No Diversity in Islam

[dronald]

I was not referring to a group before Muhammad. I simply said facts are not created by the beliefs of a group of people. If no documents currently exist from before Muhammad that can show this, it still does not mean the beliefs of a group of people who thought prior Prophets sinned were right.

That was only half of your point.

“Throughout history a group of people have held this belief and another group have rejected. Facts are not created by the beliefs of a group of people.”

I simply asked for evidence before Muhammad, I’m sure you can find just one simple something. I don’t believe Allah wouldn’t at least give us some evidence of the truth besides the claims of one man.

Anyway, considering how the church acted towards those who opposed its doctrines I would be surprised any documents can even be found today that would go against the mainstream beliefs of the church. See what happened to non-trinitarians:

"In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offense, he shall be submitted for capital punishment…" — Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians

And yet we know from hundreds of documents exactly what the Arians believed.

Besides Arians (like every heretical group) agreed on the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. So I would love some evidence that Muslim claims on the lack of a resurrection or Prophets sinlessnes hold any water.

So if the Arians were treated in such a way, and we know everything about them; I’m sure the one true Religious beliefs of Allah can be found prior to Muhammad somewhere. I would love evidence.

I understand if you don’t have any though.

 

[peace_at_last]

That was only half of your point.
“Throughout history a group of people have held this belief and another group have rejected. Facts are not created by the beliefs of a group of people.”

I simply asked for evidence before Muhammad, I’m sure you can find just one simple something. I don’t believe Allah wouldn’t at least give us some evidence of the truth besides the claims of one man.

And yet we know from hundreds of documents exactly what the Arians believed.

Besides Arians (like every heretical group) agreed on the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. So I would love some evidence that Muslim claims on the lack of a resurrection or Prophets sinlessnes hold any water.

So if the Arians were treated in such a way, and we know everything about them; I’m sure the one true Religious beliefs of Allah can be found prior to Muhammad somewhere. I would love evidence.

I understand if you don’t have any though.

Ignoring the Off-topic stuff for now.

Not half of my point. You took “throughout history” to mean before Muhammad while that was not what I meant. As I said facts are not created by the beliefs of a group of people.

You want historical evidence from before Muhammad and currently I don’t have any. But, sometimes reason is much stronger than historical evidence. Reason and common-sense tell us that someone who preaches something must firstly adhere to it himself. You kinda get the hang of it here:

"So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? … Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth-- You, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?" Romans 2:2-23

Some non-Propeht Jews are bashed in the NT using the aforementioned words for not practicing what they preach, while you believe God appoints Prophets who perfectly fit the current situation. Prophets who would commit adultery, murder, and… while they were appointed by God to prevent others from doing so. Prophets are supposed to be role-models who practice what they preach not chatterboxes whose actions and deeds contradict their words.

 

[dronald]

Ignoring the Off-topic stuff for now.

Not half of my point. You took “throughout history” to mean before Muhammad while that was not what I meant. As I said facts are not created by the beliefs of a group of people.

So then before Muhammad there was only one belief and it’s that the Prophets weren’t perfect. Yes, I agree that Muhammad brought a new teaching and may have divided this belief and it still stands that way today.

You want historical evidence from before Muhammad and currently I don’t have any. But, sometimes reason is much stronger than historical evidence. Reason and common-sense tell us that someone who preaches something must firstly adhere to it himself. You kinda get the hang of it here:

"So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? … Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and boast in God; if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth-- You, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?" Romans 2:2-23

Some non-Propeht Jews are bashed in the NT using the aforementioned words for not practicing what they preach, while you believe God appoints Prophets who perfectly fit the current situation. Prophets who would commit adultery, murder, and… while they were appointed by God to prevent others from doing so. Prophets are supposed to be role-models who practice what they preach not chatterboxes whose actions and deeds contradict their words.

God didn’t condone those actions; in fact the actions of David and Solomon brought destruction on Jerusalem. Jonah himself was questioned by God until Jonah had no response. It makes sense that we can relate to the men who struggled before us and yet God loved. And we learn from their mistakes not to repeat what they had done.

