Tuesday, October 18, 2011

1MoreMuslim Deliberately Distorts Craig's Position in an Effort to Rescue Allah

In response to my airtight argument in "Does Allah Commit Shirk?", 1MoreMuslim argues that Allah is under no obligation to obey the laws he gives to Muslims. He writes:

We need to put the definition first: A Sin is what humans do, in disobedience to God. I know Christian theology teaches that God as a being subject to his law, and must fulfill it himself like humans ( offering sacrifice for sin). In Islam, God is really Sovereign. You teach sovereignty just for lip service, we teach it for real. God is over the law, he is the maker of law.

So according to 1MoreMuslim, Allah is free to lust after women (or men, or children). Allah is free to commit adultery. Allah can have all kinds of racist thoughts. Allah can send the best people to hell, and the worst people to heaven. Allah can torture babies and puppies for no reason whatsoever. Allah could wake up one morning and love everyone, then wake up the next morning and hate everyone. Allah might be worshipping Hindu gods right now, and he might be praying to Buddha. We have no way of knowing, for "God is over the law."

If this is how 1MoreMuslim views Allah, that's up to him. What's disturbing, however, is that he deliberately distorts and misrepresents William Lane Craig's position in an effort to show that Christianity teaches the same absurd position that Muslims hold. Of course, since 1MoreMuslim's god allows him to deceive unbelievers, and since his god calls Christians and Jews the "worst of creatures," we shouldn't be surprised that he would would be eager to twist Craig's words. But if he wants to be a good deceiver, he shouldn't make it so easy to catch him!

1MoreMuslim writes:

One way to expose David wood's fallacy is to quote a more prominent and very respected Christian apologist William Lane Craig:

According to the version of divine command ethics which I’ve defended, our moral duties are constituted by the commands of a holy and loving God. Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself, He has no moral duties to fulfill. He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are. For example, I have no right to take an innocent life. For me to do so would be murder. But God has no such prohibition..

Next is a direct refutation of Anthony Roger's claims:

The problem with Islam, then, is not that it has got the wrong moral theory; it’s that it has got the wrong God. If the Muslim thinks that our moral duties are constituted by God’s commands, then I agree with him.

Yes Anthony , W L Craig must have taken that from Aristotle looooooooooooool.

By selectively quoting Craig, 1MoreMuslim attempts to deceive us into thinking that Craig agrees with his position. But reading Craig in context refutes this deceptive claim. Let's look at Craig's entire post to see 1MoreMuslim's deception.

************************************************

Craig writes:

According to the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), when God called forth his people out of slavery in Egypt and back to the land of their forefathers, he directed them to kill all the Canaanite clans who were living in the land (Deut. 7.1-2; 20.16-18). The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child was to be killed. The book of Joshua tells the story of Israel’s carrying out God’s command in city after city throughout Canaan.

These stories offend our moral sensibilities. Ironically, however, our moral sensibilities in the West have been largely, and for many people unconsciously, shaped by our Judaeo-Christian heritage, which has taught us the intrinsic value of human beings, the importance of dealing justly rather than capriciously, and the necessity of the punishment’s fitting the crime. The Bible itself inculcates the values which these stories seem to violate.

The command to kill all the Canaanite peoples is jarring precisely because it seems so at odds with the portrait of Yahweh, Israel’s God, which is painted in the Hebrew Scriptures. Contrary to the vituperative rhetoric of someone like Richard Dawkins, the God of the Hebrew Bible is a God of justice, long-suffering, and compassion.

You can’t read the Old Testament prophets without a sense of God’s profound care for the poor, the oppressed, the down-trodden, the orphaned, and so on. God demands just laws and just rulers. He literally pleads with people to repent of their unjust ways that He might not judge them. “As I live, says the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live” (Ez. 33.11).

He sends a prophet even to the pagan city of Nineveh because of his pity for its inhabitants, “who do not know their right hand from their left” (Jon. 4.11). The Pentateuch itself contains the Ten Commandments, one of the greatest of ancient moral codes, which has shaped Western society. Even the stricture “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” was not a prescription of vengeance but a check on excessive punishment for any crime, serving to moderate violence.

