I have a question
Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Interfaith Dialogue
Forum Description: It is for Interfaith dialogue, where Muslims discuss with non-Muslims. We encourge that dialogue takes place in a cordial atmosphere on various topics including religious tolerance.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=42288
Printed Date: 29 April 2024 at 6:55am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: I have a question
Posted By: Al Masihi
Subject: I have a question
Date Posted: 02 March 2018 at 12:14pm
| I have a question on what makes Islam unique to other religions? |
Replies:
Posted By: Usmani
Date Posted: 03 March 2018 at 5:10am
|
Every major Religion has a book revel from God, Quran is the book revel to Muhammad (pbuh) is the only book in its original form as it was revels 1450 years ago.All others books has corrupted and are not in their original form as they were reveled. ------------- Engage your self in good deeds,otherswise yours nafs will engage you in bad deeds |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 03 March 2018 at 5:53am
|
The book of Mormon was written by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith" rel="nofollow - Joseph Smith . It is his words, although he claims they were given/translated to him by an angel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon It is obviously drivel but it fulfills the criteria of not being corrupted and having a religion based upon it. |
Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 03 March 2018 at 6:12am
This is a Muslim doctrine [and thus] without real proof. It becomes clear when you ask: "Why did God (supposed to have sent the same message already in the Talmud and the Bible) not manage to preserve this/these original message(s) from corruption". You'll never get a decent answer to this question. Airmano
------------- The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter") |
UsmaniPosted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 03 March 2018 at 9:18am
| Firstly Christianity does have unique concepts which can't be found in any other religion on earth, the concept of grace from God and the criteria of good works in Christianity unlike other religions means nothing they are like filthy rags infront of God. Salvation is based on the grace of God and his only son Jesus Christ and salvation through faith and belief in him. |
Posted By: NABA
Date Posted: 03 March 2018 at 7:34pm
|
Islam is unique because Quran is the word of Allah ﴿سورة المائدة �£﴾ حُرِّمَتْ عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَيْتَةُ وَالدَّمُ وَلَحْمُ الْخِنْزِيرِ وَمَا �£ُهِلَّ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ بِهِ وَالْمُنْخَنِقَةُ وَالْمَوْقُوذَةُ وَالْمُتَرَدِّيَةُ وَالنَّطِيحَةُ وَمَا �£َكَلَ السَّبُعُ إِلَّا مَا ذَكَّيْتُمْ وَمَا ذُبِحَ عَلَى النُّصُبِ وَ�£َنْ تَسْتَقْسِمُوا بِالْ�£َزْلَامِ ۚ ذَٰلِكُمْ فِسْقٌ ۗ الْيَوْمَ يَئِسَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ دِينِكُمْ فَلَا تَخْشَوْهُمْ وَاخْشَوْنِ ۚ الْيَوْمَ �£َكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَ�£َتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا ۚ فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ فِي مَخْمَصَةٍ غَيْرَ مُتَجَانِفٍ لِإِثْمٍ ۙ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ [Quran 5:3] Prohibited for you are carrion, blood, the flesh of swine, and animals dedicated to other than Allah; also the flesh of animals strangled, killed violently, killed by a fall, gored to death, mangled by wild animals—except what you rescue, and animals sacrificed on altars; and the practice of drawing lots. For it is immoral. Today, those who disbelieve have despaired of your religion, so do not fear them, but fear Me. Today I have perfected your religion for you, and have completed My favor upon you, and have approved Islam as a religion for you. But whoever is compelled by hunger, with no intent of wrongdoing—Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. https://goo.gl/9jzGLZ" rel="nofollow - https://goo.gl/9jzGLZ |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 04 March 2018 at 2:43am
So Karma is not at all the same then? Your religion has blinded you to balanced thinking around the subject. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 04 March 2018 at 3:40am
|
That isn't a fact to say the Quran is the word of Allah which makes it unique, all religions almost have their own books even the simple pagans have books, but you might say but the Quran has never been changed also that's not true, here is an example of contradictions and variations between the modern Quran and the Samarkand Quran. http://web.archive.org/web/20070309000028/http://www.geocities.com/pentaur2001/index.html" rel="nofollow - http://web.archive.org/web/20070309000028/http://www.geocities.com/pentaur2001/index.html |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 04 March 2018 at 11:32am
| Karma believes in good works Christian theology isn't based on good works which are lie filthy rags in the face of God. |
Posted By: asep garut
Date Posted: 04 March 2018 at 5:07pm
Al Masihi, The Qur'an will never change its editorial composition because it is the promise of God as in His word, and the possibility that will be different is in the translation into different languages. Although there are people who make different Qur'anic compositions (not according to God word), sooner or later, the false Qur'an will someday disappear from the earth. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 05 March 2018 at 3:54am
| If I the Quran is changed at one point then that means it was changed, end of story. You need to provide evidence the Quran is not changed like how I provided evidenced that it was changed which you ignored. |
Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 05 March 2018 at 7:29am
I have heard of diverging prints of the Quran (Samarkand, Sanaa) but so far they have not magically disappeared by a direct divine intervention. If there is one canonical version [only] than simply because humans declare(d) one version as being the correct one and all others as wrong. You call it "preservation" but fact is "human selection". Airmano
------------- The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter") |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 05 March 2018 at 9:23am
Not sure if you are saying that "good works are lying filthy rags in the face of God" or "Christian theology are lying filthy rags in the face of God". Or something else? Either way can you justify your position at all? |
Posted By: asep garut
Date Posted: 05 March 2018 at 4:09pm
Al Masihi, Humans could have made fake Qur'an like in ancient times many Arabic literary experts have made such as Qur'an, for example: Musailimah al Kazzab, Thulaihah, Habalah bin Ka'ab and others, even one of them claimed that he was a Prophet. But the facts were then they failed. Humans may make like what their God made, but sooner or later it will perish. The Qur'an is truly from Allah, and will be preserved until the time of the Qur'an no one reads it again. Here's the proof: (Al Hijr 15: 9) “Verily, We, it is We who have sent down the Qur’an, and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)” Other proof that Allah has challenged humans and jinn to make such a Quran is for those who still doubt about the truth, such as: (Al Isra’ 17:88) “Say:” If the mankind and the jinn were together to produce the like of this Qur’an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another.” |
Posted By: asep garut
Date Posted: 05 March 2018 at 4:34pm
Airmano, Can you give me an example of a different Quranic verse from Samarkand, Sanaa? Thank you. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 05 March 2018 at 11:48pm
| Our good works are like filthy rags in the face of God. Salvation is not from our good works. Read the link it shows different versions of the Surahs in the Samarkand quran and the modern quran. The Warsh, Hafs, and Doori furans contradict each other aswell. One verse might say he said while one says he says. |
Posted By: MIAW
Date Posted: 06 March 2018 at 2:20am
I have looked into the document that you
presented in your link/blog above. This is another weak and dismal attempt to
attack the integrity of (and discredit) the Qur’an. It has been refuted time
and again. Maybe you can fool yourself or somebody who
does not know any notion of the Arabic language, but you cannot fool anybody
who has even the basics of Arabic.
