Discussion on the Qu'ran and Hadith

[R_not]

But the question about which are Medina verses and which are Mekka verses seems to imply that there was a progression or a change in Muhammad’s teachings (if I understand well the point that several posters tried to bring our attention to), especially about those involving respect and love for those who worship the One true God and the Jihad against the Infidels (which certain groups of Muslims apparently include the Jews and the Christians, and anyone who is not a Muslim…)
Here I don’t think all Muslims are of only one opinion on this and probably can’t be. Am I mistaken?

It is confusing. I got a couple of books ‘Moonotheism I and II’ that outline the different periods and the different verses.

here is an article about the medina and meccan surahs

One thing is that the medina surahs were usually placed before the meccan surahs. But it is not easy to discern that is why I use some books to just outright tell me which are which.

here is a site that talks about abrogated surahs (those replaced by the more violent, medina surahs).

koran - abrogation

yes, there was a change in mohammed’s teachings. He went from a relatively benign position to outright violence, theft, killing, torture, etc. I have often shown that even in his ‘what we will call peaceful period at mecca - he was still a pill’ to people and the elders went to mohammed’s uncle to ask him to stop mohammed from behaving so poorly. These following hadiths show that mohammed’s assertions about his being treated poorly was in fact the opposite and mohammed was the one who behaved poorly.

**Ishaq:119 “'Abu Tabib, your nephew Muhammad has cursed our gods [at this point he had cursed all of them, including Allah], insulted our religion [more correctly, insulted them by trying to steal their religion], mocked our way of life and accused our forefathers of error. Either you stop him or let us get to him. For you, like us, are in opposition to him. He gave them a conciliatory reply. They returned a second time and said, ‘We have asked you to put a stop to your nephew’s activities but you have not done so. By Allah, we cannot endure having our fathers reviled and our customs mocked.’ Muhammad thought that his uncle had the idea of abandoning and betraying him, and that he was going to lose his support. The Apostle broke into tears.”

Tabari VI:93 “The Quraysh went to Abu Talib and said, ‘Your nephew [Muhammad] has reviled our gods, denounced our religion, derided our traditional values, and told us that our forefathers were misguided [and burning in hell]. Either curb his attacks on us or give us a free hand to deal with him, for you are as opposed to him as we are.’ They said, ‘We asked you to forbid your nephew from attacking us, but you did nothing. By Allah, we can no longer endure this vilification of our forefathers, this derision of our traditional values, and this abuse of our gods.’ This breach and enmity with his tribe weighed heavily on Talib. ‘Abu Talib, you are our elder and our chief, so give us justice against your nephew and order him to desist from reviling our gods, and we will leave him to his god.’”

Tabari VI:95 “Abu Talib sent for Muhammad. ‘Nephew, here are the shaykhs and nobles of your tribe. They have asked for justice against you. You should desist from reviling their gods and they will leave you to your god.’”

Tabari VI:96 “Abu Talib said to Muhammad, ‘Nephew, how is it that your tribe is complaining of you and claiming that you are reviling their gods and saying this, that, and the other?’ The Messenger said, 'I want them to utter one saying. If they say it, the Arabs will submit to them and the non-Arabs will pay the jizyah [submission tax] to them.”**

 

[Lapell]

I thought it was more about them worshipping many gods and Muhammad worshipping and beginning to preach only one God, and the true One (comparing to THEIRS), and their being quite shocked and angered at this, especially his calling their gods “false gods”… This I would understand to be a quite authentic story.

 

[R_not]

mohammed mixed Satan and allah up - he said that it was Satan who caused him to forget, and then he said it was allah. At one time he admitted to being possessed by Satan which leads one to ask if it was only once!? So, who are the muslims following when they are either doing, or are silent in accepting those who do murder and mayhem? Satan or allah? (it is clear to me - but obviously it is not clear to them and their non-muslim apologists/appeasers)

I. Questions about Satan and Jinn :

Take a read of these koranic surahs:

 1.  4:120, Satan is a liar.
 2.  6:68, 18:63 Satan causes people to forget.

