Could Muhammad of been a prophet?

[tonyfish58]

This is worth repeating!

Yes, the Catholic Church also emphasizes that there is only one God, and that God is pure Spirit.

The teaching is not that God–in his nature–was incarnated. God has only one nature–a divine nature. The teaching is rather that the Person of the Son, who possesses the one divine nature, was incarnated. Persons, not natures, can be incarnated. But I’m not going to restate Trinitarian theology here. For that, I recommend Frank Sheed’s “Theology for Beginners,” and “Theology and Sanity.”

I think that Islam might never had gotten started on such a heretical track had it not first been influenced by Arian heretics at the outset.

God doesn’t send prophets to contradict one another.

True, some people might mistake someone for a prophet when he is not.

Some thought that Jim Jones was a prophet, but they were wrong./QUOTE

rinnie - From a Baha’i position their is not contradiction in scripture, its truth is One. If one looks with an eye focused on Oneness then these Truths harmonize into a melody like unto the Nightingale of Paradise singing upon the Tree of Eternity.

A True Prophet to which Muhammad was one stand on their own selves and then their Words. That Muhammad founded a great Nation proves He is as Much Truth as was Christ.

If one uses something to reject Muhammad the same can be used to reject any Prophet. Thus the rejection just becomes a circular motion.

Consider the one big thing that holds Christians back from looking for Gods Words in other Prophets is the Doctrine of the Trinity. A doctrine that is a concoction of thoughts based on this and that passage in the Bible, that has to be considered unkowable to accept it, this Doctrine could be the Deception.

Whereas this concept can be explained and as the Bible has promised and as Muhammad has also Promised (As well as all the other Prophets), the whole Truth has been revealed so we can move forward as One Human Race, Under the One and Only God as One Fold with One Shepherd. The Shepherd being all the Prophets of God who are One with Each Other and One with God.

Regards Tony

 

[tonyfish58]

I see you do take a lot of numerical information from Scripture, very good,
but that tells me nothing about how the Bible justifies the Baha’i Faith.

Sorry but I feel a little blunt this morning, I have been away from this thread for a while and when I started reading I just saw a whole lot of rejection without thought, rejection mimicking Doctrine.

One has to look and to try to understand rather than read and reject.

The Prophesy that Dale talks about is not erroneous, it is spiritual wonderment.

There are numbers in the Bible that predict Christs mission and His Crucifixion to which Biblical scholars use with relish to prove Christ from the Old Testament.

These same numbers can prove Muhammad revelation ties in to the Bible and cements the revelation of the Bab and Baha’u’llah.

A coincidence or Fact? It is actually an heart pulsating mind blowing God thankful man Humbling fact that they do.

The year 1260 of the Muslim Calendar corresponds to the Year of 1844 of the Christian Calender. The facts are out there but who will have the eyes to see

Regards Tony

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

One has to look and to try to understand rather than read and reject.

Like you did (the latter)?

There are numbers in the Bible that predict Christs mission and His Crucifixion to which Biblical scholars use with relish to prove Christ from the Old Testament.

okay…

These same numbers can prove Muhammad revelation ties in to the Bible and cements the revelation of the Bab and Baha’u’llah.

I don’t think so. Even if some verses can be twisted in favor of those three prophets,
the WHOLE Bible must support Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha’u’llah.

A coincidence or Fact? It is actually an heart pulsating mind blowing God thankful man Humbling fact that they do.

huh…?

The year 1260 of the Muslim Calendar corresponds to the Year of 1844 of the Christian Calender. The facts are out there but who will have the eyes to see

I’m still not seeing your point?

 

[tonyfish58]

I’m still not seeing your point?

Muhammad’s Revelation has a Luna Calendar that is not the Christian Solar Calendar.

The Bible gives many references to 1260 years

The year 1260 in the Luna Calendar is the Solar Year 1844 - Thus there was a great expectation that 1844 may be the year of Christs return - Google 1844 and you will find how this was a year of expectation.

