Could Muhammad of been a prophet?

[Augustine3]

You are a very interesting fellow nmgauss. I guess Augustine is taking sides because we believe christianity is absolutely true. Thus when Islam stands against Christianity it stands against truth. Thus we attempt to refute it. Seeing a fellow Christian doing otherwise gives us pause.

Bingo! You read my mind brother

 

[latin_rite]

Is it possible that Muhammad was a prophet of God? Can the belief in Jesus as our savoir and Muhammad as a prophet coincide? I don’t know much about Islam, but I’m quite curious about it.

Only if obama is too

 

[nmgauss]

Establishing the empire was done through the spread of Islam, hence by the sword. They were not exclusive to each other.

The Umayyads were primarily conquistadores. Religion had little to do with it.

Stealing for food is one thing. Killing people for food is another and is certainly unethical and unchristian.

Who said that killing was necessary? If someone steals your food, who kills whom? When plains Indians stole their neighbors horses, the object was to steal, not to kill.

Also, if a Christian is starving in the desert, is he more likely to die or grab whatever he finds, even if it means doing “unchristian” things?

 

[Augustine3]

Who said that killing was necessary?

I didn’t say killing was necessary, I’m merely applying the anaolgy of stealing in reference to what you said below.

I agree that violence is not an appropriate way to build an empire

Also, if a Christian is starving in the desert, is he more likely to die or grab whatever he finds, even if it means doing “unchristian” things?

Performing unchristrian deeds is not permitted under any circumstances. We do not compromise our faith and morals.

 

[mhmtas]

To save Trinity and doctrine of Trinity make Christian blind and deaf that thay can not see the fact that is demonstrated with thousands proofs. I see it is useless to talk much anymore. Salam!

 

[Augustine3]

To save Trinity and doctrine of Trinity make Christian blind and deaf that thay can not see the fact that is demonstrated with thousands proofs. I see it is useless to talk much anymore. Salam!

Where’s your proof mate? Let’s see what sort of proofs you have…

 

[MartinJordan]

To save Trinity and doctrine of Trinity make Christian blind and deaf that thay can not see the fact that is demonstrated with thousands proofs. I see it is useless to talk much anymore. Salam!

Typical.

There was no intention to dialogue in the first place…imo of course

MJ

 

[Sam_777]

To save Trinity and doctrine of Trinity make Christian blind and deaf that thay can not see the fact that is demonstrated with thousands proofs. I see it is useless to talk much anymore. Salam!

Christians are highly educated people, they use facts and logic to analyze matters.

On the other side, Muslim countries forbid the Bible in their countries not only to be blind and deaf about it BUT also because it will expose Islam. Salam!

 

[MartinJordan]

Christians are highly educated people, they use facts and logic to analyze matters.

On the other side, Muslim countries forbid the Bible in their countries not only to be blind and deaf about it BUT also because it will expose Islam. Salam!

This just a joke but I thought I heard SLAM! (of the door!)

MJ

 

[Sam_777]

God has never sent the Archangel Gabriel to send down a thousand of revelations.

God has used Gabriel to send a message and return back to God.

A very good point sister in Christ…

There was no reason for Mohammad to create Islam.

Since he was displeased with the Christians whom he thought worshiped more than one God and he despised the Pagans he could have joined the Jews.

Politics, Power, Money, and Women.
Judaism does not provide that.

 

[dzheremi]

No, he could not have been a prophet.

There, that was easy enough.

 

[FireFromHeaven]

To save Trinity and doctrine of Trinity make Christian blind and deaf that thay can not see the fact that is demonstrated with thousands proofs. I see it is useless to talk much anymore. Salam!

Mhmtas that is probably the worst thing to do in a religous discussion. Just throwing out blanket insults doesn’t help anyone, in fact it makes your religion look illogical.

 

[TheSufi]

According to Islam, the Holy Spirit is the Angel Gabriel.

I think one of the biggest problems with debates (discussions) between Islam and Christianity or Baptist and Orthodox or Catholic and Orthodox is terminology. We may have the same words but they don’t have the same meaning. So what does this mean, religions and groups have their own paradigm, their own set of rules, terminology etc.

So while the Holy Spirit in Islam means the Angel Gabriel. I don’t think Holy Spirit in Islam equals Holy Spirit in Christianity.

Sakīnah in Islam equals Shekinah in Judaism and I think this is what equals Holy Spirit in Christianity. There might be a correlation between the angels and Sakinah/Shekinah, which is probably the origin of Islam referring to Gabriel as the Holy Spirit. One has to be really open minded and well-read/willing to do research to have a fruitful discussion.