Now, if mohammed has blamed allah for his forgetting, then how come in these koranic surahs it is Satan that has caused them. mohammed is using allah and Satan interchangeably.

allah’s causing mohammed to forget :

 1.  In addition to losing parts of the koran due to battle losses, the traditions report that both mohammed and his Companions would simply forget various of the revealed recitations. mohammed would forget recitations from the koran,  "allah's apostle heard a man reciting the koran at night, and said, "May allah bestow his Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such Verses of such-and-such Suras, which I was caused to forget."  Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 6, Bk. 61, No. 558

  2. Similar lapses of memory are recorded for Companions as well, such as the case of Abu Musa al-Ash'ari, who confessed to forgetting practically an entire surah of recitations.

“Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash’ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur’an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:” If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used to recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:" Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and “that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection” (xvii. 13). Sahih Muslim, Bk. 5, No. 2286

   3.  Indeed, the traditions suggest that it is allah himself who made mohammed and his Companions forget portions of the koran!

“'Abdullah reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: What a wretched person is he amongst them who says: I have forgotten such and such a verse. (He should instead of using this expression say): I have been made to forget it. Try to remember the Qur’an for it is more apt to escape from men’s minds than a hobbled camel.” Sahih Muslim, Bk. 4, No. 1724; see also Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 6, Bk. 61, No. 559

If mohammed was under the sway of Satan once, then it goes to reason Satan could do it more than once!

 1.  Well, now, Satan was able to cause mohammed to forget. Now, Satan is whispering in the mind of mohammed. Is that our imagination? No, this is what the koran says. The koran is what this is the Arabic verse, "And if an evil whisper comes to you from Satan, then seek refuge with Allah." That means that mohammed once was under the sway of Satan. Clear in the koran.

 2.  mohammad admitted to have also received revelations directly from Satan. Known as the "Satanic verses," al-Tabari records in his History under "mohammad at Mecca" that "Satan Cast a False Revelation on the Messenger of God's Tongue." mohammad's admission that, "I have fabricated things against Allah and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken." confirms that mohammad was demon possessed.

 3.  *The only person who attempted to write down all of the koranic revelations while mohammad was still alive was killed by order of mohammad.   According to the Hadith, Abdallah bin Sa'd became concerned that some of the phraseology didn't sound godly, so he suggested enhancements. When mohammad accepted his edits, Abdallah rejected Islam. He recognized that the koran couldn't be from god if he, a scribe, could copyedit it. .*

Tabari V888:178 goes on to report that “When the Messenger entered Mecca he ordered that the following men should be killed… first among them was Abdallah bin Sa’d.” Clearly Abdallah bin Sa’d knew too much.

II. This is in stark contrast to Jesus who cast out demons.
1. There is no doubt about that. He did not only cast out demons, but He gave power to his apostles to cast out demons. He was not only powerful to command demons to come out of any possessed man, but He gave power to His disciples, to His apostles to do the same. And if you go to the book of Mark, Chapter 5, you'll see the story of the man with a legion (Satan). Read Mark Chapter 5 (there are many passages about this - too many to copy)

 

[R_not]

I thought it was more about them worshipping many gods and Muhammad worshipping and beginning to preach only one God, and the true One (comparing to THEIRS), and their being quite shocked and angered at this, especially his calling their gods “false gods”… This I would understand to be a quite authentic story.

Well, mohammed started out trying to convert the Jews, and eventually the Christians and others, to his new religion.

This is why he included stories of the Bible in his preachings. but because mohammed didn’t know the Bible as the very, literate Jews knew the Bible - he was not taken seriously. He wasn’t taken seriously until he started his bloody rampages of murder, lust, greed, etc.

some books,
-Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and islam Isn’t
-The Truth About mohammed
-The Life and Religion of mohammed
-Understanding muhammad, A Psychobiography

faithfreedom.org goes into some of this also

 

[planten]

Well, mohammed started out trying to convert the Jews, and eventually the Christians and others, to his new religion.

**Muhammad did not have to do anything from himslef. He was guided and commanded by Allah to proclaim One God in that pagan society.

Muhammad did not need to convert the Jews and the christians. He had a hard task ahead convincing his own pagan people. But Muhammad hoped some kind of decency and truth from the Jews and christians (who had received guidance from God earlier on) but he did not get any good response from the people of the books too. That is a fact of history. Muhammad did not conspire against the Jews or christians. He did not praise the Jews and christains wrongly. They deserved all that praise.**

This is why he included stories of the Bible in his preachings. but because mohammed didn’t know the Bible as the very, literate Jews knew the Bible - he was not taken seriously. He wasn’t taken seriously until he started his bloody rampages of murder, lust, greed, etc

This is a fabricated story, a lie. See my above note

some books,
-Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and islam Isn’t
-The Truth About mohammed
-The Life and Religion of mohammed
-Understanding muhammad, A Psychobiography

faithfreedom.org goes into some of this also

**Please all friends read the book titled " 100 Greatest men of the world". Therein Muhammad is noted as number One. Also read the book “Bible Science and Quran” by maurice bucaile. You will find the exellence of Muhammad and the teachings that he brought for the whole world. Thanks.

