Muhammed predicted the end of Islam.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sam_777
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Salaam/peace
Remember, God does not recognize culture, my dear sister.
well respected bro/sis , Islam is not a cultural religion . Anybody can become a Muslim -regardless of race, religion, skin color, language, geographical birth place, you name it 🙂
 
well respected bro/sis , Islam is not a cultural religion . Anybody can become a Muslim -regardless of race, religion, skin color, language, geographical birth place, you name it 🙂
Yaa Allaah, my head just exploded! You’re kidding, right? Islam is not a cultural religion? :eek:

This might be HUGE news to every single non-Arab Muslim, since they all pray in Arabic and many also adopt Arab customs and values (nothing wrong with that last part, if done willingly of course). Among the non-Arab Muslims I have known (primarily black Africans from outside Arab North Africa), this is a big issue: Can a Somali practice “Warqa” (traditional Somali folk religion) and still be a Muslim? Why does a Nuba person from Sudan (native speakers of a number of Nilo-Saharan languages, in an area of great linguistic diversity) have to pray in the tongue of the people who try to assimilate him into an Arab world that is not his?

I know you yourself are a non-Arab Muslim, so I wonder what you think of these issues. Maybe you will say that you are proof that Islam is not inherently culture specific, but I will still wonder: If that is not the case, why does it so thoroughly dominate one specific culture (Arab) and those conquered or converted by that culture (various African people, S.E. Asians, etc), while being virtually absent elsewhere? Western converts to Islam are, for all intents and purposes, a relatively recent phenomenon in any sort of large number outside of those travellers, scholars, and other assorted peoples whose works brought them into contact with Muslims (in an inherently sympathetic position alien to much of the rest of their societies, I might add; what good would an Arabist be if he did not at least profess respect for Islam?).

If Islam is not a culture-specific religion, then why are non-Muslim Arabs often targeted in inter-religious violence started by Muslim Arabs to cleanse their lands of non-Muslim elements? Do you know nothing of the Farhud, or how today Christians and other non-Muslims are persecuted in the Arab-Muslim world? I know that the violence is not so simple as to say that all Arabs think “non-Muslims cannot be real Arabs”, but the systematic destruction of the Arab Christian cultures across their native land certainly points to a desire to make Arab synonymous with Muslim on the part of at least some of the more fanatic Muslim groups and individuals. The great irony is, of course, that no place where Islam now predominates did not previously have established Christian communities, in some cases quite extensive (Egypt, Syria). The Aramaeans are the indigenous Christians of the Levant, the Amhara are the indigenous Christians of the horn of Africa (if founding an empire in the first century A.D. doesn’t make you indigenous, then what are we to make of the arrival of Islam some three centuries after the conversion of the Amhara at the hands of two shipwrecked Syrian monks?), the Copts are the indigenous Christians of Egypt, etc. Islam certainly has the right to be all of these places, but it unfortunately destroys all that came before it in many cases. Ahmed Gragn, for instance, tried that in Ethiopia in the 9th century and nearly succeeded (a fine way to pay back the love and tolerance shown by the Christian king to the first Muslim refugees three centuries earlier). Now an estimated 9 out of 10 Oromo (the largest single ethnic group in Ethiopia) are Muslim, and they insist that Christianity, which their own ancestors practiced for centuries prior to their forced conversion, is a foreign tool of dominance by other ethnicities and “the West”. Funny how that works out. 🤷

