Saint Paul and Islam

[paarsurrey]

I must also say that there is something that bothers me about the claim that because Paul converted he is disqualified as a teacher of the faith. .

Hi

There is no problem with conversion. The problem is with his as posing successorship of Jesus unauthorised. Jesus never mentioned expressly or hinted about Paul’s successorship or conversion before the event of Crucifixion not to speak of later. Jesus was alive and very much there on his way to India alongwith Mary.

The next choice would have been James, Jesus’ brother. Paul never was even trained by Jesus.

Paul used diplomacy to use Jesus’ name for propogating his own religious philosophy, in my opinion.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

 

[Angelos]

Hi

There is no problem with conversion. The problem is with his as posing successorship of Jesus unauthorised. Jesus never mentioned expressly or hinted about Paul’s successorship or conversion before the event of Crucifixion not to speak of later. Jesus was alive and very much there on his way to India alongwith Mary.

The next choice would have been James, Jesus’ brother. Paul never was even trained by Jesus.

Paul used diplomacy to use Jesus’ name for propogating his own religious philosophy, in my opinion.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

Paul’s conversion is authorised by Jesus and by His other apostles/disciples/followers, which is apparent in the Acts of the Apostles. If Paul had really wanted to replace Jesus’ message with his own, he could have more easily declared himself one of the 12 apostles by writing a new Gospel.

I would love to remind you that Omar’s life story has remarkable similarities to Paul’s. He is said to have been suddenly converted - through a more dramatic decision - and turned into one of the closest people to Mohammad. After Mohammad’s death, he made his way unto the throne as the second Khalif to reign the longest of all. He somehow did not let Muslims copy the Koran for ten years. I personally believe that Omar concocted a story of conversion in order to change Mohammad’s message with his own. Read the following important facts:

1) Khalif Omar was the* first *man that carried Islamic conquests out of Saudi Arabia, which turned Islam into a universal religion that had been primarily designed as a religion confined to Arabs in Mohammad’s original message.

2) The Koran version you Muslims read today is traditionally dated back to the so-called original copy preserved by one of Mohammad’s wives. Interestingly, that woman was Omar’s daughter!

3) After Omar’s reign, the clashes between Muslim groups got wilder and resulted in the next Khalif’s murder by the opposing party. This most likely had a lot to do with Omar’s tampering with the Koran and basic Islamic tenets related to succession.

This is why many Muslims still wonder how one of Mohammad’s feverish foes could be his second successor when there were many candidates closer to Mohammad for the same position.

Peace,
Angelos N. B.

 

[Valke2]

Hi

It is very easy to verify. There are no two Qurans in the world with two different texts.

Even if all written Qurans are, Godforbid, destroyed or burnt, there are thousands of persons in different regions of the world who have learnt it by heart; it would be immediately written down from memory with no change in the text.

Visit any mosque near your home, please, take along a copy of ArabicQuran with you, ask them for a Hafiz or Qari , and then ask him to recite it, and verify it with the one with you. It would be ditto the same.

Thanks

THere are no two Torah scrolls in the world with two different texts.

From wikipedia: Manuscript Torah scrolls are still used, and still scribed, for ritual purposes (i.e. religious services); this is called a Sefer Torah (“Book [of] Torah”). They are written using a painstakingly careful methodology by highly qualified scribes. This has resulted in modern copies of the text that are unchanged from millennia old copies. The reason for such care is it is believed that every word, or marking, has divine meaning, and that not one part may be inadvertently changed lest it lead to error. The text of the Torah can also be found in books, which are mass-printed in the usual way for individual use, often containing both the Hebrew text and a translation in the language of publication. For more details on production of ritual scrolls, see the article Sefer Torah.

 

[paarsurrey]

THere are no two Torah scrolls in the world with two different texts.