God’s judgement is anything but capricious.
When the Lord announces His intention to judge Sodom and Gomorrah for their sins, Abraham boldly asks,

“Will you indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked? Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city. Will you then sweep away the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous who are in it? Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” (Gen. 18.25).

Like a Middle Eastern merchant haggling for a bargain, Abraham continually lowers his price, and each time God meets it without hesitation, assuring Abraham that if there are even ten righteous persons in the city, He will not destroy it for their sake.

So then what is Yahweh doing in commanding Israel’s armies to exterminate the Canaanite peoples? It is precisely because we have come to expect Yahweh to act justly and with compassion that we find these stories so difficult to understand. How can He command soldiers to slaughter children?

Now before attempting to say something by way of answer to this difficult question, we should do well first to pause and ask ourselves what is at stake here. Suppose we agree that if God (who is perfectly good) exists, He could not have issued such a command. What follows? That Jesus didn’t rise from the dead? That God does not exist? Hardly! So what is the problem supposed to be?

I’ve often heard popularizers raise this issue as a refutation of the moral argument for God’s existence. But that’s plainly incorrect. The claim that God could not have issued such a command doesn’t falsify or undercut either of the two premises in the moral argument as I have defended it:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

2. Objective moral values do exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

In fact, insofar as the atheist thinks that God did something morally wrong in commanding the extermination of the Canaanites, he affirms premise (2). So what is the problem supposed to be?

The problem, it seems to me, is that if God could not have issued such a command, then the biblical stories must be false. Either the incidents never really happened but are just Israeli folklore; or else, if they did, then Israel, carried away in a fit of nationalistic fervor, thinking that God was on their side, claimed that God had commanded them to commit these atrocities, when in fact He had not. In other words, this problem is really an objection to biblical inerrancy.

In fact, ironically, many Old Testament critics are sceptical that the events of the conquest of Canaan ever occurred. They take these stories to be part of the legends of the founding of Israel, akin to the myths of Romulus and Remus and the founding of Rome. For such critics the problem of God’s issuing such a command evaporates.

Now that puts the issue in quite a different perspective! The question of biblical inerrancy is an important one, but it’s not like the existence of God or the deity of Christ! If we Christians can’t find a good answer to the question before us and are, moreover, persuaded that such a command is inconsistent with God’s nature, then we’ll have to give up biblical inerrancy. But we shouldn’t let the unbeliever raising this question get away with thinking that it implies more than it does.

I think that a good start at this problem is to enunciate our ethical theory that underlies our moral judgements. According to the version of divine command ethics which I’ve defended, our moral duties are constituted by the commands of a holy and loving God. Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself, He has no moral duties to fulfill. He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are. For example, I have no right to take an innocent life. For me to do so would be murder. But God has no such prohibition. He can give and take life as He chooses. We all recognize this when we accuse some authority who presumes to take life as “playing God.” Human authorities arrogate to themselves rights which belong only to God. God is under no obligation whatsoever to extend my life for another second. If He wanted to strike me dead right now, that’s His prerogative.

What that implies is that God has the right to take the lives of the Canaanites when He sees fit. How long they live and when they die is up to Him.

So the problem isn’t that God ended the Canaanites’ lives. The problem is that He commanded the Israeli soldiers to end them. Isn’t that like commanding someone to commit murder? No, it’s not. Rather, since our moral duties are determined by God’s commands, it is commanding someone to do something which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been murder. The act was morally obligatory for the Israeli soldiers in virtue of God’s command, even though, had they undertaken it on their on initiative, it would have been wrong.

On divine command theory, then, God has the right to command an act, which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been sin, but which is now morally obligatory in virtue of that command.