Do not read and never read the books pointed out above by R-Not . They are a part of some mischief. The books that I have mentioned about Muhammad were not written by any Muslim. So they are more reliable.

Also, another book of interest for all could be the one titled “Jesus in Heavens on Earth”. That is written by some Muslim, Dr. Nazir Ahmad.
**

 

[R_not]

**Muhammad did not have to do anything from himslef. He was guided and commanded by Allah to proclaim One God in that pagan society.

Muhammad did not need to convert the Jews and the christians. He had a hard task ahead convincing his own pagan people. But Muhammad hoped some kind of decency and truth from the Jews and christians (who had received guidance from God earlier on) but he did not get any good response from the people of the books too. That is a fact of history. Muhammad did not conspire against the Jews or christians. He did not praise the Jews and christains wrongly. They deserved all that praise.**

Yeah, that is why he went on his murdering rampages of the Jews and Christians - all that ‘praise’ of them. That sure is a funny way to ‘praise’ people. Or how about all those vile passages in your texts that want the Jews and christians dead, tortured or enslaved?! All that ‘praise’!?

97% of all jihad in the koran is the violent kind against non-muslims. Once again - all that ‘praise’ is just overwhelming.

**Please all friends read the book titled " 100 Greatest men of the world". Therein Muhammad is noted as number One. Also read the book “Bible Science and Quran” by maurice bucaile. You will find the exellence of Muhammad and the teachings that he brought for the whole world. Thanks.

Do not read and never read the books pointed out above by R-Not . They are a part of some mischief. The books that I have mentioned about Muhammad were not written by any Muslim. So they are more reliable.

Also, another book of interest for all could be the one titled “Jesus in Heavens on Earth”. That is written by some Muslim, Dr. Nazir Ahmad.
**

Actually, why read a book on mohammed when one can read the koran and hadiths and get the real picture of mohammed and the muslims that follow him.

You will learn about mohammed torturing a man so as to find the rest of his loot. You will learn about mohammed having an old man over 100 years old killed and a poetess still breastfeeding a baby killed because he didn’t like what they said. You will learn that mohammed lusted after his stepson’s wife, a child of 6 years old and him not being able to keep his word as a man to her father, and all of his enslaving of women and children while beheading their men. You will learn of mohammed attacking places where women and children lived (sound familiar with the jihadists even to this day) and that were poorly armed knowing that he would get a lot of loot and slaves.

yes, don’t read those things because it would upset planten.

You will learn of the endless jihad that mohammed pushed on his followers. The neverending wars, the call to islam and if you don’t accept islam their justification for their killing sprees, and the ones that mohammed knew didn’t want to do the killing were told to deceive, and support the ones who did do the killing via muslim charities. (yep, those same ones our government shuts down when they find them)

The muslims, like planten, are upset that so many kufir/infidels are talking about islam, mohammed and allah because for 1400 years they have not allowed this to happen especially for us to do the talking and reading. They have killed for those types of actions and now they have lost control of these actions so are now trying to go through the UN to stop others from doing it. They don’t obey the UN but know that stupid Westerners will follow the UN for the most part.

Here they have a huge victory for their stealth jihad in our countries at the UN. We should boot the UN out of our country and let those thugs reside in a country such as Somalia or Pakistan. I wonder how long they would even be a UN then.

http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/islam-marchers-250x300.jpg



here is a quote from the article, but take note - nothing is done to stop the human rights abuses in muslim countries, to stop them from their hatred that they even preach in their mosques, etc.

The UN anti-blasphemy measure, although non-binding at this point, is part of a larger and long-term effort to restrict speech that Islamic authorities dislike, including honest examination of the motives and goals of jihad terrorists. The only victors can be the jihadists themselves: Western authorities, already mired in politically correct myopia, will grow even more afraid to speak openly about what they’re trying to do and what we can do to stop it. The losers can only be those who value freedom of speech and understand why it is so important in a genuinely pluralistic society. The UN measure moves the West one step closer to submitting to the hegemony of Islamic norms.