Here are my findings (and my opinion): -
Anyone who
knows the basics of Arabic Calligraphy will tell you that the copy you
presented above is a fake one. It is very untidy and erratic, therefore not
Authentic Samarkand. Just compare it closely to the one here: http://https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samarkand_Kufic_Quran" rel="nofollow - http://https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samarkand_Kufic_Quran -
It has
many ‘basic’ mistakes in Arabic grammar… mistakes that not even a beginner in
the language will make… let alone the Early Arabs who were extremely proficient
in their language… in fact, spoken Arabic literature was their main strength. -
I really
wanted to suggest some ‘basic, Arabic lessons to the owner/author of your blog
above, but if you click on it, you will not find any indication as to who wrote
it… Dodgy… -
Even if we
consider the (real) Samarkand copy as a reference, it does not represent the ‘Original
Uthmanic’ copy anyway. Here is what you will find in (your) Wikipedia: http://https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samarkand_Kufic_Quran" rel="nofollow - http://https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samarkand_Kufic_Quran : “…and Uthman kept one for his own use in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medina" rel="nofollow - , although the Samarkand Quran is most likely not one of those copies. The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topkapi_manuscript" rel="nofollow - was thought to be the one held in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topkap%C4%B1_Palace" rel="nofollow - in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkey" rel="nofollow - , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samarkand_Kufic_Quran#cite_note-BBC-1" rel="nofollow - - [4] but studies have shown that the Topkapı manuscript is also not from the 7th century, but from much later...”. -
All
languages change and develop through the centuries, e.g. Shakespearian English
is slightly different to English in our time, and earlier English was even more
different… and so on. So if you take that as evidence that the message of the
Qur’an has ‘changed’, then that tells us something about YOU… not about the Qur’an. -
The Qur’an
was revealed in ‘7 styles of recitation’, because Islam was being accepted by
various (far and out, and remote) Arab tribes who had slight variations in the language…
so these tribes asked our Prophet PBUH if he could ask Allah to reveal the Qur’an
in a text that they could easily understand and apply in their everyday lives,
and this was granted by Allah SWT. (However this is another topic). -
Enemies of
Islam keep presenting us with alleged copies of the Qur’an, with unknown
authors, unknown origins, unknown scribes, and then they tells us that they are
different to the original. My comment is this: There will always be a copy that
you cannot touch or attempt to spoil and corrupt… it is the copy that has been
handed down to us in the hearts of consecutive generations (i.e. learnt and
recited by heart)… all the way back to
our Prophet PBUH. [Can you say the same about previous scriptures (bible, Torah, Injeel...etc)? No... I didn't think so.] Now let’s
look at some (obvious) loopholes in the document that you presented in your link/blog
above: -
1st
alleged mistake in your document: to me, this is enough to show me that this
document is fake; a beginner in Arabic will tell you that an Arab scribe would
never make such a basic grammar mistake: the word ‘Ardh’ in grammar is
conjugated as ‘Mudhaf’ and the word ‘Allah’ is conjugated as ‘Mudhaf ilayh’,
which means that they can never both carry the Alif Laam… Simples -
2nd
alleged mistake in your document: The word ‘Naaqah’ is a feminine gendre,
therefore it is impossible to use the demonstrative determiner ‘Hadha’… the correct word to
use is ‘Hadhihi’. -
3rd
alleged mistake in your document: Does not make sense because no Kufi Samarqand
calligraphy is presented… -
7th
alleged mistake in your document: Here: ‘ilaa’ in grammar is a ‘Harf Jarr’, therefore
it must have ‘ism majroor’ following it… Where is the ‘ism majroor’? it’s
missing!... nobody makes such a ‘basic’ mistake.
The Qur’an has neither been changed nor corrupted like the previous books, and more importantly…it
never will be. It is a miracle… and here is why:
As I mentioned
above, the Arabs at the time of Prophet Muhammad PBUH had many strengths, but
their main one was (all aspects of) their language (especially in the spoken form)… in fact if you look into their
history (of those centuries), you will discover that almost anyone of them
could come up with very advanced poetry ad hoc, impromptu, on the spot and
without any planning involved (I personally find this fascinating).
