Systematic apologetics against Islam

  • Thread starter Thread starter fnr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There seems to be two problems about Muhammad. One is that first of all no one can prove that Muhammad received any revelations ;we only have Muhammad’s word that he did ,since no one was with him when these revelations that Muhammad claims he received them, just his word that he did is not proof. Secondly, Muhammad has blood on his hands, in that he fought and killed those who did not believe in him; while Jesus never killed anyone for not believing in Him nor did His Apostles kill anyone for that matter. The New Testament teaches against killing anyone, and while there has been those who have killed in the Name of Jesus, it was never what Jesus taught.
(Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah ; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating [in prayer], seeking bounty from Allah and [His] pleasure. Their mark is on their faces from the trace of prostration. That is their description in the Torah. And their description in the Gospel is as a plant which produces its offshoots and strengthens them so they grow firm and stand upon their stalks, delighting the sowers - so that Allah may enrage by them the disbelievers. Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward.) (Quran:Al-Fath, 29)

Disbelievers(Pagans) fought and killed believers so Allah gave permission to believers to fight against Pagans. Muhammed has killed only 1 man in wars. Moses had killed one man too. So were Moses not prophet?

Sahabas(friend and apostle of Muhammed) many times witnessed coming of revealation, there are many authentic records. Anyway if Sahabas did not see the signs and marks of prophethood on Muhammed they would never believe in Him.
 
(Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah ; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating [in prayer], seeking bounty from Allah and [His] pleasure. Their mark is on their faces from the trace of prostration. That is their description in the Torah. And their description in the Gospel is as a plant which produces its offshoots and strengthens them so they grow firm and stand upon their stalks, delighting the sowers - so that Allah may enrage by them the disbelievers. Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward.) (Quran:Al-Fath, 29)

Disbelievers(Pagans) fought and killed believers so Allah gave permission to believers to fight against Pagans. Muhammed has killed only 1 man in wars. Moses had killed one man too. So were Moses not prophet?

Sahabas(friend and apostle of Muhammed) many times witnessed coming of revealation, there are many authentic records. Anyway if Sahabas did not see the signs and marks of prophethood on Muhammed they would never believe in Him.
If I didnt have to start work at 4am in the morning and just arrive home now (midnight) I could easily answer these statements which have been done here to death. I think you will find sooner or later when someone comes across this thread, you will find it not easy on here, bottom line is we do not believe in the quran, we believe in the catholic church and bible, trying to argue your point that muhammad is a prophet and the quran is correct will not get you very far in here, i hope you have some stellar points other than these. :rolleyes:
 
Sahabas(friend and apostle of Muhammed) many times witnessed coming of revealation, there are many authentic records. Anyway if Sahabas did not see the signs and marks of prophethood on Muhammed they would never believe in Him.
According to Muslim tradition, Muhammad died in 632 (although there are non-Muslim sources that claim he was leading armies after that time; the Teaching of Jacob claimed “the prophet” to be alive in 634). As I mentioned in the first post, the earliest hadith cannot be traced before the early 8th century. Also, the earliest biography of Muhammad was written in 765 AD (133 years later) by Ibn Ishaq, but that document no longer exists. In 833 AD, Ibn Hisham’s biography was written, putting the first available biography of Muhammad at a date 201 years after Muhammad’s death. All of the stories that claim to originate from a companion of Muhammad have been documented in these writings.

Outside of the Quran, there is no public mention or inscription of Muhammad until the construction of the Dome of the Rock in 690. The earliest Muslim reference to Muhammad to which we have access dates to the caliphate of Abd-Al Malik, around 690 AD. Prior coins included no such reference.

So the available documentation of Muhammad’s life date to 200 years after his supposed death. A coin referring to Muhammad as the messenger of God dates to 30-52 years after hid death.