So, while I guess I ultimately agree with that anyone can become Muslim (why would it be otherwise? Why would any religion turn away someone wanting to convert? That doesn’t show Islam’s openness!), this does not address several problems with your idea.
  • That non-Arab Muslims are required to deny their identities when it comes to praying to God (which is a pretty important part of any monotheistic religion)
  • That non-Arab Muslims are encouraged (sometimes with threats of violence) to submit to Islam’s version of Arab customs, which Islam has for centuries sought to make synonymous with its own ideology (it has been very, very successful in this regard)
  • That Islam produces in the minds of its adherents the idea that other religions, even religions once and sometimes still practiced natively by the people it now counts among its adherents, are inferior to Islam, which of course brings with it the correct customs, ideas, language and all that from an ARAB prophet, in an ARAB’s language, etc.
Everything about Islam is tailor-made for Arab supremacist ideology. I’m not going to defame your prophet by suggesting it was planned that way, as though Islam is some sort of conspiracy against the world to make us all speak Arabic and wear kaffiyeh or something, since I do not believe it is. But at the same time I do not for a second believe it a happy coincidence that Muhammad’s revelation from God fit so well with his cultural, political, and military remaking of the region. In previous holy books, God was clear that from among the Jews would come prophets and eventually the Messiah, the Deliverer. Nothing was specified for the Arabs in this regard, so it makes sense that Muhammad’s revelation would have to deny these previous books in order to confirm his status as a prophet.

(cont’d below)
 
It has been argued by someone who knows the original Arabic probably much better than the majority of posters here, inJESUS, that much of the traditional Islamic interpretation of Christianity came from Muhammad’s contact with Gnostics. I would add to that, if our fellow hasn’t already (I can’t find the original thread), that there seems to have also been a sense of “what about me” involved in the entire enterprise. Of course I believe that Muhammad was legitimately convinced of his prophethood (after all, his own people convinced him of it…how’s THAT for a non-culture specific lucky break!), but from an outsider’s perspective it seems that a likely reason why the majority of the Arab world now views Christianity as something foreign and Western even though it grew from the same soil that is now Palestine (a Muslim-majority state if there ever was one, and cause celebre for Arabs and Muslims alike throughout the world) is because Christianity does not offer any special place specifically to the Arabs as a race, but instead to the Jews an ethno-religious group (which at the time would have been much more homogenous than it is now, so perhaps just “ethnic group” suffices there). This is of course expanded with the coming of the Messiah, so Arabs are offered in kind the same salvation as any other people, and many receive it in the centuries prior to Islam, which finally tells the Arabs that THEY are the special ones.

This relates to you as a non-Arab Muslim because you have internalized the Islamic version of the Arab value system in the much the same way as I am an inheritor of the Western (Roman) Christian tradition, without really noticing it. It’s nothing to feel ashamed of, after all in my case there was a much stronger cultural pull towards Roman Catholicism than Eastern forms of Christianity (which are equally valid, just not well-represented among Latinos…my grandmother is from Mexico, and would probably have a heart attack if I crossed myself while reciting the Trinitarian formula in some vaguely Arab-y Greek-ish Russian-esque sounding words). I’m sure you have felt a similar pull to maintain your Muslim faith, if you have ever been approached by a non-Muslim in your life. There’s no problem with that, but it doesn’t mean that Islam is not culture-specific, just because it is the norm among your people. I’ll be the first to admit that Roman Catholicism is culture-specific! But we don’t have as many problems, because the Roman rite is just one of many that respresent the diverse world of Catholicism. Arabs are among my “adopted family” in that world, and may Allah bless them all (Muslims included!) as He also blesses every other people on Earth. :crossrc:
 
Well said in both regards, Swariffin. We should show our inclinations towards understanding others by at least writing out the complete name of the figures discussed. I would not appreciate someone writing Jesus" as “Jees” or something like that. It is not so much work to write “Muhammad” or “Mohammed” instead of “Mo” or something like that. We may still disagree, but let’s be good examples of the intellect and love central to our faith by not being lazy or rude.
dzhereme, I wish you people had checked Jha before I had to make any move. But let it pass…
And the Bible being written X number of years after Jesus is something that Muslims might have a problem with, since Muhammad’s revelation occured over such a short period of time maybe they don’t understand the antiquity of the Biblical message
.

dzhereme, Sorry Muhammad message was delivered over a period of 23 years. During that time the whole message of God was heard by millionsa nd put into practice. Before Muhammad left this world, he addressed a congregation of 124,000 Muslims (practicing Muslims).

On the other hand, Jesus stayed in the field for only three years. I hope you know it. I do not intend to devalue your good wishes. We also have good wishes for what Jesus taught and respect him.

