Muslim article attacking the Isaiah 9:6 prophecy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Agastasa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Could you please elaborate on the knowing for a fact aspect of history repeating and the numbers you use?
 
@Agastasa, I suspect the Muslim author of the article you link to is making a mistake in these two paragraphs (below). The terms “past tense” and “future tense” are misapplied in the case of Biblical Hebrew, which — unlike modern languages, including modern Israeli Hebrew — does not so clearly discriminate between “future’ and “past”. It would take someone on a higher pay grade than mine to give a full explanation, but in these two paragraphs the writer seems to have misunderstood the way the Hebrew verb really works.

First , all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense. For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “ his name will be called ” is the two words ‘ vayikra shemo ,’ which properly translated, should read “ his name was called .” The word “ vayikra ” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense. In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25. Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense!

Notice that it says “ a child HAS been born to us.” This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event. Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history. A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says. The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘ son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son.
 
Last edited:
Who are you to limit what God can do? If it were beneath God’s dignity to dwell among men, no man could enter Heaven under any circumstances.
 
“his sacrifice on calvary for our salvation, the resurrection of Our Lord”

Repenting for sins is enough so there is no need for a sacrifice. God is forgiving. And every attribution of God will to become manifest. So need for a god sacrifice! No. No. No.

19 ¶ Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.

20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.

23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live? Ezekiel 18

4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. Leviticus 1

11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Leviticus 17
 
If Mohammed received a calling and revelation from God, where are the miracles to demonstrate this claim? Moses, Elijah and Jesus all demonstrated their authority by working miracles in God’s Name. When Paul was called to be an Apostle, he did not presume to declare himself an Apostle before men, but rather submitted to Peter and the Church, confirming that his supposed revelations were indeed from God, because they matched what Jesus had taught and revealed to His Apostles. If Mohammed had done as Paul did, rather than presuming to assert himself as a prophet without submitting to the Church, we’d probably be venerating him today as St. Mohammed, Evangelizer of the Arabs.
 
Are Popes prophets? We know many scandals in Church. Which of them have authority of a prophet?

Popes and other any pious Christians are humankind so they are likely to make mistakes ofcourse if there is no conservation of God. You should regard Popes and Fathers as high moraly people in religion but they have no (they should not) authority of making laws or new doctrines in Faith.

Qur’an is acceptable by billions to be the most high scripture by God.
 
mythbuster1 said:
If Mohammed received a calling and revelation from God, where are the miracles to demonstrate this claim? Moses, Elijah and Jesus all demonstrated their authority by working miracles in God’s Name. When Paul was called to be an Apostle, he did not presume to declare himself an Apostle before men, but rather submitted to Peter and the Church, confirming that his supposed revelations were indeed from God, because they matched what Jesus had taught and revealed to His Apostles. If Mohammed had done as Paul did, rather than presuming to assert himself as a prophet without submitting to the Church, we’d probably be venerating him today as St. Mohammed, Evangelizer of the Arabs.
Click to expand...
Muhammad performed more than thousands miracles. Stones, trees, animals spoke to Him. Many times water came from His fingers. A very few food became enough for hundreds of men many times. There are more examples. People were witness of those so they were so faithfull.
 
Yes. Yes. Yes. You have many injures to convince yourselves and others. If that injury were to be right so Pagans and peoples would refute Muhammad very easily.

Aisha were engaged with other man before engaging wit prophet. So all people have must be pedophiles upon that times!
 
If you are a former Muslim, you know that although Muslims accept that the Old and New Testaments were revealed by God, they also believe that they have been corrupted by Christians and Jews.

There are several places in the Qur’an where Muhammad (or God, if you are a Muslim) tells Muslims that if they have any doubts about a particular issue, they should ask the Jews or Christians. Does this make sense? If you believe the Jews and Christians are basing their religion on corrupted scriptures, why would you ask them their opinion? Does this make sense?

So does it make sense to quote in detail from the Old Testament that you believe is corrupted? You can’t have it both ways–you can’t say the Old Testament is correct only when it agrees with you and corrupt if it doesn’t. That’s not logical and not a valid way to analyze ANY text.

