Could Muhammad of been a prophet?

[Ion]

The only religion that have knowledge of God is christianity. If you look inside a little, this is the most important difference compared to other religions that claim they worship the one true God; the jews the muslims and others only worship him.
If you look at the muslims, they do not have to much sense because Mohamed only brought a new guide for how to live their life, claiming that the jewish one is corrupt.
How did it get corrupt and why and why is he the solution and why is not going to get corrupt again? Doesn’t have sense even if it sounds attractive to blame a piece of paper.
And the way the prophets communicated with God was completly different than the Mohamad’s experience. He was not sure who speaks with him until his wife (???) told him he is not crazy and he is a prophet of God?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

How a man so ignorant as muhammad (given the quran and the supposed sources for his life and teaching) can be said to be a prophet I do not know.

 

[joe371]

“What can such expect but that God should come down to them overshadowed with clouds…” -Qur’an 2:210

“And there shall be a blast on the Trumpet, and all who are in the Heaven and all who are on the earth shall expire, save those whom God shall vouchsafe to live. Then shall there be another blast on it, and lo! arising they shall gaze around them: and the earth shall shine with the light of her Lord.” -Qur’an 39:68-69 [Note: The title Baha’u’llah can be translated as ‘the Light of the Lord’]

Biblically, we are warned of the three Woes, and “the third Woe cometh quickly”. The First Woe is determined to be Muhammd, followed by the Bab in the year 1260 AH (1844 AD). This is the Second Woe, And the Third Woe quickly came after the Second in the 1280 AH, or 1863 AD, when Baha’u’llah announced Himself to be the Promised One of all religion.
These prophetic numbers appear both in Daniel and Revelation. Note also that although the year 1280 AH is 1863 AH, this year is also 1290 lunar years from the public announcement of Muhammad, which occurred 10 years prior to the beginning of their calendar, “after the Hijra”. Hence the three dates given by Daniel: 1260, 1280, and 1290 all concur conclusively with the appearance of the First Woe in 622 AD (Muhammad), the 2nd being the Bab in the year 1260 AH, and the third in 1280 AH, which also is 1290 years following the Prophet Muhammad’s declaration till the declaration of Baha’u’llah in the Garden of Ridwan (Paradise)

“One day, the disturbing trumpet-blast shall disturb it [the universe] which the second blast shall follow… Verily, it will be but a single blast…” -Qur’an 79:6,7&

OK…Still, Muhammad cannot be a prophet of God, from a Christian perspective…From a Muslim perspective - sure.

 

[TheSufi]

OK…Still, Muhammad cannot be a prophet of God, from a Christian perspective…From a Muslim perspective - sure.

Islam is awesome.

 

[GaryTaylor]

According to whom?

How about Thomas Aquinas?

[4] On the other hand, those who founded sects committed to erroneous doctrines proceeded in a way that is opposite to this, The point is clear in the case of Muhammad. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be. seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.

thecatholicthing.org/colu…-on-islam.html

Granted the teaching changed slightly since this period as to believers. Still many of the same questions persist.

 

[daler]

OK…Still, Muhammad cannot be a prophet of God, from a Christian perspective…From a Muslim perspective - sure.

Well, thats a deep subject. What is interesting that each stage in the unfoldment of religion has people who believe no prophet can possibly appear after “their prophet”.

For Jews, this means no one after Moses has, or could possibly appear, and they use this to deny Jesus as the promised Messiah.

Likewise, Christians are “certain” that no prophet could possibly appear after Jesus, until the 2nd coming, etc.

Muslims are absolutely certain that Muhammad, being the “Seal” of the Prophets, was the last prophet Allah will ever send to earth, yet they expect the Qa’im, the Mihdi, or the Return of Christ.

In each case, promises are made for the coming of one after the current prophet, but each group denies this has occurred. Yet, there comes along another one who is believed by millions to be authentic to them. Thus we have Jewish, Christian, Muslim.

Now the Baha’i Faith comes along and says that the Promised One of all religions has appeared, fulfilling the expectations of all the previous Holy Books. Some accept after investigation, some reject, and others simply ignore the evidence altogether.

Personally, I think that God created a big jigsaw puzzle and handed us the box. Its up to us to figure out how the pieces fit together.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Though its not mentioned above I believe Aquinas was right in that you cannot argue the Quran from the Bible and visa versa. Its a difficult path which produces more anger and hurt than it seems to help.

All may well claim the absolute truth, yet when this results in violence and persecution regardless of who points the blame at who, then it renders the validity of truth suspect. We need to stop the violence. God is not a war monger. Violence in the name of God is better known as evil by man in the name of God.