 

[commenter]

Any suggestions for books or sources for a fair analysis of Islam theology, from someone with a Catholic view? I have seen a few books criticizing Islam from a political view, or totally criticizing it from someone who converted from Muslim to Evangelical, then I saw one that glorified Islam. I hope someone like Mitch Pacwa, S. J. or someone similar has p(name removed by moderator)ointed the essentials, the similarities and differences with Catholicism in particular and Christianity in general, minimizing politics. (Not to negate the value of reading a Muslim’s explanation, too. But for a beginner like me it helps to start with what I know, then to what I don’t know.)

 

[peace_at_last]

So then before Muhammad there was only one belief and it’s that the Prophets weren’t perfect. Yes, I agree that Muhammad brought a new teaching and may have divided this belief and it still stands that way today.

That’s not what I said.

God didn’t condone those actions; in fact the actions of David and Solomon brought destruction on Jerusalem. Jonah himself was questioned by God until Jonah had no response. It makes sense that we can relate to the men who struggled before us and yet God loved. And we learn from their mistakes not to repeat what they had done.

Just in case you didn’t realize it, God sends His Prophets and Messengers to guide us to the right path, tell us what is right and what is wrong, and inform us about what pleases God and what angers Him, because we are incapable of doing this on our own. When our role model commits the most outrageous atrocities then he can no longer be trusted in any of his other words. How can someone who openly makes the most obvious mistakes that even a fool knows are wrong, very wrong, be trusted in his other words and actions.

Let me show you an example, maybe you’ll understand what we are dealing with here. Suppose the POPE (big disclaimer here, I’m only trying to convey a concept no insult intended) or some high level priest from the Vatican did what the OT claims Prophet David did: have sex with his neighbors wife during her period, impregnate her, then make sure her husband is killed. That person would be disgraced for the rest of his life and kept out of the spotlight for good. The Vatican wouldn’t know how to cleanse itself from the stain of such a scandal. Yet, when David does commits this crime, it is seen as no big deal and he is regarded as one of the holiest most important figures in Judaism and Christianity.

 

[dronald]

**Throughout history **a group of people have held this belief and another group have rejected. Facts are not created by the beliefs of a group of people.

I was not referring to a group before Muhammad. I simply said facts are not created by the beliefs of a group of people. If no documents currently exist from before Muhammad that can show this, it still does not mean the beliefs of a group of people who thought prior Prophets sinned were right.

Not half of my point. You took “throughout history” to mean before Muhammad while that was not what I meant. As I said facts are not created by the beliefs of a group of people.

So then before Muhammad there was only one belief and it’s that the Prophets weren’t perfect.

That’s not what I said.

I don’t know how to interpret this any other way. You said throughout history there were two sets of beliefs, you weren’t referring to before Muhammad, then you said that’s not what you said.​

Just in case you didn’t realize it, God sends His Prophets and Messengers to guide us to the right path, tell us what is right and what is wrong, and inform us about what pleases God and what angers Him, because we are incapable of doing this on our own. When our role model commits the most outrageous atrocities then he can no longer be trusted in any of his other words. How can someone who openly makes the most obvious mistakes that even a fool knows are wrong, very wrong, be trusted in his other words and actions.

Let me show you an example, maybe you’ll understand what we are dealing with here. Suppose the POPE (big disclaimer here, I’m only trying to convey a concept no insult intended) or some high level priest from the Vatican did what the OT claims Prophet David did: have sex with his neighbors wife during her period, impregnate her, then make sure her husband is killed. That person would be disgraced for the rest of his life and kept out of the spotlight for good. The Vatican wouldn’t know how to cleanse itself from the stain of such a scandal. Yet, when David does commits this crime, it is seen as no big deal and he is regarded as one of the holiest most important figures in Judaism and Christianity.

So this is why I believe it’s important to actually look into history instead of believing everything the Qur’an says. The problem is that history of ancient Judaism, the Torah and the Bible conflicts with the one true book of Allah for all people for all time. There comes a point when one must take off the blindfolds and really dive into what history has to say about ancient Religions, especially the two that are important in this discussion; Christianity and Judaism.

Let’s start with what you have to say about the Prophets being as perfect as the next one:

You see, the Jews and the Christians translated their texts independently of each other. They didn’t ask how their translations were going and try to create a conspiracy that would eventually have us using the same words and same stories.

The Jews translated for centuries from what is called the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Christians stuck with the Septuagint. And then when Christians began translating the Greek texts from the Gospels they were also translated independently of each other. Part of the reason for the Great Schism is that there was a massive language barrier, and yet the text in the Bible (though in different languages) remained the same. The Greeks kept their Bible Greek, and to the West we had Jerome’s Latin Vulgate; obviously Latin.