From wikipedia: Manuscript Torah scrolls are still used, and still scribed, for ritual purposes (i.e. religious services); this is called a Sefer Torah (“Book [of] Torah”). They are written using a painstakingly careful methodology by highly qualified scribes. This has resulted in modern copies of the text that are unchanged from millennia old copies. The reason for such care is it is believed that every word, or marking, has divine meaning, and that not one part may be inadvertently changed lest it lead to error. The text of the Torah can also be found in books, which are mass-printed in the usual way for individual use, often containing both the Hebrew text and a translation in the language of publication. For more details on production of ritual scrolls, see the article Sefer Torah.

Hi

Thanks for the information. I am reading it from wikipedea.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Valke2; 3407935:

There are no two Torah scrolls in the world with two different texts.

From wikipedia: Manuscript Torah scrolls are still used, and still scribed, for ritual purposes (i.e. religious services); this is called a Sefer Torah (“Book [of] Torah”). They are written using a painstakingly careful methodology by highly qualified scribes. This has resulted in modern copies of the text that are unchanged from millennia old copies. The reason for such care is it is believed that every word, or marking, has divine meaning, and that not one part may be inadvertently changed lest it lead to error. The text of the Torah can also be found in books, which are mass-printed in the usual way for individual use, often containing both the Hebrew text and a translation in the language of publication. For more details on production of ritual scrolls, see the article Sefer Torah.

Hi

I have just finished reading the write up on Sefer Torah from wikipedia.

We Ahmadi Muslim have the highest regards for all the Revealed Books from GodAllahYHWH in any part of the world, any religion, race and colour. We understand though from Quran that Books of all other Religions have been corrupted at least from the point of view of our standards of protection and security, again mentioned in Quran, as to the Words of Text and also for the Meanings Part, both being essential to impart guidance to the humanity in the world, in our opinion.

There is a Chapter on as to how and what manner Quran descended from GodAllahYHWH on the heart of Muhammad , bit by bit, it was memorized by heart by Muhammad and also by his disciples immediately and repeated a portion of it daily which process continues till this times by millions of Muslims daily. Under an elaborate system it was committed to writing also by disciples of Muhammad as instructed by him. Under these two different systems Quran has reached us and it would continue till end of the world.

For a good understanding I would like you to read it, and then we would discuss it if you like to discuss. It won’t be a contentious debate in any case.

Others could also join in, if they like, mentioning as to how their ReligiousBook has been protected and secure.

It is a matter of great satisfaction for me that the RevealedReligions have books from GodAllahYHWH for guidance while many people around Antitheists/Agnostics don’t have any to guide them, there might be many people among them who are good human beings in secular matters, I don’t deny and I love and respect them, but in matters spiritual they lack everything.

Kindly read the relevant chapter in the book:
alislam.org/library/books/Introduction-Study-Holy-Quran.pdf

Thanks and regards

 

[Lapell]

THere are no two Torah scrolls in the world with two different texts.

From wikipedia: Manuscript Torah scrolls are still used, and still scribed, for ritual purposes (i.e. religious services); this is called a Sefer Torah (“Book [of] Torah”). They are written using a painstakingly careful methodology by highly qualified scribes. This has resulted in modern copies of the text that are unchanged from millennia old copies. The reason for such care is it is believed that every word, or marking, has divine meaning, and that not one part may be inadvertently changed lest it lead to error. The text of the Torah can also be found in books, which are mass-printed in the usual way for individual use, often containing both the Hebrew text and a translation in the language of publication. For more details on production of ritual scrolls, see the article Sefer Torah.

After this information one can wonder how Muhammad could have the information that the sacred books were corrupt at one point.
Also, the serious warning in the Book of Revelation about not removing from nor adding to the text should be enough for the copiers not to attempt to risk losing their eternal life…

 

[Lapell]

Such a claim by Muhammad (about the other sacred books being “corrupt” at one point) is one of the kind that should have been double-cheched scrupulously. Especially since he claimed to have been announced in the Bible, the supposedly corrupted Bible!

 

[Lapell]

Hi

There is no problem with conversion. The problem is with his as posing successorship of Jesus unauthorised. Jesus never mentioned expressly or hinted about Paul’s successorship or conversion before the event of Crucifixion not to speak of later. Jesus was alive and very much there on his way to India alongwith Mary.

