Mohammed

[LtTony]

As the topic of this thread is “Mohammed”, I thought it is good to give you some ideas who Mohammed really was. It is obvious that most of you know very few things about Prophet Mohammed’s life and his great teachings.

For Muslims, Mohammed is the ideal person, and we always try to follow his path in everything in life. God chose him to deliver his final revelation because he was a righteous man. We admire him and believe everything he taught us, not because we are naïve or stupid, but because his teachings are so valuable and reasonable that a logical person cannot deny.

One, you presume non-muslims know little of Mohammad. That is incorrect. Is it necessary to know a lot of Mohammad or just a little to know and accept Islam?

Teaching valuable, reasonable and logical lessons does not make someone a prophet.

You have no proof that God chose Mohammad to do anything. Having proof of that is what would be logical, not just you saying it.

You have no proof that Mohammad was the “ideal person.” There is no standard by which to judge that, it is only a matter of opinion.

You can believe anything you want. But don’t keep making assumptions about Mohammad, don’t use circular arguments and don’t keep repeating how “logical” your religion is. That is what is stupid and naive, not you. You seem very sincere and a good person.

He taught us to respect our parents

**He taught us to respect our neighbors **

Really? You need someone to “teach” you to “respect” your parents? Really?

Prophet Mohammed was the solver of youth problems

A young man came to Prophet Mohammed once and asked him to give him permission to commit adultery. The companions of Prophet Mohammed were very annoyed of this request, and asked him to be silent. But Prophet Mohammed was calm and asked the young man to come close to him. He asked him “would you accept if someone commits adultery with your mother?” he said “oh Prophet of Allah, I wouldn’t accept it”. Then Prophet Mohammed told him “no one would accept it for their own mothers too”, then he asked him “Would you accept it for your daughter?” He said he wouldn’t.

Are you kidding me?!!? Because Mohammad told this fellow not to cheat on his wife, it makes Mohammad a “great” man. Most people would say the same thing. That doesn’t make them great; it just means they are not creeps.

I can go on and on with many great teachings of Prophet Mohammed, but I keep insisting that our greatest proof that he is the Prophet of God is the Quran.

Muslims always say that. There is nothing – zero – miraculous about the Koran. By the way, tell us what EXACTLY is so miraculous about the Koran.

If Quran was produced by man, that man should be so great to come up with such a book,

No, the man wouldn’t be that great at all. He could be a lot of things. He could merely be a good person who had some ideas – some good, some not so good. (Don’t tell us “Honor your parents” is any sort of revelation.) Or he could be a liar or just mistaken or suffering delusions.

yet you don’t seem to admit that Mohammed was a great man!

That’s because there is absolutely nothing that makes him, at best, any better than any other decent guy. Telling a person “Don’t cheat on your wife” (based on the “Golden Rule”) doesn’t make Mohammad or anyone a prophet.

And if it was produced by satan, it would have contained so much evil and wrong things.

Some people say it does. It does lead people away from Christ, and that is a serious problem IMO.

We can predict the teachings of satan because he would come to delude people and ask them to associate partners with God,

It does delude people IMO to follow Mohammad.

Our religion encourages all that is good and forbids all that is bad. That is why I ask you to read the Quran, and I am sure if you are really seeking the truth, you will definitely find it in Quran.

I appreciate your concern and sincerity. But the Koran is painful and confusing to read. There is nothing wonderful about it.

 

[LtTony]

Just for the sake of balance, it bears mentioning that Christ himself didn’t perform any/many miracles on some occasions:

Whether Jesus performed miracles or not is irrelevant to whether Mohammed did. Mohammed either did or did not perform miracles. He should state his case and prove it on his own without any help or detraction from other religions, especially Christianity

Sedonaman is correct, of course. But as Trebor stated Christ didn’t perform miracles “on some occassions.” So what? He performed many of them, including a doozy for a finale!

Also, Moh was so scared of this angel that apparently he almost killed himself in the desert. I do not think any angel would make you want to kill yourself.

And another thing… I’m not sure if this is true, but I read that as a little boy, Moh would steal from people? Is this correct?

Mohammad and his followers raided caravans. Muslims say they were only taking back what was stolen from them or making strategic attacks in a time of war.
I take it at face value. Mohammad was a bandit. A “good man” would have no reason to attack and steal.

 

[Trebor135]

I didn’t get that out of your comment about Jesus’ miracles or lack thereof. But what you are saying here, I agree with.