So the Jews, Greeks and Romans had their translations, in their languages, without anyone else’s help; and yet the stories remain the same. Now, originally the oldest Jewish Masoretic text we had was from the 10th Century, but one day about 70 years ago the Dead Sea Scrolls were found; created around 408 BCE to 318 CE. And to every Jewish and Christian’s excitement, they’re legit.

So legitimate in fact, that Christians and Jews now use them to get a better meaning of the original text in the Bible. Over thousands of years there are textual varients (he went up vs he then went up) but the stories are still there, and the text remains the same.

Even more compelling I think for you is that there is nothing that should point to Islam in these scrolls. Not one thing. I think if Islam was true, Allah could have made this a great revelation for Muslims, and yet it goes well in favour of Jews and Christians.

 

[dronald]

On to my next point: Jesus:

Jesus was, well… Jewish. Very Jewish. He would have done all of the Jewish things that Jews do, and we have it documented in the Bible quite well. Every question the Jews asked Jesus to challenge Him was “What does the Law of Moses say?” And Jesus knew the Law of Moses. He didn’t have a special book sent down to Him that we know of, but rather He knew the Torah and Tanakh better than anyone else.

So Jesus would have observed passover, He would have observed the Sabbath (properly), He would have understood and accepted the role of the Priests, even though He was sent to be the Highest Priest Himself. Throughout the Bible we have evidence of Jesus observing ancient Jewish holidays.

On top of that, Jesus read Scripture. You know how the Qur’an says that Allah sent David the Psalms? Well, He would have known the Psalms; and the Psalms don’t match your narrative that David was without sin, but rather they match the Christian and Jewish narrative. Take a look:

Psalm 25:
6 Remember your mercy, O Lord, and your steadfast love,
for they have been from of old.
7 Remember not the sins of my youth or my transgressions;
according to your steadfast love remember me,
for the sake of your goodness, O Lord!
8 Good and upright is the Lord;
therefore he instructs sinners in the way.
9 He leads the humble in what is right,
and teaches the humble his way.
10 All the paths of the Lord are steadfast love and faithfulness,
for those who keep his covenant and his testimonies.
11 For your name’s sake, O Lord,
pardon my guilt, for it is great.
12 Who is the man who fears the Lord?
Him will he instruct in the way that he should choose.
13 His soul shall abide in well-being,
and his offspring shall inherit the land.
14 The friendship** of the Lord is for those who fear him,
and he makes known to them his covenant.
15 My eyes are ever toward the Lord,
for he will pluck my feet out of the net.
16 Turn to me and be gracious to me,
for I am lonely and afflicted.
17 The troubles of my heart are enlarged;
bring me out of my distresses.
18 Consider my affliction and my trouble,
and forgive all my sins.
19 Consider how many are my foes,
and with what violent hatred they hate me.
20 Oh, guard my soul, and deliver me!
Let me not be put to shame, for I take refuge in you.
21 May integrity and uprightness preserve me,
for I wait for you.

Beautiful isn’t it? And are these the Psalms Allah was speaking of in his Qur’an? I suppose Muslims must say this is a corruption as well as the actual story found in Samuel about David and his sin.

But it doesn’t end there; Jesus was quoted these Psalms like crazy, in fact; He quoted the Psalms more than any other book!

Matthew 21:1616 and they said to him, “Do you hear what these are saying?” And Jesus said to them, “Yes; have you never read,
“ ‘Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies
you have prepared praise’?”

Matthew 22:44 “ ‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at my right hand,
until I put your enemies under your feet” ’?

Mark 12:36 David himself, in the Holy Spirit, declared,
“ ‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at my right hand,
until I put your enemies under your feet.” ’

Luke 20:42 For David himself says in the Book of Psalms,
“ ‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at my right hand,
43 until I make your enemies your footstool.” ’

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

John 15:25 But the word that is written in their Law must be fulfilled: ‘They hated me without a cause.’

John 13:18 I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have chosen. But the Scripture will be fulfilled, ‘He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.’

John 10:34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’?

Luke 20:17 But he looked directly at them and said, “What then is this that is written:
“ ‘The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone’?