DANIEL 7:25
He shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws – and they shall be given into his hands until a time and times and the dividing of a time.
DANIEL 12:7
It shall be for a time, times, and half a time that he can scatter the power of the holy people.
REVELATION 11:2
The holy city they tread under foot forty and two months.
REVELATION 11:3
And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophecy a thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.
REVELATION 12:6
And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and sixty days.
REVELATION 12:14
And the woman was given wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
REVELATION 13:5
And there was given to the beast a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and power was given to him to continue forty and two months.

Thus the Bible tells us of the Revelation of Muhammad and How long it would last to the exact time

Times, Times & 1/2 a time, 42 months and 1260 days are all 1260 Years as per biblical Prophesy. (Not a Baha’i Interpretation. This rendering of prophesy was well known before the Baha’i Faith was started)

1260 years Muhammad’s Revelation reigned it was fulfilled as was Christianity in 1844 by the coming of the Bab then Baha’u’llah, the Twin Shining Stars.

The night of the Babs Declaration across the other side of the world the first ever telegraph message was sent, opening the new era of communication

The Message - “What hath God wrought” is a phrase from the Book of Numbers (Numbers 23:23), “What hath God wrought”, the message transmitted on May 24, 1844 to officially open the Baltimore-Washington telegraph line

A might statement indeed

Regards Tony

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Muhammad’s Revelation has a Luna Calendar that is not the Christian Solar Calendar.
The Bible gives many references to 1260 years
The year 1260 in the Luna Calendar is the Solar Year 1844 - Thus there was a great expectation that 1844 may be the year of Christs return - Google 1844 and you will find how this was a year of expectation.

DANIEL 7:25
He shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws – and they shall be given into his hands until a time and times and the dividing of a time.
DANIEL 12:7
It shall be for a time, times, and half a time that he can scatter the power of the holy people.
REVELATION 11:2
The holy city they tread under foot forty and two months.
REVELATION 11:3
And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophecy a thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.
REVELATION 12:6
And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and sixty days.
REVELATION 12:14
And the woman was given wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
REVELATION 13:5
And there was given to the beast a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and power was given to him to continue forty and two months.

Thus the Bible tells us of the Revelation of Muhammad and How long it would last to the exact time
Times, Times & 1/2 a time, 42 months and 1260 days are all 1260 Years as per biblical Prophesy. (Not a Baha’i Interpretation. This rendering of prophesy was well known before the Baha’i Faith was started)
1260 years Muhammad’s Revelation reigned it was fulfilled as was Christianity in 1844 by the coming of the Bab then Baha’u’llah, the Twin Shining Stars.
The night of the Babs Declaration across the other side of the world the first ever telegraph message was sent, opening the new era of communication
The Message - “What hath God wrought” is a phrase from the Book of Numbers (Numbers 23:23), “What hath God wrought”, the message transmitted on May 24, 1844 to officially open the Baltimore-Washington telegraph line

A might statement indeed

Regards Tony

Daniel & The Book of Revelation were speaking about
the End of Days, which has not come yet, so it is not
applicable to the Bab and/or Baha’u’llah.

Something else too: Revelation 12 & 13, if you want to say they happened in
the mid-1800s, also speaks of the a Great Red Dragon and the second beast
with two horns, like a lamb, but speaks as a dragon, telling everyone to wor–
ship the first Beast (not to be confused with the Great Red Dragon). So how
are we to tell whether the Bab and Baha’ullah are not two of those Beasts?

Besides, supposing your mathematical calculation are indeed accurate,
you still have not reconciled the Bible and the Baha’i Faith. It’s all as re-
ligiously fanciful as the book Oahspe (1882).

Jesus and the New Testament work perfectly with Moses and the Old Testament.

