Islam: Miracles and Proof

[Alexius]

Dear Katy,

Muslims used to read their Quran word by word and believe those words literally, just like a lawyer read a legal documents (no way for implied meanings). Do not blame them if they read the bible the way they read the Quran. It is understandable if they have that kind of conclusion. The problem is, they use their approach instead of ours in term of interpreting the bible, make their own conclusions, and stick on it. Forget about the magisterium’s interpretations, and whatever we say. Another problem is, when we use the same method interpreting the Quran, it will always be false if they disagree, no matter how many doctorate degrees you get.

Exactly!

 

[paarsurrey]

Muslims used to read their Quran word by word and believe those words literally

Hi

That is not correct behaviour if one does that on one’s own, Quran/Islam/Muhammad never intructed that so they are not responsible for this irrational approach.

Quran

[25:71] Except those who repent, and believe and do righteous deeds, for as to these, Allah will convert their evil deeds into good ones, and Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful.
[25:72] And those who repent and do righteous deeds, indeed turn to Allah with true repentance;
[25:73] And those who bear not false witness, and when they pass by anything vain, they pass by with dignity; **
[25:74] And those who, when they are reminded of the Signs* of their Lord, fall not down thereat deaf and blind; **[25:75] And those who say, ‘Our Lord, grant us of our wives and children the delight of our eyes, and make us a model for the righteous.’
[25:76] It is such as will be rewarded with lofty chambers in Paradise, because they were steadfast, and they will be received therein with greeting and peace,
Unquote

• The Arabic word ‘Aya’ could be translated ’ verses’ as well.

The verses of Quran have to be studied with utmost attention, wisdom and deep thoughtfulness.

Thanks

 

[hamba2han]

Matthew 10
34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it

For me, this passage from the Bible is clearly a call for ‘jihad’ from Prophet Jesus (pbuh).

The only part of the passage that I would have a problem is the part about losing one’s life for the sake of Jesus (pbuh) as I have no doubt at all that what he really meant was to “loseth his life” for the sake of God.

Anyhow, the thing to note from these Biblical verses is that Jesus says “I came not to send peace, but a sword” and he uses the word ‘sword’ and not ‘shield’.

This is hugely significant because a sword is both a defensive and an offensive weapon whereas a shield is only meant to defend oneself when attacked.

And the fact that Jesus uses the word ‘sword’ instead of ‘shield’ is a very clear indication that he was indeed calling for ‘jihad’ if and when the need arises.

 

[De_Maria]

Matthew 10
34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
**36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household. **
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
**38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. **
39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it

For me, this passage from the Bible is clearly a call for ‘jihad’ from Prophet Jesus (pbuh).

Yes, it is. But not military Jihad. It is spiritual Jihad. It is war against Satan.

The only part of the passage that I would have a problem is the part about losing one’s life for the sake of Jesus (pbuh) as I have no doubt at all that what he really meant was to “loseth his life” for the sake of God.

Correct. Because Jesus is God.

Anyhow, the thing to note from these Biblical verses is that Jesus says “I came not to send peace, but a sword” and he uses the word ‘sword’ and not ‘shield’.

Jesus was referring to the Word of God:

Hebrews 4 12 For the word of God is living and effectual, and more piercing than any two edged sword; and reaching unto the division of the soul and the spirit, of the joints also and the marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Apocalypse 1 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars. And from his mouth came out a sharp two edged sword: and his face was as the sun shineth in his power.

Jesus elicited a response from everyone. His enemies will yield a sword against us:

John 15
18 If the world hate you, know ye, that it hath hated me before you. 19 If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. 20 Remember my word that I said to you: The servant is not greater than his master.** If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you**: if they have kept my word, they will keep yours also.

Our defense will be the Word of God:

Luke 12:11 And when they shall bring you into the synagogues, and to magistrates and powers, be not solicitous how or what you shall answer, or what you shall say; 12 For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what you must say.

This is hugely significant because a sword is both a defensive and an offensive weapon whereas a shield is only meant to defend oneself when attacked.

Yet Jesus never counseled us to use the sword:

Matthew 26

52 Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

And the fact that Jesus uses the word ‘sword’ instead of ‘shield’ is a very clear indication that he was indeed calling for ‘jihad’ if and when the need arises.

The only fact indicated in your statement above is that you don’t understand Jesus nor the Scriptures.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[Joyousguard]

If this is the probelm with many Muslims interpreting such and obvious text I can’t imagine the problems they must have finding the actual mustard seed and the vine

 

[Joyousguard]

So the point still remains:

Christ came bearing a message of love and salvation (simplified). He nevere picked up a sword nor forced anyone to believe in anything He said.