These are the types of considerations that I argue are part of a historical-critical evaluation of Islam. This is radically different from Christianity, where even the most skeptical critics admit that evidence for the death and resurrection of Jesus can be traced to 1-2 years of its happening. Here’s Bart Ehrman writing in the Huffington Post:
"With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) – sources that originated in Jesus’ native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). "
 
(Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah ; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating [in prayer], seeking bounty from Allah and [His] pleasure. Their mark is on their faces from the trace of prostration. That is their description in the Torah. And their description in the Gospel is as a plant which produces its offshoots and strengthens them so they grow firm and stand upon their stalks, delighting the sowers - so that Allah may enrage by them the disbelievers. Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward.) (Quran:Al-Fath, 29)

Disbelievers(Pagans) fought and killed believers so Allah gave permission to believers to fight against Pagans. Muhammed has killed only 1 man in wars. Moses had killed one man too. So were Moses not prophet?

Sahabas(friend and apostle of Muhammed) many times witnessed coming of revealation, there are many authentic records. Anyway if Sahabas did not see the signs and marks of prophethood on Muhammed they would never believe in Him.
My Points on Muhammad about killing has nothing to do with Moses as it is about Jesus who I said never killed anyone and preached against violence That is the difference Jesus never killed while Muhammad did and so did his followers which I might add Jesus" followers did not kill in order to convert anyone. In later times there were those who did kill those who would not convert to Christianity but that was never what the CC taught nor di Jesus teach that.
 
According to Muslim tradition, Muhammad died in 632 (although there are non-Muslim sources that claim he was leading armies after that time; the Teaching of Jacob claimed “the prophet” to be alive in 634). As I mentioned in the first post, the earliest hadith cannot be traced before the early 8th century. Also, the earliest biography of Muhammad was written in 765 AD (133 years later) by Ibn Ishaq, but that document no longer exists. In 833 AD, Ibn Hisham’s biography was written, putting the first available biography of Muhammad at a date 201 years after Muhammad’s death. All of the stories that claim to originate from a companion of Muhammad have been documented in these writings.

Outside of the Quran, there is no public mention or inscription of Muhammad until the construction of the Dome of the Rock in 690. The earliest Muslim reference to Muhammad to which we have access dates to the caliphate of Abd-Al Malik, around 690 AD. Prior coins included no such reference.

So the available documentation of Muhammad’s life date to 200 years after his supposed death. A coin referring to Muhammad as the messenger of God dates to 30-52 years after hid death.

These are the types of considerations that I argue are part of a historical-critical evaluation of Islam. This is radically different from Christianity, where even the most skeptical critics admit that evidence for the death and resurrection of Jesus can be traced to 1-2 years of its happening. Here’s Bart Ehrman writing in the Huffington Post:
"With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) – sources that originated in Jesus’ native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). "
Muhammed died in 632 and that is certain but the birth date is not definite. Muhammed has lived for 63 years. The most popular birth date is considered as 571 but some sources claim it to be 569. That conflicts because of the difference between the Moon Calendar and the Sun Calendar. Muslims used/use spesifically moon calendar. The moon year is about 354 days and the sun year is about 365 days. So for about every 33 years 1 year is plus. For 63 years roughly 2 years get plus. ( like:571+63=634)

The Hadiths issue………… Well…….

Sahabas collected, writed, memorised, recorded hadiths each one by them selves. İn the early years of İslam prophet forbid to write hadiths to prevent interfuse with verses of Quran. But later that ban canceled because everyone learn type of verses.

There were hadits by Sahabas written. But about 150 years after death of prophet hadiths were collected in books by several hadiths imams in differentl ways. Ofcourse some problems occured but in the end we have thousands trustable hadiths. This issue is so long.

Sahabas wrote “mağazi” about life, behaviours and especially about wars of Muhammed while prophet was alive. There were at least 50 samples. İn actual fact most of behaviours of prophet were translated by hadiths. İt is true that “So the available documentation of Muhammad’s life date to 200 years after his supposed death” but that does not mean there had not been hadiths before that times. Untill that times it was not so needed for written hadiths because there were many Sahabas or people who have seen sahabas and they could say a hadith about any issue.

Gospels were writen after depart of Jesus about 60 years later and were translated in many languages in many ways by different people. İf we care the chronology and sources İslamic scholarships is yet more reliable.

Salam.
 