Well, I’m glad that we’re now on the same page.

It goes back to a similar claim/counterclaim, “The Koran advocates violence” / “There is violence in the Bible, too.” The two claims are unrelated. Hypothetically, if we are going to hold both religions to the same standard, then that standard would have to be stated up front first, such as, “Advocating violence is bad.” But that’s only if we are going to hold both religions to the same standard,

Right.

which I still don’t see as being relevant to whether or not Mohammed performed miracles.

I had been suggesting that perhaps in all the cases in which Muhammad is challenged in the Qur’an to perform a miracle, he refused to do so because he knew that the audience would never accept them anyway.

But, upon further reflection, it’s difficult to believe that Muhammad never–during the twenty-plus years chronicled in the Qur’an–met one sincere soul who would have been converted by a miracle or strengthened in their faith by such an incident. Jesus fed thousands of people, but he didn’t vet everyone present to separate those with pure hearts of flesh from those with stubborn hearts of stone. It’s doubtful that each and every one of the thousands who partook in Christ’s bounty ended up following him then and there or believing in his resurrection later on, but that reality didn’t forestall the performance of the miracle.

 

[Augustine3]

I noticed in this thread many objections/defences are based on the Bible and Quran.

One thing must be understood neither the Bible or the Quran are self authenticating books, they can’t be because books always have an author. It’s the Church Magisterium that declares the Bible to be the word of God. It’s Mohammed that declares the Quran to be the word of God. Therefore the Church Magisterium and Mohammed’s credentials must be examined in order to determine the truth. This should be the focus.

Muslims claim Mohammed lead a righteous life, delivered prophecies and even performed miracles.

Catholics claim 11 out of the 12 apostles died martyrs unwilling to comprise their belief. Many saints have performed thousands of miracles as one of the fruits from the Church under God’s care.

I obvious have not provided all the credentials, I’m just making the point both sides have substantial cases and so both of their credentials need to be examined and discussed rather than debated if we want to make any progress from here.

God bless,

 

[rinnie]

We must also always remember to pray for all no matter what faith.

The Muslims will come to the truth because they as our Church teaches us, submit to the One True God.

It is the One True God who will also call everyone to himself in his Church as scripture states.

 

[sedonaman]

…I had been suggesting that perhaps in all the cases in which Muhammad is challenged in the Qur’an to perform a miracle, he refused to do so because he knew that the audience would never accept them anyway.

There was no way he could have known this since he was not God.

But, upon further reflection, it’s difficult to believe that Muhammad never … met one sincere soul who would have been converted by a miracle or strengthened in their faith by such an incident. …

Sounds reasonable.

 

[Trebor135]

There was no way he could have known this since he was not God.

Well, God could have revealed this knowledge to a mere man–he does such things, it seems sometimes genuinely, to Pentecostals. It should give one pause, however, that not even once–as far as I know–was Muhammad used in such a fashion, to reveal the power of the one true God and the favour of his purported prophet…

Sounds reasonable.

Great. God bless.

 

[Peace_of_cake]

I noticed in this thread many objections/defences are based on the Bible and Quran.

One thing must be understood neither the Bible or the Quran are self authenticating books, they can’t be because books always have an author. It’s the Church Magisterium that declares the Bible to be the word of God. It’s Mohammed that declares the Quran to be the word of God. Therefore the Church Magisterium and Mohammed’s credentials must be examined in order to determine the truth. This should be the focus.

Muslims claim Mohammed lead a righteous life, delivered prophecies and even performed miracles.

Catholics claim 11 out of the 12 apostles died martyrs unwilling to comprise their belief. Many saints have performed thousands of miracles as one of the fruits from the Church under God’s care.

I obvious have not provided all the credentials, I’m just making the point both sides have substantial cases and so both of their credentials need to be examined and discussed rather than debated if we want to make any progress from here.

God bless,

In principal I agree

However, I did want to add that many people seem to think Muhammed was on his own and that the birth of Christianity is vastly different? Whilst we may quibble over the validity of some Muslim sources, we can say that Muslims themselves think similar things to us, for examples apostles are similar to companions (sahabah) and the magisterum is similar to the consensus of Islamic scholars (Sunni Islam) or ahul sunnah wal jamaat. But yes the credentials need examining.