So when the Qur’an
was being revealed, it shook and shocked them, because they (the most versed in
terms of language) thought that they were on top of their linguistic
proficiency, but they were hearing the ‘next level’… a much higher level. In fact,
that is why the Jinns were amazed at the level of Arabic when they heard it for
the first time, so amazed that they believed in our prophet straight away:
Qur’an [72:1]
So... in order to
prove to them that this Qur’an is from Allah (and not from humans), Allah SWT
challenged the then Arabs to come up with just ten chapters (Suras) similar to
the Qur’an… and they failed:
Qur’an [11:13]
Allah SWT then Challenged them to come up with just ONE chapter (Sura)… and they failed (in fact this
time it was a ‘stronger’ challenge, because He said “if you cannot, and I am telling
you from the outset that you cannot”:
Qur’an [2:23]
Also: Qur’an [10:37-38]
Also: Qur’an [17:88]
So, The Qur'an is truly a miracle that has stood the test of time, and proven itself through the centuries. We have nothing more to prove to anybody. Oh dear... You say that you have left Islam for another religion... Well... all I can say is: if it's because of 'blogs' like the one you presented above, then that tells me everything about you. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 06 March 2018 at 4:10am
| Anyone who has no idea about the history of the Middle East would say the strongest thing Arabs had was their language, remember most of what we know about pre Islamic Arabia was most probably fabricated to fit for the narrative of Islam. Arabic is a relatively new language as most Arabs at the time were still writing using the Syriac and Aramaic script according to tradition the first Arab tribe to write in their own Arabic script which was about a few hundred years before the rise of Mohammed and Islam. Even ancient Yemenites the so called pure Arabs were known to write using a script closely related to Amharic. Muslims are commonly told that the differences between the Qira'at can be explained away as styles of pronunciation or dialects and spelling. Yet in many cases the variations added or ommitted words, or are completely different words or contradict each other in meaning. The Corpus Coranicum database can be used as a neutral online source for verifying the existence of such variations in the Qira'at. An interesting example is given below, and more of them are listed in the next section about the popular Hafs and Warsh transmissions. In Qur'an 18:86, Dhu'l Qarnayn finds the sun setting in a muddy spring, according to the Qira'at used by today's most popular transmissions of the Qur'an. However, in around half of the various Qira'at the sun intead sets in a warm spring. The latter variant is even used in some English translations. It is easy to see how the corruption arose (whichever one is the variant). The arabic word حَمِئَة (hami'atin - muddy) sounds very similar to the completely different word حَامِيَة (hamiyyatin - warm). Al-Tabari records in his tafseer for this verse the differing opinions on whether the sun sets in muddy or warm water. Also keep in mind that Arabic was pretty much developing as a language at the time. |
Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 07 March 2018 at 2:26pm
|
@Asep When you open https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sana27a_manuscript" rel="nofollow - this link on the Sanaa manuscript you'll find a list of differences. The Tashkent and Topkapi are written in Kufic writing, which is also not the case anymore. That there has never been a copy being made publicly accessible speaks also for itself ( I let you guess why !) Furthermore; Uthman burned deviating versions as it is also acknowledged in the Muslim world. So there must have been alternative forms. Do you think these alternative form were all written "by enemies from within" as Miaw likes to call them. Last not least: What do you really mean by "preserved" ? - Books differ by chemistry (wood and ink) and page formatting - The pronunciation (and writing) has changed over 1400 years - The interpretation of it is so disputed amongst Muslims that the wording "the message" becomes highly blurred if not outright meaningless. - Now you may still speculate about a "divine book in heaven" where all earthly versions are a bad copy of the original. (But frankly this is an old trick that the Mormons master equally well.) May be, but this doesn't make the preservation (on earth) less faulty. @Miaw: Here comes a magnificent surah which I'm sure nobody (including Mohamed) can do any better: "Valkovuokkoa on jo kauan siirretty luonnosta puutarhojen kaunistukseksi. Monet nykyisin luonnonvaraiset valkovuokkoesiitymät ovatkin peräisin siirtoistutuksissa, varsinkin pohjoisessa." Airmano
------------- The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter") |
Posted By: MIAW
Date Posted: 08 March 2018 at 12:43pm
Hyvä Airmano, tiedät hyvin, ettei tämä ole surah. Olen kuitenkin hämmästynyt siitä, että sinulla on kiinnostusta puutarhanhoitoon ja ruusuihin.MIAW |
Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 08 March 2018 at 2:01pm
|
@Miaw What makes you say that what I wrote is not a surah ? Because it talks of real objects instead of fiery beings (made of smokeless fire), etherlike angels which only your prophet could see and little shiny silver dragons (that sure exists somewhere in another dimension) as your book does ? So I take the challenge and claim: What I wrote is unique and can not be imitated/improved by anybody. Try to prove the opposite. Airmano
------------- The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter") |
Posted By: Sufi Islam
Date Posted: 09 March 2018 at 7:34am
In my opinion, Islam is more advanced and more developed than other religions (Christianity and Judaism). We have the hadith and the Sunnah, full of many examples of good, honourable actions for us to follow. It's true that Christians have Jesus, but they also have the Old Testament and the Trinity and many confusing things. It's also true Islam is a complicated subject and the more we learn about it, the more we realise we didn't know the full depth of Islam. Scholars have spent a life time studying and there is always more to learn. Maybe the best example is to look at the historical record. The achievements of Islam and the Muslims are amazing, perhaps more amazing than any other world civilisation. The western society of today is sometimes considered the most powerful, but at what cost? Capitalism, accumulation of material wealth, destroying the natural world? Climate change, rising sea levels, out of control weather and natural disasters? Modern society is playing with fire in my opinion and while there are many good things about the modern technology, we really need to be careful. These days people are worshipping money and oil and many other things instead of remembering Allah. Islam offers us a path to know God and the self. What other religions have depth of understanding like Islam?
