Moses' law VS Mohammad's law

[inJESUS]

Mohammad stated that hecameto confirm the “prophets” before him…Under the thread Islam, i proved as you all already know, that mohammad did not confirm Jesus’ teachings but opposed them in the area of morality ( polygamy, divorce, eye for eye law, sex with slaves, temporary marriage, killing, stealing ,sex in paradise ecc)…

Lets now move to Moses and see whether mohammad confirmed Moses’ law :

The Word of God

God forbids persons from remarrying their divorcees after having married someone else:

“If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled.** That would be detestable in the eyes of the LORD**. Do not bring sin upon the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance.” Deuteronomy 24:1-4

“God says, ‘If a husband divorces his wife And she goes from him And belongs to another man, Will he still return to her? Will not that land be completely polluted? But you are a harlot with many lovers; Yet you turn to Me,’ declares the LORD. Lift up your eyes to the bare heights and see; Where have you not been violated? By the roads you have sat for them Like an Arab in the desert, And you have polluted a land With your harlotry and with your wickedness.” Jeremiah 3:1-2

Muhammad

Muhammad goes against Moses by allowing divorcees to remarry one another only after they have been married to someone else!

“A divorce is only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold together on equitable terms, or separate with kindness. It is not lawful for you, (men), to take back any of your gifts (from your wives), except when both parties fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah. If ye (judges) do indeed fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah, there is no blame on either of them if she give something for her freedom. These are the limits ordained by Allah. So do not transgress them if any do transgress the limits ordained by Allah, such persons wrong (themselves as well as others). So if a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), he cannot, after that, re- marry her until after she has married another husband and he has divorced her. In that case there is no blame on either of them if they re-unite, provided they feel that they can keep the limits ordained by Allah. Such are the limits ordained by Allah, which He makes plain to those who understand.” S. 2:229-230

Muhammad’s Allah calls permissible what Yahweh calls shameful and detestable!

The Word of God:
Polygamy is against God’s law…It is interesting to note that the first polygamist mentioned in Scripture was also a cold-blooded murderer (see Genesis 4:19-24).Adam, Enoch, Noah, Joseph, Samuel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Elijah, Jonah, Hosea, Zacharias , Abraham, Moses had only one wife.

Mohammad :
Mohammad allowed polygamy in the Quran.Mohammed claims special privileges especially in the area of marriage and sexuality. Mohammed had nine wives and could marry anyone he wanted since it was an honor for a woman to be his wife, even if it were his adopted son’s wife.

The Word of God

The Holy Bible forbids the raping of captive women, and commands that if a person desires one of them then they must get married to them:

“When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her AS YOUR WIFE. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. If you are not pleased with her, **let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.” ** Deuteronomy 21:10-14

Cont…

 

[inJESUS]

Muhammad

Muhammad allowed for both the raping and selling of captive women, even permitting his men to rape women who were married and whose husbands were still alive:

And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise. S. 4:24 Pickthall

The above citation clearly shows that Muhammad permitted Muslims to commit adultery with married women, provided that they were taken as captives.

The Islamic traditions unashamedly admit:

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khudri (Allah he pleased with him): O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq **and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). ** But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371)

The Word of God

"When you besiege a city for a long time, making war against it in order to take it, you shall not destroy its trees by wielding an axe against them. You may eat from them, but you shall not cut them down. ** Are the trees in the field human, that they should be besieged by you? Only the trees that you know are not trees for food you may destroy and cut down, that you may build siegeworks against the city that makes war with you, until it falls." Deuteronomy 20:19-20
**
God forbids the Israelites from destroying trees providing food under any circumstance.

Muhammad

Muhammad decided to discard the command of Moses when it served his purpose of gaining an advantage over his enemies:

Whatever palm-trees you cut down, or left standing upon their roots, that was by God’s leave, and that He might degrade the ungodly. S. 59:5

Cont…

 

[inJESUS]

The Word of God:
“Do not eat any detestable thing. These are the animals you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat, the deer, the gazelle, the roe deer, the wild goat, the ibex, the antelope and the mountain sheep. You may eat any animal that has a split hoof divided in two and that chews the cud. However, of those that chew the cud or that have a split hoof completely divided you may not eat the camel, the rabbit or the coney. Although they chew the cud, they do not have a split hoof; **they are ceremonially unclean for you.” ** Deuteronomy 14:3-7

Mohammad

“The sacrificial camels we have made for you as among the signs from Allah: in them is (much) good for you: then pronounce the name of Allah over them as they line up (for sacrifice): when they are down on their sides (after slaughter), eat ye thereof, and feed such as (beg not but) live in contentment, and such as beg with due humility: thus have We made animals subject to you, that ye may be grateful.” S. 22:36
**
The Word of God**

God commands the Israelites to observe the Sabbath day:

"Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God.Exodus 20:8-11

Mohammad:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
I heard Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) saying, “We (Muslims) are the last (to come) but (will be) the foremost on the Day of Resurrection though the former nations were given the Holy Scriptures before us. And this was their day (Friday) the celebration of which was made compulsory for them but they differed about it. So Allah gave us the guidance for it (Friday) and all the other people are behind us in this respect: the Jews’ (holy day is) tomorrow (i.e. Saturday) and the Christians’ (is) the day after tomorrow (i.e. Sunday).” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 13, Number 1, see also Number 21)

.The prophets of the Old Testament did not make new laws. They called people to observe and obey the laws given to Moses. It is strange for a prophet to claim special privileges in contrast to pious believers and followers. No prophet in the Old Testament started a new religion, and even Jesus came to fulfill the prophecies of the Old Testament. The fact that Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah concerning the New Covenant brought about a departure from Judaism because the Jews rejected this fulfillment in the person of Jesus. The story of the Bible is about Yahweh’s revealing Himself beginning with Adam, Noah, Abraham, the Patriarchs, and the prophets, being fulfilled in his self-revelation in Jesus, the Christ, the eternal Son of God.

In view of all this, allah changed God’s morality…what was abhorent to God became a commandmant by allah…what was evil became good. Prophet Isaiah has a response to allah : woe to you who see evil good and good evil.

 

[Greg00]

I’m giving this post a bump because I would like to see it answered. I encourage everyone else to do the same until it is answered.

 

[inJESUS]

Greg00:

I’m giving this post a bump because I would like to see it answered. I encourage everyone else to do the same until it is answered.

well…let’s see…its been here for some time…no muslim bothered so far.

 

[Joseph_Alison]

Salaam inJESUS;
This is not fair; 3 pages in one shot!!
You could have given the link to Sam Shamoun’s page instead of dumping a whole web page here.

That’s a lot of homework you are giving us here; would we find the needed time to answer you? (Although I know this is not what you are after, your defiant tone is a proof to this). Keep up the good work for us. Thanks.

Salaam.
Joseph.

 

[Justice2006]

inJESUS:

Under the thread Islam, i proved as you all already know, that mohammad did not confirm Jesus’ teachings but opposed them in the area of morality ( polygamy, divorce, eye for eye law, sex with slaves, temporary marriage, killing, stealing ,sex in paradise ecc)…

Mr. inJESUS,

It is really strange that the very premise of your “argument” has no foundation.

It is like you have no money in your pocket but went on to discuss how to spend a billion dollor?..by buying what and what not, what if I buy a running business but then later turned out to be disaster, and what if…and how about buying that thing and…on and on…"

You claim that “mohammad did not confirm Jesus’ teachings but opposed them”. Well your claim is merely a personal claim and not a fact. To make it fact you have to have true teachings of Jesus. So,you should ask yourself the following questions:

**- Wait a minute, do I have the actual uncorrupted teachings of Jesus, in the first place?

• If yes, where are they?
• If they are in the various versions of the Bibles (in thousands of Greek copies of the New Testament) then what real proof do I have that they were inded written/dictated/verified by either Jesus or his Hebrew/Jewish disciples?
• What was Jesus’ native langauge?
• What guarantee do I have that whoever wrote books of the New Testament, in Greek, did translate faithfully, scholarly and accurately, in order to know what was actual Message of Jesus?
• Who were the authors of the most books of the New Testament?
• Do our Bible scholars/Churches, really know their names? **

Once you have satisfying answers to all these questions and be sure that you indeed have 100% true, uncorrupted teachings of Jesus, then and then only you can compare them with other people’s/Prophet’s teachings. Then, if they contradict eachother then and then only you can claim what you claimed in the beginning of your opening post. Otherwise you are just wasting your time because thus far Christiandom has no 100% true teachings of Jesus.
.

 

[mjdonnelly]

Justice2006:

Mr. inJESUS,

It is really strange that the very premise of your “argument” has no foundation.

It is like you have no money in your pocket but went on to discuss how to spend a billion dollor?..by buying what and what not, what if I buy a running business but then later turned out to be disaster, and what if…and how about buying that thing and…on and on…"

You claim that “mohammad did not confirm Jesus’ teachings but opposed them”. Well your claim is merely a personal claim and not a fact. To make it fact you have to have true teachings of Jesus. So,you should ask yourself the following questions:

- Wait a minute, do I have the actual uncorrupted teachings of Jesus, in the first place?