 

[swariffin]

Since we are Christians, why not add that it could be said there is a difference in what Jesus taught before and after he let the Apostles know that he is the Messiah and the Son of God (according to Matthew), one big difference being that after that point he was teaching them that he would suffer a lot, that he would be tried, crucified, and on the third day he would resurrect… he didn’t teach that before that very point.
Maybe there such a thing as a before and an after in the teachings of Moses, but that’s something I should examine first, for I wasn’t taught about such a thing until planten brought that point.
But this should be examined under another thread maybe… I don’t mind examining it, though…

Dear brother,

Basically Planten would like to compare Muhammad and Moses. He would like to find any justification of what Muhammad did in correlation with what Moses did. He could not. Moses is a prophet of God while Muhammad is a self claim prophet.

 

[planten]

Dear brother,

Basically Planten would like to compare Muhammad and Moses. He would like to find any justification of what Muhammad did in correlation with what Moses did. He could not. Moses is a prophet of God while Muhammad is a self claim prophet.

**swariffin, no one is self claimed prophet. Moses was told in Deut 18:20 that a false prophet will be killed. We believe in that. Muhammad was not killed. So you have a lesson there.

Moses was not a prophet until he was called and appointed. Same for Muhammad. he did not know that he was a prophet until he was called and told. After that, of course, Moses and Muhammad were told many things and commanded todo things.

I was only suggesting that the verses revealed to Moses while he was inside Egypt were not any harsh warlike verses. Samething for Muhammad. The verses revealed to Muhammad in Makkah were for the spiritual uplift of the believers (Momins). There was no warlike verse revealed in Makkah. But all other guidance was given.**

 

[planten]

** Mere politics and a sermon of pure hatred. Or it may be a good christian example of “Love thy enemy”.**

 

[dzheremi]

How is disagreeing with your religion the same as hating you?

 

[planten]

How is disagreeing with your religion the same as hating you?

dzhereme, my post #347 was in reply to the post #345 of R_Not only. That was all politics. No religion.

 

[paarsurrey]

**swariffin, no one is self claimed prophet. Moses was told in Deut 18:20 that a false prophet will be killed. We believe in that. Muhammad was not killed. So you have a lesson there.

Moses was not a prophet until he was called and appointed. Same for Muhammad. he did not know that he was a prophet until he was called and told. After that, of course, Moses and Muhammad were told many things and commanded todo things.

I was only suggesting that the verses revealed to Moses while he was inside Egypt were not any harsh warlike verses**. Samething for Muhammad. The verses revealed to Muhammad in Makkah were for the spiritual uplift of the believers (Momins). There was no warlike verse revealed in Makkah. But all other guidance was given.

Hi

Muhammad was a Messenger Prophet of God Allah like unto Moses. Jesus and Mary being Jews were followers of Moses; like Second Coming 1835-1908 is Messenger Prophet a follower of Muhammad, in my opinion.

Incidentally this is what is meant by Khatamun Nabiyyeen, in my opinion.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna

Thanks

 

[R_not]

**swariffin, no one is self claimed prophet. Moses was told in Deut 18:20 that a false prophet will be killed. We believe in that. Muhammad was not killed. So you have a lesson there.

Moses was not a prophet until he was called and appointed. Same for Muhammad. he did not know that he was a prophet until he was called and told. After that, of course, Moses and Muhammad were told many things and commanded todo things.

I was only suggesting that the verses revealed to Moses while he was inside Egypt were not any harsh warlike verses. Samething for Muhammad. The verses revealed to Muhammad in Makkah were for the spiritual uplift of the believers (Momins). There was no warlike verse revealed in Makkah. But all other guidance was given.**

Actually, mohammed was indeed killed. He was poisoned by a woman. (I just find that ironic!)

Reasons why mohammed is not a propet:

Mat 7
15 'Beware of false prophets who come to you disguised as sheep but underneath are ravenous wolves.
16 You will be able to tell them by their fruits. Can people pick grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles?
17 In the same way, a sound tree produces good fruit but a rotten tree bad fruit.
18 A sound tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor a rotten tree bear good fruit.
19 Any tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and thrown on the fire.
20 I repeat, you will be able to tell them by their fruits.