|
Posted By: asep garut
Date Posted: 11 March 2018 at 10:41pm
At the time of the Prophet Muhammad was still alive, there were many companions of the Prophet who could read and write: Muawiyah. Yazid, Umar ibn Khathab, Uthman ibn Affan, Ali ibn Abi Talib, Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, Talha ibn Abdullah, Abu Ubaidah ibn Jarah, Hudzaifah ibn al-Yaman, Abu Hurairah, Abu al-Darda 'and Abu Musa al-Ash'ari. Uthman was one of the four closest friends and trusted by the Prophet Muhammad. They wrote verses of the Qur'an in several tools such as date palms, stone plates, leaves, skin and bones, based on the reading as it is, according to the composition of the language as well as the words. The activity lasted from the time of the Qur'an down in Makkah for about 13 years, and at al-Madinah for about 10 years. Every year the Angel Gabriel always comes to the Prophet to establish the reading and deeper understanding, and all the verses are always the Prophet convey and told the companions who he considers to have the qualities of Shiddiq (honest), Amanah (can be trusted), Tabligh (convey the truth), and Fathanah (intelligent), either one verse, two verses or more, and he read it exactly as Jibril taught, because Allah guarantees his unity in him as in His word: (Al-Qiyamah 75: 16-19). 16. Move not your tongue concerning the Qur’an to make haste therewith. 17. It is for Us to collect it and to give you (Muhammad) the ability to recite it (the Qur’an). 18. And when We have recited it to you through Gabriel, then follow its the Qur’an’s recital. 19. Then it is for Allah to make it clear to you. And the Prophet Muhammad read all the verses to his friends (including Uthman) exactly as Gabriel taught. The Uthman Caliph's initiative to bind the Qur'an to the writers' team for the Qur'an to be recorded by using Quraish is a historical fact that can not be denied, not a traditional explanation. What the Caliph 'Uthman implies is that everything in this world will be damaged including the means by which the verses of the Qur'an are written, such as date palms, stone plates, leaves, etc. Based on that thought, Uthman immediately ordered his members in the binding of the Qur'an to remember that all in this world will be "fana" (broken), he chose people who are really close to the Prophet Muhammad like Zaid bin Thabit, Abdullah bin Zubair, Sa 'id bin Al-Ash, and Abdul Rahman bin Hisham. Al Hijr 15:9 “Verily, We, it is We who have sent down the Dhikr (Qur’an) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)” And what I mean "preserved" is the content of the word of Allah, not the tools or the places where the words of Allah are written. Anyone can make a difference in both the Qur'anic and the translations, but for those who are included in Surah Al-Hijr 15:9 above, it will be able to distinguish between what is original and what is not. Al Baqarah 2:269 “He grants "Hikmah" to whom He pleases, and he, to whom "Hikmah" is granted, is indeed granted abundant good. But none remember (will receive admonition) except men of understanding.” |
Posted By: debatedebate
Date Posted: 15 March 2018 at 9:08pm
Allah collected the Quran? Before that it was scattered?
19.
Then it is for Allah to make it clear to you. Allah also revealed that no one can understand some of revelation except him, so whats the point? (in fact this verse is self contradictory) He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations - they are the substance of the Book - and others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed. (Quran 3 7)
Besides, your own Sunnah narrates that the Quran was not well preserved; It was narrated that 'Aishah said: “The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed(1), and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.” (1): These verses were abrogated in recitation but not ruling. Other ahadith establish the number for fosterage to be 5. English reference : Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1944 Sunan Ibn Majah » The Chapters on Marriage - كتاب النكاح Arabic reference : Book 9, Hadith 2020 |
Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 17 March 2018 at 2:44pm
@asep
Can you try to be more specific ? Allah has never "spoken" [a word] in a physical sense. So, could you try to define the terms: "content" and "word of Allah" more precisely ? Thanks: Airmano ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- @DebateDebate I always liked the story of the Surah on adultery kept by Aisha(!) before it got eaten by a goat. (Ooups, too bad !) Never mind, something that is gone can at least not get corrupted anymore. ------------- The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter") |
Posted By: asep garut
Date Posted: 19 March 2018 at 3:59am
Yes, this means that Allah gathers His word in Muhammad's heart, and after he has mastered and understood it, it is his duty to deliver all His words to all humanity. Yes ... in the Qur'an there are verses mutasyabihat (allegorical) and these verses will only be believed and understood by people who are good at using his mind. (.....but only men of understanding really heed. (Quran 3:7) “.....Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Are those who know equal with those who know not? But only men of understanding will pay heed.” (Qur’an 39:9) The Prophet Muhammah is an honest man because in his life he feels that Allah is always watching him, even Allah says as its proof that he conveyed all verses to his Companions even to all people around him about the word of Allah without added or subtracted. "Nor does he speak (Qur'an) of (his own) desire." "It is only a Revelation revealed." (Qur'an 53: 3, 4) Only those who believe in the word of Allah will believe all His words in the Qur'an (15:9), and I am one of those who believe it. Which will be broken or destroyed is the place where His words were written, not the essence of His words. All that is in this world will be destroyed except Allah. The main source of law for Muslims is the Qur'an which all the contents are Allah's words, while the Hadits there are sahih (valid), Dhoif (false), and necessary in search of verification through the Qur'an. |
Posted By: asep garut
Date Posted: 19 March 2018 at 7:55am
In every human being there is a soul, including the Prophet Muhammad, and one of the ways Allah conveys revelation to the Prophet Muhammad is by the way Allah speaks into his soul through the Angel Gabriel (42:51) |
Posted By: debatedebate
Date Posted: 19 March 2018 at 9:04pm
The prophet has a tendency to forget verses, so what's the guarantee he managed to deliver all of Allah's words to all? 'A'isha reported that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) listened to the recitation of the Qur'an by a man in the mosque. Thereupon he said: May Allah have mercy upon him; be reminded me of the verse which I had been made to forget
Reference : Sahih Muslim 788 b The Book of Prayer - Travellers In-book reference : Book 6, Hadith 266 USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 4, Hadith 1721
(.....but only men of understanding really heed.
