Jesus vs Muhammad

[canadiangoose]

well… I disagree with you, hamba2han is the most knowledgeable Muslim about Islam I have seen on CAF so far.

You have to teach him/her about Christianity, point out for him/her the wrongs from rights, however, you have just registered three days back and you say such thing about a senior member!!!

I was referring to his knowledge of Christianity and his use of the bible when it suits his purpose. Then he disregards the bible as corrupted when there is something he disagrees with…such as Jesus being God.

 

[elwill]

Elwill:

Your cry of “objectivity” is a little strange here. I am an outsider, a non-Egyptian and a Christian, so I recognize that I may be a little more likely to believe these accounts than the average Egyptian Muslim would be. However, were it not for the volume of such accounts, and the growing recognition of the problem even in Egyptian media (most of which refuses to talk about systematic persecution of the Copts, as this destroys the facade of Egyptian secularism), I would perhaps be taken in by your protestations. As it is, I can only offer one more link (well, really, I can offer many more, but we’ve been through why this is unproductive), including some portions I will quote here in case qwerk is right and you really aren’t reading them.

From an article by Dr. Waheed Alla found here (all emphases and truncations mine):

let us be fair , not me nor you expect from each other to change the other’s mind . so offenses and mockery isn’t needed
if you consider this site nationalcopticassembly.com to be reliable , unbiased and authentic site so be it , i have no problem .

The ultimate goal of this article is propagandistic (certainly no Christian agrees with this nonsense of “going backwards and forwards between religions”!), but I should like to point out two important facts to you:

• It is published in Al-Ahram, a legitimate Egyptian newspaper that is well-respected and widely read across all of Egypt and wider parts of the Arab and non-Arab world.

• While minimizing them, it recognizes that there is a real issue of minor Coptic girls being abducted by Muslims. It is NOT a rumor started by Copts or their supporters – it is essentially true. It is not hearsay or baseless accusations, but a real problem in the relations between Muslims and Copts in Egypt.

fine , you cite for me article which published in ahram , but what this article says ?
it mentioned about story of muslim girl which traveled abroad with her boyfriend and converted to christianity and married him

the comment which you refere to is that one
**This human tragedy is offset on the other side - dozens of cases of abducted minor girls from some Christian families, and their parents face the same sad feelings that struck this good Muslim whose daughter escaped with a Christian husband outside the country. **

it means that in egypt , christian girls loved muslims and traveled with them then converting to islam

this is the only conclusion i can get from the article which published in ahram .

 

[Jay53]

let us be fair , not me nor you expect from each other to change the other’s mind . so offenses and mockery isn’t needed
if you consider this site nationalcopticassembly.com to be reliable , unbiased and authentic site so be it , i have no problem .

fine , you cite for me article which published in ahram , but what this article says ?
it mentioned about story of muslim girl which traveled abroad with her boyfriend and converted to christianity and married him

the comment which you refere to is that one
This human tragedy is offset on the other side - dozens of cases of abducted minor girls from some Christian families, and their parents face the same sad feelings that struck this good Muslim whose daughter escaped with a Christian husband outside the country.

it means that in egypt , christian girls loved muslims and traveled with them then converting to islam

this is the only conclusion i can get from the article which published in ahram .

Please reread the underlined portion above, “abducted minor girls” is not Christian girls who loved Muslims and traveled with them to convert to Islam.

Abducted: means kidnapped
minor: means under-age; under the legal guardianship of their parents

 

[hamba2han]

well… I disagree with you, hamba2han is the most knowledgeable Muslim about Islam I have seen on CAF so far.

You have to teach him/her about Christianity, point out for him/her the wrongs from rights, however, you have just registered three days back and you say such thing about a senior member!!!

Thank you for your compliment but modesty aside, it is just not true that I am the most knowledgeable Muslim here.

In fact, I have learned quite a bit about my own faith since I first joined CAF i.e. from both Muslim and non-Muslim posters here.