Muhammed died in 632 and that is certain but the birth date is not definite. Muhammed has lived for 63 years. The most popular birth date is considered as 571 but some sources claim it to be 569. That conflicts because of the difference between the Moon Calendar and the Sun Calendar. Muslims used/use spesifically moon calendar. The moon year is about 354 days and the sun year is about 365 days. So for about every 33 years 1 year is plus. For 63 years roughly 2 years get plus. ( like:571+63=634)
According to Muslim tradition only, it is certain that Muhammad died in 632. However, in the Teaching of Jacob, which claims to represent the date of July 13, 634, the following text appears:
“When the candidatus was killed by the Saracens, I was at Caesarea and I set off by boat to Sykamina. People were saying “the candidatus has been killed,” and we Jews were overjoyed. And they were saying that the prophet had appeared, coming with the Saracens, and that he was proclaiming the advent of the anointed one, the Christ who was to come. I, having arrived at Sykamina, stopped by a certain old man well-versed in scriptures, and I said to him: “What can you tell me about the prophet who has appeared with the Saracens?” He replied, groaning deeply: “He is false, for the prophets do not come armed with a sword. Truly they are works of anarchy being committed today and I fear that the first Christ to come, whom the Christians worship, was the one sent by God and we instead are preparing to receive the Antichrist. Indeed, Isaiah said that the Jews would retain a perverted and hardened heart until all the earth should be devastated. But you go, master Abraham, and find out about the prophet who has appeared.” So I, Abraham, inquired and heard from those who had met him that there was no truth to be found in the so-called prophet, only the shedding of men’s blood. He says also that he has the keys of paradise, which is incredible.”

This work is notable for the precision with which it dates itself… to a single day in 634. Yet it refers to the “prophet” of the Saracens as being present at the time. It records a teaching a messiah was coming, not the true messiah – Jesus of Nazareth – but one anticipated by the Jews of the time. Even if one were to concede that this prophet may have been speaking about the Muslim version of the second coming of Christ (where he will crush the cross) or the Mahdi, there’s still a huge historical problem here. According to this source, which wasn’t written to agree with the official Umayyad account of the life of Muhammad, Muhammad was still alive during the conquests after 632.
The Hadiths issue………… Well…….
Sahabas collected, writed, memorised, recorded hadiths each one by them selves. İn the early years of İslam prophet forbid to write hadiths to prevent interfuse with verses of Quran. But later that ban canceled because everyone learn type of verses.
There were hadits by Sahabas written. But about 150 years after death of prophet hadiths were collected in books by several hadiths imams in differentl ways. Ofcourse some problems occured but in the end we have thousands trustable hadiths. This issue is so long.
Sahabas wrote “mağazi” about life, behaviours and especially about wars of Muhammed while prophet was alive. There were at least 50 samples. İn actual fact most of behaviours of prophet were translated by hadiths. İt is true that “So the available documentation of Muhammad’s life date to 200 years after his supposed death” but that does not mean there had not been hadiths before that times. Untill that times it was not so needed for written hadiths because there were many Sahabas or people who have seen sahabas and they could say a hadith about any issue.
This is the “official” account – Umayyad and later Abbasid – of how the hadith came into being. Yet, as I wrote in my original post, Western scholars have not been able to trace independent isnads back before about the early 8th century AD, during or after the reign of Abd-Al Malik. The “common links” in the isnads all appear to post-date the sahabas.
 
Gospels were writen after depart of Jesus about 60 years later and were translated in many languages in many ways by different people. İf we care the chronology and sources İslamic scholarships is yet more reliable.
Actually, critical scholars almost universally agree that the earliest gospel written was that of Mark, which they all date to no later than 70 AD, because it refers to the Jerusalem Temple as still being present. That puts the earliest Gospel – in its current form – no later than 40 years after the death of Jesus (70 as the latest possible date of its compilation, and 30 as the earliest possible date for the crucifixion of Jesus). More likely, it was written around 65 AD, about 32 years after the most probable date for the crucifixion of Jesus in 33 AD.

Since the Gospels of Matthew and Luke use text from the Gospel of Mark (containing almost all the text of Mark up to verse 16:8), they must post-date 65-70 AD. However, they also contain a common set of verses, often referred to as “Q” (from the German quelle for “source”). For both Gospels to contain Q, the material in Q must pre-date them by a considerable period of time.