Krishna and the Gita, no.
Buddha and his enlightenment, no.
Zarathustra and the Avesta, no, no, no…

Muhammad and his Qur’an, no also,
The Bab and Baha’u’llah, them and the above impossible to make work with the Bible.

 

[Servant19]

Well, AFTER reading the Bible, OT and NT, and after reading most that the Muslim ‘Trilogy’ has to say, and studying the historic backgrounds according to followers of the time and later followers, and of historic references from those who were not 'followers, and from modern academic scholarship I must say that your post has far from got me convinced. [This despite my supposed ‘IQ of 164’ and comments on academic assignments of ‘very insightful’ and ‘you are obviously capable of complex thought and analysis’ from professors.] Oh well.

Thankyou Mount Carmel, you are very very intelligent

I appreciate intelligent discourse because I will usually learn something valuable from very intelligent people.

Would you mind sharing with us WHY you are not convinced, please?
Given the extent and range of your study, and your intelligence, I think a convincing argument outlining your reasons for not being convinced would convince me to take up a more intelligent mindset

God bless

 

[Servant19]

As far as “if you were God, how would you bring, the Jews in one era, and the Arabs in another era, given the climate of their thoughts and spiritual condition, out of their spiritual lethargy towards recognizing the one God?”

If I were God maybe I would find it more important to have a Plan for the Salvation of ALL and implement this Plan rather than worrying about whether everyone would recognize Me, since I would be more concerned with My creation than their opinion of Me.

However, since I am not God, I will have to trust and hope that God cares more about us, all of us, than our opinion of God.

If you were God, would it be feasible to provide some valuable reason as to what we have done wrong that we would require salvation in the first place?

 

[Servant19]

That which is, reflected PERFECTLY in the Islamic understanding of Jesus, by your own words, is absolutely and totally at odds with what is the understanding of Jesus in Christianity, therefore all of the back and forth concerning this, points out quite clearly, that one or the other is true or they are both false, they can NOT both be true.

If, by saying that Jesus is God, He is the Supreme Being beyond which there is no other, then I am happy to say, at this stage in the history of humanity, Christianity is wrong. However, if I were to go back in time, and imagine myself as living in Galatia for example, Jesus is as God as it comes. There is no greater.

You discount the fact that there have been three Divine Revelations since then, which have clarified the human errors made from interpreting the verses of the Bible, and advanced our understanding of the nature of God.

God never tests an individual beyond his/her capacity. You learn from these tests.
Similarly, God never tests humanity beyond its capacity. Small drips of milk are fed to humanity as they “gradually” learn more about the nature of their Creator

Either God became One of us or God didn’t, there is no middle ground, I repeat: either both are false, one or the other is true but they can NOT both be true.

Ok, well given the options given, ontologically, He didn’t…
Epistemologically, He did

Jesus flat-out said He was/is God and it was for this supposed blasphemy that the Jews connived the Romans into crucifying Jesus since the Jews of Jesus’s day, being an occupied country, did not have the authority to carry out capital punishments on their own.

Please show me WHERE this quotation from Jesus is where He says “flat-out” that He was God?

Please

 

[Servant19]

But what you’re not getting is that in the quotes of Basil earlier than the part you quoted
he is describing Jesus as being as eternal as the Father, being God and Creator. You’re
problem choosing St. Basil as your support is that you know that he would never agree
with your use of his words. You have to take his words only in the context of what he be-
lieved, not just apply them to whatever belief system you want.

Well, even an explanation then as to why St.Basil even writes the paragraph I provided. It clearly goes against the Nicene Creed.

Why would St.Basil contradict the Creed?

 

[Servant19]

I don’t think so. Even if some verses can be twisted in favor of those three prophets,
the WHOLE Bible must support Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha’u’llah.

Can you please tell us Judas, how the WHOLE Jewish Scripture supports Jesus?

.

 

[Mount_Carmel]

Thankyou Mount Carmel, you are very very intelligent

I appreciate intelligent discourse because I will usually learn something valuable from very intelligent people.