And BTW, I really would not mind at all if non-Muslims post verses from the Qur’an “when it suits their purpose”.

 

[elwill]

Please reread the underlined portion above, “abducted minor girls” is not Christian girls who loved Muslims and traveled with them to convert to Islam.

Abducted: means kidnapped
minor: means under-age; under the legal guardianship of their parents

thank you for your remark

may be i should to explore about arabic article , i hope to find it easly
then i should to explore if it was legal in egypt to kidnapping christian girls and raping them then converting them to islam .
then i should to explore if sholars of islam find it okey to kidnapping little christians girls and raping them , hence i will think again about my relegion

thank you anyway for your hint

 

[Moro_Rock]

"… until everything is accomplished"

Since the term “everything” in the sentence is believed to be so absolutely crucial and monumental in order to obtain salvation, why didn’t Jesus (pbuh) just explain in all the years he spent with his disciples, not even once to them, that “everything” really meant his own life?

It just does not add up… In plain English, the word “everything” simply does not mean one’s own life… because if it did mean that, then it is not logical at all for Jesus (pbuh) not to explain it to his disciples and making sure they understood perfectly without even an iota of doubt or misunderstanding, what is required for them to obtain salvation.
.

To a Christian Jesus is everything because He is the True Son Of God
authenticated by miracles
by fulfillment of O.T. prophecy
by His holy life
and His Sacrificial Death
His disciples were fully convinced of who He was , and after the Resurrection they understood the purpose and meaning of His death

 

[dzheremi]

let us be fair , not me nor you expect from each other to change the other’s mind . so offenses and mockery isn’t needed

Where did I mock you? By calling your idea that I am not being objective strange? I’m sorry, but I think it is! My point was that, yes, I am probably more willing than you are to believe the reports of the Copts, but this is not merely blind sectarianism. These reports would exist even if I did not believe in them, but it is the sheer volume and similar pattern in all of them that makes me unable to say that there is nothing to them. I do not believe that dozens of unrelated Coptic families across Egypt who are unknown to each other have all decided to engage in the same lie. Why would they do that? If that is what they have done, then it clearly is not profiting them any. What are they gaining?

if you consider this site nationalcopticassembly.com to be reliable , unbiased and authentic site so be it , i have no problem .

No, no, my friend. You’ve missed the point. This is why I did not include any of Dr. Alla’s personal analysis, only a direct quote of what was in Al-Ahram, written by Al-Fiqee! To show you that this problem is not only recognized by the Copts, and it is not a matter of supporting their allegations against Muslims due to religious sympathies. Certainly Dr. Al-Fiqee is NOT a Coptic Christian! When it is only a minority that you yourself do not belong to, it is easier to close your eyes and ears to it, isn’t it? But here, in this article, is a man from your own religion, admitting in a relatively frank way that the Copts are NOT lying - that these aren’t merely “accusations”, as you would like them to be.

fine , you cite for me article which published in ahram , but what this article says ?
it mentioned about story of muslim girl which traveled abroad with her boyfriend and converted to christianity and married him

Yes…

the comment which you refere to is that one
**This human tragedy is offset on the other side - dozens of cases of abducted minor girls from some Christian families, and their parents face the same sad feelings that struck this good Muslim whose daughter escaped with a Christian husband outside the country. **

it means that in egypt , christian girls loved muslims and traveled with them then converting to islam

this is the only conclusion i can get from the article which published in ahram .

Really?

What kind of “love” is it where it is necessary to steal the girl (UNDERAGE, these are not adult women making their own decisions) from her parents and to convert her to Islam even though it is illegal for minors to convert in Egypt?! Why so many reports of this activity from the families mention how the girls tell them that they are scared and they want to come home, but they cannot because they are threatened by their new “husbands”? These are neither the foundations of a loving marriage or the actions of loving husbands. They are the acts of criminal thugs and abusers, often directly helped and protected by police and security forces.

You are unbelievable, Elwill. May God help you see the truth in this matter.

