s very modern to try to lump everything together, but it isn’t gonna fly.
The fact that the people in which islam arose also descend from Abraham is of no consequence. It’s still idolatry, and denying the Lord Jesus the honor and worship that is due to Him.

Or in other words: If A, then not B.

Lutheran, I think I understand what you are saying, but yet forgive me for my ignorance I am not sure I do. Could you explain this a litttle more simple for me Sorry:blush:

Now I was taught that they believe in the God of Abraham, Is that not correct? Now we believe in the God of Abraham. Now if I am understanding you, you are saying they do not accept the God of Abraham as the Trinity. THe 3 Persons made up of ONE GOD.

IF I am not understanding you please help me here. But where I am confused is them worshiping the idol. IF indeed we both worship the God of Abraham. HELP

 

[rinnie]

I wonder if you fully do. I say that not to be condescending, but because I feel that you are in essence simply throwing my opinion out. Your response is similar to, “Yeah yeah whatever, now I’m gonna say this.” These are things you cannot run away from, elwill. They confirm Christ’s deity. To say that it is just a “way in understanding” is to ignore what is given before you. You have a responsibility to either accept the truth or reject it. In any case, if you’re going to throw “verses from the Bible” at me, I would want you to first admit this statement:

The scripture of the New Testament is trustworthy and has not been corrupted.

If you deny that statement, then any scripture you quote will only prove your entire argument inconsistent. You’ll be quoting scripture to us that you don’t believe in the first place, and you’ll be shown to be intellectually dishonest and upholding double standards. If, however, you accept that statement, then you can use those verses freely, however you must then recognize that any Islamic arguments that the Bible has been corrupted is wrong, and admit that the Quran must therefore be held up to the same standards as the New Testament.

Whether or not you can agree to this statement will decide whether or not you can quote verses from the NT for this discussion. We are not simply placing demands, we are making a call for consistent intellectual honesty.

Then you haven’t studied it at all, I’m afraid. Let’s look at the full reference in Daniel:

“I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.” [Daniel 7:13-14; ESV]

Here we see “one like a son of man” (the future messiah) coming before the “Ancient of Days” (God the Father) and then given all the authority and power of God. This was not only an early Messianic prophesy, but one that spoke of deity, because the character of the Messiah had power equal to that of God.

This is why when Christ replies to the Sanhedrin with the quotation from this, all accounts say that the high priest tore at his robes. When could the high priest do this? When he heard blasphemy - he didn’t do it for fun or simply because he disagreed with another person. What Christ said was blasphemous against God because, in quoting this passage, He made Himself equal with God. It was this statement, in fact, which sealed Christ’s death on the cross.

Therefore to say that this doesn’t suggest deity is to not fully understand what is happening here.

Now here is something I am seeing. They have to say that all of the scripture is corrupted because if they do not, they don’t have as they say a leg to stand on.

But here is what gets me, their own prophet tells them to believe the scripture. How and why would he do so if its corrupted?

And to make it worse they are told to believe the N.T and the O.T. Now where is this N.T and O.T they are to believe if they don’t read the bible?

 

[flower_of_God]

Now here is something I am seeing. They have to say that all of the scripture is corrupted because if they do not, they don’t have as they say a leg to stand on.

But here is what gets me, their own prophet tells them to believe the scripture. How and why would he do so if its corrupted?

And to make it worse they are told to believe the N.T and the O.T. Now where is this N.T and O.T they are to believe if they don’t read the bible?

It is simple. He heard about Jesus, he had some info which was mentioned in Koran, and the rest he added, to be convenient. What contradicts his saying is supposed to be corrupt, because he changed the most important part: Jesus is GOD, so this is why they came up with the corruption.

And don’t forget that in the revelation it is written that nobody can add or remove one word. It was the final BOOK, GOD did not send Coran.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Now here is something I am seeing. They have to say that all of the scripture is corrupted because if they do not, they don’t have as they say a leg to stand on.

But here is what gets me, their own prophet tells them to believe the scripture. How and why would he do so if its corrupted?

The blunt answer is because Mohammad did not know his scripture. That is the only real reason that Muslims and Christians have these debates on CAF and various other places across the internet and debate sphere. Yet as you said, the Quran mentions what came before - some examples:

And this [the Quran] is a blessed Scripture which We have revealed, confirming that which (was revealed) before it… [S. 6:92; Pickthal]

Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them… [S. 7:157; Pickthal]

…It is a promise which is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an… [S. 9:111; Pickthal]

And this Qur’an is not such as could ever be invented in despite of Allah; but it is a confirmation of that which was before it and an exposition of that which is decreed for mankind… [S. 10:37; Pickthal]

Note that the Quran claims to be a confirmation of what came before (such as S. 10:37), is put on equal merit with the Torah and Gospel (S. 9:111), and even states that Jews and Christians can confirm it in their own books (S. 7:157). Yet we later find, after Islam has grown, a different outlook on it.