The Synoptic tradition includes a significant number of references to Jesus having confronted the Pharisees of his time. Recent Judaic scholarship has shown that during the pre-70 time period, the dominant school in the Pharisees was that of Shammai, an exceptionally nationalistic and zealous group of Rabbis who sought to confront Rome. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (in Matthew 5-6) or Sermon on the Plain (Luke 6) actually makes specific reference to Roman military law. Under that law, a Roman soldier in Palestine could legally press a civilian into service for one mile, which typically involved carrying something for them. But Jesus said “Should anyone press you into service for one mile, go with him for two miles.” For the high insult of being slapped on the right cheek, which Roman and Jewish law provided a right to prosecution for the victim, Jesus said to turn the other cheek. Contextually, this puts Jesus’ statements into the political and social context of pre-70 Roman Palestine. This puts the “Q” language of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke very much into the context of the early first century AD.

Even John, the gospel universally agreed by scholars to be the last to be finalized (around 90-95 AD), includes text that most scholars agree to be much older, and in fact, attested by recent archaeological finds and text in the Dead Sea Scrolls that date the text to the pre-70 time period. In particular, John 5:2 refers to a pool called Bethesda, surrounded by five porticos. This pool has been verified by archaeology as being found in the location described by the Gospel. The pool has also been identified in the Copper Scroll from the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran. There are other archaeological digs that prove that text in John reflects a detailed knowledge of Jerusalem from before the Roman siege of Jerusalem in 66-70 AD.

The date at which a Gospel is finalized has nothing to do with its veracity. In fact, the execution of Jesus by crucifixion during the reign of the emperor is attested by the pagan historian Tacitus in 115 AD:
“Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”
 
Gospels were writen after depart of Jesus about 60 years later and were translated in many languages in many ways by different people. İf we care the chronology and sources İslamic scholarships is yet more reliable.
Lastly, we have the letters of Paul, which provide even more evidence of that Catholicism in fact goes back to the earliest days of Jesus followers. First, in 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul says,
“For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received”
What follows are several lines of stylized rhythmic Greek, obviously designed for an oral (illiterate) culture to learn the basic tenets of Christianity. Paul says that in his visit to the Corinthians, he taught them this text, and now, in his letter to them, he is reiterating that teaching. That visit to the Corinthians scholars date to approximately 51 AD, which means that the rythmic Greek text of 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 also precedes 51 AD.

When did Paul “receive” this text? Well, we have from Acts and from the other letters of Paul a very good estimate. In Galatians 1:18-19, we hear that Paul – three years after his initial conversion, visited Peter and James in Jerusalem for a period of 15 days. Fourteen years later, Paul returned to Jerusalem and presented what he was teaching to the Apostles who were there before him. From Galatians 2:2,
“I went up in accord with a revelation, and I presented to them the gospel that I preach to the Gentiles—but privately to those of repute—so that I might not be running, or have run, in vain.” And in Galatians 2:6, we hear, “those of repute made me add nothing.” In other words, Paul’s preaching was absolutely in accord with the preaching of the other Christians.

From this information, we know when Paul learned the rythmic Greek text of 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. That is, during his visit to Peter and James in Jerusalem, described in Galatians 1. Because he was using that text with the Corinthians in his visit to them in 51 AD, and we know that a minimum of 14 years could have passed between Paul’s visits to Jerusalem described in Galatians 1 and 2, we see that the latest possible date for Paul to have “received” this rhythmic Greek text is 51-14 = 37 AD. However, that’s assuming that Paul visited the Corinthians immediately after the meeting in Jerusalem described in Galatians 2, which even Galatians 2 tells us didn’t happen. It says that Paul went to Antioch afterward, which is also attested in Acts 15:30-35. The Book of Acts also tells us that before visiting Corinth, after Antioch, he visited Lycanonia, Phyrgia, Galatia, Mysia, Troas, Samothrace, Neapolis, Philippi (where he was imprisoned), Thessalonica, Beroea, and Athens. We know from reference in Acts to the Proconsul Galio (attested by archaeology) that Paul’s visit to Corinth took place between 50-52 and lasted for 18 months. In actuality, the text of 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 can have been taught to Paul by Peter and James in 36 AD at the very latest. So this is really really old.