Whereas every word that was revealed to Muhammad was written down by many scribes and it was memorised and recited openly in prayers, such a thing was not done in the case of Jesus. Jesus was working, teaching, showing the good way, giving the light. But he did not dictate anything to his disciples and nothing was recorded on the spot.

The case of bible is almost like our Hadith which was written about 200 years after Muhammad. The bible may have been written 80 years after Jesus. But our book is not Hadith. Our book is the Quran which you should all read please with good intentions.
I will stop here and post the rest of reply in next post.
 
dzhereme:
Indeed it is before the New Testament itself, with the Jewish belief in the coming of the Messiah. Certainly in those years prior to Jesus’ coming to Earth, and again in the time before the canonization of the Bible, there was already a rich oral tradition affirming the principles that define us as a community. This is something that Protestant Christians (and Muslims, apparently), however well-intentioned they may be, cannot understand, because they have only a book, and furthermore only their private, subjective interpretation of it.
I could not understand what you mean. There was a very old practice, more ancient than that of Moses, prevalent amongst the Arabs that they hail from Abraham. They were pagans but they used to circuit around the house (Ka’abah) in Makkah for thousands of years. They had the tradition of sacrifice and circumcision amongst them according to the teachings of Abraham and Ishmael.

That custom and culture was more ancient and well rooted amongst the Arabs.
The apostles did not have a Bible, of course. Many of today’s believers in the most repressive societies may not have a Bible, or may only have parts of one, and they still believe in Christ. It is a beautiful thing, isn’t it? Remember what Jesus said to Simon Barjona about belief in what is not seen. It is truly a blessing from God.
I have given a reply to the above. The traditions of Arabs were more ancient than the Jewish ones. Dating back to Abraham. The Arabs did not have any book because no prophet appeared amongst them. Yet the ritual practices were going on.
If there were no Bible, how many would still believe?
Why there should be no bible. Bible is a must and fact of history.
Can we also ask our Muslim friends if they would believe if there were no Qur’an or Hadiths? I honestly have no idea if this is a valid question or not, but I think it is still worth asking.
Planten, would you be the first to answer, please? I would really appreciate your answer, since you have a lot to say about our Book
.

dzhereme, why ask an impossible question??. The bible is here to stay and so is the Quran. It is better not to explore an impossible situation. The answer will not help any one at all.
 
dzhereme, I wish you people had checked Jha before I had to make any move. But let it pass…

.

dzhereme, Sorry Muhammad message was delivered over a period of 23 years. During that time the whole message of God was heard by millionsa nd put into practice. Before Muhammad left this world, he addressed a congregation of 124,000 Muslims (practicing Muslims).

On the other hand, Jesus stayed in the field for only three years. I hope you know it. I do not intend to devalue your good wishes. We also have good wishes for what Jesus taught and respect him.

Whereas every word that was revealed to Muhammad was written down by many scribes and it was memorised and recited openly in prayers, such a thing was not done in the case of Jesus. Jesus was working, teaching, showing the good way, giving the light. But he did not dictate anything to his disciples and nothing was recorded on the spot.

The case of bible is almost like our Hadith which was written about 200 years after Muhammad. The bible may have been written 80 years after Jesus. But our book is not Hadith. Our book is the Quran which you should all read please with good intentions.
I will stop here and post the rest of reply in next post.
Muhammed did not have millions of followers. He only had the following of people in the Arab Penisula; which, most of it could barley support life. He never left the Arab Penisula.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Salaam/peace
…even if she was a slave she was mairried to his step son.
U did not read my post carefully. I am writing again. she was not a slave , she was cousin of the Prophet Muhammed (p).

Marrying cousin is allowed in Islam. So , Prophet could marry her at any moment . If he had lust for her , why he arranged marriage of her with the once slave man ?

Zaid was once a slave . Prophet freed him & allowed to go back with his dad. Zaid denied to go back home & wanted to stay with the Prophet . After that everybody started calling him son of Muhammed (p). God forbade it & ordered to call everyone by father’s name.