Narrated Ubaidullah:
Ibn 'Abbas said, “Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah’s Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, ‘It is from Allah,’ to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!” [Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461]

Suddenly we go from “Yes! Look at the previous revelations! The Quran is compliant with them!” in the Quran to “Oh wait, no, don’t read it, they tarnished it!” Again, why is this? Because, quite simply, nothing in the Quran is compliant with Judeo-Christian doctrine and prophesy. The minute a Muslim reads the New Testament, he has to accept either the truth therein, or he has to say it was corrupted. But therein lies the problem: how does he carry through the Quranic idea that Mohammad was in line with the Old and New Testaments? So then he has to run to the Bible. Yet Islamic thought is not consistent with the Bible, so what can he do then? Tell people that their scripture is corrupted. As I said earlier, it’s simply astounding inconsistency, and I sometimes wonder why more Muslims don’t realize just how absurd they sound when they argue this way.

And to make it worse they are told to believe the N.T and the O.T. Now where is this N.T and O.T they are to believe if they don’t read the bible?

That depends on which Muslim you talk to. Some do the “The Bible is corrupt!/Wait no it’s not!” intellectual dishonesty, whereas others will claim, “The Torat and Injil were given to Moses and Jesus, but it doesn’t exist any more!” There’s very little evidence of that as well, unless we’re supposed to assume that God is completely incapable of preserving His word.

 

[sedonaman]

…
The fact that the people in which islam arose also descend from Abraham is of no consequence. …

And the only evidence that they are descended from Abraham is Mohammed’s claim that they are, which stemmed from his other claim, i.e., to prophethood. And his reasoning for that went something like, “The Jews are rejecting me. They rejected the prophets of old; therefore [voila!], I must be a prophet too!”

 

[rinnie]

The blunt answer is because Mohammad did not know his scripture. That is the only real reason that Muslims and Christians have these debates on CAF and various other places across the internet and debate sphere. Yet as you said, the Quran mentions what came before - some examples:

And this [the Quran] is a blessed Scripture which We have revealed, confirming that which (was revealed) before it… [S. 6:92; Pickthal]

Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them… [S. 7:157; Pickthal]

…It is a promise which is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an… [S. 9:111; Pickthal]

And this Qur’an is not such as could ever be invented in despite of Allah; but it is a confirmation of that which was before it and an exposition of that which is decreed for mankind… [S. 10:37; Pickthal]

Note that the Quran claims to be a confirmation of what came before (such as S. 10:37), is put on equal merit with the Torah and Gospel (S. 9:111), and even states that Jews and Christians can confirm it in their own books (S. 7:157). Yet we later find, after Islam has grown, a different outlook on it.

Narrated Ubaidullah:
Ibn 'Abbas said, “Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah’s Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, ‘It is from Allah,’ to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!” [Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461]

Suddenly we go from “Yes! Look at the previous revelations! The Quran is compliant with them!” in the Quran to “Oh wait, no, don’t read it, they tarnished it!” Again, why is this? Because, quite simply, nothing in the Quran is compliant with Judeo-Christian doctrine and prophesy. The minute a Muslim reads the New Testament, he has to accept either the truth therein, or he has to say it was corrupted. But therein lies the problem: how does he carry through the Quranic idea that Mohammad was in line with the Old and New Testaments? So then he has to run to the Bible. Yet Islamic thought is not consistent with the Bible, so what can he do then? Tell people that their scripture is corrupted. As I said earlier, it’s simply astounding inconsistency, and I sometimes wonder why more Muslims don’t realize just how absurd they sound when they argue this way.

That depends on which Muslim you talk to. Some do the “The Bible is corrupt!/Wait no it’s not!” intellectual dishonesty, whereas others will claim, “The Torat and Injil were given to Moses and Jesus, but it doesn’t exist any more!” There’s very little evidence of that as well, unless we’re supposed to assume that God is completely incapable of preserving His word.

Yes, I Understand thank-you. And I agree. Back then they never were taught scripture, and listened to only him. And Jesus and the Apostles told us not to to that. And I do not believe he ever claimed to have the Power of the Holy SPirit to do so. But like Jesus told us and the APostles that the Church is the Pilar of all Truth. And he was never given the power of the Holy SPirit by the laying of hands to teach, Got it!!!

 

[rinnie]

And the only evidence that they are descended from Abraham is Mohammed’s claim that they are, which stemmed from his other claim, i.e., to prophethood. And his reasoning for that went something like, “The Jews are rejecting me. They rejected the prophets of old; therefore [voila!], I must be a prophet too!”

Yes, I agree, that would cause quite a problem for them, wouldn’t it

 

[JTD]

Tiffany, simply reading the Koran without guidance and historical context will not give you a good understanding. The Koran is not in chronological order and neither is it arranged by subject matter. Additionally it is important to understand that later verses erase or “abrogate” earlier verses. This makes it easy to get confused about the true message. Let me suggest a good place to start learning about the history and beliefs of Islam. Here is a simple, easy to understand comparison of the Bible and the Koran: answering-islam.org/Authors/Fisher/Topical/index.htm. I also suggest you read some of Robert Spencer’s books and visit his web site: jihadwatch.org/. Good luck on your learning adventure!

 

[sedonaman]

…jihadwatch.org/.