 

[lastinline]

Thank you for your compliment but modesty aside, it is just not true that I am the most knowledgeable Muslim here.

In fact, I have learned quite a bit about my own faith since I first joined CAF i.e. from both Muslim and non-Muslim posters here.

And BTW, I really would not mind at all if non-Muslims post verses from the Qur’an “when it suits their purpose”.

Hamba…when non-muslims quote verses from the koran…it is not to show what we believe…but rather what you believe according to the koran. The koran is manmade therefore I need none of it for my faith in Christ. When you go on a tangent about eating pork by using Sacred Christian Scripture…then toss out the most important part because it is corrupt…you are being inconsistent.

I’ll tell you what…I’ll completely accept your use of the NT when you proclaim…“Jesus is God” as the bible says.

 

[qwerk]

This is the beginning of Matthew 15:

1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked,
2 "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!"

Clearly, the question posed to Jesus (pbuh) was specifically about eating with unwashed hands.

And when Jesus (pbuh) delivers his answer, he concludes with:

20 These are what make a man ‘unclean’; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him ‘unclean.’ "

And so, verse 11 ("What goes into a man’s mouth does not make him ‘unclean,’ but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him ‘unclean.’ ") which of course lies in the middle of the answer that Jesus (pbuh) gave, must logically be specifically in response to the question which he was asked i.e. about eating with unwashed hands.

For Christians to liberally extrapolate this answer of Jesus (pbuh), which he gave in response to a specific question about eating with unwashed hands, in order to make such a broad generalization and hence allowing the permissibility of consuming all kinds of food, regardless of any religious prohibitions, is grossly erroneous and plainly wrong.

You worry about washed hands and we worry about an ideology that tells us that it is ok to just war against non-Muslims just because they are non-Muslims (the first line of the definition of Jihad, book of Sharia laws 0.9) because Muhammad said this:

-1- ``Fighting is prescribed for you’’ (Koran 2:216);

-2- ``Slay them wherever you find them’’ (Koran 4:89);

-3- ``Fight the idolators utterly’’ (Koran 9:36);

Or the art of deception, taqiyya.

the Qur’an is against believers deceiving other believers—for “surely God guides not him who is prodigal and a liar”[1]—deception directed at non-Muslims, generally known in Arabic as taqiyya, also has Qur’anic support and falls within the legal category of things that are permissible for Muslims.

Taqiyya offers two basic uses. The better known revolves around dissembling over one’s
religious identity when in fear of persecution. Such has been the historical usage of taqiyya
among Shi’i communities whenever and wherever their Sunni rivals have outnumbered and thus
threatened them. Conversely, Sunni Muslims, far from suffering persecution have, whenever
capability allowed, waged jihad against the realm of unbelief; and it is here that they have
deployed taqiyya—not as dissimulation but as active deceit. In fact, deceit, which is doctrinally
grounded in Islam, is often depicted as being equal—sometimes superior—to other universal
military virtues, such as courage, fortitude, or self-sacrifice.

According to Shari’a—the body of legal rulings that defines how a Muslim should behave in all
circumstances—deception is not only permitted in certain situations but may be deemed
obligatory in others

one of the few books devoted to the subject, At-Taqiyya fi’l-Islam (Dissimulation in
Islam) makes it clear that taqiyya is not limited to Shi’a dissimulating in fear of persecution.
Written by Sami Mukaram, a former Islamic studies professor at the American University of
Beirut and author of some twenty-five books on Islam, the book clearly demonstrates the
ubiquity and broad applicability of taqiyya:

Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it
and practices it … We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in
Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream … Taqiyya
is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.

 

[lastinline]

You worry about washed hands and we worry about an ideology that tells us that it is ok to just war against non-Muslims just because they are non-Muslims (the first line of the definition of Jihad, book of Sharia laws 0.9) because Muhammad said this:

-1- ``Fighting is prescribed for you’’ (Koran 2:216);

-2- ``Slay them wherever you find them’’ (Koran 4:89);

-3- ``Fight the idolators utterly’’ (Koran 9:36);

Or the art of deception, taqiyya.