In addition I must say I’m confused people say that Islamic literature doesn’t have miracles that didn’t bring people too Islam. For example I read just the other day that he milked a sheep that was dry and made abundant milk and this encouraged the shepherd and his wife to Islam. The moon splitting supposedly brought the first mosque to India and so on. Let’s give people credit, they aren’t stupid and the religion has clearly had eminent followers so there must be decent claims attracting them to Islam?

This more general than to you Augustine, may you live up to the name

 

[PumpkinSeed]

Mohammad and his followers raided caravans. Muslims say they were only taking back what was stolen from them or making strategic attacks in a time of war.
I take it at face value. Mohammad was a bandit. A “good man” would have no reason to attack and steal.

Yes, very true. Mohammad should of known two wrongs don’t make a right.

He was stealing because someone stole from him. Could you imagine Jesus doing that? Me neither.

 

[Marybeloved]

In addition I must say I’m confused people say that Islamic literature doesn’t have miracles that didn’t bring people too Islam. For example I read just the other day that he milked a sheep that was dry and made abundant milk and this encouraged the shepherd and his wife to Islam. The moon splitting supposedly brought the first mosque to India and so on. Let’s give people credit, they aren’t stupid and the religion has clearly had eminent followers so there must be decent claims attracting them to Islam?

But this claim is strange- Surely the religion has proof and that’s why it exists. So lets us all just be nice people and just have faith in these uncorroborated claims because we don’t want to be mean and say that the early Muslims blindly believed in Mohammed without proof. Makes no sense. The first Muslims could believe Mohammed the same way the Mormons believed Joseph Smith.

Hinduism is 7,000 years old and has very, very many fantastic adherents and mystics and sages and priceless teachings of great wisdom. Does that mean that the claims of the incarnations of Krishna and others must be true and must have been proved for them to be believed? Buddha himself is no ordinary fellow and is a wonderful figure and Devout Buddhists are excellent wise folks, their scholars are great philosophers and genuinely good human beings- Much more peaceful than Christians historically. Yet either God revealed himself to the Jews as a distinct transcendent being and gave certain absolute truths about himself and the world or he did not.

Just because a movement has many good people does not make its foundations credible. And with Mohammed especially, we know that the sophisticated, cultured people of his time in Arabia dismissed him as a lunatic and it was the illiterate war-tribes of Medina who themselves hated the Meccans from whom Mohammed was fleeing with a passion who embraced Mohammed as a prophet and then through warfare conquered everyone else in Arabia into submission to Islam. Even in Medina they carried out assassinations to silence criticism of Mohammed. So this idea that "Surely they must have had proof to accept him" makes no sense. They did in fact reject him and questioned him and they paid dearly for it.

 

[sedonaman]

…Just because a movement has many good people does not make its foundations credible.

Yes. That would be the bandwagon fallacy. fallacyfiles.org/bandwagn.html

And with Mohammed especially, we know that the sophisticated, cultured people of his time in Arabia dismissed him …

orthodoxinfo.com/general/stjohn_islam.aspx

 

[Amoon]

You never answered my question about Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer I asked in post #87. Are you ignoring it?

Give me a brief of the “Sermon on the Mount” and Jesus teaching’s on the mount so that I can till you if Islam teaches the same or no. Is this your question?

What about the Lord’s prayer, a prayer to the One True God that you claim to worship [the Trinity is not mentioned in it] and a prayer that praises Him and asks Him for our physical and spiritual needs? Is Islam ready to argue that this prayer is also a corruption?
.

So you are saying that you have a prayer for God only without associating Jesus and the Holy Spirit with Him?

 

[sedonaman]

Give me a brief of the “Sermon on the Mount” and Jesus teaching’s on the mount so that I can till you if Islam teaches the same or no. Is this your question?

You said:

1. Prophet Mohammed did not bring a new faith that contradicts with the teachings of the other Messengers that God sent before him. His teaching is not different than the teaching of Abraham, Noah, Jacob, David, Moses, and all the Prophets of God who came to guide people to the One True God, including Prophet Jesus of course, who delivered the exact same teaching.