Matthew 23:39 For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’ ”

So Jesus knew the Psalms. He also knew quite well the Torah, and quoted from many Prophets. In one instance He stands up in front of the synagogue, pulls out Isaiah and starts reading from it; then claims “This is about me.”**

 

[dronald]

I would recommend that you read the book of Hebrews. It really dives deep into the Jewish practice of ancient times and how it relates to Jesus. Here’s a sample:

Hebrews 9 (New Testament by the way)

1 Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly place of holiness. 2 For a tent[a] was prepared, the first section, in which were the lampstand and the table and the bread of the Presence.** It is called the Holy Place. 3 Behind the second curtain was a second section[c] called the Most Holy Place, 4 having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s staff that budded, and the tablets of the covenant. 5 Above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat. Of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

6 These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties, 7 but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. 8 By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing 9 (which is symbolic for the present age).[d] According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, 10 but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.

11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,[e] then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify[f] for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our[g] conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.[h] 16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. 18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. 22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. 25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.**

 

[Jerusha]

thanks for the link to the article. CAF is obviously being attacked with spam from some Islam group. Shame on them.

I used Google translate on one post of that spam attack the other day, and it was about a sale on refrigerators in Egypt. Malicious, but not as bad as you thought.

 

[MartinJordan]

I used Google translate on one post of that spam attack the other day, and it was about a sale on refrigerators in Egypt. Malicious, but not as bad as you thought.

MJ

 

[oldcatholicguy]

Any suggestions for books or sources for a fair analysis of Islam theology, from someone with a Catholic view? I have seen a few books criticizing Islam from a political view, or totally criticizing it from someone who converted from Muslim to Evangelical, then I saw one that glorified Islam. I hope someone like Mitch Pacwa, S. J. or someone similar has p(name removed by moderator)ointed the essentials, the similarities and differences with Catholicism in particular and Christianity in general, minimizing politics. (Not to negate the value of reading a Muslim’s explanation, too. But for a beginner like me it helps to start with what I know, then to what I don’t know.)

en.pisai.it/the-pisai/our-history/

 

[commenter]

en.pisai.it/the-pisai/our-history/

Thanks, I’ll check it out.

 

[peace_at_last]

So this is why I believe it’s important to actually look into history instead of believing everything the Qur’an says. The problem is that history of ancient Judaism, the Torah and the Bible conflicts with the one true book of Allah for all people for all time. There comes a point when one must take off the blindfolds and really dive into what history has to say about ancient Religions, especially the two that are important in this discussion; Christianity and Judaism.

Let’s start with what you have to say about the Prophets being as perfect as the next one:

You see, the Jews and the Christians translated their texts independently of each other. They didn’t ask how their translations were going and try to create a conspiracy that would eventually have us using the same words and same stories.

The Jews translated for centuries from what is called the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Christians stuck with the Septuagint. And then when Christians began translating the Greek texts from the Gospels they were also translated independently of each other. Part of the reason for the Great Schism is that there was a massive language barrier, and yet the text in the Bible (though in different languages) remained the same. The Greeks kept their Bible Greek, and to the West we had Jerome’s Latin Vulgate; obviously Latin.

So the Jews, Greeks and Romans had their translations, in their languages, without anyone else’s help; and yet the stories remain the same. Now, originally the oldest Jewish Masoretic text we had was from the 10th Century, but one day about 70 years ago the Dead Sea Scrolls were found; created around 408 BCE to 318 CE. And to every Jewish and Christian’s excitement, they’re legit.

So legitimate in fact, that Christians and Jews now use them to get a better meaning of the original text in the Bible. Over thousands of years there are textual varients (he went up vs he then went up) but the stories are still there, and the text remains the same.

Even more compelling I think for you is that there is nothing that should point to Islam in these scrolls. Not one thing. I think if Islam was true, Allah could have made this a great revelation for Muslims, and yet it goes well in favour of Jews and Christians.

I see no relation between what I was discussing about the Prophets necessarily being infallible and what you have posted about the translation of the Hebrew texts and the dead sea scrolls. The date the dead sea scrolls were written is also irrelevant to the discussion. As for your claim that the dead sea scrolls are not in favor of Islam, well that is another topic altogether that deserves to be discussed in another thread.

 

[dronald]

I see no relation between what I was discussing about the Prophets necessarily being infallible and what you have posted about the translation of the Hebrew texts and the dead sea scrolls. The date the dead sea scrolls were written is also irrelevant to the discussion. As for your claim that the dead sea scrolls are not in favor of Islam, well that is another topic altogether that deserves to be discussed in another thread.