Zaid had no blood relationship with the Prophet . Adoption system is different in Islam . Adopted son is not like real son. He does not have to die , if he divorces his wife , adopted dad can marry his divorced wife as they are not real son or daughter -in-law.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Salaam/peace
Did he forgive them? My secular sources state he demanded payment.
huh… Why bother bargaining & took a part from their money ? Prophet conquered Macca & he had 10 thousands armed soldiers with him . He could order his army to kill each & every enemy & took their wealth .

Even if it’s truth that he freed them in exchange of money , what’s wrong with it ? A conqueror ( who was earlier tortured & was forced to leave his birthplace just because he called people not to associate partner with God) , he could destroy the all citizens of the city with their kattles ( yes , you have a right to be angry here because Muhammed (p) did not listen to Jesus (p) …city of idle worshipers should be destroyed totally with domestic animals ).
 
http://theislampath.com/smf/Smileys/default/salam.gif

Salaam/peace

huh… Why bother bargaining & took a part from their money ? Prophet conquered Macca & he had 10 thousands armed soldiers with him . He could order his army to kill each & every enemy & took their wealth .

Even if it’s truth that he freed them in exchange of money , what’s wrong with it ? A conqueror ( who was earlier tortured & was forced to leave his birthplace just because he called people not to associate partner with God) , he could destroy the all citizens of the city with their kattles ( yes , you have a right to be angry here because Muhammed (p) did not listen to Jesus (p) …city of idle worshipers should be destroyed totally with domestic animals ).
I apologize as I do not understand. My belief in Jesus states that one should not kill or steal. He gave his life up instead of fighting. It appears that Muslims not only allow killing and stealing they support it. I am not trying to be negative, Your response “what is wrong with it” is puzzling. Everything is wrong with it. Jesus shows that the true path was peace. Not revenge, stealing etc. Loving thy neighbor was the key to salvation. God does not need the material things of this world as he created them. Why would Muhammed need them?
 
http://theislampath.com/smf/Smileys/default/salam.gif

Salaam/peace

U did not read my post carefully. I am writing again. she was not a slave , she was cousin of the Prophet Muhammed (p).

Marrying cousin is allowed in Islam. So , Prophet could marry her at any moment . If he had lust for her , why he arranged marriage of her with the once slave man ?

Zaid was once a slave . Prophet freed him & allowed to go back with his dad. Zaid denied to go back home & wanted to stay with the Prophet . After that everybody started calling him son of Muhammed (p). God forbade it & ordered to call everyone by father’s name.

Zaid had no blood relationship with the Prophet . Adoption system is different in Islam . Adopted son is not like real son. He does not have to die , if he divorces his wife , adopted dad can marry his divorced wife as they are not real son or daughter -in-law.
I do not have a problem with what your posted. I am stating that Christ clearly states that divorce is wrong in the Bible. Yet Muhammed has his step son divorce a woman in order that he can marry her. Does this not break the ten commandments? He is lusting after another’s wife. To Chrsitians this is adultery and is a sin. Is he not allowing divorce even though Christ states in the Bible that one can not divorce. Is this not also adultery?
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Salaam/peace
… He is lusting after another’s wife. ?
she was his cousin , he saw her since her childhood. If he had lust for her , why he did not marry her earlier ?
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Salaam/peace
answered previously. After all he was concealing his feelings to a married woman.
why waited till she got married & divorced ? why not married her when she was a virgin ?
 
