Mohammed the Prophet?

[Augustine3]

Canonization of the Bible: 625 A.D.

Who told you that?

The official bible canon was made definitive and absolute at the Council of Laodicea in A.D. 363. The Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) also affirmed this. The bible canon had already been decided over 2oo years before the revelation of the Quran.

Hmmm….

As to the whole ‘son of God’ thing I can see that none of you bothered to read either of the blog links so I will try a different approach:

Whether it is begotten son or adopted son or son by virtue of the office held, the same word “son” came be used on different levels for different meanings. When we read the letter to the Hebrews:

For to which of the angels did God ever say: “You are my son; this day I have begotten you”? Or again: “I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me”? And again, when he leads the first-born into the world, he says: “Let all the angels of God worship him.” –
Hebrews 1:5-6

How many other “sons” in the bible are commanded to be worshipped?

And please before you ask me who wrote the letter to the Hebrews I would suggest we avoid cherry picking which books of the bible can be used to prove our point and use the bible in it’s entirety. You don’t have the authority to make up your own bible canon.

 

[Darryl1958]

The Koran itself speaks of the gospels of the People of the Book as inspired, and would even condemn Christians to hell for not following it.
It is quite clear in the Koran even that God is strong enough to keep his scripture untainted from corruption, and the Book of the peoples of the Book, as it existed in Mohammeds day, was given a big thumbs up by the Koran.

Since the bible has definitely not changed since that time at least, the Bible that we follow now is one and the same as the one that the Koran praises.

Bad enough that the people of the desert don’t follow in the Biblical tradition. Worst still that they don’t really even heed what the Koran has to say about the Bible.

 

[smaneck]

And please before you ask me who wrote the letter to the Hebrews I would suggest we avoid cherry picking which books of the bible can be used to prove our point and use the bible in it’s entirety. You don’t have the authority to make up your own bible canon.

I think it is perfectly valid to make a distinction between what Jesus said and what his followers may have said about him. It is not a question of having authority, it is a matter of making a distinction between the Messenger and those who interpreted the Message.

 

[smaneck]

The Koran itself speaks of the gospels of the People of the Book as inspired, and would even condemn Christians to hell for not following it.

It would be good if when you guys say the Qur’an says something you would cite the actual passage. I know the Qur’an pretty well but half the time I can’t tell which passage you think you are citing. Certainly the Qur’an acknowledges the Gospel. It doesn’t say anything about the epistles, however.

 

[vskipper]

I have provided the links for the proofs of the prophethood of Muhammad. I have posted links as to the use of the term “son” of God. None of which has been responded to, …

Augustine I am happy to continue talking to you via pm or whatever but I think I am done with this website outside of pm.

I came here for a chance to listen to reasonable discussion as to why Muhammad (s.a.w.) was not a prophet and all I see is dialogue in a format which leads me to believe that they want to pick a fight rather than simply trying to help someone out.

As I said before, Augustine, I am happy to continue our conversation via pm including answering your question but if this is the attitude that people are supposed to take towards others in Christianity then I am not really sure I am interested in Catholicism anymore.

Btw, smaneck I realize we have not directly conversed on here but yes I did realize my error later on with the dates. It was supposed to be 325 AD not 625 … also I work with someone of your faith. We had a very long discussion one day.

As far the so called “attack” that I was reprimanded for. It shows me only that the mod reads what they want to in the manner that they wish to; seeing as how I was acknowledging the strong argument that another had made in the concern of the Holy Spirit and another question that was brought up. I was giving a compliment, initially, and then after I said that they had a strong and reasonable argument they told me there was no point in continuing to fight over a topic that has already been beaten down. So yes I used the word ignorant. As I they say here in Dixie if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck its probably a duck.

Personally I think that at least 2 of the posters in this thread could benefit from reading Galatians 5 and actually practicing their faith when dealing with others.

p.s.
Yes Smnaeck I realize that Jesus is considered the messiah by the Qur’an. The point was that the concept of messiah never had anything to do with Jesus, pbuh, being essentially part of the godhead and as an individual that attended Belhaven University I would say that I am fairly familiar with the Christian doctrine of the trinity.

 

[smaneck]

Yes Smnaeck I realize that Jesus is considered the messiah by the Qur’an. The point was that the concept of messiah never had anything to do with Jesus, pbuh, being essentially part of the godhead

No, of course not.

and as an individual that attended Belhaven University I would say that I am fairly familiar with the Christian doctrine of the trinity.