Also from Galatians 1, we know that Paul “went into Arabia” (probably the Nabatean Arabs – around Damascus) for three years between his conversion to Christianity and his first visit to Peter in Jerusalem. That puts his initial conversion in 33-34 AD.
 
Lastly, we have the letters of Paul, which provide even more evidence of that Catholicism in fact goes back to the earliest days of Jesus followers. First, in 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul says,
“For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received”
What follows are several lines of stylized rhythmic Greek, obviously designed for an oral (illiterate) culture to learn the basic tenets of Christianity. Paul says that in his visit to the Corinthians, he taught them this text, and now, in his letter to them, he is reiterating that teaching. That visit to the Corinthians scholars date to approximately 51 AD, which means that the rythmic Greek text of 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 also precedes 51 AD.

When did Paul “receive” this text? Well, we have from Acts and from the other letters of Paul a very good estimate. In Galatians 1:18-19, we hear that Paul – three years after his initial conversion, visited Peter and James in Jerusalem for a period of 15 days. Fourteen years later, Paul returned to Jerusalem and presented what he was teaching to the Apostles who were there before him. From Galatians 2:2,
“I went up in accord with a revelation, and I presented to them the gospel that I preach to the Gentiles—but privately to those of repute—so that I might not be running, or have run, in vain.” And in Galatians 2:6, we hear, “those of repute made me add nothing.” In other words, Paul’s preaching was absolutely in accord with the preaching of the other Christians.

From this information, we know when Paul learned the rythmic Greek text of 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. That is, during his visit to Peter and James in Jerusalem, described in Galatians 1. Because he was using that text with the Corinthians in his visit to them in 51 AD, and we know that a minimum of 14 years could have passed between Paul’s visits to Jerusalem described in Galatians 1 and 2, we see that the latest possible date for Paul to have “received” this rhythmic Greek text is 51-14 = 37 AD. However, that’s assuming that Paul visited the Corinthians immediately after the meeting in Jerusalem described in Galatians 2, which even Galatians 2 tells us didn’t happen. It says that Paul went to Antioch afterward, which is also attested in Acts 15:30-35. The Book of Acts also tells us that before visiting Corinth, after Antioch, he visited Lycanonia, Phyrgia, Galatia, Mysia, Troas, Samothrace, Neapolis, Philippi (where he was imprisoned), Thessalonica, Beroea, and Athens. We know from reference in Acts to the Proconsul Galio (attested by archaeology) that Paul’s visit to Corinth took place between 50-52 and lasted for 18 months. In actuality, the text of 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 can have been taught to Paul by Peter and James in 36 AD at the very latest. So this is really really old.

Also from Galatians 1, we know that Paul “went into Arabia” (probably the Nabatean Arabs – around Damascus) for three years between his conversion to Christianity and his first visit to Peter in Jerusalem. That puts his initial conversion in 33-34 AD.
Hi fnr: Great posts! I myself just learned much from the information that you have provided. Please keep up the great you are doing peace and God bless.
 
One more bit of information.

Two older mosques at Mecca and Medinah (Mosque of the Haram and Mosque of the Prophet) have been demolished totally and rebuilt in a way that comports with the traditional Muslim story, making archaeological investigation impossible. Furthermore, the Saudi government actively discourages any archaeological excavation of the area in which the life of Muhammad is purported to have occurred.

We can ask Mormons why they refuse to excavate the Cumorah Hill, where the golden plates of Joseph Smith are supposed to be buried. It seems perfectly reasonable to ask Muslims to demand that the Saudi government allow independent archaeological excavation to occur.
 
One more bit of information.

Two older mosques at Mecca and Medinah (Mosque of the Haram and Mosque of the Prophet) have been demolished totally and rebuilt in a way that comports with the traditional Muslim story, making archaeological investigation impossible. Furthermore, the Saudi government actively discourages any archaeological excavation of the area in which the life of Muhammad is purported to have occurred.

We can ask Mormons why they refuse to excavate the Cumorah Hill, where the golden plates of Joseph Smith are supposed to be buried. It seems perfectly reasonable to ask Muslims to demand that the Saudi government allow independent archaeological excavation to occur.
Hi fnr: I agree!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top