The Prophets weren’t infallible because history shows this. I assumed you would come back with loads of evidence and scriptural tradition from the time before Jesus and the time between Jesus and Muhammad to support your claim. All of the Prophets including Jesus were Muslim, so I thought you might have some evidence based on thousands of years of tradition.

According to the Qur’an, even the Disciples were Muslims and preached what could only be Islam right? I’m just wondering where your trail of proof is. There must be lots if it is the one true Religion of God.

 

[otjm]

I agree that the idea that Islam will take over the world and Sharia will be become the law of the land is as far fetched as the cold war idea that communism was going to take over the world - actually even more unlikely because they just don’t have the weapons that communist Russia had.

All that the Muslim extremists can do is scare us, they have difficulty taking over their own countries.

They can do it peacefully, simply by the fact that their reproduction rate is beyond stasis, while, for example, many European countries are below stasis. Once a sufficient voting population is in place, they can control the votes.

 

[peace_at_last]

The Prophets weren’t infallible because history shows this. I assumed you would come back with loads of evidence and scriptural tradition from the time before Jesus and the time between Jesus and Muhammad to support your claim. All of the Prophets including Jesus were Muslim, so I thought you might have some evidence based on thousands of years of tradition.

According to the Qur’an, even the Disciples were Muslims and preached what could only be Islam right? I’m just wondering where your trail of proof is. There must be lots if it is the one true Religion of God.

If by ‘history’ you mean the OT then ‘history’ proves nothing because the OT has numerous problems that undermine its reliability. The OT is a book made up of numerous sections authored by different people with many additions and editions throughout hundreds of years. No one knows who exactly wrote what part of it and how much of it is right and how much wrong (historically speaking).

If the pope had committed only a fraction of the crimes attributed to the prophets in the OT, Catholics worldwide would have made sure he would be laid off for good and disgraced because this is what common-sense and reason tells us to do. But when you read the same stuff about the Prophets in the OT who are supposed to be a role model for the people, you shut down your reasons and common-sense and don’t ever question the validity of the narrations in the OT.

Anyway, you can base your allegations on the OT and refute my claims based on the unreliable narrations therein, but, you cannot refute common-sense and reason.

P.S. When quoting the Quran provide a reference.

 

[dronald]

If by ‘history’ you mean the OT then ‘history’ proves nothing because the OT has numerous problems that undermine its reliability. The OT is a book made up of numerous sections authored by different people with many additions and editions throughout hundreds of years. No one knows who exactly wrote what part of it and how much of it is right and how much wrong (historically speaking).

Because God cared for His people from the time of Adam to Abraham to Moses we can trust that the OT is inspired. Given that without it we must believe that God never left us anything until approximately the early 7th Century.

I apologize that I can’t cite at will, I do lots of my responding on my phone so it’s quite a pain. But the Qur’an does say Allah “Gave David the Psalms” and “Gave Jesus the Gospel.” And Moses the Torah. So we should expect some evidence, or some type of chain of proof like we have in Judaism/Christianity. Here’s an example of Allah giving a book that Muhammad believed in:

5:42[They are] avid listeners to falsehood, devourers of [what is] unlawful. So if they come to you, [O Muhammad], judge between them or turn away from them. And if you turn away from them - never will they harm you at all. And if you judge, judge between them with justice. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.

43
But how is it that they come to you for judgement while they have the Torah, in which is the judgement of Allah ? Then they turn away, [even] after that; but those are not [in fact] believers.

So it seems that even in Muhammad’s time Allah thought the Torah was quite alright. Again I bring up the Psalms which we still have and I believe refutes your claim.

Anyway, you can base your allegations on the OT and refute my claims based on the unreliable narrations therein, but, you cannot refute common-sense and reason.

P.S. When quoting the Quran provide a reference.

At least I have something to point to in order to refute you; Muslims have nothing. Not one thing.

As for common sense; the biggest gripe Muslims have with both Christianity and Judaism is that “It just doesn’t make sense that God would do that.” C.S. Lewis puts it perfectly:

“Reality, in fact, is usually something you could not have guessed. That is one of the reasons I believe Christianity. It is a religion you could not have guessed. If it offered us just the kind of universe we had always expected, I should feel we were making it up. But, in fact, it is not the sort of thing anyone would have made up. It has just that queer twist about it that real things have. So let us leave behind all these boys’ philosophies–these over simple answers. The problem is not simple and the answer is not going to be simple either.”