Would you mind sharing with us WHY you are not convinced, please?
Given the extent and range of your study, and your intelligence, I think a convincing argument outlining your reasons for not being convinced would convince me to take up a more intelligent mindset

God bless

Well, Servant, to go through all of what I have gleaned and mulled over through what is a number of decades would probably take rather a long time - but the nub of the matter seems to focus around, did Jesus or Muhammad have/show any of their ‘own voice’, and if so did it ever appear unreasonable or malicious. Looking at Jesus’ life there is nothing that may be argued as purely selfishly human and with tones of maliciousness or indulgence. Regrettably, there is much about Muhammad narrated in the Islamic texts that does not smack of the Divine or indeed of ‘innocent’ self humanity.

I just cannot see any prophet or righteous person of God continuing to indulge some of the things Muhammad appears to have continued to indulge in - and worse still, continuously awarding himself the golden ‘get out of jail’ card of claiming 'Allah says it is OK for him to act and instruct in ways deemed highly morally and ethically questionable for anyone else. A sort of ‘do as I say, don’t do as I do’ scenario it seems.

Via con Dios.

ps. I think Judas Thaddius is referring to the Prophets, not the whole Talmud.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

If, by saying that Jesus is God, He is the Supreme Being beyond which there is no other, then I am happy to say, at this stage in the history of humanity, Christianity is wrong. However, if I were to go back in time, and imagine myself as living in Galatia for example, Jesus is as God as it comes. There is no greater.,

The beginning is correct, Jesus is God and by say-
ing that we say that he is the Supreme BEING, be-
yond which there is no other.

You discount the fact that there have been three Divine Revelations since then, which have clarified the human errors made from interpreting the verses of the Bible, and advanced our understanding of the nature of God.

Yet Jesus assured us that the Holy Spirit (Third person
of God sent by the Father and the Son, by the way)
would guide his Church. You discount that, which
kinda puts you in a bind there.

God never tests an individual beyond his/her capacity. You learn from these tests.
Similarly, God never tests humanity beyond its capacity. Small drips of milk are fed to humanity as they “gradually” learn more about the nature of their Creator.

I do happen to believe something like that, but
I don’t believe God would tell us one thing and
then in the next instance reveal something en-
tirely to the contrary. You do, however.

Please show me WHERE this quotation from Jesus is where He says “flat-out” that He was God?

Here it is: Jesus NEVER explicitly uttered the three words “I AM GOD,” but Jesus
did identify himself with the I AM that spoke to Moses. He declared that he is the
First and the Last, Alpha & Omega. We can show various passages describing
Jesus as the Creator. You already reject it, but we’ve shown John 1:1, which if
you read it in the original Greek, demonstrate how Jesus is God Eternal by
whom all things are made.

But then you can be like, “The Father was speaking through Jesus,”
“John wasn’t written by Jesus,” “Why trust Paul, he isn’t Jesus,” and
so on and so on and so on.

God gave us his word, and by the Holy Spirit we
have the correct understanding of the Scriptures
in relevance to the Nature of God.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Well, even an explanation then as to why St.Basil even writes the paragraph I provided. It clearly goes against the Nicene Creed.

Why would St.Basil contradict the Creed?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
He did not! You simply refuse to read your quotation of Basil in the context of the entire
body of text which he wrote. Earlier in that text (an epistle of sorts, I believe?), he clear-
ly identifies Jesus as God, yet in what you quoted, he talks about the Father and Jesus
as separate distinct persons, describing their relationship, and how Jesus reflects to us
the Father.

Review on what the Trinity is: The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit,
the Holy Spirit is not the Father, etc, yet the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy
Spirit is God, yet the Bible proclaims that there is only One God, therefore we come
to the conclusion that God is One in Being, Three in Person.

What you are doing is giving the text that differentiates the Father and the Son, which
is fine, as that is what Christians believe, what Saint Basil believed, but you use in a
way so as to disassociate Jesus from God, as though Jesus is not Deity.