 

[jakasaki]

• snip

We both believe in the second coming of Jesus, perhaps we should not let our current theological beliefs cause us to miss his second coming.

• snip

The prophet of Islam claimed in a hadith that when Jesus (Isa) returns in Damascus, he’ll do much, but one of his tasks is to break the Cross & destroy Christianity and make Islam the religion of the globe.

And in the end, he’ll live on earth for 40 years, and he’ll die. He will be buried next to the prophet of Islams grave.

 

[daler]

Though its not mentioned above I believe Aquinas was right in that you cannot argue the Quran from the Bible and visa versa. Its a difficult path which produces more anger and hurt than it seems to help.

All may well claim the absolute truth, yet when this results in violence and persecution regardless of who points the blame at who, then it renders the validity of truth suspect. We need to stop the violence. God is not a war monger. Violence in the name of God is better known as evil by man in the name of God.

When I was a kid growing up on the farm, we had a fair, and one of the games for the kids was a greased pig contest. All of us youngsters would chase this critter around in a big muddy corral, slipping and falling, grabbing and getting poked, feeling foolish but laughing all the way, cause we were having lots of fun.

Humanity’s rotten nature has surely not gone away, no matter how many prophets God has sent to us, whoever they are. In the effort to subdue our lower animal nature, we are supposed to “obey” God’s commandments, and have historically failed down through the ages. Currently, fanatical Muslims seem to take center stage. No so long ago it was some other fellas who, in the name of God, broke all the commandments, raping and pillaging, breaking treaties, nuking foreign lands, dropping napalm, etc. Indeed, we are a sorry lot.
It is hard to ferret out the truth where religion is concerned, a daunting task for sure. We must first overcome our prejudices and conditioned reflexes to always see the other guy as evil, and ourselves as always good. Perhaps there is good in the other guy, too!
Then, to objectively study the merits of cohesion, setting aside the rumors, and at least let testimony be heard. That is hard to do when there is a war on, or when somebody is flying airplanes into buildings full of people. Then, in retaliation there are drone strikes hitting innocents, as well. That’s what the UN is for, but people withhold support from that process out of distrust, and aggression continues. But at least people are talking, so I think there is hope.
In fairness, everyone at the table comes with bloody hands. So how to we get people from the Torah, the Gospel, and the Quran to sit down peaceably and discuss peace if each sees the other as an infidel? Then throw in some Buddhists and Hindus, some cowboys and Indians, and the rest of God’s children and declare that “There shall be One Fold and One Shepherd” ?
Its a hard hog to wrestle, my friend. Gotta admit that much… ;-?

 

[joe371]

Well, thats a deep subject. What is interesting that each stage in the unfoldment of religion has people who believe no prophet can possibly appear after “their prophet”.

For Jews, this means no one after Moses has, or could possibly appear, and they use this to deny Jesus as the promised Messiah.

Likewise, Christians are “certain” that no prophet could possibly appear after Jesus, until the 2nd coming, etc.

Muslims are absolutely certain that Muhammad, being the “Seal” of the Prophets, was the last prophet Allah will ever send to earth, yet they expect the Qa’im, the Mihdi, or the Return of Christ.

In each case, promises are made for the coming of one after the current prophet, but each group denies this has occurred. Yet, there comes along another one who is believed by millions to be authentic to them. Thus we have Jewish, Christian, Muslim.

Now the Baha’i Faith comes along and says that the Promised One of all religions has appeared, fulfilling the expectations of all the previous Holy Books. Some accept after investigation, some reject, and others simply ignore the evidence altogether.

Personally, I think that God created a big jigsaw puzzle and handed us the box. Its up to us to figure out how the pieces fit together.

All I meant was Muhammad could not be a prophet from God, from the Christian perspective, because he denied that Jesus was God (second Person of the Trinity) and he denied that Jesus died on the cross for our sins - agreed?

 

[nmgauss]

According to whom?

How about Thomas Aquinas?

[4] On the other hand, those who founded sects committed to erroneous doctrines proceeded in a way that is opposite to this, The point is clear in the case of Muhammad. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. **He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; **for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be. seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.

thecatholicthing.org/colu…-on-islam.html

Granted the teaching changed slightly since this period as to believers. Still many of the same questions persist.

 

[nmgauss]

How about Thomas Aquinas?

[4] On the other hand, those who founded sects committed to erroneous doctrines proceeded in a way that is opposite to this, The point is clear in the case of Muhammad. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be. seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.