Islam is the religion of peace yet it was created by the sword and forced upon people. This is inescapable historical fact. The man who brought Islam to the people killed infidels and forced Islam upon many others. Should we all follow Mohammed’s example?

How can a religion, professing to be one of peace, be initially spread by its founder’s use of violence, persecution and force?

I think we all know many of the general teachings of the Koran. How can we come to accept the teachings of a holy book when the very person who brought those teachings did not follow them himself nor did he spread them through peaceful means?

 

[De_Maria]

It is not just the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who is responsible for the rise of Islam and the preservation of the Qur’an in it’s original form.

You see, a very major reason why Muslims have absolutely no doubts regarding the authenticity and accuracy of the Qur’an is that we have the eye-witness testimony of “ten thousands of saints” to vouch for this… as the Bible itself testifies:

InJesus already debunked this idea of yours thoroughly.

**

"And this [is] the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. And he said, The LORD

The Lord, not Mohammed. But God.

came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand [went] a fiery law for them."

**

… Deuteronomy 33:1

Are you saying that Mohammed is God? Then you are committing Shirk.

If you are not saying that Mohammed is God, then this verse can’t possibly apply to Mohammed.

And so, with the help of Allah, it was also due to the painstaking efforts of these “ten thousands of saints” during and shortly after the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that has enabled the Qur’an and also his Sunnah to be preserved so precisely and meticulously

But it hasn’t been. The very hadith or sunnah explain that Mohammed’s own companions fought over what Mohammed actually said.

And Mohammed never actually compiled his Quranic documents, but left them such a shambles that Uthman saw it fit to destroy them lest anyone discover the sham.

and which has thereby ensured that the Message of Islam will never be corrupted or lost till the Last Day when the world finally comes to an end.

In fact, the Message of Islam was fabricated by Mohammed and Uthman. It is not a message from God as it is full of contradictions and errors.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[swariffin]

Hi

That is not correct behaviour if one does that on one’s own, Quran/Islam/Muhammad never intructed that so they are not responsible for this irrational approach.

The verses of Quran have to be studied with utmost attention, wisdom and deep thoughtfulness.

Thanks

Dear Paarsurrey,

I must apologize to you, my dear brother, if I over generalize the way Muslims interpret their Quran. At least I know that you don’t read the Quran and get the meaning literally. But, the way I see from reading the posting from our Muslim brothers who quote our bible said so. You are right. The verses from any holy book must not be taken for granted literally, without proper attention, wisdom and deep thoughtfulness from the context. That is what we, the Christians are saying in this thread, but you guys are ignorant about it.

 

[swariffin]

Dear Metaron,

Here is a copy from the article you post :

This has come as quite a shock to Muslims. According to the legends, myths, and stories found in the Hadith, the Qur’an was written in heaven by Allah on a large stone tablet. The angel Gabriel brought it down and Muhammad recited it verbally but did not write any of it down. It was Muhammad’s companions who wrote down what he recited. After his death, it was gathered together and compiled by the Calif Uthman.

As far as I know, Muslims claim that Mohammad was illiterate. In this case, why did the angel of Gabriel wrote the message from God on a large stone tablet, since Mohammad was illiterate? Did Angel Gabriel gave Mohammad a quick course of reading? Can we ask R. Morey about this?

 

[paarsurrey]

Dear Metaron,

Here is a copy from the article you post :

This has come as quite a shock to Muslims. According to the legends, myths, and stories found in the Hadith, the Qur’an was written in heaven by Allah on a large stone tablet. The angel Gabriel brought it down and Muhammad recited it verbally but did not write any of it down. It was Muhammad’s companions who wrote down what he recited. After his death, it was gathered together and compiled by the Calif Uthman.

As far as I know, Muslims claim that Mohammad was illiterate. In this case, why did the angel of Gabriel wrote the message from God on a large stone tablet, since Mohammad was illiterate? Did Angel Gabriel gave Mohammad a quick course of reading? Can we ask R. Morey about this?

Hi

To know how Quran was Revealed and collected one may read the relative Chapters in the following book:
“INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE HOLY QURAN”
BY MIRZA MAHMUD AHMAD, Son of the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 by accessing
alislam.org/library/books/Introduction-Study-Holy-Quran.pdf

Thanks

 

[Joyousguard]

Hi

To know how Quran was Revealed and collected one may read the relative Chapters in the following book:
“INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE HOLY QURAN”
BY MIRZA MAHMUD AHMAD, Son of the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 by accessing
alislam.org/library/books/Introduction-Study-Holy-Quran.pdf

Thanks

WOW I read through a bit of the book you posted. Not to be harsh or anything but much of the authors logical and reasoning alone are something to be desired. He makes conclussions while ommitting many serious arguments and understanding to the contrary of his own beliefs.

