Predictions of Muhammad (pbuh) in the Bible

[De_Maria]

There is an amazing prophecy in the Qur’an concerning the eventual fate of Abu Lahab.

This man Abu Lahab, an uncle of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), used to hate Islam so much that he would go after the Prophet wherever he goes to humiliate him. If he saw the Prophet talking to strangers, he used to wait till he finishes and then ask them: what did Mohammed tell you? If he said it’s white then it’s in reality black and if he said it’s night then it’s day. He meant to falsify all what the Prophet says and to make people suspicious about it. And 10 years before the death of Abu Lahab, a sura was inspired to the Prophet, named “Al-Masad”.

"Perish the two hands of Abu Lahab and perish he! His wealth and his children will not benefit him! He will be burnt in a Fire of blazing flames!" [Qur’an, 111:1-3]

This sura tells that Abu Lahab will go to Hell. In other words, it says that Abu Lahab will not convert to Islam.

During 10 years, Abu Lahab could have said: “Mohammed is saying that I will not become a Muslim and that I will go to the Hell fire, but I’m telling you now that I want to convert to Islam and become a Muslim. What do you think about Mohammed now? Is he saying the truth or no? Does his inspiration come from God?”.

But Abu Lahab did not do that at all although he was disobeying the Prophet in all matters, but not in this one. In other words, it was as if the Prophet (pbuh) was giving Abu Lahab a chance to prove him wrong! But he did not do that and during 10 whole years, he did not convert to Islam and did not even pretend to be a Muslim!!

Throughout 10 years, he had the chance to destroy Islam in 1 minute! But this did not happen because those are not the words of Mohammed (pbuh) but the words of God who knows what’s hidden and knows that Abu Lahab will not become a Muslim.

How can the Prophet (pbuh) know that Abu Lahab will prove what is said in that Sura if this was not inspiration from Allah? How can he be sure throughout 10 whole years that what he has (the Qur’an) is true if he did not know that it’s inspiration from Allah??

For a person to take such a risky challenge, this has only one meaning: that this prophecy regarding Abu Lahab remaining a disbeliever till his death 10 years later, can only come from God.

All I can say is, you are easily impressed.

 

[Tah_Dah_Man]

I saw a video years ago, of an Islamic preacher who illustrated the condemning Islamic view of those who believe God has a Son.
They believe that such an idea is an insult to God (Allah). He even went so far as to say that it is an insulting “animalistic” sexual thing to suggest that God had a Son.
And, when Christians find this out, it is so unbelievable.
Because, you know, that we believe that it was a miracle, that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, and not of an “animalistic” sexual nature.
So, how many Muslims still believe that Christians believe that?
This is going to take a lot of patience and Bible doctrine to lay it all out plainly before Muslims.
I hope that this makes an impression, to say the least.

And, it should be noted that the Mormons believe (since 1827) that God the Father is a man, who came down to have sex with Mary for the conception of Jesus.
The Mormon Church is a cult, indeed.
Maybe, they are partly to blame.

 

[inJESUS]

The Mormon Church is a cult, indeed.
Maybe, they are partly to blame.

the one to blame is Muhammad because it was his misunderstanding that makes Muslim think in this way…he tried to refute what he did not understand in the first place and still Muslims try to refute the title by saying exactly the same thing.

 

[jblake]

hamba2han;:

There is an amazing prophecy in the Qur’an concerning the eventual fate of Abu Lahab.

That is one of the classic examples of self-fulfilling prophecy.

How can the Prophet (pbuh) know that Abu Lahab will prove what is said in that Sura if this was not inspiration from Allah?

Remedial Psychology 099 covers that phenomena in considerable detail.

For a person to take such a risky challenge, this has only one meaning: that this prophecy regarding Abu Lahab remaining a disbeliever till his death 10 years later, can only come from God.

What was done by Mohammad was to force the individual to never be able to convert to Islam. Which is why it was a self-fulfilling prophecy, and utterly meaningless. (Actually, it can be used as an object lesson as to why islam is a false religion.)

xan

jonathon

 

[CTA1967]

Now about Jesus. He had promised the 12 disciples the keys to the 12 thrones of heavens. One of those disciples (Judas Ascrutie) reported him to the enemies and got him arrested. So where were the 12 thrones gone. The promise became untrue.

Um, Acts 1:15-26.

 

[hamba2han]

What was done by Mohammad was to force the individual to never be able to convert to Islam. Which is why it was a self-fulfilling prophecy, and utterly meaningless.

All that this individual had to do in order to disprove the truth of the Qur’an and thereby destroy Islam was to publicly declare his Shahada.

Even though it was entirely within his power to single-handedly destroy the faith taught by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the 10 years after the Sura was revealed till the day he died, he never did it.

It is also important to note that this Sura was revealed in the early days of Islam while the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was still living in Makkah before his migration to Madinah.

Abu Lahab however remained in Makkah and there was nothing whatsoever that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or any of the early Muslims could have done, even if they had wanted to, to prevent him from publicly declaring his Shahada.

There is therefore absolutely nothing self-fulfilling about this particular prophecy of the Qur’an.