- If yes, where are they?
- If they are in the various versions of the Bibles (in thousands of Greek copies of the New Testament) then what real proof do I have that they were inded written/dictated/verified by either Jesus or his Hebrew/Jewish disciples?
- What was Jesus’ native langauge?
- What guarantee do I have that whoever wrote books of the New Testament, in Greek, did translate faithfully, scholarly and accurately, in order to know what was actual Message of Jesus?
- Who were the authors of the most books of the New Testament?
**- Do our Bible scholars/Churches, really know their names? **

Once you have satisfying answers to all these questions and be sure that you indeed have 100% true, uncorrupted teachings of Jesus, then and then only you can compare them with other people’s/Prophet’s teachings. Then, if they contradict eachother then and then only you can claim what you claimed in the beginning of your opening post. Otherwise you are just wasting your time because thus far Christiandom has no 100% true teachings of Jesus.
.

But this thread was about the teachings of Moses as compared to Mohammad!

Stop trying to sidetrack.

 

[Justice2006]

mjdonnelly:

But this thread was about the teachings of Moses as compared to Mohammad!

Stop trying to sidetrack.

Hi mjdonnelly,

I know what is the topic of this thread. What I said earlier was to refute a hollow claim of Mr. inJESUS, who in his mind “proved” something.

Did you read atleast the opening statement/claim of his OP?
Let me re-qoute it:

inJESUS:

Under the thread Islam, i proved as you all already know, that mohammad did not confirm Jesus’ teachings…

The question is, did Mr. inJESUS really “prove” that "mohammad [pbuh] did not confirm Jesus’ [pbuh] teachings?

Ofcourse Mr. inJESUS did not prove it, because Christiandom simply **did not ** have the true teachings of Jesus Christ, in the first place.

How can Mr. inJESUS compare a non-existing thing with an existing thing and then claim to have proven the superiority of that non-existing thing? Mr. inJESUS is just making fool out of himself by making such hollow claim.

.

 

[mjdonnelly]

But what do you say about the comparison between the teachings of Moses and Mohammad?

 

[exoflare]

Justice2006:

The question is, did Mr. inJESUS really “prove” that "mohammad [pbuh] did not confirm Jesus’ [pbuh] teachings?

Ofcourse Mr. inJESUS did not prove it, because Christiandom simply **did not **have the true teachings of Jesus Christ, in the first place.

How can Mr. inJESUS compare a non-existing thing with an existing thing and then claim to have proven the superiority of that non-existing thing? Mr. inJESUS is just making fool out of himself by making such hollow claim.

Oh my gosh, are the Muslims STILL proselytizing everyone on this forum? I left for a while, and had no idea it would still be this way the next time I checked out the forums.

Justice, we aren’t going to bother with you unless you start to think rationally. Your reasoning reminds me of those people who say the Holocaust was a myth, or that we never landed on the moon. When you have to deny history itself as a prerequisite for your argument, don’t expect that many people to take you seriously.

 

[inJESUS]

Salaam inJESUS;

Salaam Joseph :

This is not fair; 3 pages in one shot!!

they are about some comparison…its just that we are limited by a number of characters othewise it’d have been one page…

You could have given the link to Sam Shamoun’s page instead of dumping a whole web page here.

no, i wanted to keep the passages shown and make the topic easier to read…a link is much longer.

That’s a lot of homework you are giving us here; would we find the needed time to answer you? (Although I know this is not what you are after, your defiant tone is a proof to this). Keep up the good work for us. Thanks.

i posted it some days ago and i pushed no one…take your time.

 

[Emad]

Jesus said: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)”

Christians always say as an excuse “Oh this law doesn’t exist in the New Testament, it is only the Old Testament.” Well, according to Matthew 5:17-18 above, we clearly see that Jesus honored the Old Testament, and forces Christians to follow the unmodified laws of it that have not been replaced by newer ones in the New Testament. The Old Testament as we clearly see above does indeed allow polygamy without a shadow of a doubt !!.

There is not a single verse from the New Testament that prohibits polygamy. Christians usually mistakenly present the following verses from the Bible to prove that polygamy in the New Testament is not allowed:

Matthew 19:1-12 "1. When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to
the other side of the Jordan.
2. Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.
3. Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”
4. “Haven’t you read,” he (Jesus) replied, “that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female,' 5. and said, For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’ ?
6. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”
7. “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”
8. Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.
9. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
10. The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”
11. Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.
12. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

In the above verses, we see that Jesus was approached with a question about whether or not it is allowed for a man to divorce his wife in Matthew 19:3. Jesus immediately referred to the Old Testament for the answer in Matthew 19:4. He referred to Adam and Eve, one man and one woman. The Old Testament does talk about the story of Adam and Eve as one husband and one wife. However, the Old Testament which Jesus had referred to in Matthew 19:3 does allow polygamy.

Also, when a man becomes a one flesh with his wife in Matthew 19:5-6, this doesn’t mean that the man can’t be one flesh with another woman. He can be one flesh with his first wife, and one flesh with his second wife, and one flesh with his third wife and so on… To further prove this point, let us look at the following from the New Testament:

Matthew 22:23-32 "23. That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question.
24. “Teacher,” they said, “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him.
25. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother.
26. The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh.
27. Finally, the woman died.
28. Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?”
29. Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
30. At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
31. But about the resurrection of the dead–have you not read what God said to you,
32. `I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’ ? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.”