I will not post all of them but there are more passages: Matthew 24, 2 Peter, 1 John 4.

And what did mohammed do quite often? Deceive and tell his followers that deception is ok if they need to do it.

mohammed showed no signs from God other than ‘I say I am a prophet and so that means I am a prophet - and allah is god and whatever I say that allah says - that means you have to follow…’

Matthew 7:15-20
Deuteronomy 18:21-22
Deuteronomy 13:1-4

And no prophet will bring a message that conflicts with the previous messages - well, we all know that mohammed’s whole premise was a conflict of the Bible and that is why he had to say that WE were the ones that rewrote it - and NO MUSLIM HAS YET PROVEN THAT THE BIBLE WAS CORRUPT BECAUSE THEY CANNOT. They only have the texts from an illiterate pagan.

mohammed wasn’t even consistent with his own rants! That is why there are so many abrogated surahs!

In conflict with the previous messages of the Bible is the premise that Jesus is not God. Well, that right there debunks the myth that mohammed was a prophet.

mohammed was not a prophet because he would change his mind to suit his needs at the time. (especially his sexual, murderous, and greedy needs!)

There is no call for muslims to reach beyond the basest of human cravings - sex, lust, greed, murder, lying, etc. Look at mohammed’s idea of heaven - just one big orgy of raping virgins!

What is the koran/islam’s teachings? To kill, to enslave, to take as many woman as one can (enslavement, booty), to steal, to lie, to break peace treaties, only recognize peace as either death, conversion or subjugation) while the previous message of the Bible was to love and forgive thy enemy. to obey the 10 Commandments, or to love God, love thyself and thy neighbor. NOT to kill them!

and the koran was thought up AFTER the revelation was completed. In fact, if you go back to Matthew 7:15-20 you will read the warning of such charlatans as mohammed.

And lastly since the koran, or mohammed, kept changing the message of the previous prophets - he cannot be a prophet because he denies the Crucifixion of Jesus. Not only does he deny the Divinity of Jesus, but also the Crucifixion and that Jesus died to save us from sin. He also changed many of the Old Testament stories.

mohammed was all about sin, he encouraged his followers to sin and he made his heaven into one big sinful orgy of rape and lust.

Read the rest of the reasons

 

[paarsurrey]

Mat 7
15 'Beware of false prophets who come to you disguised as sheep but underneath are ravenous wolves.
16 You will be able to tell them by their fruits. Can people pick grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles?
17 In the same way, a sound tree produces good fruit but a rotten tree bad fruit.
18 A sound tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor a rotten tree bear good fruit.
19 Any tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and thrown on the fire.
20 I repeat, you will be able to tell them by their fruits.

Hi

Oh, that quite fits, in my opinion, on Paul. Whatever Paul said , he said in the name of Jesus, and cleverly became an Epistel of Jesus. The sheep, in my opinion, could not recognize him; that is what Jesus warned for.

Muhammad stood in the name of God Allah; this is mentioned almost 113 times in Quran, in the beginning of all but one chapter. Muhammad was straightforward, whatever God Allah told him he immediately informed the public of it.

No disrepect is intended to any body we are just discussion things in search of truth.

Thanks

 

[R_not]

Hi

Oh, that quite fits, in my opinion, on Paul. Whatever Paul said , he said in the name of Jesus, and cleverly became an Epistel of Jesus. The sheep, in my opinion, could not recognize him; that is what Jesus warned for.

Muhammad stood in the name of God Allah; this is mentioned almost 113 times in Quran, in the beginning of all but one chapter. Muhammad was straightforward, whatever God Allah told him he immediately informed the public of it.

No disrepect is intended to any body we are just discussion things in search of truth.

Thanks

Paul was not a prophet, nor was he an apostle. He was a man who had an extraordinary event happen to him and changed to be a Christian to spread the Word of Christ to other lands.

I don’t know why this obsession over Paul. While mohammed made up things and just said ‘allah told me to do it’ (I paraphrase). He would do that when he lusted after women, wanted some booty, slaves, or just wanted to control his followers. That is why it looks as if allah changed its mind all the time - it was mohammed making things up as he went. Of course, mohammed wasn’t very bright and forgot quite often what he said previously so that is why the abrogated surahs.