The next choice would have been James, Jesus’ brother. Paul never was even trained by Jesus.

Paul used diplomacy to use Jesus’ name for propogating his own religious philosophy, in my opinion.

I love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

What “successorship” are you talking about? Paul didn’t replace Peter as the leader among the Apostles!

 

[planten]

Angelos:I would love to remind you that Omar’s life story has remarkable similarities to Paul’s. He is said to have been suddenly converted - through a more dramatic decision - and turned into one of the closest people to Mohammad. After Mohammad’s death, he made his way unto the throne as the second Khalif to reign the longest of all. He somehow did not let Muslims copy the Koran for ten years. I personally believe that Omar concocted a story of conversion in order to change Mohammad’s message with his own. Read the following important facts:

That is a good example of sudden conversion of paul and umar. But there is a lot of difference. Umar converted during the lifetime of the prophet. He was going to kill the prophet but was informed of the conversion of his sister.
So he went to her home and beat up the sister and brother in law. Then sis ter spoke out in favor of Islam and told Umar that he could do what he liked. They will not leave Islam.

On that Umar asked about what they were reading. When part of Quran was recited to him, he understood the message and went to thehouse where the prophet and his friends were gathered secretly. He knocked on the door. The Muslims were ready to face him in case he misbehaved. (I need not make it too long.) When the prophet asked him, “Umar how and why have you come?” He immediately replied that he was convinced andhad come to join the fold of the believers.

That incident of Umar is totally different to that of obscure incident of a flash on the road to damascus for paul. For Umar prophet was alive and accepted him. For paul there was nobody. Umar suffered all the hardships of persecution and difficulties for many years with the prophet. Did paul even see Jesus for one day.

Then Umar followed the teachings of the prophet and the Quran. Paul did not have Jesus and did not haveany written book with him. Besides his teachings are 180 degree opposite to what Jesus had been teaching. Good-Bye to paul.
1) Khalif Omar was the* first *man that carried Islamic conquests out of Saudi Arabia, which turned Islam into a universal religion that had been primarily designed as a religion confined to Arabs in Mohammad’s original message.

2) The Koran version you Muslims read today is traditionally dated back to the so-called original copy preserved by one of Mohammad’s wives. Interestingly, that woman was Omar’s daughter!

3) After Omar’s reign, the clashes between Muslim groups got wilder and resulted in the next Khalif’s murder by the opposing party. This most likely had a lot to do with Omar’s tampering with the Koran and basic Islamic tenets related to succession.

This is why many Muslims still wonder how one of Mohammad’s feverish foes could be his second successor when there were many candidates closer to Mohammad for the same position.

Peace,
Angelos N. B.

 

[Lapell]

What seems to be largely unknown is that Paul was in full communion with the Apostles. He says so himself when he tells about his meeting with the Apostles in Jerusalem…

 

[Lapell]

That incident of Umar is totally different to that of obscure incident of a flash on the road to damascus for paul. For Umar prophet was alive and accepted him. For paul there was nobody…] Did paul even see Jesus for one day…]Paul did not have Jesus and did not haveany written book with him. Besides his teachings are 180 degree opposite to what Jesus had been teaching. Good-Bye to paul.

You don’t know the details of the meeting between Paul and the Apostles, so you don’t know that Paul didn’t adjust himself to the whole of the message of the Gospel preached by the Apostles! After all, he used to be an Orthodox Jew, a Pharisee, so don’t think it was an automatic given for him to accept that non-Jews would be part of the Church!

 

[planten]

You don’t know the details of the meeting between Paul and the Apostles, so you don’t know that Paul didn’t adjust himself to the whole of the message of the Gospel preached by the Apostles! After all, he used to be an Orthodox Jew, a Pharisee, so don’t think it was an automatic given for him to accept that non-Jews would be part of the Church!

I do not know about any meeting of paul with apostles. I had read something which paul said himself “I did not go to Jeroshlem. I went to Arabia and damascus.” His later ramblings are well known in the direction away from Jeroshlem to the west side.
The way he was beheaded in the end is also a sure proof that a false prophet will be killed Deut 18:20 ].