(Quran 3:7) “.....Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Are those who know
equal with those who know not? But only men of understanding will pay heed.” (Qur’an
39:9) Allah says: 1. I have given clear revelation but 2.No one can understand some verses except me but 3. Some who can use their mind can understand them Let the forum member decide whether these makes sense or obviously full of contradiction.
"Nor does he speak (Qur'an) of (his own)
desire." "It is only a Revelation revealed." (Qur'an 53: 3, 4) These verses were actually Quran defending your prophet when the pagan Arabs were accusing him of making up verses and claiming it as revelation. Anyhow claims from the Quran that Allah is watching is no prove that the Quran is not corrupted/ well preserved. You mentioned about his Companion, well Abu Musa al-Ash'ari himself testified to the existence of surahs that are no longer in the Qur'an because they were forgotten. Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:" If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:" Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and" that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13). Reference : Sahih Muslim 1050 The Book of Zakat In-book reference : Book 12, Hadith 156 USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 5, Hadith 2286
Which will be broken or destroyed is the place where
His words were written, not the essence of His words. All that is in this world will be destroyed except
Allah. Quran 15:9 says Allah will be the guardian of the Quran.Where did you get the assertion that His written words may be destroyed but not the essence of the word? So the written Quran may not be well preserved? Need I say more...
My friend, the 5 pillars of Islam are from the Hadiths not the Quran, It shows how central are the hadiths are in the your faith. As for the validity of hadiths, Al-Bukhari & Muslim are sahih. As for the other hadiths, your Muslim scholars had removed all rejected hadiths from the books. Only accepted narrations are remain. Daif mean weak but not rejected. Anyway none of the sunnah that I have refered so far is Daif. Please show me if I did. Thanks |
Posted By: ovibos
Date Posted: 20 March 2018 at 2:35am
The Sadducees believe only in the Torah but they reject anything else The Jews believe in the Tanakh (Old Testament) but they reject the Gospel The Christians believe in the Bible but they reject the Quran The Muslims believe in the Quran along with the Scriptures before it, including the Scrolls of Abraham and Moses (suhuf Ibrahim wa Musa), the Torah, and the Gospel. There's a saying in a hadith: "Wisdom is the lost property of the believer, so wherever he finds it then he has a right to it." In my opinion, Islam is unique to other religions because Islam acknowledges the previous Scriptures (especially the Torah and the Gospel) along with the Quran. So, theoretically a muslim has a broader view than a Christian or a Jew, since a muslim can take the good things in the Bible while a Jew or a Christian won't take the good teachings in the Quran.
|
Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 20 March 2018 at 1:57pm
@Ovibos
Wrong religion, you missed the latest update. It is the mormons and the "book of mormons". Airmano ------------- The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter") |
Posted By: asep garut
Date Posted: 20 March 2018 at 8:35pm
debatedebate, You say : “The prophet has a tendency to forget verses, so what's the guarantee he managed to deliver all of Allah's words to all?” All human beings have a tendency to forget, but are different from the word of Allah that has been conveyed to the Prophet Muhammad. I repeated it again for His guarantee: (15: 9) إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُۥ لَحٰفِظُونَ ﴿الحجر:٩ “Verily, We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (Qur’an) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)” Yes.... .”No one can understand some verses except me” This is a proof that human science will not be higher than Allah, not even the same. As a reflection of mankind: If human knowledge is equal to Allah, so there will be many of God, then this world has already ruined since a long time ago. Here is the proof: (21:22) لَوْ كَانَ فِيهِمَآ ءَالِهَةٌ إِلَّا اللَّـهُ لَفَسَدَتَا ۚ فَسُبْحٰنَ اللَّـهِ رَبِّ الْعَرْشِ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ ﴿ال�£نبياء:٢٢ “If there were therein gods beside Allah, then verily both (the heavens and the earth) had been disordered. Glorified be Allah, the Lord of the Throne, from all that they ascribe (unto Him).” You say: “Anyhow claims from the Quran that Allah is watching is no prove that the Quran is not corrupted/ well preserved.” Here is the proof that Allah is watching all of us (not only to prophet Muhammad): 57:4 وَهُوَ مَعَكُمْ �£َيْنَ مَا كُنتُمْ ۚ وَاللَّـهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ ﴿الحديد:٤ “.....And He is with you wheresoever you may be. And Allah is the All-Seer of what you do.” Human opinion is likely to be different, but the word of Allah will not be different because only Allah who speaks. The verses in the Qur'an are Qath'i, which means clear and definitive to the truth, whereas hadith is Dhanni (need a proof from the Qur'an), and not all hadiths come from the Prophet Muhammad. You say: “Where did you get the assertion that His written words may be destroyed but not the essence of the word? So the written Quran may not be well preserved?” What I mean is all Allah's Words in the correct Qur'an now (not the false Qur'an), that's what will always be preserved by Allah until the end of time. Not only in today, but from time immemorial also there are people who want to make false but failed Qur'an (Musailamah al Kazzab and others), around the middle of 2005 have been discussed also about the fake Qur'an, but failed. And all words of Allah in the Qur'an will always be preserved even though there are people who want to eliminate it from the surface of this earth. (61: 8) يُرِيدُونَ لِيُطْفِـُٔوا۟ نُورَ اللَّـهِ بِ�£َفْوٰهِهِمْ وَاللَّـهُ مُتِمُّ نُورِهِۦ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكٰفِرُونَ ﴿الصف:٨ “They intend to put out the Light of Allah (i.e. the Religion of Islam, this Qur’an, and the Prophet Muhammad) with their mouths. But Allah will bring His Light to perfection even though the disbelievers hate it.” Then, I am not rejecting all hadiths, but the first source of Islamic law must be believed is the words of Allah in the Qur'an, and the second is the hadith, and then the Ijma ' Oh
yes .... if I look at the way you give opinion or question, there's almost
similarity with a previous discussion friend, his name is "Saved"
in this forum. Thanks.