To which I said:

Muslims claim that everyone was born a Muslim, and those who are not today got tricked into leaving the faith. … This falling away is supposedly caused by the “corruption” of the original scriptures, by men so that they could control the people. Muslims consider the Old and New Testaments to be true only so far as they agree with Islam. The rest is a “corruption”. So it is fair to conclude that a passage from the Old or New Testament that is not a corruption should also be in the Qur’an. Where in the Qur’an are Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer? There are only two possible answers to this: 1) they are corruptions, so they were left out; 2) they are not corruptions, and the Islamic claim that “His [Mohammed’s] teaching is not different than the teaching of Abraham, Noah, Jacob, David, Moses, and all the Prophets of God who came to guide people to the One True God, including Prophet Jesus of course, who delivered the exact same teaching” did “contradict with the teachings of the other Messengers that God sent before him” and is therefore false. You can argue that they are corruptions, but that would require a rejection of the Beatitudes, ideals that focus on love and humility rather than force and exaction. They echo the highest ideals of the teachings of Jesus on mercy, spirituality, and compassion. …

**The Sermon on the Mount. **[Math. 5]

1 When he saw the crowds, he went up the mountain, and after he had sat down, his disciples came to him.
2 He began to teach them, saying:
The Beatitudes
3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4 Blessed are they who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5 Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the land.
6 Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be satisfied.
7 Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8 Blessed are the clean of heart,
for they will see God.
9 Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.
10 Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11 Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you [falsely] because of me.
12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven. Thus they persecuted the prophets who were before you.”
My question is where does this sermon appear in Islamic scripture?

The Lord’s Prayer. [Math. 6]

9 “This is how you are to pray:
Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
10 your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.
11 Give us today our daily bread;
12 and forgive us our debts,
as we forgive our debtors;
13 and do not subject us to the final test,
but deliver us from the evil one.”
14 If you forgive others their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you.
15 But if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your transgressions.

So you are saying that you have a prayer for God only without associating Jesus and the Holy Spirit with Him?

No. Since this prayer does not mention any of God’s “partners” and it is one of Jesus’ teachings, where is it in Islamic scripture?

 

[Amoon]

You said:
To which I said:

**The Sermon on the Mount. **[Math. 5]

1 When he saw the crowds, he went up the mountain, and after he had sat down, his disciples came to him.
2 He began to teach them, saying:
The Beatitudes
3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4 Blessed are they who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5 Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the land.
6 Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be satisfied.
7 Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8 Blessed are the clean of heart,
for they will see God.
9 Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.
10 Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11 Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you [falsely] because of me.
12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven. Thus they persecuted the prophets who were before you.”
My question is where does this sermon appear in Islamic scripture?

The Lord’s Prayer. [Math. 6]

9 “This is how you are to pray:
Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
10 your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.
11 Give us today our daily bread;
12 and forgive us our debts,
as we forgive our debtors;
13 and do not subject us to the final test,
but deliver us from the evil one.”
14 If you forgive others their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you.
15 But if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your transgressions.

No. Since this prayer does not mention any of God’s “partners” and it is one of Jesus’ teachings, where is it in Islamic scripture?

So you think if Quran is the Word of God, it should mention the above things exactly the same as Jesus taught? Jesus and Mohammed are two messengers of God, and their teachings must be similar but it is not necessarily to be mentioned in the exact same way.

We always start our prayers with “The Opening” of Quran:
1:1-7.Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the Worlds (2) Most Gracious, Most Merciful (3) Master of the, Day of Judgment. (4) Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek. (5) Show us the straight way. (6) The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, Those whose (portion) is not wrath and who go not astray. (7)

And Prophet Muhammad taught us to say this verse in the end of each prayer:
Quran 2:255. Allah! There is no God save Him, the Alive, the Eternal. Neither slumber nor sleep overtaketh Him. Unto Him belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that intercedeth with Him save by His leave? He knoweth that which is in front of them and that which is behind them, while they encompass nothing of His knowledge save what He will. His throne includeth the heavens and the earth, and He is never weary of preserving them. He is the Sublime, the Tremendous.

All good names belong to Allah:
59:22-24. Allah is He, than whom there is no other god― Who knows (all things) both secret and open; He Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Allah is He, than whom there is no other god― the sovereign, the Holy One, the Source of Peace (and Perfection). the Guardian of Faith, the Preserver of Safety, the Exalted in Might, the Irresistible, the Supreme: Glory to Allah! (High is He) above the partners they attribute to Him. He is Allah the Creator the Evolver, the Bestower of Forms (or Colours). To Him belong the Most Beautiful Names: whatever is in the heavens and on earth, doth declare His Praises and Glory: and He is the exalted in Might, the Wise.

And before sleeping every night, we learnt from Prophet Mohammed to say this:
“Oh my Lord, I have taken Your name and placed myself on my side and by Your power will rise up again. If you take my soul whilst I am sleeping (grant me death) then have mercy on my soul and if you leave me (let me live) by your power protect me by that with which you have protected your righteous servants”.