I cannot understand why we are so much following after paul when we have Jesus. And paul never mentioned the mother Mary. Also Jesus never mentioned paul. The four gospels never mentioned paul too.

The all important news about the conversion of Paul was not foretold by Jesus at all. Jesus never appeared to any disciple to inform them of the conversion of Paul. Why was that? Jesus should have appeared to the disciples to inform them. There are so many complications in this whole matter.

I am not interested in this matter. The christians can believe what they like. But Muslims cannot go near Paul. How the Catholics can deal with Paul when Paul never visited mother Mary who was the most respected person after Jesus. Thanks any way.Please keep convincing the Muslims in this matter of Paul and Islam. There is no paul in Islam.

 

[Angelos]

There is a Chapter on as to how and what manner Quran descended from GodAllahYHWH on the heart of Muhammad , bit by bit, it was memorized by heart by Muhammad and also by his disciples immediately and repeated a portion of it daily which process continues till this times by millions of Muslims daily. Under an elaborate system it was committed to writing also by disciples of Muhammad as instructed by him. Under these two different systems Quran has reached us and it would continue till end of the world.

For a good understanding I would like you to read it, and then we would discuss it if you like to discuss. It won’t be a contentious debate in any case.

Thanks and regards

Dear Ahmadi,

Repeating the same allegations for a hudred times with no evidence will lead us nowhere at this point of our discussion. I hope you perfectly know that it is absolutely impossible today to reach the primary - original - version of the Koran today since the compilation of the verses and chapters occurred after Mohammad’s death and through a painful process casting doubts over the Islamic Bible.

I would ask you to show me the first-hand version of the Koran, which is reported to have been written at different times on whatever was found under different circumstances - animal skins, leaves, stones, parchment.

Before that challenging task, I would ask you to grant me access to the first Koran in the form of a book, which is said to have been present at the first Khalif’s period. If you fail to accomplish any of these, please let me compare the Koran version in Othman’s period to the one in Omar’s reign.

I know many experts who believe and claim that the current Koran was canonized not before the 8th century. If u want, I shall copy and paste those theories under the same thread.

( FYI, I personally believe that it was impossible to memorise the Koran verses at that time since those reciters had no written material to be used as a checklist after Mohammad, and because it would require a miracle to recite all those verses accurately - especially, narratives that differed in order and minor details while the supposed revelation kept adding to them new data.)

Peace,
Angelos N. B.

 

[Angelos]

I do not know about any meeting of paul with apostles. I had read something which paul said himself “I did not go to Jeroshlem. I went to Arabia and damascus.” His later ramblings are well known in the direction away from Jeroshlem to the west side.
The way he was beheaded in the end is also a sure proof that a false prophet will be killed Deut 18:20 ].

I suggest you read the Acts of the Apostles before you make further comments about Paul and his relation with the other apostles/disciples. You mark Paul as a false prophet on the basis of his martyrdom? LOL What will you call all Muslims persecuted and murdered by Arabic idolaters then? What was John the Baptist (Yahya), a mighty prophet that was beheaded in the end, according to your beloved Koran? All the prophets sent by Allah to Jews and murdered by them according to the info in the Koran were false prophets then?
planten;3411165:

I cannot understand why we are so much following after paul when we have Jesus. And paul never mentioned the mother Mary. Also Jesus never mentioned paul. The four gospels never mentioned paul too.

The all important news about the conversion of Paul was not foretold by Jesus at all. Jesus never appeared to any disciple to inform them of the conversion of Paul. Why was that? Jesus should have appeared to the disciples to inform them. There are so many complications in this whole matter.

I am sure your aversion to Paul would not change in either case. The Gospels focus on Jesus, not His apostles. More, the first reference by Peter the apostle to a Psalm predicting Jesus’ resurrection occurs in the Acts of the Apostles, not any of the Gospels. You must study Christianity better in order to learn you must avoid hasty generalizations.