Aquinas was influenced by the Neo-Platonism of Augustine, in which spirituality takes precedence over carnal needs. Even though suffering occurs from ignoring carnal needs, this idealism is preferable to the practical needs of humans.

Muhammad was a practical man, and addressed the material suffering of the poor and disadvantaged he saw in Mecca, which he interpreted as being made worse by the rampant capitalism of the Quraysh. To address their material needs, he saw the value of unity among the tribes. Whatever worked in his quest to build a united Arab front under Al-lah is what he concentrated on. Spirituality took second seat behind politics.

 

[daler]

All I meant was Muhammad could not be a prophet from God, from the Christian perspective, because he denied that Jesus was God (second Person of the Trinity) and he denied that Jesus died on the cross for our sins - agreed?

Actually, this gets really interesting because of the following:

1 “These are not My words, but Him that sent Me.”
2 “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do…”
3 “Why callest thou Me good? There is none good but one. That is God.”
4 “Father, if it be Thy will, take this cup away from me; yet not my will but Thine be done!”

People draw different conclusions from this, but it does seem to speak of Jesus as the Messenger of God, not God Himself. I think that is what is meant in the Quran, that we are not to deify Jesus as many tend to do.

As for the matter of the crucifixion, "Before Abraham was, I am."   How does one crucify that Spirit of God Who has always existed?

It may well be that the reference in the Quran where it says:

“That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts…”

I have read several different translations of this, and it appears to me that there are various interpretations by people who cannot grasp the idea that “He” is not His physical, bodily identity. In other words, it still allows for Jesus’ body, or person, to have been crucified.

As Muhammad Himself was illiterate and spoke only what was revealed to Him by the Angel Gabriel, and to my understanding these revelations were oral, others eventually committed them to writing. It seems reasonable to me that the intent of the “idea” that Christ was separate, in a very real spiritual sense, from His physical body was no more understood by the very literate early Muslims, than those to whom Jesus said, “Ye must be born again” understood what He was talking about.
This gets into the Resurrection, and the belief by some (or most) that it was a physical resurrection of the body, which then went up into a physical heaven. Whereas others sensibly believe that His resurrection was not of the body, for He said:
“And no man has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.”
This implies that although He came down “from” heaven, although He was born of the womb of Mary, and “is” in heaven, although He was on earth, and would ascend “to” heaven, it would be a return to the unseen world of the spirit, and not a physical place of geography.
Considered in this light, the pieces of the puzzle still fit. Right?

 

[Mount_Carmel]

The ‘other Comforter’ that Jesus promised the Father would send was the Holy Spirit that appeared as tongues of flame on the foreheads of the Apostles - NOT Muhammad, who in reality was one of the false prophets. Muhammad was involved in much war and strife and booty taking.

Matthew 7:15 - Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

 

[MartinJordan]

The ‘other Comforter’ that Jesus promised the Father would send was the Holy Spirit that appeared as tongues of flame on the foreheads of the Apostles -** NOT Muhammad**.

MC, this is only an act of desperation

MJ

 

[daler]

The ‘other Comforter’ that Jesus promised the Father would send was the Holy Spirit that appeared as tongues of flame on the foreheads of the Apostles - NOT Muhammad, who in reality was one of the false prophets. Muhammad was involved in much war and strife and booty taking.

Matthew 7:15 - Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Here is a most profound reading called The Most Holy Tablet, or Tablet to the Christians. It is written in the most eloquent style, and one must read it with eyes free of pre-conceived ideas and simply allow the words to penetrate the heart unimpeded:

reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/TB/tb-3.html

 

[MartinJordan]

Here is a most profound reading called The Most Holy Tablet, or Tablet to the Christians. It is written in the most eloquent style, and one must read it with eyes free of pre-conceived ideas and simply allow the words to penetrate the heart unimpeded:

Daler, I think you are proselytizing.

Forgive me If I seem to be judgmental;just my thoughts only

MJ

 

[GaryTaylor]

Aquinas was influenced by the Neo-Platonism of Augustine, in which spirituality takes precedence over carnal needs…

The carnal is contingent on the spiritual. The breath of Grace preceded everything in the sequence. In my mind I’m literally alive by grace, not the air I breath.

Even though suffering occurs from ignoring carnal needs, this idealism is preferable to the practical needs of humans…

Suffering your relating to self denial? Suffering is a good topic to relate about in the realm of the God of Abraham.