And when a Muslim is oppressed, he says what Prophet Muhammad said when he was oppressed by the unbelievers:
“Oh, Allah, I appeal to you due to my weakness and my helplessness,
and the humiliation people subject me to.
Oh most Merciful of all the Merciful ones,
You are the Lord of the oppressed, and you are my Lord.
To whose care are you leaving me?
To a stranger oppressing me?
Or to a foe you have given control of my affair?
If there is no anger from You on me, I do not mind any suffering.
Your blessing is vaster than my shortcomings.
I seek refuge in the Glory of Your Light,
through which darknesses lightens,
and by which matters in this world and the world to come are set aright,
from the befalling of Your anger,
or the descendence of your displeasure.
To you is the supplication until you are pleased,
and there is no might nor power except by You.”

For Muslims, all the prayers are for God alone, and we do not associate partners with the All-Mighty. The problem with Christians is that they do associate partners with God, and the fact is that neither the Quran nor the Bible mentioned anything of Jesus being God, and Jesus himslef insisted in different occasions that God is greater than him. So, if you only agree with Muslims in this point, you will realize that Islam is your only path to salvation.

 

[Peace_of_cake]

But this claim is strange- Surely the religion has proof and that’s why it exists. So lets us all just be nice people and just have faith in these uncorroborated claims because we don’t want to be mean and say that the early Muslims blindly believed in Mohammed without proof. Makes no sense. The first Muslims could believe Mohammed the same way the Mormons believed Joseph Smith.

Hinduism is 7,000 years old and has very, very many fantastic adherents and mystics and sages and priceless teachings of great wisdom. Does that mean that the claims of the incarnations of Krishna and others must be true and must have been proved for them to be believed? Buddha himself is no ordinary fellow and is a wonderful figure and Devout Buddhists are excellent wise folks, their scholars are great philosophers and genuinely good human beings- Much more peaceful than Christians historically. Yet either God revealed himself to the Jews as a distinct transcendent being and gave certain absolute truths about himself and the world or he did not.

Just because a movement has many good people does not make its foundations credible. And with Mohammed especially, we know that the sophisticated, cultured people of his time in Arabia dismissed him as a lunatic and it was the illiterate war-tribes of Medina who themselves hated the Meccans from whom Mohammed was fleeing with a passion who embraced Mohammed as a prophet and then through warfare conquered everyone else in Arabia into submission to Islam. Even in Medina they carried out assassinations to silence criticism of Mohammed. So this idea that "Surely they must have had proof to accept him" makes no sense. They did in fact reject him and questioned him and they paid dearly for it.

As you say lots of good followers doesn’t necessarily validate the movement. My point was lots of good followers means the movement is not stupid. On this forum arguments are put forward that are not analysed for coherency first, they’re just the first thing that comes into people’s minds. So the stupidity people are perceiving is not actually from the religion, but poor arguments. Like I said I like to play Devil’s advocate, just as the church has done to test claims. It makes sense right? Would you agree with me that false arguments against Islam does not disprove or even lower it’s status.

Not sure about criticising the early Muslims from being from lower classes!?! Didn’t see many Romans etc embracing Jesus as Messiah! Ok the Romans eventually become Christian, but then the same can be said for the Persians or Byzantines becoming Muslim. This could give rise to arguments about being ‘spread by the sword’ and please let’s not, history and logic just doesn’t support the claim. Also how did Christianity spread, let’s not be naive.

I think youre right that many converts to Islam were tribal and had power / money as their reasoning, however this is not the rule nor can we blame Islam for it. The Mongols also spread fast based on a tribal model, yet where are they now? The achievement of Islam is to offer something alternative than tribalism (since it doesn’t work) and give a robust infastructure that brings stability. The triumph of Islam is not the conquests but the stability it brought (I’ll have to look up the academic that said this).

Islam is an interesting religion and no where near as muddled as many people here make out. Like I’ve said Fr. Louis Masignon made some really good informed observations, let’s famiarise ourselves with him

 

[Marybeloved]

So you think if Quran is the Word of God, it should mention the above things exactly the same as Jesus taught? Jesus and Mohammed are two messengers of God, and their teachings must be similar but it is not necessarily to be mentioned in the exact same way.