dzhereme, I wish you people had checked Jha before I had to make any move. But let it pass…
Sorry. I can’t be everywhere at once.
dzhereme, Sorry Muhammad message was delivered over a period of 23 years. During that time the whole message of God was heard by millionsa nd put into practice. Before Muhammad left this world, he addressed a congregation of 124,000 Muslims (practicing Muslims).
On the other hand, Jesus stayed in the field for only three years. I hope you know it. I do not intend to devalue your good wishes. We also have good wishes for what Jesus taught and respect him.
So Muhammad’s message is more valuable or correct because he was physically on Earth preaching for a longer period of time? How is that supposed to work? American cult leader Jim Jones preached for 27 years (1951-1978) before he died in the mass suicide that he ordered in South America. Should we all consider him more truthful or better than Muhammad or Jesus?
Whereas every word that was revealed to Muhammad was written down by many scribes and it was memorised and recited openly in prayers, such a thing was not done in the case of Jesus.
There were also those famous “Satanic verses” that Muhammad was given and later recinded, weren’t there? Be careful of claiming immutability through direct revelation. It is the whole message of God as Muhammad gave it, plus or minus some things thanks to the doctrine of abrogation, which is apparently fine when Muhammad does it… 🤷
Jesus was working, teaching, showing the good way, giving the light. But he did not dictate anything to his disciples and nothing was recorded on the spot.
You presume a lot, though you are right that Jesus was busy doing the Father’s work. He did not come to Earth to author a manual, but to save all mankind. I think that’s better.
The case of bible is almost like our Hadith which was written about 200 years after Muhammad. The bible may have been written 80 years after Jesus. But our book is not Hadith. Our book is the Quran which you should all read please with good intentions.
To you it might seem so, but since as you say your book is not Hadith, it’s not a good comparison to make. We Christians do not have a secondary book of sayings of Jesus; all recorded sayings are as they are in the Bible. Again, it is this way because Jesus had a qualitatively different mission than Muhammad. It does not diminish the Bible in any way, as the Bible’s authors were rightly guided by the Holy Spirit.

Thank you for your invitation to the Qur’an. To be honest, I have tried to read it in translation in the past. To put it as nicely as I can, I was not impressed by much. Perhaps I would need to read it in the original, because the translation I found was repetitive and often very vague or nonsensical. If it is a book from God, then He speaking in a way that is much less clear to me than in previous books, perhaps more tailored to Muhammad’s place, time, and people.
 
I could not understand what you mean. There was a very old practice, more ancient than that of Moses, prevalent amongst the Arabs that they hail from Abraham. They were pagans but they used to circuit around the house (Ka’abah) in Makkah for thousands of years. They had the tradition of sacrifice and circumcision amongst them according to the teachings of Abraham and Ishmael.

This is nice, but it does not relate to my post. I am not talking about general religious beliefs of a certain time, but a specific belief in the Messiah that is rooted in Jewish culture. Jesus and all the early “Christians” (before that term came to be used) were all Jews, and kept Jewish customs.

The Ka’abah is interesting and all, but unless you want to claim that they circled it in the same belief that Muhammad later instituted among his followers, I don’t see how it relates to anything. My point was that, for Christians, Jesus’ arrival is confirmation of the Jewish belief, the fulfillment of God’s promise to His people (most of whom at the time did not believe so). In one case (Jesus), we have fulfillment, in another case (Muhammad/Ka’abah) we have adaptation of local custom to a new religious reality. It is not the same.
I have given a reply to the above. The traditions of Arabs were more ancient than the Jewish ones. Dating back to Abraham. The Arabs did not have any book because no prophet appeared amongst them. Yet the ritual practices were going on.
Because it is not, in fact, impossible (see above). I meant it as a hypothetical to you and to some “Bible-Only” Christians, because I believe the answer to this question will tell me a lot about their mindset, and I appreciate learning about other people from what they tell me of themselves, not what I assume them to believe.
 
http://theislampath.com/smf/Smileys/default/salam.gif

Salaam/peace

she was his cousin , he saw her since her childhood. If he had lust for her , why he did not marry her earlier ?
Perhaps if you gave a response instead of a question we could get farther. I am trying to understand your point; however, it is hard. Your are not explaining much of my posts. When you do respond you ask a question that does not apply to my post.

I do not care if she was his cousin. Muhammed married a divorced woman. Jesus in the Bible states that this is wrong. Muhammed is acting in direct contradiction of God. In your belief a direct contradiction of another prophet.

Will you answer all my others questions? I am trying to understand your view.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Salaam/peace
Perhaps if you gave a response instead of a question we could get farther.
it’s a logical response. If Prophet (p) had lust for his cousin , he could marry her before she becomes wife of once slaved person & later became a divorced lady. Instead of marrying a virgin , why went through unnecessary hazards like arranged marriage of the loved one , asked her husband to divorce her after a year lol .