|
Posted By: ovibos
Date Posted: 21 March 2018 at 1:08am
@ airmano
I didn't say that Islam is unique because it's the latest religion. I'm saying that Islam acknowledges the previous Scriptures, and the believers are required to believe in those Scriptures and believe in the former prophets like Moses, John the Baptist, and Jesus. Mormons, on the other hand, reject the Quran and deny prophet Muhammad. According to Gospel of John, around 20-30 AD the Jews were expecting three different figures (not just one), that is the Messiah, Elijah, and the Prophet. (According to the Rule of Community (DSS), the Qumrans were also waiting for three different figures as well, that is the Prophet like Moses and the Messiahs (plural) of Aaron and Israel). I want to point out that the Messiah is different from the Prophet. Today, the Jews are still expecting them (or him?). They failed to recognize that some of those figures mentioned above had come. So they denied John the Baptist, Jesus, and prophet Muhammad. The Christians believe that the Elijah is John the Baptist, and both the Messiah and the Prophet are one person, that is Jesus. They don't realize that actually the Messiah and the Prophet are different persons. Muslims believe all prophets, including Jesus, John the Baptist, and Muhammad. And Islam, in my opinion, is the only religion who recognize those figures properly, that is, Jesus is the Messiah, while Muhammad is the Prophet like Moses. |
Posted By: DavidC
Date Posted: 21 March 2018 at 3:34pm
|
Interesting points, Ovibos. You are not wrong. The similarities between Moses and Muhammed are striking. ------------- Christian; Wesleyan M.Div. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 21 March 2018 at 11:29pm
| Moses's revelations were witnessed by the whole nation of Israel, Mohammed's supposed "revelations" were not witnessed by anyone but himself. Moses performed miracles in front of all to see and these miracles are sometimes recorded in history, yet Mohammed and his "splitting of the moon we don't find that outside of the writings of the Quran, Hadith, and other Islamic writings. Mohammed was an Arab from the Quraysh while Moses was an Israelite and Jew. When the Pharaoh came to chase down the Israelites Moses turned to face them and with the will of God himself, he split the sea. When the Quraysh came to chase down Mohammed he fled in fear to Medina and was luckily taken in by the Ansar. I don't see many similarities. |
Posted By: ovibos
Date Posted: 22 March 2018 at 12:29am
|
Thanks David And moreover: According to the Qumrans (the people of the Dead Sea Scrolls), there are two Messiahs (cf Zechariah 4:14), that is: 1. Priestly Messiah of Aaron 2. Royal Messiah (of David) Which one is Jesus: the priestly messiah or the royal messiah? The Christians think that Jesus is the Messiah of David, i.e. Jesus is David's descendant. Is it true? whereas Jesus himself said, "If David then calls Him ‘Lord,’ how is He his Son?" There's a verse in the Quran where people called Mary the mother of Jesus as "sister of Aaron" (Q 19:28) Many non-muslims mock this verse since they think the Quran mistakenly identifies Mary the mother of Jesus with Miriam the sister of Moses. But that is not the case. There's no error in this verse (Q 19:28)
In other words, the Quran informs us that biologically Jesus is the descendant of Aaron (tribe of Levi), not David (tribe of Judah). This is why David calls hims as "my Lord" not "my son" because the tribe of Levi has a higher position than the tribe of Judah, as Judah himslef stated: AND now, my children, I command you, love Levi, that ye may abide, and exalt not yourselves against him, lest ye be utterly destroyed. 2 For to me the Lord gave the kingdom, and to him the priesthood, and He set the kingdom beneath the priesthood. 3 To me He gave the things upon the earth; to him the things in the heavens. 4 As the heaven is higher than the earth, so is the priesthood of God higher than the earthly kingdom (Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, Judah 21) |
Posted By: ovibos
Date Posted: 22 March 2018 at 8:18pm
If you expect a prophet that 100% identical to Moses, you will not find such person in history ever. Deuteronomy states: "But since then there has not arisen in Israel a prophet like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, 11 in all the signs and wonders which the Lord sent him to do in the land of Egypt, before Pharaoh, before all his servants, and in all his land, 12 and by all that mighty power and all the great terror which Moses performed in the sight of all Israel." It means that all miracles performed in the land of Egypt won't happen again for the second time. So, please don't expect a prophet who performs miracles like Moses did. The Jews reject Jesus because they think Jesus didn't fulfill 100% the requirements of a Messiah or the signs of the Prophet. It is stated in the Quran: Indeed, We gave Moses the Book and sent after him successive messengers. And We gave Jesus, son of Mary, clear proofs and supported him with the holy spirit. Why is it that every time a messenger comes to you ˹Israelites˺ with something you do not like, you become arrogant, rejecting some and killing others? (Q 2:87)In other words, Jesus was rejected by the Jews because Jesus did NOT perfectly match the figure of the Messiah and/or the Prophet that the Jews wanted. However, you have to consider this: What is the best thing that Moses brought to the Israelites? Is it his staff? Is it the plagues? Is it because Moses split the Sea? NO! In my opinion the best thing that Moses gave to the Israelites is the LAW, or the Book of Moses, that evolved to what