Muhammad was a practical man, and addressed the material suffering of the poor and disadvantaged he saw in Mecca, which he interpreted as being made worse by the rampant capitalism of the Quraysh. To address their material needs, he saw the value of unity among the tribes. Whatever worked in his quest to build a united Arab front under Al-lah is what he concentrated on. Spirituality took second seat behind politics.

Is that a vote for prophet of God? I’m not sure what you mean, spiritually still takes a second seat? I think with all this restrictiveness in Islamic countries, condemned Bible and banned reading lists, that there’s some type of insecurity or paranoia, maybe even fear. I think they are just wound a bit too tight. Does that relate to the spiritual, probably to some degree. I’m more inclined to see good muslims through my eyes as those in Egypt taking back their country.

Listen all the chaos is bad for God, way to dramatic for me, we need each other, its the interrelated structure of reality. So in my mind as I was saying above, I fail to see how conversations which center around Christ isn’t God and Mohammad isn’t a prophet have any future.

Maybe the conversation ought to be about what we can do to get along and build a better world for unbelievers. A good start would be allowing the Catholic missionaries to intercede.

 

[nmgauss]

The carnal is contingent on the spiritual. The breath of Grace preceded everything in the sequence. In my mind I’m literally alive by grace, not the air I breath.

If you can live without the air you breathe, the water you drink, the food you eat, the warmth you need, then be my guest. If all these things are perfunctory, then why are we bothering to be incarnate? Why not stay as souls only?

Suffering your relating to self denial? Suffering is a good topic to relate about in the realm of the God of Abraham.

The self-denial is good within limits. The lack of self-denial is probably why so many humans are over-indulging. If one satisfies the needs to thrive, then denial of excess makes sense. But assigning a basic sexual need to the realm of committing sin, as Augustine would do, is to ignore a need that makes humans thrive.

Is that a vote for prophet of God? I’m not sure what you mean, spiritually still takes a second seat? I think with all this restrictiveness in Islamic countries, condemned Bible and banned reading lists, that there’s some type of insecurity or paranoia, maybe even fear. I think they are just wound a bit too tight. Does that relate to the spiritual, probably to some degree. I’m more inclined to see good muslims through my eyes as those in Egypt taking back their country.

Listen all the chaos is bad for God, way to dramatic for me, we need each other, its the interrelated structure of reality. So in my mind as I was saying above, I fail to see how conversations which center around Christ isn’t God and Mohammad isn’t a prophet have any future.

Certainly Muhammad would strongly disapprove of what has happened in the Islamic world since his death. I do not believe that what is happening today follows the teachings of the Quran or those of the ahadith. The spirit of revolt permeates Middle Eastern Islam today, but notably not in Far Eastern Islam. Why is that?

It is interesting to note that tribal culture is still part of the Middle East. In the Far East, I see little tribal tradition. So, superimposing traditions predating Muhammad upon the current Islamic world seems to be what is driving this violence.

 

[GaryTaylor]

If you can live without the air you breathe, the water you drink, the food you eat, the warmth you need, then be my guest. If all these things are perfunctory, then why are we bothering to be incarnate? Why not stay as souls only?.

I attribute air, water and the rest to Gods Grace as I do life.

The self-denial is good within limits. The lack of self-denial is probably why so many humans are over-indulging. If one satisfies the needs to thrive, then denial of excess makes sense. But assigning a basic sexual need to the realm of committing sin, as Augustine would do, is to ignore a need that makes humans thrive…

I’m not sure what your specific reference is with St Augustine?

Certainly Muhammad would strongly disapprove of what has happened in the Islamic world since his death. I do not believe that what is happening today follows the teachings of the Quran or those of the ahadith. The spirit of revolt permeates Middle Eastern Islam today, but notably not in Far Eastern Islam. Why is that?.

I would be speculating on what Mohammad would have to say about today. You say revolt, I could only suggest its the language of the oppressed.

It is interesting to note that tribal culture is still part of the Middle East. In the Far East, I see little tribal tradition. So, superimposing traditions predating Muhammad upon the current Islamic world seems to be what is driving this violence.

What tradition is superimposed? Whats superimposed is extreme Islam and its social/political which combines and interprets religion to the extreme as I see. Isn’t that why they are revolting in Egypt, Isn’t that why the religion isn’t recognized in Italy and is a tyranny in Iran? Syria, the kids are suffering as usual? The transition of social progress is expected. What about the tradition of the Christians in the middle east? What about the Jews and the secular minded?

And all that came from Mohammed and how his message in interpreted and by whom?. How does that connect to Prophet?