 

[De_Maria]

All that this individual had to do in order to disprove the truth of the Qur’an and thereby destroy Islam was to publicly declare his Shahada.

And be killed.

Apostasy in Islam (Arabic: ارتداد, irtidād or ridda) is commonly defined as the rejection of Islam in word or deed by a person who has been a Muslim. All five major schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that a sane male apostate must be executed.[1]

Even though it was entirely within his power to single-handedly destroy the faith taught by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the 10 years after the Sura was revealed till the day he died, he never did it.

Nor would you or anyone else having the threat of death over their head.

It is also important to note that this Sura was revealed in the early days of Islam while the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was still living in Makkah before his migration to Madinah.

Abu Lahab however remained in Makkah and there was nothing whatsoever that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or any of the early Muslims could have done, even if they had wanted to, to prevent him from publicly declaring his Shahada.

But they could certainly cut his head afterwards.

There is therefore absolutely nothing self-fulfilling about this particular prophecy of the Qur’an.

Lol!!!

Perhaps, but your message does not take the real world of Islam into account.

"Why are ye two parties about the hypocrites, when God hath overturned them for what they earned? Do ye wish to guide those whom God hath led astray? Whoso God hath led astray ye shall not surely find for him a path. They would fain that ye misbelieve as they misbelieve, that ye might be alike; take ye not patrons from among them until they too fight in God’s way; but if they turn their backs, then seize them wheresoever ye and them, and take from them neither patron nor help" (IV. 90, 91). “O ye who believe! Whoso is turned away from his religion-God will bring (instead) a people whom He loves and who love Him, lowly to. believers, lofty to unbelievers, strenuous in the way of God, fearing not the blame of him who blames” (V.59).

It will be sufficient to quote what the standard commentary of Baidhawi says on the first passage: "Whosoever turns back from his belief (irtada), openly or secretly, take him and kill him wheresoever ye find him, like any other infidel.

1 Mufradat-gharib-ul-Quran-lil Sheikh-ar-Raghib, p.191.

answering-islam.org/Books/Zwemer/Apostasy/chap2.htm

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[hamba2han]

And be killed.

Apostasy in Islam (Arabic: ارتداد, irtidād or ridda) is commonly defined as the rejection of Islam in word or deed by a person who has been a Muslim. All five major schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that a sane male apostate must be executed.[1]

The detractors of Islam have a peculiar habit of forgetting what they constantly remind others of i.e. that the ruling on apostasy was made only later on in Madinah when the early Muslims had greatly grown in numbers and become strong.

This means that at the time the Sura was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) when he was still living in Makkah, the ruling on apostasy did not exist yet and therefore it did not apply to Abu Lahab.

In any case, the early Muslims in Makkah were still very few in numbers and extremely weak and they were in no position at all to do anything untoward to a relatively powerful figure like Abu Lahab.

 

[CTA1967]

The detractors of Islam have a peculiar habit of forgetting what they constantly remind others of i.e. that the ruling on apostasy was made only later on in Madinah when the early Muslims had greatly grown in numbers and become strong.

This means that at the time the Sura was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) when he was still living in Makkah, the ruling on apostasy did not exist yet and therefore it did not apply to Abu Lahab.

In any case, the early Muslims in Makkah were still very few in numbers and extremely weak and they were in no position at all to do anything untoward to a relatively powerful figure like Abu Lahab.

al-islam.org/restatement/10.htm - Um, the authors of this Muslim website seem to disagree with your statement that “early Muslims in Makkah” were “extremely weak”. They seemed pretty open to using violence as an answer even in their early days:

There were no external fights in Makkah before the Migration of the Prophet to Medina but there were many fights in the streets and open spaces of the city. It was in these “battlefields” that Ali, the young lion, acquired all his martial skills. These “battles” in Makkah were a “dress rehearsal” of the role he was destined to play a few years later in Medina in the armed struggle of Islam and paganism. It was also in these early days, before the Migration of the Prophet to Medina, that Ali became “the first line of the defense of Islam.” In fact, he also became, at the same time, the second line and the last line of the defense of Islam. This he and he alone, was to remain for the rest of his life.

 

[De_Maria]

The detractors of Islam have a peculiar habit of forgetting what they constantly remind others of i.e. that the ruling on apostasy was made only later on in Madinah when the early Muslims had greatly grown in numbers and become strong.

Why would the detractors of Islam have any interest in minimizing the Islamic rule on apostasy? You must mean that Muslims forget to emphasize that theory.

This means that at the time the Sura was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) when he was still living in Makkah, the ruling on apostasy did not exist yet and therefore it did not apply to Abu Lahab.

Did Mohammed really have to wait for a ruling to kill anyone?

In any case, the early Muslims in Makkah were still very few in numbers and extremely weak and they were in no position at all to do anything untoward to a relatively powerful figure like Abu Lahab.

Is this story accurate?