Taqiyya…isn’t that against one of those things we call the 10 Commandments?

 

[richardacombs]

This is the beginning of Matthew 15:

1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked,
2 "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!"

Clearly, the question posed to Jesus (pbuh) was specifically about eating with unwashed hands.

And when Jesus (pbuh) delivers his answer, he concludes with:

20 These are what make a man ‘unclean’; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him ‘unclean.’ "

And so, verse 11 ("What goes into a man’s mouth does not make him ‘unclean,’ but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him ‘unclean.’ ") which of course lies in the middle of the answer that Jesus (pbuh) gave, must logically be specifically in response to the question which he was asked i.e. about eating with unwashed hands.

For Christians to liberally extrapolate this answer of Jesus (pbuh), which he gave in response to a specific question about eating with unwashed hands, in order to make such a broad generalization and hence allowing the permissibility of consuming all kinds of food, regardless of any religious prohibitions, is grossly erroneous and plainly wrong.

Either your knowledge of English is unbelievably poor, or you are purposely miscontruing the verse. Jesus and His disciples **did NOT **wash their hands following the Pharisaic ritual. That is the whole point of the quoted verses. Jesus was perfectly familiar with the Jewish handwashing ritual for mealtimes, but chose to ignore it.

He wanted to make a point, which had nothing to do with pork, or beef, or dog, or even unwashed hands for that matter. He made the point that what a human eats or drinks does NOT defile him/her spiritually, rather what comes out of a person in how he/she speaks and behaves is what defiles him/her. This is not an extrapolation. This is the clear meaning of the text.

As for the Church’s permission to eat all foods, EXCEPT for those that have been offered to idols or strangled and the ingestion of blood, I referred you to the Book of Acts. There are numerous other Scriptural references as to the abolishment of Jewish dietary restrictions and purification ceremonies with the advent of the New Covenant.

Once again I make my offer of providing you links to the entire Scriptures, using various translations, and to a good set of Catholic Bible commentaries. May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you and open your mind to the Scriptures.

 

[qwerk]

I think that people have explained to hamba2han so many times that he doesn’t really care what the explanation is, he is just trying to divert off of the discussion of Muhammad.

In our world as it is now they can’t follow the Quran as it states, but that doesn’t mean that people in non-Muslims countries are allowed to criticize Muhammad or Islam. They are not. We do not follow Sharia laws or Islam, and we have the freedom of the internet (for now) and must follow guidelines of other’s websites but we do have the freedom to criticize Islam.

This is why we are not allowed to do so:

Qur’an (33:57) - “Lo! those who malign Allah and His messenger, Allah hath cursed them in this world and the Hereafter, and hath prepared for them the doom of the disdained”

Qur’an (33:61) - [continues from above] “Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter.”

The Hadith:

Bukhari (59:369) - This recounts the murder of Ka’b bin al-Ashraf, a Jewish poet who wrote verses about Muslims that Muhammad found insulting. He asked his followers, ‘Who will rid me of this man?’ and several volunteered. al-Ashraf was stabbed to death while fighting for his life.

Bukhari (4:241) - Those who mocked Muhammad at Mecca were killed after he had retaken the city and asserted his authority.

We do have recent examples of the peaceful ones after Islam was criticized. Theo Van Gogh was killed for the movie Submission and Hirsi Ali has to be in hiding because she has a fatwa against her. After the Muhammad exploding head, at least one nun that I know of was killed. She was someone who had no connection with the cartoon. The cartoonist and the publisher have death threats levied against them. We all know that Geert Wilders has been paying the price for Fitna after the Saudis successfully bullied the UN into passing a no blaspheming Islam law and the Dutch government follows it. Of course, there is no recriprocation in blaspheming anyone else’s religion or even giving them any sort of rights under Sharia laws if they live in Muslim lands. The Pope has at least one fatwa against him for quoting from a book. There is at least been on Jihad called against Rome (I think there has been two now that have been issued).