I think personally that if I was going to make a Religion, my Prophets would all be perfect super heroes who can do no wrong. It makes sense in Islam that Jesus wasn’t killed, or Solomon was perfect, or David, etc.

In Christianity, the greatest saviour, God Himself died for us. He was beat, spit on, mocked and killed. God Himself. He did what David and Solomon never could have for they lived in a broken world and fell to its brokeness.

I think your Pope example is a good one. How do we feel about Leo X? He’s quite an embarrassment to many, as well as other Popes. Peter himself denied his Lord 3 times, and yet it’s believed that he was one of the greatest Christians; because you see, we’re all sinners.

So did God let David get away with his sin? Absolutely not. Samuel did condemn him until he was in tears, and God took away his chance to ever see the temple. Solomon got to build the temple but his sin brought Jerusalem into chaos by God’s will. These men were punished! But they were still chosen by God to bring a message even though they were sinners.

Likewise us. We are chosen to spread the Word of God, the sinners that we are. So we relate when we fall, but ultimately we want to live up to who Jesus was. He was perfect.

 

[dronald]

You asked for reference I think for the Disciples quote regarding them being Muslims. If there’s anything I’ve said that I didn’t reference, let me know what else I missed and I’ll post it later:
"’(I, Jesus, have come to you Children of Israel), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear God, and obey me.
“‘It is God who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a way that is straight.’”
When Jesus found unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) God?” Said the disciples: "We are God’s helpers: We believe in God, and do thou bear witness that we are Muslims.
“Our LORD! we believe in what Thou hast revealed, and we follow the Messenger (Jesus); then write us down among those who bear witness.”

—Qur’an, sura 3 (Al-i-Imran), ayat 49-53

O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of God: As said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) God?” Said the disciples, “We are God’s helpers!” then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: but We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed.

—Qur’an, sura 61 (As-Saff), ayat 14[6]

 

[peace_at_last]

Sorry for the delayed response.

Because God cared for His people from the time of Adam to Abraham to Moses we can trust that the OT is inspired. Given that without it we must believe that God never left us anything until approximately the early 7th Century.

Look at it like this: A dude commits adultery with your neighbors wife then has her husband killed. The same dude runs around claiming to be Inspired by God and other dudes who commit more or less similar crimes claim that they too are inspired by God. Would you believe them? I wouldn’t. In real life, you wouldn’t believe them too but somehow you do now. The acclaimed sins and crimes attributed to the Prophets in the OT make no sense at all. That is why Muslims believe the OT has been distorted. As I already pointed out, historically, no one knows who and when exactly wrote which part of the OT and it has been edited and changed numerous times in history at the hands of many people who themselves were not infallible. I can’t in any way call this a book inspired by God.

I apologize that I can’t cite at will, I do lots of my responding on my phone so it’s quite a pain. But the Qur’an does say Allah “Gave David the Psalms” and “Gave Jesus the Gospel.” And Moses the Torah. So we should expect some evidence, or some type of chain of proof like we have in Judaism/Christianity. Here’s an example of Allah giving a book that Muhammad believed in:
5:42[They are] avid listeners to falsehood, devourers of [what is] unlawful. So if they come to you, [O Muhammad], judge between them or turn away from them. And if you turn away from them - never will they harm you at all. And if you judge, judge between them with justice. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.
43 But how is it that they come to you for judgement while they have the Torah, in which is the judgement of Allah ? Then they turn away, [even] after that; but those are not [in fact] believers.
So it seems that even in Muhammad’s time Allah thought the Torah was quite alright. Again I bring up the Psalms which we still have and I believe refutes your claim.
At least I have something to point to in order to refute you; Muslims have nothing. Not one thing.

You are not refuting anything. Muslims claim the OT has been distorted and historically there is enough evidence to support this claim (all the changes and editions done by God knows who are enough to show this). Furthermore, many sections are merely historical accounts again penned down by fallible people and not inspirations from God.
What we mean by distortion is that there are wrong things in it too. We don’t believe it is all wrong. The verses in the Quran that you cited are references to undistorted sections.