For example the author finds conflict with these two accounts and list them as contradictory:

(i) With regard to the birth of Jesus we find from Matthew
(I : 1-22) and Luke (I : 32-33) that the Messiah was to be one
of ordinary human beings. Only, he was to be called son of
God. From the Gospel of John (I : I), however, we find that the
Messiah is the word which was ever with God and was, in fact,
God, so that all have been made out of him.

Jesus was supposedly a man but God at the same time…oh the contradictions. I find it a bit lazy that the author did not research this further and then try and critique the hypostalic union instead of just leaving this as is.

(ii) From Matthew (3 : 13-17), Mark (I : 9-12) and Luke
(3 : 21, 22 and 4 : I) it appears that Jesus received baptism from
John and after receiving baptism from him, he left him at once
or on the same day. But in the Gospel of John there is no
mention of any baptism and the meeting between Jesus and
John is said to have lasted two days.

WOW…different gospels not recording the same events in the life of Christ:tsktsk:

A study of the New Testament shows that it is not free from
the element of superstition.
(i) In Mark ( I : 12-13) we have :
And immediately the spirit driveth him into the wilderness.
And he was therein the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan ;
and was with the wild beasts ; and the angels ministered unto
him.
The incidents recorded here are nothing but delusions. The
laws of God are against them. On this earth man lives in the
company of men and not in that of animals or satans or angels.
It is inconceivable that the laws of God were different at that
time. We do not have satans living visibly with men in this
world, nor do we find angels doing visible service for men.
To witness such things in dreams and visions is a different
matter. Such experiences were had by persons in the past,
and they can be had even today. But neither did we in the
past nor do we at the present time have human beings living
with animals such as wolves and lions. Nor do we have Satan
coming to a human being and carrying him off with him, so
that the man follows him and obeys him against his will,
rebelling only occasionally. Nor do we have angels coming and
doing such services as baking bread, cooking and fetching
water. In fairy tales we do have such accounts, but what
place can they have in a religious book ? If the New Testament
were a book like Kipling’s Jungle Book, it would have
been a different matter altogether. But the New Testament
is a book for the religious guidance of man. What use can such
a book have for fairy tales of this kind ?

What bothers me most about much of this book is the fact that the author does not consult many of the works about the Bible but rather creates his own understanding, time lines and resoning without learning elements such as how the gospels were written and who put them together. When he does cite the works of the early fathers, he cherry picks and pull texts out of context and omitts serious facts. In addition, the book is filled with so many logical inaccuaracies that I get the feeling that it was originaly written in crayon.

 

[inJESUS]

It is not just the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who is responsible for the rise of Islam and the preservation of the Qur’an in it’s original form.

You see, a very major reason why Muslims have absolutely no doubts regarding the authenticity and accuracy of the Qur’an is that we have the eye-witness testimony of “ten thousands of saints” to vouch for this… as the Bible itself testifies:

"And this [is] the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand [went] a fiery law for them."… Deuteronomy 33:1

And so, with the help of Allah, it was also due to the painstaking efforts of these “ten thousands of saints” during and shortly after the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) that has enabled the Qur’an and also his Sunnah to be preserved so precisely and meticulously and which has thereby ensured that the Message of Islam will never be corrupted or lost till the Last Day when the world finally comes to an end.

i already proved that if this Biblical passage proves anything, it proves that Muhammad is a false prophet . Repeating it proves helplessness on the part of any person who still picks this passage when the whole passage shows Muhammad as a false prophet. Believe me, this attitude does not give you credit as a person, nor does it give credit to your religion because it shows that both are based on willful distortion of clear passages.

 

[inJESUS]

1. If God furthered our understanding of forgiveness and righteousness from and “eye to an eye” to “love one another as I have loved you” and “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword” with Christ as the supreme example in the New Testament, why would we see a revert of a prophet such as Mohammed, supossedly sent by God, expanding and spreading Islam at the point of a sword?

the majority believe in tradition as well. Quran-only are few and considered a sect to my knowledge.