Some lawsuits have been filed to intimidate people. Some examples have been against Michael Savage, Internet journalist Joe Kaufman, Mark Steyn, etc.

It is meant to spend our money, the person’s money who is being sued, and tie up the courts with frivolous lawsuits meant to intimidate us into shutting up.

So we can see here that just diverting us off the topic is only a tactic.

 

[elwill]

Where did I mock you? By calling your idea that I am not being objective strange? I’m sorry, but I think it is! My point was that, yes, I am probably more willing than you are to believe the reports of the Copts, but this is not merely blind sectarianism. These reports would exist even if I did not believe in them, but it is the sheer volume and similar pattern in all of them that makes me unable to say that there is nothing to them. I do not believe that dozens of unrelated Coptic families across Egypt who are unknown to each other have all decided to engage in the same lie. Why would they do that? If that is what they have done, then it clearly is not profiting them any. What are they gaining?

No, no, my friend. You’ve missed the point. This is why I did not include any of Dr. Alla’s personal analysis, only a direct quote of what was in Al-Ahram, written by Al-Fiqee! To show you that this problem is not only recognized by the Copts, and it is not a matter of supporting their allegations against Muslims due to religious sympathies. Certainly Dr. Al-Fiqee is NOT a Coptic Christian! When it is only a minority that you yourself do not belong to, it is easier to close your eyes and ears to it, isn’t it? But here, in this article, is a man from your own religion, admitting in a relatively frank way that the Copts are NOT lying - that these aren’t merely “accusations”, as you would like them to be.

3 years ago i think , such issue raised in our media when a christian mother started to make some allegations about kidnapping of two of her daughter , it happened in our media , and through two weeks the tape was propagate where her daughters saying to the media that they were not kidnapped , they converted to islam and run away since two years and they allrady have a kids and happy with thier life

as i read your aticle , i hope you either read mine

bikyamasr.com/?p=7068

 

[dzheremi]

There is truth to that article mixed in with a great deal of falsehood. It is not true that Coptic women have no access to divorce, period. They may have civil divorce for any of the same reasons as Muslims – it is ecclesiastical divorce that is restricted within the Coptic Church, just as it is also restricted in some other church communions (like the Catholic Church). Some Copts recognize this problem and continue to petition the Church to rethink its view.

At any rate, we are talking about MINORS, not married adults. I have little doubt that at least some of these abductions are the result of minors not wishing to obey their parents or their Church, but it is too much to say that therefore all of them are. I have read testimonies of Coptic girls themselves who did NOT simply run away out of fear of an eventual unhappy marriage. It seems unlikely to me that they were faking it, just as it would seem unlikely to you that the two Copt-turned-Muslim girls you mentioned were “faking” their conversion to Islam (I wouldn’t think they are, either).

 

[Reuben_J]

Either your knowledge of English is unbelievably poor, or you are purposely miscontruing the verse. Jesus and His disciples **did NOT **wash their hands following the Pharisaic ritual. That is the whole point of the quoted verses. Jesus was perfectly familiar with the Jewish handwashing ritual for mealtimes, but chose to ignore it.

He wanted to make a point, which had nothing to do with pork, or beef, or dog, or even unwashed hands for that matter. He made the point that what a human eats or drinks does NOT defile him/her spiritually, rather what comes out of a person in how he/she speaks and behaves is what defiles him/her. This is not an extrapolation. This is the clear meaning of the text.

As for the Church’s permission to eat all foods, EXCEPT for those that have been offered to idols or strangled and the ingestion of blood, I referred you to the Book of Acts. There are numerous other Scriptural references as to the abolishment of Jewish dietary restrictions and purification ceremonies with the advent of the New Covenant.

Once again I make my offer of providing you links to the entire Scriptures, using various translations, and to a good set of Catholic Bible commentaries. May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you and open your mind to the Scriptures.