 

[Mount_Carmel]

Oops, miss post.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Can you please tell us Judas, how the WHOLE Jewish Scripture supports Jesus?
.

That is really a lot to get into, but I would at least cite
Micah 5:2, Isaiah 16:5, Daniel 9:26, Psalm 22:16,
Psalm 110:1 (as seen in older versions), just to
name a few crucial prophecies.

Hopefully others will enter this part of
the discussion and help prove Jesus
with God’s Word.

 

[Mount_Carmel]

Servant19 - With reference to Jesus being the fulfilment of the Prophets, the Messiah; on studying the Prophets and Psalms it is clear the Messiah would appear twice {in two guises] - once in humility and sacrifice and to fill His role of redemption [someone who would be rejected by many] - and once in overwhelming power and glory. Many of the Jews, caught up as they were in Roman occupancy seemed to overlook the first coming of the Messiah in humility and sacrifice, as they were focused on the Messiah of Divine power and glory coming from Heaven to smite all oppressors of the Jews and to restore Israel to Davidian political and military power and influence. It is clear that many did not fully listen to or understand the Prophets in a joined up way - it is as a result of this that I believe the second part of the Messianic Coming - Jesus’ second coming has perhaps been delayed. Maybe if the Jews had been more inclined to see/understand the Messiah of physical weakness and spiritual humility, that the second coming may have happened earlier? Patience, all will happen in God’s good time.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

The continuing butchering of Saint Basil as if he were a bahai (and not one of the greatest trinitarian thinkers to help the church define its doctrine) seems to be a theme and so I will just post this quote from Saint Basil in order to demonstrate the equality of the father son and Holy spirit in his thought. This is from the same text our bahai friend has appealed to, I do not think he understands the concepts being talked about. What is the meaning of Hypostases and ousia and the confusion at the time of these words, because Hypostases was commonly used to indicate Ousia.

1. Transfer, then, to the divine dogmas the same standard of difference which you recognise in the case both of essence and of hypostasis in human affairs, and you will not go wrong. Whatever your thought suggests to you as to the mode of the existence of the Father, you will think also in the case of the Son, and in like manner too of the Holy Ghost. For it is idle to bait the mind at any detached conception from the conviction that it is beyond all conception. For the account of the uncreate and of the incomprehensible is one and the same in the case of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. For one is not more incomprehensible and uncreate than another. And since it is necessary, by means of the notes of differentiation, in the case of the Trinity, to keep the distinction unconfounded, we shall not take into consideration, in order to estimate that which differentiates, what is contemplated in common, as the uncreate, or what is beyond all comprehension, or any quality of this nature; we shall only direct our attention to the enquiry by what means each particular conception will be lucidly and distinctly separated from that which is conceived of in common.

I would also quote this

1. Now the proper way to direct our investigation seems to me to be as follows. We say that every good thing, which by God’s providence befalls us, is an operation, of the Grace which works in us all things, as the apostle says, “But all these works that one and the self same Spirit dividing to every man severally as he will.” 1 Corinthians 12:11 If we ask, if the supply of good things which thus comes to the saints has its origin in the Holy Ghost alone, we are on the other hand guided by Scripture to the belief that of the supply of the good things which are wrought in us through the Holy Ghost, the Originator and Cause is the Only-begotten God; for we are taught by Holy Scripture that “All things were made by Him,” John 1:3 and “by Him consist.” Colossians 1:17 When we are exalted to this conception, again, led by God-inspired guidance, we are taught that by that power all things are brought from non-being into being, but yet not by that power to the exclusion of origination. On the other hand there is a certain power subsisting without generation and without origination, which is the cause of the cause of all things. For the Son, by whom are all things, and with whom the Holy Ghost is inseparably conceived of, is of the Father. For it is not possible for any one to conceive of the Son if he be not previously enlightened by the Spirit. Since, then, the Holy Ghost, from Whom all the supply of good things for creation has its source, is attached to the Son, and with Him is inseparably apprehended, and has Its being attached to the Father, as cause, from Whom also It proceeds; It has this note of Its peculiar hypostatic nature, that It is known after the Son and together with the Son, and that It has Its subsistence of the Father. The Son, Who declares the Spirit proceeding from the Father through Himself and with Himself, shining forth alone and by only-begetting from the unbegotten light, so far as the peculiar notes are concerned, has nothing in common either with the Father or with the Holy Ghost. He alone is known by the stated signs.