 

[Joyousguard]

I think many of us have come to similiar conclussions over the years concerning Islam and Mohammed. I’m still hoping some one of the Islamic faith can shed more light on these questions. I realize this is mostly a Christain forum, but never the less this is a very important discussion regardless of the venue. I guess it is very fortunate that apologetics is a trait Christains excel in

 

[inJESUS]

Christ never used violence, nor ever preached anything of violence. He parcticed what he preached, there was no difference bewteen what He said and what He did

peace and love in muhammads dictionary are relative; Jesus taught heavenly love that Muhammad neither knew nor taught. The love Jesus taught transcends humanity’s understanding of love; Muhammad’s teachings pamper the humans’ instincts, Jesus goes beyong them that’s why we “do not belong to this world” but Muhammad does.

Now, If Mohhamed claimed to be a prophet, or whatever the proper term may be, and the Koran as the “true” word of God. Why did God send a messenger who would act differently to what he said? Why would Islam be professed as the religion of peace yet the man who founded it spread it and built it on a foundation of the sword and violence?

since the Bible is “corrupt”, then surely Jesus lead many wars, took booties and some women slaves, and He must have not taught anything we find in the Bible about love. Surely corrupt and immoral Christians added them to the Bible and deleted all the wars Jesus fought from the Bible and all non-Christian documents.

Muslims will tell you that people attacked Muhammad that’s why all the dozens of war are “defensive”…dozens of them happen to be “defensive”, even the futuhat wars to conquer other nations must have been defensive…

Lets forget history and put intelligence aside, Jesus as well was attacked and threatened, He was even lead to death, not only threatened, yet did not start a war, nor asked the thousands of His followers to launch wars, neither during His time, nor after.

But people will find you a thousand reason to justify war, money and sex and still boldly claim to believe in Jesus. But whose tactic was it to mention the name of Jesus without mentioning His teachings? yet people have brain to search for His teachings;
what Jesus taught is only found in the Bible and Tradition, let those who have ears listen. After that, it will become clear there is no room for comparision : after the good money comes the forged one.

 

[inJESUS]

The only part of the passage that I would have a problem is the part about losing one’s life for the sake of Jesus

 

[ralphinal]

inJesus raises a great point. If the scriptures were corrupted, why leave in the hard stuff about forgiving enemies and praying for those who hate us. Why not put in kill those who hate you. Hate them back. Why leave in rules against all the “fun” stuff of the world? Why emphasize sacrafice? Man, these were the dumbest corrupters ever.

 

[hamba2han]

Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus (pbuh) unequivocally says that he is God and then proceeds to command his followers to worship him.

On the other hand, the Bible does indeed record that he unequivocally says the following:

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. … Matthew 10:34

Why then do Christians insist on believing that Jesus is God i.e. something that Jesus himself NEVER said or emphasized throughout his ministry… and yet they refuse to believe that he came not to send peace on earth i.e. something which he very clearly and categorically did indeed say as recorded in Matthew 10:34??

If Christians do believe that salvation can only be obtained by believing in Jesus Christ, then they most certainly have a bizarre way of showing it.

This is akin to someone who is struggling to stay afloat in the ocean and he grasps at a straw i.e. the belief that Jesus is God, in order to save himself from drowning… but yet he ignores the lifebuoy i.e. the belief in the things that Jesus actually says in the Bible, which has been thrown right in front of him in the water.

 

[Reuben_J]

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. … Matthew 10:34

Why then do Christians insist on believing that Jesus is God i.e. something that Jesus himself NEVER said or emphasized throughout his ministry… and yet they refuse to believe that he came not to send peace on earth i.e. something which he very clearly and categorically did indeed say as recorded in Matthew 10:34??

A little Bible study will help in telling us what this verse is all about:

10:34 At first glance this saying sounds like a contradicition of Isa 9:6 (“Prince of Peace”) and Jn 14:27 (“Peace I leave with you”.)

It is true that Christ came to bring peace - peace between the believer and God, and peace among humans.

Yet the inevitable result of Christ’s coming is conflict - between Christ and the antichrist, between light and darkness, between Christ’s children and the devil’s children. This conflict can occur even between members of the same family (vv.35-36; Mk 10:29-30).

 

[Jesusisgod]

Dear all, before one even accepts the opinion of another, one must first be sure of the sanity of the person.

Can the muslims first tell us why a pedophilic old man like muhammad who had sex with a biologically underaged 9 year old girl is good enough to be a prophet? And why did muhammad’s own sons all die in their infancies while muhammad himself was poisoned to death which is obviously a curse make him a blessed man? Jesus as we know was brought up to heaven, but muhammad is today still rotting at medina.

So…eh. What’s the catch???

There was neither miracles nor good works in the life of muhammad according to the Qu’ran.

So, can we first ascertain where is the sanity of the muslims before we on further to discuss on what is sane. Otherwise, we would be talking about the skies while they are talking about what they saw in their dreams.