Bellhaven, here in Mississippi?

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Now you say the manifestations could have all said “I am GOD.” As if this answers the problem. The problem of course is that they are not really God. You deny them the things that God requires, worship, creation and the like. Now what Makes Jesus distinct in this regaurd is that the gospel actually tells us he is responsible for creation, and I would like a clear answer from you. Is Jesus Christ the person who created you? Is he the cause of everything that which began to exist? Or will you just say all the manifestations are the word of God, something decisively none biblical, because John only indicates the word becoming flesh with Jesus, not with Moses or the Budha.
“For they are all but one person, one soul, one spirit, one being, one revelation.”
Now this is quite the teaching, there are not individual manifestations it seems. Jesus and Muhammad were the same person. Moses and Jesus were the same person? Buhda who ignored God is the same person as Jesus? I cannot accept this. But no doubt you have some metaphorical interpretation, that it only means they are one in purpose.

Mat 28: 17 And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 19 Going therefore, teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Notice How the name is in the singular. So yes, the father and the son and the holy spirit share the same unique name. And in so far as the personhood is concerned, the holy spirit’s person is essential if we are to believe in the trinity, though certaintly the Holy spirit is not the angel Gabriel.

 

[Augustine3]

Augustine I am happy to continue talking to you via pm or whatever but I think I am done with this website outside of pm.

I came here for a chance to listen to reasonable discussion as to why Muhammad (s.a.w.) was not a prophet and all I see is dialogue in a format which leads me to believe that they want to pick a fight rather than simply trying to help someone out.

As I said before, Augustine, I am happy to continue our conversation via pm including answering your question but if this is the attitude that people are supposed to take towards others in Christianity then I am not really sure I am interested in Catholicism anymore.

Hi vskipper,

I tried to send you a pm but a message came up notifying me that your inbox is full. First I have to say thank you very much for giving this forum a try! Not many Muslims are willing to do what you did; they usually insist everything they need to know is in the Quran so there would be no need to go outside of it. You’ve proven yourself to be a genuine person seeking the truth, so thank you.

Second I would like to apologise on behalf of myself and anyone else if we have spoken to you in an uncharitable manner. Charity is the heart of Christian conduct (I still need to work at it ). Please don’t judge Catholics by this forum, as you know divine truth is what it is regardless how the followers conduct themselves whether they are Christian or Muslim (I know it’s no excuse and they should lead by example).

I hope we do stay in contact. I’m more than happy to answer any further questions you have about Christianity. We can stay in contact via pm whether it be here or the Islamic forum or by e-mail it’s up to you, I don’t mind whichever way.

God bless you and lead you on the path he desires

 

[sylex1318]

Love it how the mohammedan can’t even get the date of the bible correct. No-doubt either ignorant or engaging in taqiyya.

If Mohammed was a prophet then Satan and Allah are synonymous with one another!

 

[meedo]

Hi vskipper,

I tried to send you a pm but a message came up notifying me that your inbox is full. First I have to say thank you very much for giving this forum a try! Not many Muslims are willing to do what you did; they usually insist everything they need to know is in the Quran so there would be no need to go outside of it. You’ve proven yourself to be a genuine person seeking the truth, so thank you.

Second I would like to apologise on behalf of myself and anyone else if we have spoken to you in an uncharitable manner. Charity is the heart of Christian conduct (I still need to work at it ). Please don’t judge Catholics by this forum, as you know divine truth is what it is regardless how the followers conduct themselves whether they are Christian or Muslim (I know it’s no excuse and they should lead by example).

I hope we do stay in contact. I’m more than happy to answer any further questions you have about Christianity. We can stay in contact via pm whether it be here or the Islamic forum or by e-mail it’s up to you, I don’t mind whichever way.

God bless you and lead you on the path he desires

I haven’t read this thread… but i feel a sense of brotherhood that crosses religion barriers with charitable posters like this one… God bless you my friend.

 

[vskipper]

No, of course not.

Bellhaven, here in Mississippi?

yes, I went after Crichton (in Memphis) closed. I was there when the fountain froze. Miss the school, can’t say I miss the roads though

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

I have provided the links for the proofs of the prophethood of Muhammad. I have posted links as to the use of the term “son” of God. None of which has been responded to, …

I responded to the links concerning the prophethood of Mohammad. I also explained that the reason people weren’t really addressing the term Son of God was because that wasn’t the topic of this thread. Start another thread and ask the subject of Christians, and I’m sure people will be more than happy to answer. And, again, you can’t criticize people for supposedly responding to what you’ve given when you’ve yet to respond to anything provided to you.