we know today as the Torah. It is the LAW that brought the Israelites from darkness into the light. Likewise, the greatest "miracle" of Muhammad is the Quran. It is the Quran that brought the Arabs from darkness into the light. It is the Quran that changed the characters of the Arabs drastically It is the Quran that changed the Arabs from lawlessness to be civilized people. It is the Quran that inspired the Muslims centuries after the death of prophet Muhammad, that Muslims in those days once became one of the most civilized nations in the world. The Quran and the Torah have many similarities. Both books talk about the One True God. Both books state that there is no god except Him. Both books instruct how to behave, the do's and the don'ts, distinguish between lawful and unlawful, etc. In fact, the Quran states that there is no book better than those two (the Quran and the Book of Moses) (Q 28:49) Now take a closer look on these verses: I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him. 19 And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him. (Deuteronomy 18) All suras in the Quran begin with: in the Name of God. (Well, all except one actually) In fact, the first verse revealed to prophet Muhammad is: "Recite in the Name of your Lord who created" (Q 96:1) You also can see some other similarities of Moses and Muhammad as follows:
|
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 23 March 2018 at 12:44am
|
Many verses say Jesus was a son of David and I find it strange Muslims can't agree on a single interpretation of that one verse some say that she is the literal descendant of Aaron yet others say it is sister in faith while others actually think she's related as in this Surah we find Mary, the mother of Jesus, is also called "daughter of Imran" in sura 66: And Mary, daughter of 'Imran, whose body was chaste, therefor We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. And she put faith in the words of her Lord and His scriptures, and was of the obedient. Qur'an 66:12 Imran is an Arabic form of the name Amram. Amram was the father of Moses, Aaron and Miriam. So the Qur'an mentions Mary in the same family relationship as Miriam. Since Ibn Kathir put two possible solutions for this problem, he was probably not sure about any of them. Otherwise he would put just one (either she is a descendant "sister" of Aaron or she had an actual brother coincidentally called Aaron). The Qur'an literally says "sister (�£ُخْتَ) of Aaron" and people understood the verse to literally mean "sister of Aaron". Only when Muhammad came to know that it was wrong, the meaning changed into "a descendant of Aaron". In the Christian sources she is said to be from the family of David, so why is the Qur'an saying she is from the family of Aaron? Some apologists point out that in Luke 1:5, Elizabeth is said to be a descendant of Aaron and in Luke 1:36 Mary is said to be a cousin or relative of Mary. But just because Mary is a cousin or somehow related to Elizabeth, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are both descendants of Aaron. If Mary was known to be a descendant of Aaron, then why the Arab Christians (and Aisha and Mughira b. Shu'ba) from Muhammad's time didn't know about it? This also doesn't explain why in the 3rd sura she is described as an actual daughter of Amram. Muhammad's companions and even Aisha, all understood the Qur'an to mean she is literally the sister of Aaron. Tafsir Ibn Kathir in its non-abridged Arabic version says this: وَقَالَ اِبْن جَرِير حَدَّثَنِي يَعْقُوب حَدَّثَنَا اِبْن عُلَيَّة عَنْ سَعِيد بْن �£َبِي صَدَقَة عَنْ مُحَمَّد بْن سِيرِينَ قَالَ �£ُنْبِئْت �£َنَّ كَعْبًا قَالَ إِنَّ قَوْله : " يَا �£ُخْت هَارُون " لَيْسَ بِهَارُون �£َخِي مُوسَى قَالَ فَقَالَتْ لَهُ عَائِشَة كَذَبْت قَالَ يَا �£ُمّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِنْ كَانَ النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَهُ فَهُوَ �£َعْلَم وَ�£َخْبَر وَإِلَّا فَإِنِّي �£َجِد بَيْنهمَا سِتّمِائَةِ سَنَة قَالَ فَسَكَتَتْ وَفِي هَذَا التَّارِيخ نَظَر It was narrated from Ibn Jarir, narrated from Yaqub, narrated from Ibn U’laya, narrated from Sa’id Ibn Abi Sadaqa, narrated from Muhammad Ibn Sireen who stated that he was told that Ka’b said the verse that reads, "O sister of Harun (Aaron)!" (of Sura 19:28) does not refer to Aaron the brother of Moses. Aisha replied to Ka’b, "You have lied." Ka’b responded, "O Mother of the believers! If the prophet, may Allah’s prayers be upon him, has said it, and he is more knowledgeable, then this is what he related. Besides, I find the difference in time between them (Jesus and Moses) to be 600 years." He said that she remained silent. Tafsir Ibn Kathir (non-abridged) on 19:28 [2] |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 23 March 2018 at 12:46am
|
Seventeen verses in the New Testament describe Jesus as the “son of David.” But the question arises, how could Jesus be the son of David if David lived approximately 1,000 years before Jesus? The answer is that Christ (the Messiah) was the fulfillment of the prophecy of the seed of David (2 Samuel 7:12–16). Jesus is the promised Messiah, which means He had to be of the lineage of David. Matthew 1 gives the genealogical proof that Jesus, in His humanity, was a direct descendant of Abraham and David through Joseph, Jesus’ legal father. The genealogy in Luke 3 traces Jesus’ lineage through His mother, Mary. Jesus is a descendant of David by adoption through Joseph and by blood through Mary. “As to his earthly life [Christ Jesus] was a descendant of David” (Romans 1:3). Primarily, the title “Son of David” is more than a statement of physical genealogy. It is a Messianic