 

[Emad]

In Matthew 22:24-28, the Jews referred to Deuteronomy 25:5 from the Old Testament where it states that if a woman’s husband dies, and she didn’t have any kids from him, then she must marry his brother regardless whether he had a wife or not. When the Jews brought this situation up to Jesus in Matthew 22:24-28, Jesus did not prohibit at all for the childless widow to marry her husband’s brother (even if he were married). Instead, Jesus replied to them by saying that we do not marry in heaven, and we will be like angels in heaven (Matthew 22:30).

So in other words, if Jesus allowed for a widow to marry her former husband’s brother even if he were married, then this negates the Christians’ claim about the Bible prohibiting polygamy.

 

[Giovanni]

Emad:

In Matthew 22:24-28, the Jews referred to Deuteronomy 25:5 from the Old Testament where it states that if a woman’s husband dies, and she didn’t have any kids from him, then she must marry his brother regardless whether he had a wife or not. When the Jews brought this situation up to Jesus in Matthew 22:24-28, Jesus did not prohibit at all for the childless widow to marry her husband’s brother (even if he were married). Instead, Jesus replied to them by saying that we do not marry in heaven, and we will be like angels in heaven (Matthew 22:30).

So in other words, if Jesus allowed for a widow to marry her former husband’s brother even if he were married, then this negates the Christians’ claim about the Bible prohibiting polygamy.

Emad, glad you found these verses in the Holy Bible, but you are missing the question. Maybe you should go back to the same scripture verses and re-read it, and maybe you will understand, if not, I pray that some day God will illuminate your mind so you my understand.

Peace of christ be upon you

 

[inJESUS]

Emad, your case is beyond hope. You want to twist the scriptures to prove the sinful law mohammad allowed, but you lose; polygamy is annd was a sin; God’s morals do not change. As to Jesus fulfilling the law, you unfortunately understood nothing.

 

[brotherhrolf]

From a strictly anthropological and historical view, this would have been a way of taking care of the brother’s children and his wife providing for their care and sustenance and legitimacy. These are “wive’s” in name only - a fairly common practice in other cultures throughout the world particularly in patriarchal cultures.

 

[SpiritIsWilling]

The basic fact is that Mohammad took what parts of the Old Testament that he liked and discarded the ones that didn’t fit his war mongering and womanizing way of life.

If Jesus says he’s the last prophet, then 600 years later someone else comes along saying that Jesus was a liar, who would you believe?

 

[LilyM]

Emad:

In Matthew 22:24-28, the Jews referred to Deuteronomy 25:5 from the Old Testament where it states that if a woman’s husband dies, and she didn’t have any kids from him, then she must marry his brother regardless whether he had a wife or not. When the Jews brought this situation up to Jesus in Matthew 22:24-28, Jesus did not prohibit at all for the childless widow to marry her husband’s brother (even if he were married). Instead, Jesus replied to them by saying that we do not marry in heaven, and we will be like angels in heaven (Matthew 22:30).

So in other words, if Jesus allowed for a widow to marry her former husband’s brother even if he were married, then this negates the Christians’ claim about the Bible prohibiting polygamy.

Emad, this is the same Jesus who said ‘whoever divorces and remaries committs adultery, and whoever marries a divorced person committs adultery’ in fact he went further and said ‘any man who LOOKS AT A WOMAN WITH LUST IN HIS HEART has already committed adultery with her’. The evidence is well and truly against you my friend.

 

[jcaz]

Just poking my head in today to see how these forums are going and to see if the moderators are moderating.

The MAIN reason i stopped posting and visiting this forum was the onslaught of non-Catholic “Christians”, of arab descent, who came here to these forums and who post their barrage of defaming articles on Islaam, almost as if they are teaming up and just joining in numbers hoping to “outpost” the Muslims who were here.

They completely disregard the rules of this forum and they not only post an ENTIRE article on a post, but as in this post (just one of MANY examples), they post **THREE PAGES ** from a website defaming Islaam.

I rarely saw a moderator take action, and in the few instances that they did, perhaps after a few warnings, those individuals were banned, only to come right back under another name.

And what’s worse is the true Catholics on this site who encourage the behavior of these “former Muslims”.

This is very sad indeed, as there could have been, and perhaps still can be, valuable discussions between Catholics and Muslims, as there were several posters who did seem sincerely interested in educating themselves on Islamic beliefs.

But why do the moderators turn a blind eye to these posts? Is this justice? Is this fair? And ONLY because I hold Catholics in a high position, these actions do surprise and disappoint me greatly.