 

[Robin_des_Bois]

But how can you trust a “weak” Hadith vs. a strong one. That is a terminology used by Muslims. When they are challenged by various things such dreaming about a black person, they slip into , “thats a weak Hadith.” Christians hold up scripture, and never does it have “weak” writings.

Hadith are not considered scriptural.Some are true, some are false.
Usually, to determine whether a hadith is true or not, we should check the trustfulness of all the people that figure in it’s chain of narration.
Also, we reject every hadith that contradicts the Qur’an.

 

[Robin_des_Bois]

So the Jews must have a difderent god than yours, because they don’t believe in trinity.

The key is that Mohammad claims to be a prophet in line with the Jews and Christians. Speaking as a Christian, the problem here, therefore, is that the teachings of Mohammad contradict clear Christian theology. Some of his teachings, found in the Quran itself:

• The Trinity is a damnable heresy (S. 5:73)
• The Trinity is a lie (S. 5:74)
• Christ is not divine, and any one who says so, according to the own words of “Jesus”, is lying (S. 5:116-117)
• Christ was merely a prophet (S. 5:75)
• Christ did not die on the cross (S. 4:157)

This doesn’t cover the contradictions between the Bible and the Quran, which I’ve outlined before. Mohammad’s god, in fact, is a god completely different than the God of Christianity (consider Unitarianism versus Trinitarianism). Here, in scripture, we have a clear teaching regarding those who teach other gods:

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him.” [Deuteronomy 13:1-4]

So we can talk about what Mohammad did or said in his lifetime, but the dividing line is theology, and especially in regards to what god he claims to follow.

 

[vskipper]

Hi vskipper,

I tried to send you a pm but a message came up notifying me that your inbox is full. First I have to say thank you very much for giving this forum a try! Not many Muslims are willing to do what you did; they usually insist everything they need to know is in the Quran so there would be no need to go outside of it. You’ve proven yourself to be a genuine person seeking the truth, so thank you.

Second I would like to apologise on behalf of myself and anyone else if we have spoken to you in an uncharitable manner. Charity is the heart of Christian conduct (I still need to work at it ). Please don’t judge Catholics by this forum, as you know divine truth is what it is regardless how the followers conduct themselves whether they are Christian or Muslim (I know it’s no excuse and they should lead by example).

I hope we do stay in contact. I’m more than happy to answer any further questions you have about Christianity. We can stay in contact via pm whether it be here or the Islamic forum or by e-mail it’s up to you, I don’t mind whichever way.

God bless you and lead you on the path he desires

Surely you are right in this matter and I appreciate the manner as well. Btw, my inbox is clear now

 

[vskipper]

The key is that Mohammad claims to be a prophet in line with the Jews and Christians. Speaking as a Christian, the problem here, therefore, is that the teachings of Mohammad contradict clear Christian theology. Some of his teachings, found in the Quran itself:
• The Trinity is a damnable heresy (S. 5:73)
• The Trinity is a lie (S. 5:74)
• Christ is not divine, and any one who says so, according to the own words of “Jesus”, is lying (S. 5:116-117)
• Christ was merely a prophet (S. 5:75)
• Christ did not die on the cross (S. 4:157)

I am going to relabel your bullets as a,b,c and so on. Moving from there I say that yes the Qur’an does not agree with the trinity and strictly speaking I would say that I don’t believe the Bible does either. Matter, of fact I would argue that the trinity is an invention that Catholics came up with in order to appease nearby pagans. What might be most interesting is that the concept of a three in one God was originally Hindu not Christian.
As for point b see previous paragraph. The term son of God was used for many such as Adam, and even David who was called God’s first born. Who has higher standing then? Doesn’t the first born have highest standing?

I find point d just insulting. If you remove the word, ‘mere’ then yes that would be accurate. In fact it would be in line with the original idea of the messiah, as per the Judaic belief at the time.

As for point e this goes back to the question that nobody on this forum has bothered to answer which is simply that there is no reason to believe that one would be atoning for all sins. I do not find this concept as in line with the qualifications of messiah and thus Islam still seems accurate. Also Psalms 91, if read in completion, talks about protecting the messiah from all harm and even has God saying that he will give the messiah HIS (God’s) salvation. How is the messiah going to bring us salvation if God is promising to give it to him?