I am not interested in this matter. The christians can believe what they like. But Muslims cannot go near Paul. How the Catholics can deal with Paul when Paul never visited mother Mary who was the most respected person after Jesus. Thanks any way. Please keep convincing the Muslims in this matter of Paul and Islam. There is no paul in Islam.

I wonder why the Koran never mentions Khadijah, Mohammad’s first wife, one of the earliest Muslims, and the so-called mother of Muslims. The same can be said about Mohammad’s mother Amina. Why does not the current Koran say anything about those women so many Muslims still venerate? Above all, where is Hagar, Ishmael’s mother, in the Koran, being such a prominent female figure supporting the Islamic assertions about Abraham’s supposed settlement in Mecca and the construction of the Cube?

Peace,

Angelos N. B.

 

[Angelos]

That is a good example of sudden conversion of paul and umar. But there is a lot of difference. Umar converted during the lifetime of the prophet. He was going to kill the prophet but was informed of the conversion of his sister.
So he went to her home and beat up the sister and brother in law. Then sis ter spoke out in favor of Islam and told Umar that he could do what he liked. They will not leave Islam.

That incident of Umar is totally different to that of obscure incident of a flash on the road to damascus for paul. For Umar prophet was alive and accepted him. For paul there was nobody. Umar suffered all the hardships of persecution and difficulties for many years with the prophet. Did paul even see Jesus for one day.

What do you mean by “for Paul there was nobody”? Christ’s Church was present to accept or refuse new followers wishing to join the Christian community. If you read the Acts of the Apostles, you will find out that Paul saw Jesus on many occasions. The only thing you fail to understand is that who appeared to Paul on the way to Damascus was the risen Jesus, no one else.

For the pure reason of playing the skeptical, I shall ask you a few questions. You say Omar was authorised by Mohammad himself. What if that story of Omar’s conversion during Mohammad’s lifetime is but a lie? What if that conversion story - the one you consider totally different from the one in Christianity - is a fake one concocted during Omar’s period? What if Omar changed his mind after making his way to the throne and determined to change Mohammad’s message after his death?

Besides, I can find no verse in the Koran that relates and endorses Omar’s sudden conversion. Where in the Koran does Allah or Mohammad authorise Omar as a sincere believer and Mohammad’s successor?
planten;3410813:

Then Umar followed the teachings of the prophet and the Quran. Paul did not have Jesus and did not have any written book with him. Besides his teachings are 180 degree opposite to what Jesus had been teaching. Good-Bye to paul.

Paul did see Jesus indeed! This is one of the main differences between Christianity and Islam. In Islam even conversion stories are expected to have occurred during Mohammad’s lifetime since Mohammad’s death snatches him away from this world whereas in Christianity Jesus’ death is followed by His resurrection, through which He keeps tending His flock and protecting His message until the day of judgment:

Matthew 28:20 And remember, I am with you, always, to the end of the age.”

Peace,

Angelos N. B.

 

[planten]

Angelos: would ask you to show me the first-hand version of the Koran, which is reported to have been written at different times on whatever was found under different circumstances - animal skins, leaves, stones, parchment.

Before that challenging task, I would ask you to grant me access to the first Koran in the form of a book, which is said to have been present at the first Khalif’s period. If you fail to accomplish any of these, please let me compare the Koran version in Othman’s period to the one in Omar’s reign.

I know many experts who believe and claim that the current Koran was canonized not before the 8th century. If u want, I shall copy and paste those theories under the same thread.

1 and 2. That is not a good demand because the Quran was written on many pieces, as you know. In the time of the first three Caliphs, it was assembled and finally, in the time of the third Caliph (Uthmman) it was finally brought into the shape of a standardised, authenticated, verified book. That first century quran, I believe, is evennow available in Russia.
3. Sorry for that far fetched.idea. The Muslims recite the Quran in their prayers from the very first day. We have a history and a bible i.e. hadith. It tells everything. Do you think that Muslims were not praying at all till 8th century. They were praying five times a day. There were many in the time of the prophet who had memorised the whole Quran by heart. So to deny the Quran is like denying the Shining Sun.