What your God gifted intelligence tells u ? Why Muhammed (p) did not marry her earlier , a very simple question.
Muhammed married a divorced woman. Jesus in the Bible states that this is wrong.
Messengers received holy books from God. Sometimes they got some new rules to introduce . Such as alcohol was allowed earlier , during the time of Muhammed (p) , it became unlawful . Christians believe though pork was forbidden for jews , Christ (p) allowed it for them etc . Islam does not oppress women ; so a widow or a divorced lady is allowed to marry. It’s not a sin at all. How logical is that if a husband divorces his young wife , she will be forced to live like a widow ? Why punish the woman ?
Muhammed is acting in direct contradiction of God.
no way. He was a Muslim , he surrendered to God as Jesus (p) submitted to God . They were the best examples of good Muslims 🙂

may be some laws were different in their time , but no way they disobeyed God—ever.
In your belief a direct contradiction of another prophet.
huh…if u believe Jesus (p) taught about Trinity , then he had a direct contradiction not with only one Prophet but all the Prophets (pbut) God sent to mankind .
Will you answer all my others questions?
I am trying 🙂 only 4/5 Muslim participants vs hundreds of anti-Islamic posts. It takes time to read & write in a foreign language .
 
I do not have a problem with what your posted. I am stating that Christ clearly states that divorce is wrong in the Bible. Yet Muhammed has his step son divorce a woman in order that he can marry her. Does this not break the ten commandments? He is lusting after another’s wife. To Chrsitians this is adultery and is a sin. Is he not allowing divorce even though Christ states in the Bible that one can not divorce. Is this not also adultery?
PJ, divorce is wrong in Islam too. It is the worst thing that is permissible. I do not say Jesus stopped all divorce. He could not do that because of the Jewish law that he was following. But he spoke against the divorce and that what Muhammad did.

In islam divorce is allowed. Christains wrongly interpretted the words of Jesus and disallowed divorce. So the christians had to go to courts and to the legislature to correct the mistake of the church.

PJ you do not have enough room to stand on. Recently M W has questioned why Jesus as a god allowed divorce to the Jews and disallowed it to the christians. Was it an after thought of the God Jesus?

Whatever the church is teaching about the family relations is all wrong. It is not to be found in Jewish or Islamic teachings. And that teaching of the church is all against nature.
 
Perhaps if you gave a response instead of a question we could get farther. I am trying to understand your point; however, it is hard. Your are not explaining much of my posts. When you do respond you ask a question that does not apply to my post.
PJ, some time it becomes necessary to widen the scope and ask counter questions. That is for the persons who put up wrong questions. In courts also, questions and counter questions are asked to come to some good result.
I do not care if she was his cousin. Muhammed married a divorced woman. Jesus in the Bible states that this is wrong. Muhammed is acting in direct contradiction of God. In your belief a direct contradiction of another prophet.
PJ, You should care about relations. Wht Jesus said was grossly over-emphasized by the church… Jesus was only denouncing the divorce in severe words. Otherwise he could not speak/ alter a dot of the Jewish law. So this phrase " any one marrying a divorced woman is adultry" is no where in any book. And it is wrong on all counts.It is un-natural and not practiced any where.

jesus denounced the divorce. So did Muhammad. Muhammad told that man not to divorce his wife. But that man had to do it because his wife demanded it. Do you see the superiority of the Islamic faith. It allows ladies to claim separation and (Khula’a) resignation and they get it.

You people have done wrong by disallowing by religion, the ladies, the right to separate. And disallowed the right to remarry. That is all bad in the first place. Why to praise such bad rules and practices. It is like being an extremist. Please see our side of the story in practical ways…
Will you answer all my others questions? I am trying to understand your view.
Thanks for understanding. We are here to give all replies to you only. If there has been any harsh word, please forgive.

In the end, may i ask you PJ, “Do you feel that women should have right to permanent separation (resignation)?? and the right to remarry?” Please tell.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top