Do bahai believe that Christ sustains the universe? That Christ created the universe? No they do not.

 

[nmgauss]

The wedding event is told in chapter 2 of the Gospel of John. It is not mentioned at all in the synoptic gospels. Since the event mentions Jesus’ disciples the first of whom were originally disciples of John, the Baptist, it had to have occurred after Jesus’ baptism.

I am not sure of “Christ talking with the elders”. Where is that passage?

 

[tonyfish58]

Daniel & The Book of Revelation were speaking about
the End of Days, which has not come yet, so it is not
applicable to the Bab and/or Baha’u’llah.

Something else too: Revelation 12 & 13, if you want to say they happened in
the mid-1800s, also speaks of the a Great Red Dragon and the second beast
with two horns, like a lamb, but speaks as a dragon, telling everyone to wor–
ship the first Beast (not to be confused with the Great Red Dragon). So how
are we to tell whether the Bab and Baha’ullah are not two of those Beasts?

Besides, supposing your mathematical calculation are indeed accurate,
you still have not reconciled the Bible and the Baha’i Faith. It’s all as re-
ligiously fanciful as the book Oahspe (1882).

Jesus and the New Testament work perfectly with Moses and the Old Testament.

Krishna and the Gita, no.
Buddha and his enlightenment, no.
Zarathustra and the Avesta, no, no, no…

Muhammad and his Qur’an, no also,
The Bab and Baha’u’llah, them and the above impossible to make work with the Bible.

The good thing re Faith and the Love of God, God gives us free will.

Thus my fellow lover of God you are fee to choose your path.

Consider carefully the path to God

I need say no more God Bless you and All Humanity

Regards Tony

 

[tonyfish58]

Muhammad, the Bab and Baha’u’llah also showed wondrous signs as youth.

When Muhammad was twelve years old, he accompanied his uncle Abu Talib on a mercantile journey to Syria, and they proceeded as far as Busra. The journey lasted for some months. It was at Busra that the Christian monk Bahira met Muhammad. He is related to have said to Abu Talib: “Return with this boy and guard him against the hatred of the Jews, for a great career awaits your nephew.” alim.org/library/biography/stories/content/SOP/2/30/Muhammad%20%28Muhammad%29/Muhammad%27s%20Childhood

Abdul Muttalib (Prophet Muhammad’s grandfather) was more passionate with his grandson (young Muhammad) than with his own children. He never left the boy a prey to loneliness, but always preferred him to his own kids. Ibn Hisham reported: A mattress was put in the shade of Al-Ka’bah for Abdul Muttalib. His children used to sit around that mattress in honour to their father, but Muhammad used to sit on it. His uncles would take him back, but if Abdul Muttalib was present, he would say: “Leave my grandson. I swear by Allah that this boy will hold a significant position.” He used to seat the boy on his mattress, pat his back and was always pleased with what the boy did. Source: Ibn Hihsam, 1/168.

It is also reported that during Amina’s (Prophet Muhammad’s mother) pregnancy, she felt no pain or discomfort. She had always heard women complaining about the hardships of pregnancy, but she felt very well. During these months Amina had many dreams. One night in a dream she saw a light coming out of her. The light was shining on castles of Syria. Source: Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, 1/63.

God’s Religions are not a one sided story!

Regards Tony