As for common sense; the biggest gripe Muslims have with both Christianity and Judaism is that “It just doesn’t make sense that God would do that.” C.S. Lewis puts it perfectly:

“Reality, in fact, is usually something you could not have guessed. That is one of the reasons I believe Christianity. It is a religion you could not have guessed. If it offered us just the kind of universe we had always expected, I should feel we were making it up. But, in fact, it is not the sort of thing anyone would have made up. It has just that queer twist about it that real things have. So let us leave behind all these boys’ philosophies–these over simple answers. The problem is not simple and the answer is not going to be simple either.”
I think personally that if I was going to make a Religion, my Prophets would all be perfect super heroes who can do no wrong. It makes sense in Islam that Jesus wasn’t killed, or Solomon was perfect, or David, etc.

What you cite from C.S. Lewis has nothing to do with believing in Christianity or any other religion. Nearly nothing in this world is predictable and neither were the events in Islam. Lewis’ argument makes no sense: I am a Christian because it is a religion you could not have guessed. I can use the exact same argument to prove why I am a Muslim but the argument is flawed on many levels and useless.
I have no idea why you think it would make sense in Islam for Jesus to not be killed, for Prophet Muhammad and his twelve God appointed successors (except the last one) were all killed themselves. So nothing superheroish here.
By the way, no one accepts anything unless it makes sense. What other tool has God given us to discern between right and wrong except common-sense and reason? 22 = what? 5? Does that make sense? It makes sense to mock the person who claims 22 =5 and it makes sense to praise the person who claims 2*2=4. You are mocking Islam for accepting what makes sense and are praising non-Muslims for accepting what doesn’t make sense. This behavior doesn’t make sense to me. My reason and intellect find it unacceptable.

In Christianity, the greatest saviour, God Himself died for us. He was beat, spit on, mocked and killed. God Himself. He did what David and Solomon never could have for they lived in a broken world and fell to its brokeness.

A fine example of what I mean by things that don’t make sense (discussing this will takes us way off-topic so I’ll leave it at that).

I think your Pope example is a good one. How do we feel about Leo X? He’s quite an embarrassment to many, as well as other Popes. Peter himself denied his Lord 3 times, and yet it’s believed that he was one of the greatest Christians; because you see, we’re all sinners.

Pope Leo is considered an embarrassment but someone who commits adultery and Murder isn’t? Doesn’t make sense to me.

 

[peace_at_last]

So did God let David get away with his sin? Absolutely not. Samuel did condemn him until he was in tears, and God took away his chance to ever see the temple. Solomon got to build the temple but his sin brought Jerusalem into chaos by God’s will. These men were punished! But they were still chosen by God to bring a message even though they were sinners.

We are not discussing someone getting away with their sins or not. You don’t follow a guide with a message who cannot guide you but rather leads you astray. God will not send a Prophet who will lead people astray and deceive them. It defeats the purpose. According to your beliefs David, a guide that was sent by God with a message to guide people to righteousness, led people astray. He led his neighbors wife astray and deceived her to commit adultery and he deceived others to make sure her husband got killed. There is no guarantee that a someone like this will not lead other people astray elsewhere instead of guiding them. Nothing that this person says can be believed or trusted. Is this how God guides his servants? My reason prevents me from accepting such a Prophet and such a God: either the God and Prophet are false or the narrations about them.

You asked for reference I think for the Disciples quote regarding them being Muslims. If there’s anything I’ve said that I didn’t reference, let me know what else I missed and I’ll post it later:
"’(I, Jesus, have come to you Children of Israel), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear God, and obey me.
“‘It is God who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a way that is straight.’”
When Jesus found unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) God?” Said the disciples: "We are God’s helpers: We believe in God, and do thou bear witness that we are Muslims.
“Our LORD! we believe in what Thou hast revealed, and we follow the Messenger (Jesus); then write us down among those who bear witness.”

—Qur’an, sura 3 (Al-i-Imran), ayat 49-53

O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of God: As said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) God?” Said the disciples, “We are God’s helpers!” then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: but We gave power to those who believed, against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed.

—Qur’an, sura 61 (As-Saff), ayat 14[6]

‘Muslim’ in Arabic refers to someone who submits (to Gods will). That is why Muslims are called ‘Muslims’. Technically speaking, we all submit to Gods will. The original Arabic text quotes the Disciples saying we are ‘muslims’ meaning we ‘submit to God’. The translator made a sloppy translation and translated it to ‘Muslim’. Other translations show the correct meaning:
corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=3&verse=52