Something one should look into.

 

[FireFromHeaven]

Thank you Sufi. No one had ever explained it like that to me before.

 

[TheSufi]

The difference is Christianity was spread through word of mouth and acts of charity. Islam was spread by the sword.

There’s nothing noble or admirable about Muslim conquests.

Perhaps you may be unaware but when using phrases like “Unlike Christianity…” it appears as though you are debunking us Christians. It almost seems like you’re on your way to becoming a Muslim yourself.

This isn’t accurate. Both religions were spread by the sword, word of mouth and acts of charity. Europeans got the ship and enslaved the world through colonization, and spread Christianity with the gun, supported slavery for many years in North and South America. It is part of the reason there is large percentage of the converts to Islam in USA, who are black, because they blame Christianity for their enslavement here in America. Something to think about. And Southern Slave masters used the bible to justify slavery.

You need to be fair.

Religions don’t make bad people, bad people makes religion look bad. Every sin that you see, comes from a darkened heart, which is why Jesus said, Blessed are those who are pure in heart for they shall see God.

 

[TheSufi]

Is it possible that Muhammad was a prophet of God? Can the belief in Jesus as our savoir and Muhammad as a prophet coincide? I don’t know much about Islam, but I’m quite curious about it.

From the Christian paradigm, I don’t think Christians are looking for a prophet, in the Old Testament sense. What is interesting about Jesus is that he did NOT bring a new scripture, a new holy book.

Jesus brought the Holy Spirit to everybody, it seems to me, that he wanted to make everybody a prophet (based on the teachings of the Orthodox Church), and if one read the new testament (a scripture that Jesus did NOT bring), this seem very likely.

In terms of Jesus being God, this would be a matter of debate. The disciples of Jesus, of which there were many, some of them believed Jesus to be God, while others did not see Jesus to be God. The Orthodox Church, didn’t want to exclude any of the disciples, formulated a creed which included all of them, that Jesus is 100% man and 100% God. But one has to realize it wasn’t a consensus among the disciples of Jesus. I think part of the confusion that existed among the disciples, were they had different backgrounds, some of jewish origins and others of pagan origins. So depending on your background, determines how you understood what Jesus said. The Jewish population by large did not see Jesus as God, it was the pagan disciples who converted to Christianity that saw him as God.

So from one perspective, Islam does fit into the Christian paradigm, just not the Orthodox/Cathoic paradigm, who chose to embrace both groups of the disciples of Jesus. While Islam only embracing one group of the disciples of Jesus, the ones who did not see Jesus as God.

 

[Augustine3]

This isn’t accurate. Both religions were spread by the sword, word of mouth and acts of charity. Europeans got the ship and enslaved the world through colonization, and spread Christianity with the gun, supported slavery for many years in North and South America. It is part of the reason there is large percentage of the converts to Islam in USA, who are black, because they blame Christianity for their enslavement here in America. Something to think about. And Southern Slave masters used the bible to justify slavery.

You need to be fair.

Religions don’t make bad people, bad people makes religion look bad. Every sin that you see, comes from a darkened heart, which is why Jesus said, Blessed are those who are pure in heart for they shall see God.

I’ve heard many people say Muhammad was the greatest role model to follow. This role model spread Islam by the sword, many people were killed.

Christians that manipulated the bible in order to justify slavery have been denounced. I don’t see any Muslims denouncing the acts of Muhammad. You need to be fair.

 

[Reuben_J]

This isn’t accurate. Both religions were spread by the sword, word of mouth and acts of charity. Europeans got the ship and enslaved the world through colonization, and spread Christianity with the gun, supported slavery for many years in North and South America. It is part of the reason there is large percentage of the converts to Islam in USA, who are black, because they blame Christianity for their enslavement here in America. Something to think about. And Southern Slave masters used the bible to justify slavery.

You need to be fair.

Religions don’t make bad people, bad people makes religion look bad. Every sin that you see, comes from a darkened heart, which is why Jesus said, Blessed are those who are pure in heart for they shall see God.

Fair enough. Both religions are spread by the sword somewhere sometimes along their history. Some Christian posters here would not go along the line that Islam was spread by the sword and Christianity was not.

However, depending on how one sees it, perhaps there is a thin line but subjected to argument on how the role of the sword in spreading the religions respectively. Islam immediately went into war even during Mohammad’s time and continued by the caliphs. In a short period it had spread from the Arabian Peninsula to Northern Africa, Asia and Europe. Christianity was less fortunate. For about three hundred years after Jesus died, it was persecuted.