Jihadwatch.org has a good article called “Islam 101”.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Yes, I Understand thank-you. And I agree. Back then they never were taught scripture, and listened to only him. And Jesus and the Apostles told us not to to that. And I do not believe he ever claimed to have the Power of the Holy SPirit to do so. But like Jesus told us and the APostles that the Church is the Pilar of all Truth. And he was never given the power of the Holy SPirit by the laying of hands to teach, Got it!!!

Christ and His apostles not only said they were in line with what came before…but they quoted it to prove it. Mohammad never did that once, nor did any of his companions after him. In the end, it became a game of “Ignore what they say and just follow the Quran because we told you to.” The unfortunate thing is that Muslims today like to hide behind atheist academia and claim that this is the reason for their doubt in Christianity when, at the very first fruits of their faith, it was simply blind, irrational faith.

 

[flower_of_God]

To elwill:

Allow me to respond to your points one by one…

First, you again run away from the intellectual dishonesty in claiming Jesus never said He was God. You jump again, pointing to passages where Christ gives credit to the Father to something. Aside from the fact that’s misunderstanding the roles of the Trinity, you’re again ignoring the passages wherein Christ gives Himself power that only God can have, and credits Himself something only God could. You’re simply picking and choosing scripture while ignoring the focus of the argument. I’m sorry - to argue Christ never said He was God while at the same time admitting Christ never said He was prophet or messenger but claiming that proves your point is to be intellectually dishonest and is further proof of eisegesis.

Second, in response to the quotation of John 8:58, you ask “is ‘i am’ a name or present tense?” With all due respect, I’ve explained that ad nauseum so that even a five-year old can understand. You have been given all the facts before you, now it is your God-given duty to respond. To respond with more questions is, I think every one can see, is to avoid giving a response to what you know deep down is true.

Third, you respond to Christ’s statement regarding Himself in John 6 with: “maybe he meant his divine massage and teaching and wisdom.” That’s a common tactic by some Muslim apologists to put the words “his message” in there…but the text never does that. Christ never says “My message came down from heaven,” He says in the text “I came down from heaven.” While it is true He was born in the Virgin Mary’s womb, that was how the Eternal Word entered into creation (John 1:1-5, 14). Again, what prophet would ever speak in such a way as Christ does there?

Fourth, in response to Christ’s reference to Himself as the resurrection, you, quite frankly, blow a gasket. And I think you know why - because you can’t argue with it. Christ isn’t saying, “belief in me as a prophet,” nor “belief in my message.” He is quite literally saying, “I am the resurrection.” Again, Jews like Martha would have believed this to be something only associated with God, and Christ here associates it with Himself. Therefore, to throw out a bunch of questions, jump to other passages, and declare “it’s not clear for me!” is simply blustering because deep down you know the truth and are trying to conceal it.

Fifth, you say that you have no problem Jesus was a great prophet, but you seem unable to understand that no great prophet ever claimed the power to forgive sins. Even your own prophet Mohammad taught a doa wherein it is said that only God had the power to forgive sins. Therefore when you say you have no problem that Christ has authority, you seem to forget that this authority (which He claims for Himself) is something that only God had. Either the Pharisees were right and Christ was blaspheming against God, or Christ had good reason to say what He did because as fully man and fully God He had the power to forgive sins.

Sixth, you say that I quoted a verse of Jesus praying to God - but therein you show basically that you covering your eyes and ears and ignoring everything we’re saying. Let’s review the passage again:

“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” [John 17:5; NASB]

Again, Christ is asking the Father to glorify Him with Himself, and with the glory which Christ had with the Father before the world was. Name me one prophet which not only asked for equal glory with God, but claimed to have had that glory before the world even existed. I think you will find none, because if a mere prophet had ever said such a thing, he would have been a great blasphemer.

Seventh…well, when you suddenly use caps, punctuation and perfect English I can tell you are merely copying and pasting from a website. I really wish you’d give the original source credit rather than trying to pass it off as your own (especially since I didn’t mention Matt 28:17 at all, which gives it away). As it stands, your argument says “check Strong’s concordance!” and gives a link. You should have probably checked the link first, however, because do you know what the first word in Strong’s concordance on the link supplied is?

worship.

The word you refer to is only the root word, and from there come the various different forms, all of which mean worship. And those forms, often said in reference to God (Rev 11:16), are also said in reference to Christ (Matt 14:33). Yet the only people to refuse such worship are Peter, the angel, and generally people we know weren’t God. Either Christ was like Satan and enjoyed basking in the worship meant for God, or He accepted worshiped meant for God because, as the Incarnate Word, He was fully God and deserved such worship.

Also, I’m curious if you’ve looked into Christ’s quotation of Daniel yet, and what your thoughts on it are.

Once more, i must say, you have my respect!

 

[flower_of_God]

Elwill, didn;t you ever wonder why Jesus, a so called prophet in islam ( blasphemy for christians)was conveived from the Holly Spirit, while the rest was conceived normally.

While Christ is teaching us to forgive and to love, this is the most important teaching, while in Coran Allah is claiming to hate the unbelievers. God can hate ? If so, can you adore such GOD?