*This point is proven by many incidences in the life of Mohammed. He often lied and instructed his followers to do the same. He rationalized that the prospect of success in missions to extend Islam’s influence overrode Allah’s initial prohibitions against lying. A good example of sanctioned lying is the account of the assassination of Kaab Ibn al-Ashrf, a member of the Jewish tribe, Banu al-Nudair. It had been reported that Kaab had shown support for the Quraishites in their battle against Mohammed. This was compounded by another report that infuriated Mohammed. It was alleged that Kaab had recited amorous poetry to Muslim women. Mohammed asked for volunteers to rid him of Kaab Ibn al-Ashraf. As Mohammed put it, Kaab had “Harmed Allah and His Apostle.” **At that time Kaab Ibn al-Ashraf, and his tribe were strong, so it was not easy for a stranger to infiltrate and execute the task. *A Muslim man by the name of Ibn Muslima, volunteered for the murderous project on the condition that Mohammed would allow him to lie. With Mohammed’s consent, Ibn Muslima, went to Kaab and told him fabricated stories that reflected discontent about Mohammed’s leadership. When he had gained Kaab’s trust he lured him away from his house one night and murdered him in a remote area under the cover of darkness.
islamreview.com/articles/lying.shtml

If so, then why would Mohammed be unable to touch Lahab with the same methods?

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[planten]

Are there any?

Bible OT and NT are full of prophecies about Muhammad, not less than 30 or forty. That is the truth.

 

[De_Maria]

Bible OT and NT are full of prophecies about Muhammad, not less than 30 or forty. That is the truth.

No it isn’t. There are no prophecies of Mohammed. But there are prophecies of false prophets which Mohammed fits the description.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[Booklover]

No it isn’t. There are no prophecies of Mohammed. But there are prophecies of false prophets which Mohammed fits the description.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Vickie

 

[hamba2han]

If so, then why would Mohammed be unable to touch Lahab with the same methods?

There is really very little point in speculating about their intentions.

The FACT of the matter is that Abu Lahab died as a disbeliever and for 10 whole years did nothing to disprove the truth of the Sura about him and thereby destroy the faith taught by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), even though he was in a unique position to easily do so.

 

[inJESUS]

There is really very little point in speculating about their intentions.

The FACT of the matter is that Abu Lahab died as a disbeliever and for 10 whole years did nothing to disprove the truth of the Sura about him and thereby destroy the faith taught by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), even though he was in a unique position to easily do so.

you still have not proved to us that Abu Lahab is in hell in order for us to SEE a prophecy coming true.

If we cannot see the fulfillment, then it is not called a prophecy.

And according to your logic, then Jews could have easily proved that Jesus is not the Messiah by simply not crucifying Him, hence all his prophecies about His death would have proved Him a false “prophet”…see, things do not happen like this in real life…Jews cared less about whether they fulfilled what Jesus said or not cuz to them he is simply no Messiah…as DeMaria said, you are easily impressed.

 

[CTA1967]

There is really very little point in speculating about their intentions.

The FACT of the matter is that Abu Lahab died as a disbeliever and for 10 whole years did nothing to disprove the truth of the Sura about him and thereby destroy the faith taught by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), even though he was in a unique position to easily do so.

Did you completely ignore posts 49 and 50?

 

[hamba2han]

Did you completely ignore posts 49 and 50?

Like I mentioned, the FACT of the matter is that even though Abu Lahab had 10 whole years in which to merely declare his Shahada publicly in Makkah and thereby single-handedly destroy the veracity of the Qur’an, he did not.

Since none of the early Muslims, who had all migrated to Madinah, thought that his life was worth killing throughout this 10-year period from the time the Sura was revealed until his death, then I would think that all other considerations are pretty much besides the point.

 

[inJESUS]

Hamba2han,

you are repeating the same words, and we are asking different questions.

1- Can you prove to us Abu Lahab is in hell? if you cannot, then case closed.

2- your reasoning can be applied to any prophet. Jews could have proved Jesus is a false Messiah by not fulfilling His predictions. Judas could have proven Him a false Messiah by not handing Him over and so on…

 

[CTA1967]

Like I mentioned, the FACT of the matter is that even though Abu Lahab had 10 whole years in which to merely declare his Shahada publicly in Makkah and thereby single-handedly destroy the veracity of the Qur’an, he did not.

Since none of the early Muslims, who had all migrated to Madinah, thought that his life was worth killing throughout this 10-year period from the time the Sura was revealed until his death, then I would think that all other considerations are pretty much besides the point.

How at all does declaring your “facts” help your argument? You still haven’t effectively refuted the “facts” that we brought up in posts 49 and 50 which show that Islam forceful even when it first began. From what I’ve seen, all you do is shove aside our arguments with circular “facts”.

 

[jblake]

There is therefore absolutely nothing self-fulfilling about this particular prophecy of the Qur’an.

a) The Q’ran was written after Mohammad’s alleged death. (Alleged, because there is conclusive proof that Mohammad never existed. )

b) People live by what is expected of them. The structure of that Sura prohibited him from converting, which is why it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. That is also why it is an object lesson in why Islam is a false religion. The story contradicts one of the major tenants of Islam;

c) Take a look at the different redactions of the Q’ran, and how that Sura was changed;

xan

jonathon