It is because of this that non-Muslims argue that Islam by nature was violent and spread by the sword since Mohammad and the caliphs represented Islam. The same cannot be said of the Christians in the colonization by the West of the new world which Christians would quick to point out that the colonization was done by secular power while Christianity was spread by the missionaries.

Ultimately, there are good and bad people from the religions respectively and on that score, I agree. Beyond that, which is often the contention here, is a matter of which religion, vis-à-vis Islam and Christianity that inherently has a propensity to violence and killing.

 

[MartinJordan]

From the Christian paradigm, I don’t think Christians are looking for a prophet, in the Old Testament sense. What is interesting about Jesus is that he did NOT bring a new scripture, a new holy book.

Jesus brought the Holy Spirit to everybody, it seems to me, that he wanted to make everybody a prophet (based on the teachings of the Orthodox Church), and if one read the new testament (a scripture that Jesus did NOT bring), this seem very likely.

In terms of Jesus being God, this would be a matter of debate. The disciples of Jesus, of which there were many, some of them believed Jesus to be God, while others did not see Jesus to be God. The Orthodox Church, didn’t want to exclude any of the disciples, formulated a creed which included all of them, that Jesus is 100% man and 100% God. But one has to realize it wasn’t a consensus among the disciples of Jesus. I think part of the confusion that existed among the disciples, were they had different backgrounds, some of jewish origins and others of pagan origins. So depending on your background, determines how you understood what Jesus said. The Jewish population by large did not see Jesus as God, it was the pagan disciples who converted to Christianity that saw him as God.

So from one perspective, Islam does fit into the Christian paradigm, just not the Orthodox/Cathoic paradigm, who chose to embrace both groups of the disciples of Jesus. While Islam only embracing one group of the disciples of Jesus, the ones who did not see Jesus as God.

You’re talking gibberish. And clearly out of touch about Jesus. You missed the whole point about the meaning of 100% man and 100% God. I really hope our Orthodox brethren will also clarify things with you.

MJ

 

[Reuben_J]

Jesus brought the Holy Spirit to everybody, it seems to me, that he wanted to make everybody a prophet (based on the teachings of the Orthodox Church), and if one read the new testament (a scripture that Jesus did NOT bring), this seem very likely.

Again, an interesting perception by a non-Christian. However that perception simply stops before you complete the full picture. You did not mention the message of the Gospel. Jesus brought the Gospel primarily. The Holy Spirit helps, for Christians who are willing to surrender to him, to be able to live out the Gospel. The end result will be for that Christian to be holy. Yes, he can take the role of a prophet that is teaching the faith. He also would be a priest, offering sacrifice . And finally, he is king, to serve.

So a Christian is called to be a prophet, a priest and a king in the sense that he teaches the Christian faith, offering himself as a living sacrifice and always willing to serve like Jesus the King.

In terms of Jesus being God, this would be a matter of debate. The disciples of Jesus, of which there were many, some of them believed Jesus to be God, while others did not see Jesus to be God. The Orthodox Church, didn’t want to exclude any of the disciples, formulated a creed which included all of them, that Jesus is 100% man and 100% God. But one has to realize it wasn’t a consensus among the disciples of Jesus. I think part of the confusion that existed among the disciples, were they had different backgrounds, some of jewish origins and others of pagan origins. So depending on your background, determines how you understood what Jesus said. The Jewish population by large did not see Jesus as God, it was the pagan disciples who converted to Christianity that saw him as God.

I am not sure what you mean by the disciples of Jesus because they can be understood in two categories. One, the disciples who followed Jesus while he was alive. Two, Christians after the death of Jesus – for as long as you are a Christian, you are indeed a disciple or at least called to be a disciple of Jesus.

The disciples of Jesus (as in one) eventually were not confused at all with regards to the nature of Jesus.

Yes, there was admittedly some confusion among Christians later on and that can be argued because the ‘official’ Christian body on earth was never confused about the nature of Jesus. While there were many who claim to be Christians, Christianity do have spokesman and the spokesman for Christian was never in confusion on this issue.

So from one perspective, Islam does fit into the Christian paradigm, just not the Orthodox/Cathoic paradigm, who chose to embrace both groups of the disciples of Jesus. While Islam only embracing one group of the disciples of Jesus, the ones who did not see Jesus as God.

I do not quite understand this and I feel this statement is false. In any case, I would like your clarification: who were the disciples of Jesus that did not see Jesus as God?