title. When people referred to Jesus as the Son of David, they meant that He was the long-awaited Deliverer, the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies. Jesus was addressed as “Lord, thou son of David” several times by people who, by faith, were seeking mercy or healing. The woman whose daughter was being tormented by a demon (Matthew 15:22) and the two blind men by the wayside (Matthew 20:30) all cried out to the Son of David for help. The titles of honor they gave Him declared their faith in Him. Calling Him “Lord” expressed their sense of His deity, dominion, and power, and calling Him “Son of David,” expressed their faith that He was the Messiah. The Pharisees understood exactly what the people meant when they called Jesus “Son of David.” But, unlike those who cried out in faith, the Pharisees were so blinded by their own pride that they couldn’t see what the blind beggars could see—that here was the Messiah they had supposedly been waiting for all their lives. They hated Jesus because He wouldn’t give them the honor they thought they deserved, so when they heard the people hailing Jesus as the Savior, they became enraged (Matthew 21:15) and plotted to destroy Him (Luke 19:47). Jesus further confounded the scribes and Pharisees by asking them to explain the meaning of this very title: how could it be that the Messiah is the son of David when David himself refers to Him as “my Lord” (Mark 12:35–37; cf. Psalm 110:1)? The teachers of the Law couldn’t answer the question. Jesus thereby exposed the Jewish leaders’ ineptitude as teachers and their ignorance of what the Old Testament taught as to the true nature of the Messiah, further alienating them from Him. Jesus’ point in asking the question of Mark 12:35 was that the Messiah is more than the physical son of David. If He is David’s Lord, He must be greater than David. As Jesus says in Revelation 22:16, “I am the Root and the Offspring of David.” That is, He is both the Creator of David and the Descendant of David. Only the Son of God made flesh could say that. |
Posted By: DavidC
Date Posted: 23 March 2018 at 5:17am
|
I have not read the testament of the twelve patriarchs. I will need to get back with you on that. ------------- Christian; Wesleyan M.Div. |
Posted By: ovibos
Date Posted: 23 March 2018 at 9:03pm
in case the Testament of the Twelve Patriarch is not convincing enough, there's another "proof" that Levi has a higher position than Judah in the Book of Jubilee Chapter 31: In the Book of Jubilee, Isaac gave blessings to two of Jacob's sons, that is Levi and Judah. Isaac blessed Levi first by his right hand, and then he blessed Judah by his left hand. It reminds me how Jacob blessed Ephraim and Manasseh, which we know that Ephraim became greater than Mannaseh.
|
Posted By: ovibos
Date Posted: 26 March 2018 at 1:22am
Nowhere in the Bible states that Mary is from the family of David. Luke 3:23 simply states that people thought that Jesus is the son of Joseph (what people think is not necessarily true). Unlike the Gospels, the Quran always calls Jesus as "the son of Mary", not "the son of Joseph" It's the genealogy of Mary that matters, not Joseph.
There's a problem if you said that Jesus is a descendant of David by adoption through Joseph. According to Matthew 1, Jesus is the descendant of David through Joseph ... through Jeconiah. According to Jeremiah 22:28-30, Jeconiah is childless and none of his offspring shall succeed in sitting on the throne of David and ruling in Judah. Therefore, the Messiah must be NOT from the lineage of Jeconiah. ====================================================== If you study the Dead Sea Scrolls, you might be familiar with the Testimonia (4Q175). In the Testimonia or Messianic Anthology, there are three verses about three different figures, that is: 1. The Prophet (Deut 18:18-19), 2. The Messiah of David (Numbers 24:15-17), 3. The Priestly Messiah (Deut 33:8-11) Of all those verses, which one is fit to Jesus? In my opinion, it's Deuteronomy 33:8-11 that fits to Jesus, especially in the phrase: "Who says of his father and mother, ‘I have not seen them’; Nor did he acknowledge his brothers, Or know his own children"So, in my opinion, Jesus must be from the tribe of Levi. FYI: When commented on the Diatessaron, Saint Ephrem also stated that Mary was from the House of Aaron. So, the Quran is not the only one that states that Mary is the descendant of Aaron. |
Posted By: Al Masihi
Date Posted: 11 April 2018 at 6:10am
|
The curse on Jeconiah (more commonly known as Jehoiachin) in Jeremiah 22:30 says that, due to his unfaithfulness, none of his children would prosper or sit on the throne of David. Jeremiah 36:30 is even more specific in saying the curse fell “on him and his children and his attendants. In fact, this is what happened. When Jehoiachin was taken by Nebuchadnezzar, his uncle Zedekiah was made king. When Zedekiah rebelled, he was killed by the Babylonians. Zedekiah was the last of the royal line to rule in Jerusalem. So, the prophecy was fulfilled. None of Jehoiachin’s children became king of Judah,and neither did his attendants. The prophecy says nothing of his great grandchildren of those who came later. Even if we were to take the prophecy to apply to later generations, which is not the most reasonable interpretation, Jesus never took a throne or ruled in Judah. His kingdom is not of this world. However, there is no indication that the prophecy was about the distant future in any case. |
Posted By: FearPlay
Date Posted: 19 April 2018 at 2:10am
| It is the continuation of the other monotheistic faiths and thus maintains consistency. It is the consistency that makes it compelling. |