 

[planten]

** Paul was not a prophet but he tried to overtake Jesus. He came in the name of Jesus. He used the name of Jesus and taught many false notions to the people (like Greeks) who were unaware of the Jewish teachings. Those people who knew nothing about Jesus or the Jews.

paul went into propagating and teaching his own developed philosophy in the name of Jesus. No doubt he was beheaded in the end, being a false teacher.**

 

[R_not]

** Paul was not a prophet but he tried to overtake Jesus. He came in the name of Jesus. He used the name of Jesus and taught many false notions to the people (like Greeks) who were unaware of the Jewish teachings. Those people who knew nothing about Jesus or the Jews.

paul went into propagating and teaching his own developed philosophy in the name of Jesus. No doubt he was beheaded in the end, being a false teacher.**

No he didn’t. You guys are so obsessed with this guy that it is just amazing. Priests, Reverends, and other Christians teach in the name of Jesus. And so what if he brought the Word to the people like the Greeks.

Why are you so afraid of Paul to this day? You guys are ok with mohammed, but not Paul - I find that ironic. mohammed came with a nasty message and Paul did not - but that is ok with you guys. mohammed set himself up as a prophet which I have proven time and again that he was a false prophet and Paul did not.

At least he didn’t go out and slaughter the Jews, or the Greeks, or anyone after he was converted. While mohammed did all his despicable deeds AFTER he thought up islam.

 

[paul_c]

** Paul was not a prophet but he tried to overtake Jesus. He came in the name of Jesus. He used the name of Jesus and taught many false notions to the people (like Greeks) who were unaware of the Jewish teachings. Those people who knew nothing about Jesus or the Jews.

paul went into propagating and teaching his own developed philosophy in the name of Jesus. No doubt he was beheaded in the end, being a false teacher.**

Paul did not operate independent of the other Apostles. He met with Peter and James at the start of his mission and he was a participant in the council of Jerusalem in 49AD. He traveled with Luke and Mark, who also traveled with Peter. He supported the church in Jerusalem through his collections. He was an acknowledge and esteemed member of the Catholic Church, not a usurper who took over the religion.

 

[R_not]

Paul did not operate independent of the other Apostles. He met with Peter and James at the start of his mission and he was a participant in the council of Jerusalem in 49AD. He traveled with Luke and Mark, who also traveled with Peter. He supported the church in Jerusalem through his collections. He was an acknowledge and esteemed member of the Catholic Church, not a usurper who took over the religion.

This is a usual ploy of the muslims on this board to not talk about their koran and hadiths - to deflect and start their rants about such people as Paul, or Moses, or whomever they think of at the time.

This has been discussed with planten so many times that it is old. planten doesn’t want to understand, but he doesn’t want to discuss his texts either.

 

[planten]

Paul did not operate independent of the other Apostles. He met with Peter and James at the start of his mission and he was a participant in the council of Jerusalem in 49AD. He traveled with Luke and Mark, who also traveled with Peter. He supported the church in Jerusalem through his collections. He was an acknowledge and esteemed member of the Catholic Church, not a usurper who took over the religion.

**Paul, we do not have any grudge against Saul. He was an enemy till the last time of Jesus. He killed many friends of Jesus. Okay. Forgive him if he did something good afterwards. But he did not. We can see clearly that he abondoned the law of Moses a.s.

While Jesus was alive, the law was sacred and being followed by Jesus and all disciples. When paul took over, law became a curse.
He abondoned the Sabath etc. He stopped the circumcision and started the eating of the flesh of swine. None of these were in practice during the time of Jesus.

WE Muslims are justified in blaming paul for high-jacking the christians faith. If paul had followed in the footsteps of Jesus then we would have no objection. But we can see that paul started a new religion of his own, including Trinity and original sin and death on the cross etc. Jesus and his mother did not do anything wrong. They were sinless. But this sinful man paul damaged christianity beyond repair.

Jesus never predicted the conversion of a staunch enemy (paul). So there is no real conversion. Jesus did not appear to any of his true followers to tell them that paul had converted. So there is no testimony for conversion. The person who was with paul on his journey to damacus was a man for paul. His testimony is not reliable. He is not a neutral person.

We will keep on discussing the subject of paul taking over the church. If christians are happy with him, we have nothing to worry. It is their own business. They can have paul. But we will not follow the teachings of paul. There is more paul in the bible than there is Jesus. Why?**