All right; but isn’t such a command contrary to God’s nature? Well, let’s look at the case more closely. It is perhaps significant that the story of Yahweh’s destruction of Sodom--along with his solemn assurances to Abraham that were there as many as ten righteous persons in Sodom, the city would not have been destroyed--forms part of the background to the conquest of Canaan and Yahweh’s command to destroy the cities there. The implication is that the Canaanites are not righteous people but have come under God’s judgement.

In fact, prior to Israel’s bondage in Egypt, God tells Abraham,

“Know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites [one of the Canaanite clans] is not yet complete” (Gen. 15. 13, 16).

Think of it! God stays His judgement of the Canaanite clans 400 years because their wickedness had not reached the point of intolerability! This is the long-suffering God we know in the Hebrew Scriptures. He even allows his own chosen people to languish in slavery for four centuries before determining that the Canaanite peoples are ripe for judgement and calling His people forth from Egypt.

By the time of their destruction, Canaanite culture was, in fact, debauched and cruel, embracing such practices as ritual prostitution and even child sacrifice. The Canaanites are to be destroyed “that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the Lord your God” (Deut. 20.18). God had morally sufficient reasons for His judgement upon Canaan, and Israel was merely the instrument of His justice, just as centuries later God would use the pagan nations of Assyria and Babylon to judge Israel.

But why take the lives of innocent children? The terrible totality of the destruction was undoubtedly related to the prohibition of assimilation to pagan nations on Israel’s part. In commanding complete destruction of the Canaanites, the Lord says, “You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons, or taking their daughters for your sons, for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods” (Deut 7.3-4). This command is part and parcel of the whole fabric of complex Jewish ritual law distinguishing clean and unclean practices. To the contemporary Western mind many of the regulations in Old Testament law seem absolutely bizarre and pointless: not to mix linen with wool, not to use the same vessels for meat and for milk products, etc. The overriding thrust of these regulations is to prohibit various kinds of mixing. Clear lines of distinction are being drawn: this and not that. These serve as daily, tangible reminders that Israel is a special people set apart for God Himself.

I spoke once with an Indian missionary who told me that the Eastern mind has an inveterate tendency toward amalgamation. He said Hindus upon hearing the Gospel would smile and say, “Sub ehki eh, sahib, sub ehki eh!” (“All is One, sahib, All is One!” [Hindustani speakers forgive my transliteration!]). It made it almost impossible to reach them because even logical contradictions were subsumed in the whole. He said that he thought the reason God gave Israel so many arbitrary commands about clean and unclean was to teach them the Law of Contradiction!

By setting such strong, harsh dichotomies God taught Israel that any assimilation to pagan idolatry is intolerable. It was His way of preserving Israel’s spiritual health and posterity. God knew that if these Canaanite children were allowed to live, they would spell the undoing of Israel. The killing of the Canaanite children not only served to prevent assimilation to Canaanite identity but also served as a shattering, tangible illustration of Israel’s being set exclusively apart for God.

Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.

So whom does God wrong in commanding the destruction of the Canaanites? Not the Canaanite adults, for they were corrupt and deserving of judgement. Not the children, for they inherit eternal life. So who is wronged? Ironically, I think the most difficult part of this whole debate is the apparent wrong done to the Israeli soldiers themselves. Can you imagine what it would be like to have to break into some house and kill a terrified woman and her children? The brutalizing effect on these Israeli soldiers is disturbing.

But then, again, we’re thinking of this from a Christianized, Western standpoint. For people in the ancient world, life was already brutal. Violence and war were a fact of life for people living in the ancient Near East. Evidence of this fact is that the people who told these stories apparently thought nothing of what the Israeli soldiers were commanded to do (especially if these are founding legends of the nation). No one was wringing his hands over the soldiers’ having to kill the Canaanites; those who did so were national heroes.

Moreover, my point above returns. Nothing could so illustrate to the Israelis the seriousness of their calling as a people set apart for God alone. Yahweh is not to be trifled with. He means business, and if Israel apostasizes the same could happen to her. As C. S. Lewis puts it, “Aslan is not a tame lion.”