 

[R_not]

I’m not even Muslim, or Christian anymore. I discarded identification with those religions because they are so rotten. So it’s not my violence. I can accept the violence in OT and Quran as a thing of the past, since I also accept the message of Jesus to be non-violent as the thing to do now.

Which you don’t want to do, you still defend your right to violence.

And by retaining membership in a religion that has done bad things, you are guilty of its sins by association, even more if you deny and defend its sins.

So it looks like you are on the short end of the stick here in this discussion.

I have not done any violence. Your accusation is so absurd.

As for the short end of a stick - it seems you have run out of arguments.

As for your denials to being a muslim - I don’t believe. mohammed told muslims that they can deny being a muslim if they feel threatened, or if it is convenient to do so because allah knows what is in their (blackened - I add this word) hearts.

I cannot change the past, nor can you. but one thing that can be changed is the present and the future and the muslims are still carrying on their lobbing of bombs into Isreal today, slaughtering Christians in Africa, slaughtering Hindus in India, slaughtering Buddhists in Thailand, etc. And carrying on their jihad to establish sharia law in our lands, etc.

It is too bad that you haven’t anything more to argue. But, I know how violent islam is, so it isn’t surprising.

 

[Angelos]

1 and 2. That is not a good demand because the Quran was written on many pieces, as you know. In the time of the first three Caliphs, it was assembled and finally, in the time of the third Caliph (Uthmman) it was finally brought into the shape of a standardised, authenticated, verified book. That first century quran, I believe, is evennow available in Russia.

That is not a good demand in your sight because it targets the authenticity of the Koran. Sİnce those many pieces - a vague reference to the supposed revelation - were assembled after Mohammad’s death and since we do not have any copy of the Koran text prior to Othman, I shall keep suspecting the preservation of the Islamic Bible as well as its authenticity.

1. Sorry for that far fetched.idea. The Muslims recite the Quran in their prayers from the very first day. We have a history and a bible i.e. hadith. It tells everything. Do you think that Muslims were not praying at all till 8th century. They were praying five times a day. There were many in the time of the prophet who had memorised the whole Quran by heart. So to deny the Quran is like denying the Shining Sun.

The idea of Muslims memorising the whole Koran by heart at that time - so many pieces written and hidden God knows where - is absolutely a legend, if not a miracle attributed to the earliest Muslims. Actually, all same kind of narratives differing in minor details and order in today’s Koran mirror how Muslims at Mohammad’s time failed to memorise various verses in the same way. More, we cannot be sure if the Koran verses and chapters they recited were exactly the same as the ones recited today. The critics who claim that Koran’s canonization was not complete until late 8th century do not deny the Koran, but only approach the text in question with certain doubts due to the linguistic problems it has got.

 

[ZuzuBailey]

Very interesting thread, BUT it is sooo long!
I think I need to print it out

 

[R_not]

I have no objection to honoring Jesus. I respect all his commands and advices. But I do not see anything good in paul and Peter. Not only the conversion was a hoax but it was not true at all. paul did not come forward during the time of Jesus.

Jesus did not tell any one that paul the enemy will convert and be a great disciple. Jesus did not tell that in his life time. When Jesus went away and it is said that Jesus appeared to paul when on the road to Damascus, okay, let us believe it. But Jesus never appeared to any of the actual disciples to tell them that paul had converted and that I have chosen him and guided him. Jesus should have appeared to some one and authenticated the all important news of the conversion of paul.

I have no objection to anything about Jesus. I have no objection to anything of his apostles if they teach the same thing as Jesus was teaching. But if any disciple will start something opposite to the teachings of Jesus then I am not bound to believe that person.

Samething is about Muhammad. If any of his companion tries to teach something different to what Muhammad had been teaching then I won’t follow him.

Yeah, mohammed taught to kill infidels, enslave them, and do whatever to them. Yep, a big difference between what Paul did and what mohammed was all about.

Paul was far superior to mohammed, in my opinion. Paul never claimed to be a prophet either.