But Islam says that the Qur’an is the ‘verbatim’ speech of God that exists in heaven for all eternity! Word for word- It’s the speech of God. So why should it change with different messengers? It’s not their speech, they are just dictating exactly word-for-word what is already in Heaven forever, not via inspiration, so why should they not be exactly the same everywhere, word for word? They should be perfect translations of each other from one language to the other, if the claim of Islam is really true. But I find no chapter, verse or sentence in the Qur’an at all that perfectly translates to any chapter, verse or sentence in either the Hebrew or Christian scriptures. Yet the revelation is supposed to be merely a direct dictation of the heavenly Qur’an which is eternal and it’s supposed to bring nothing new because you believe the other previous revelations were the same revelation as the Qur’an! That it merely corrects the corrupted verses of the Qur’an in the Injil and Tauret.

So what are the chances that not a single sentence translates verbatim to the Quran, in any of the previous revelations, or even between the Jewish and Christian ones aside from direct citations of the OT in the NT by the authors? Clearly the idea that the Quran is verbatim Divine Speech and that the others were also revelations that were corrupted and the Qur’an merely corrects them cannot all be true- Not all three. Something here is false, and I think that the claim that “Qur’an is direct dictation from Heaven” is the first suspect/culprit.

Originally Posted by Amoon forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
*So you are saying that you have a prayer for God only without associating Jesus and the Holy Spirit with Him? *

I’m just curious Amoon- Do you even know what Christian belief about the Trinity really is? Do you understand what Christians truly believe about God and the Trinity or what they mean when they say God is one in three, three in one?

 

[dolphinlove]

Amoon,

Are you sure your not here to just try and spread islam? Your not really answering question, but are just cutting and pasting rules of islam.
Its against the forum rules to spread religion, its called proselytizing.

 

[Sam_777]

Amoon,

Are you sure your not here to just try and spread islam? Your not really answering question, but are just cutting and pasting rules of islam.
Its against the forum rules to spread religion, its called proselytizing.

 

[Amoon]

But Islam says that the Qur’an is the ‘verbatim’ speech of God that exists in heaven for all eternity! Word for word- It’s the speech of God. So why should it change with different messengers? It’s not their speech, they are just dictating exactly word-for-word what is already in Heaven forever, not via inspiration, so why should they not be exactly the same everywhere, word for word? They should be perfect translations of each other from one language to the other, if the claim of Islam is really true. But I find no chapter, verse or sentence in the Qur’an at all that perfectly translates to any chapter, verse or sentence in either the Hebrew or Christian scriptures. Yet the revelation is supposed to be merely a direct dictation of the heavenly Qur’an which is eternal and it’s supposed to bring nothing new because you believe the other previous revelations were the same revelation as the Qur’an! That it merely corrects the corrupted verses of the Qur’an in the Injil and Tauret.

So what are the chances that not a single sentence translates verbatim to the Quran, in any of the previous revelations, or even between the Jewish and Christian ones aside from direct citations of the OT in the NT by the authors? Clearly the idea that the Quran is verbatim Divine Speech and that the others were also revelations that were corrupted and the Qur’an merely corrects them cannot all be true- Not all three. Something here is false, and I think that the claim that “Qur’an is direct dictation from Heaven” is the first suspect/culprit.?

I have never learnt that Quran should be the word by word translation of the Bible, and the Bible should be word by word translation of the Torah! God sent these three revelations for different nations in different times, and they are not intended to be exactly the same. However, the teachings in all these revelations are similar, as they were all sent to guide people to the One True God, and teach them to be righteous and forbid them from bad deeds.

I’m just curious Amoon- Do you even know what Christian belief about the Trinity really is? Do you understand what Christians truly believe about God and the Trinity or what they mean when they say God is one in three, three in one?

ya I heard some people explaining it as an apple that has three parts but still one apple. Or an egg that has three parts but still one egg, and a family of three members but still one family! I was never convinced actually. How can you explain it?
How can you convince me that Jesus is God while he admitted that God is greater than him? And how can he be god while he did not know the answer when he was asked about the Hour?

 

[Amoon]

Amoon,

Are you sure your not here to just try and spread islam? Your not really answering question, but are just cutting and pasting rules of islam.
Its against the forum rules to spread religion, its called proselytizing.

I think a (Catholic) opened this thread with the title (Mohammed) to learn more about Islam, and I am trying to explain to you why Muslims believe Islam is the True religion of God. Of course I will be putting verses of Quran to support my belief. If you go back to the posts in this thread, you will see that there are many posts that are insulting for Muslims and I believe that I have the right to defend my faith.