It cannot get any clearer than this. …

 

[LittleSoldier]

no offense be taken , never mind
i can understand the confusion you have from what you read

but why the confusion ? once you determine your goal you can get it
if you waana to condemn islam and hate it , you can find the sites which will satisfying you
if you wanna to learn about islam and wanna to hear from muslims themselfs about thier moral views and respecting for women , you can find the sites which present the openion of muslims

if you wanna to collect crimes commited by muslims , you will succeed either

whatever you want , you will find in the internet . it’s you who dtermine what you really wanna to know

OK, I understand. I want to thank you for all the help you gave me. You can’t know how much I appreciate it, especially your suggestion to use the Internet. I guess I just never even considered doing that.

*Holy Mother, please keep
all unborn children safe tonight.

St. Francis, please pray for all unwanted and hurt animals.*

 

[hamba2han]

It cannot get any clearer than this. …

Oh… it cannot get any clearer than that you say??

Well, if it is so clear that nothing that a person eats will make him ‘unclean’ as Christians say what the verse in question means, then the question remains → Why did Jesus (pbuh) himself abstain from eating pork and blood?

Why indeed did all of his disciples abstain from eating pork and blood throughout their entire lives?

And if Christians answer that dietary prohibitions applies only to Jews and not themselves, then where in the Bible does Jesus (pbuh) himself say this in clear and unequivocal terms?

If as I suspect, Christians are relying ONLY on the words of their Church leaders to support this claim of theirs that dietary prohibitions apply only to Jews… and they are NOT referring to the actual words of Jesus (pbuh) himself, then the only thing that is very clear to me is the truth of this verse in the Qur’an:

They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him). … Al-Qur’an, 009.031

 

[Sam_777]

If as I suspect, Christians are relying ONLY on the words of their Church leaders to support this claim of theirs that dietary prohibitions apply only to Jews… and they are NOT referring to the actual words of Jesus (pbuh) himself,

No they are not relying on the Church leaders, they are relying on the Holy Spirit who is guiding those Church leaders…

 

[hamba2han]

No they are not relying on the Church leaders, they are relying on the Holy Spirit who is guiding those Church leaders…

And who exactly is informing Christians that their Church leaders are being guided by the Holy Spirit?

Erm… let me guess… Could it be that the Church leaders themselves have been informing the flock that they are being guided by the Holy Spirit?

 

[LittleSoldier]

And who exactly is informing Christians that their Church leaders are being guided by the Holy Spirit?

Erm… let me guess… Could it be that the Church leaders themselves have been informing the flock that they are being guided by the Holy Spirit?

I’ve jumped into this thread very late and haven’t been able to read all the posts. I apologize if I don’t understand what you have posted above. But what you posted implies to me that you don’t understand the Church and her teaching authority, the Magisterium.

No. It’s not some sort of conspiracy ala Jack Chick. The Church leaders may indeed inform the flock that they are being guided by the Holy Spirit, but it doesn’t really matter if they do so (and I have never heard that they have done so) because we already know the Holy Spirit guides the Magisterium. Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church:

“Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.” [Matthew 16:18-19, Douay-Rheims Bible]

I don’t think Jesus is a wimpy god who does things in a lazy, lackadaisical method, or who lies. I believe that what He said is Truth.

When it comes to matters of dogma, the Church is indeed guided by the Holy Spirit. Why wouldn’t she be? If she weren’t, wouldn’t that mean that the gates of hell have prevailed against her? Wouldn’t that mean Jesus lied to us? Do you think God would abandon His Church? The Church He founded? Why would He ever do this? Why wouldn’t He guide her? As He is God, so is the Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit, as God, who guides the Church.

Praise and glory be given to God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit! And may peace be with us all!

*Holy Mother, please keep
all unborn children safe today.

St. Francis, please pray for all unwanted and hurt animals.

Jesus, I love you. Please bestow upon me the gift of faith.*