This doesn’t cover the contradictions between the Bible and the Quran, which I’ve outlined before. Mohammad’s god, in fact, is a god completely different than the God of Christianity (consider Unitarianism versus Trinitarianism). Here, in scripture, we have a clear teaching regarding those who teach other gods:
“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him.” [Deuteronomy 13:1-4]
So we can talk about what Mohammad did or said in his lifetime, but the dividing line is theology, and especially in regards to what god he claims to follow.

Jews do not believe in any of that but you say that they believe in the same God as you….

What about the Hindu trinity? Does that mean that they worship the same God?
Hindu Trinity

Mithraism meets many of your standards. Do they qualify?
religionfacts.com/greco-roman/sects/mithraism.htm

Actually just to clarify I believe the accurate description of the Qur’anic statement is that Jesus did not die on the cross but it was made to look like he did. Anyone who says anything more to that is rolling the dice with their own fate. Personally I believe he did go to the cross, I just don’t think he died as they say. I don’t think he died on the cross but that it merely looked like he was dead to the soldiers. But then again I ain’t a salafi

 

[smaneck]

Now you say the manifestations could have all said “I am GOD.” As if this answers the problem. The problem of course is that they are not really God.

They are everything we can understand about God human speaking.

You deny them the things that God requires, worship, creation and the like.

I didn’t realize God requires creation.

Now what Makes Jesus distinct in this regaurd is that the gospel actually tells us he is responsible for creation,

Not so distinct really.

and I would like a clear answer from you. Is Jesus Christ the person who created you? Is he the cause of everything that which began to exist?

I’ve been very clear on this issue. In his universal aspect where all the Manifestations are one, Jesus is the First Cause.

Or will you just say all the manifestations are the word of God,

See, I was clear. You just didn’t like what I had to say.

something decisively none biblical, because John only indicates the word becoming flesh with Jesus, not with Moses or the Budha.

Guess, what? John didn’t know about Buddha. As for Moses, if Deuteronomy 18:15 refers to Christ and not to Muhammad then you must admit that Jesus is a “prophet like unto Moses.”

“For they are all but one person, one soul, one spirit, one being, one revelation.”
Now this is quite the teaching, there are not individual manifestations it seems. Jesus and Muhammad were the same person.

In their divine station, yes. But not in their human station.

Moses and Jesus were the same person?

Unless you believe that Deut. 18:15 is a reference to Muhammad and not Christ, then according to Moses Jesus is a prophet like unto him.

.

But no doubt you have some metaphorical interpretation, that it only means they are one in purpose.

It is a bit more than metaphorical, but I believe that Baha’u’llah is the Return of Christ in the same sense that John the Baptist is the Return of Elijah. Figure out what Jesus meant when he indicated that John the Baptist was Elijah and you will have the answer to your question.

Mat 28: 17 And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 19 Going therefore, teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Notice How the name is in the singular.

Sorry, but the sentence structure does not allow for a plural form here. To make it a plural you would have to write “in the names of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.” The minute you instead put “and of the” before each item then the grammar requires a singular form. That doesn’t mean they all share the same name.

But nice try.

 

[smaneck]

yes, I went after Crichton (in Memphis) closed. I was there when the fountain froze. Miss the school, can’t say I miss the roads though

I teach Middle East history at Jackson State University.

And yes, the roads are still bad.

 

[smaneck]

Also, we reject every hadith that contradicts the Qur’an.

In that case there is no justification whatsoever for stoning adulterers, right?

 

[smaneck]

I am going to relabel your bullets as a,b,c and so on. Moving from there I say that yes the Qur’an does not agree with the trinity and strictly speaking I would say that I don’t believe the Bible does either. Matter, of fact I would argue that the trinity is an invention that Catholics came up with in order to appease nearby pagans.

Given the fact the concept is first articulated by Tertullian, I doubt if its aim was to appease pagans. I think its intention was to explain the relationship between God and Jesus in way that would be intelligible to the Greeks. However, it created more problems than it solved.

What might be most interesting is that the concept of a three in one God was originally Hindu not Christian.

Well obviously, there is the Trimurdi in Hinduism, but there is no evidence that Hindu influence reached that far, at least not until the rise of Manicheanism.

As for point b see previous paragraph. The term son of God was used for many such as Adam, and even David who was called God’s first born. Who has higher standing then? Doesn’t the first born have highest standing?

Or perhaps more to the point, if Jesus is greater because he had no father should not Adam be the greatest given he had neither father or mother?