A Christian doesn’t believe ANY of the Qur’an was revealed by God. So to use the Qur’an to try to “prove” something to a Christian doesn’t make any sense. The opposite is also true: a Christian can’t quote from the Bible to “prove” Islam is false, because a Muslim would just dismiss those passages as corruptions of the “real” Bible.

The only way to “prove” the truth of either Islam or Christianity is to examine its internal consistency: using its own rules, is it logical? (For example, Muslims believe the Qur’an is uncreated and has existed from the beginning. On the other hand, they believe a lot of verses (some Muslim scholars say over 200) have been “abrogated” or “replaced” by other verses. Is this logical? Muslims believe the Qur’an has been completely unchanged. But this contradicts many of the hadith, which talk about verses being lost (Ayesha said a goat ate some verses she kept under her pillow!) and also contradicts the actual different current Qur’ans printed in the Muslim world today–different editions have slight variations. So: logical?)
 
Last edited:
It is written, “I give you the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven; whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven.” The Pope and the Councils cannot make a mistake with regards to matters of the Faith, like which books are Scripture, because God Himself prevents them from doing so.
 
Last edited:
No, repenting is not enough. Repentance alone does not repair the damage done by sin. To deliver a man from a debt he cannot pay requires redemption.
 
Furthermore, prophecies often refer to future events as accomplished facts. For instance, Revelation 18:2 says, “…Fallen, fallen, is Babylon the Great…”
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
If you are a former Muslim, you know that although Muslims accept that the Old and New Testaments were revealed by God, they also believe that they have been corrupted by Christians and Jews.

There are several places in the Qur’an where Muhammad (or God, if you are a Muslim) tells Muslims that if they have any doubts about a particular issue, they should ask the Jews or Christians. Does this make sense? If you believe the Jews and Christians are basing their religion on corrupted scriptures, why would you ask them their opinion? Does this make sense?

So does it make sense to quote in detail from the Old Testament that you believe is corrupted? You can’t have it both ways–you can’t say the Old Testament is correct only when it agrees with you and corrupt if it doesn’t. That’s not logical and not a valid way to analyze ANY text.

A Christian doesn’t believe ANY of the Qur’an was revealed by God. So to use the Qur’an to try to “prove” something to a Christian doesn’t make any sense. The opposite is also true: a Christian can’t quote from the Bible to “prove” Islam is false, because a Muslim would just dismiss those passages as corruptions of the “real” Bible.

The only way to “prove” the truth of either Islam or Christianity is to examine its internal consistency: using its own rules, is it logical? (For example, Muslims believe the Qur’an is uncreated and has existed from the beginning. On the other hand, they believe a lot of verses (some Muslim scholars say over 200) have been “abrogated” or “replaced” by other verses. Is this logical? Muslims believe the Qur’an has been completely unchanged. But this contradicts many of the hadith, which talk about verses being lost (Ayesha said a goat ate some verses she kept under her pillow!) and also contradicts the actual different current Qur’ans printed in the Muslim world today–different editions have slight variations. So: logical?)
Click to expand...
Bible is revealed by God. But both Jews and Christians interpret revelation according to their inclinations. For instance The Doctrines. That is corruption. Does it make sense? Yes.

God advice to ask people who had revelation(People of Book) to be satisfied about revelation came to Muhammad. Because People of Book were aware of revelation. Many pastors affirmed Muhammad.

God is eternal with all attributes. The Qur’an is direct words of God so Qur’an is eternal and uncreated in that way. But also that words(verses) were revealed through time. The letters in books are in time so they are created. We read the created letters but they come/are from eternal words. For example as it is explained for the Destiny God knows all times and circumstances. There shouldbe many options for us and some laws might be changed for us but God knows all probalities without time as eternally. So God may change the circumstances for people but beside God it is eternal. Because God is eternal. There is no such thing in Islam to rest on mysteries. There is no paradox in Islam.

The Hadiths are long issue with some problems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top