Now how does all this relate to Islamic jihad? Islam sees violence as a means of propagating the Muslim faith. Islam divides the world into two camps: the dar al-Islam (House of Submission) and the dar al-harb (House of War). The former are those lands which have been brought into submission to Islam; the latter are those nations which have not yet been brought into submission. This is how Islam actually views the world!

By contrast, the conquest of Canaan represented God’s just judgement upon those peoples. The purpose was not at all to get them to convert to Judaism! War was not being used as an instrument of propagating the Jewish faith. Moreover, the slaughter of the Canaanites represented an unusual historical circumstance, not a regular means of behavior.

The problem with Islam, then, is not that it has got the wrong moral theory; it’s that it has got the wrong God. If the Muslim thinks that our moral duties are constituted by God’s commands, then I agree with him. But Muslims and Christians differ radically over God’s nature. Christians believe that God is all-loving, while Muslims believe that God loves only Muslims. Allah has no love for unbelievers and sinners. Therefore, they can be killed indiscriminately. Moreover, in Islam God’s omnipotence trumps everything, even His own nature. He is therefore utterly arbitrary in His dealing with mankind. By contrast Christians hold that God’s holy and loving nature determines what He commands.

The question, then, is not whose moral theory is correct, but which is the true God?


************************************************

Here we see that, in context, Craig's position is actually radically different from that of 1MoreMuslim. Craig declares that God is, by nature, compassionate, just, and loving. God's actions do not flow from a legal code, but from his nature. Hence, while God is not bound by the laws he issues to creatures, these laws flow from the same source as God's actions (namely, his nature).

The commands God gives to us fall into more than one category. Moral laws ("Do not murder") are a reflection of God's nature (in this case, his compassion and justice). Ceremonial laws ("Remember the Sabbath") often have a moral aspect, but are more flexible (God gave the Sabbath as a time of rest due to his compassion, but he could have commanded us to honor two Sabbaths per week, or three Sabbaths per month, etc.). Theological laws ("You shall have no other gods before me") relate to our exclusive worship of and devotion towards the one true God.

Craig holds to a version of Divine Command Theory, according to which God is not bound by all of the laws he commands us to obey. But this doesn't mean that God's actions are arbitrary. Indeed, Craig criticizes Allah's arbitrary dealings with mankind. God, as the supreme author of life, the final judge over mankind, and the only being who knows everything (e.g. our thoughts, our future actions, etc.) is certainly not bound by commands such as "Do not judge" or "Do not retaliate." The reason we are not allowed to judge or to retaliate is that only God's judgment is perfect. So God, in virtue of his supremacy, gets to do certain things that we are not allowed to do. Notice, however, that this reasoning applies to certain laws in virtue of God's superior knowledge or goodness.

But 1MoreMuslim wants us to believe that Craig's God can therefore do anything whatsoever. The context of Craig's words shows that this is utter nonsense. Craig carefully argues that God has "morally sufficient reasons" for his commands in the Old Testament. How can God have morally sufficient reasons when his actions are arbitrary?

Thus, while Craig agrees with 1MoreMuslim that the laws that apply to human beings do not necessarily apply to God, Craig would completely reject the absurd conclusions 1MoreMuslim draws from this.

The real issue before us is 1MoreMuslim's attempted justification of Allah's actions. According to Muhammad, swearing by anything other than Allah is "shirk." Why? Because when we swear by something, we're drawing attention to its greatness and supreme importance, and Muhammad held that only Allah is great enough to be mentioned in an oath. To swear by something other than Allah is to give it a position that it cannot rightly have.

What kind of law is this? Is it a moral law, on the same level as "Do not commit adultery"? No. Is it a ceremonial law, like keeping the Sabbath? No. "Do not swear by anything other than Allah" is a theological law, meant to prohibit creatures from honoring created things alongside Allah. The command is similar to "Do not worship idols" and "Do not pray to false gods."

According to 1MoreMuslim, Allah is not only above moral and ceremonial laws, but above theological laws as well. Hence, Allah is free to swear by his creation, even though this means that he is giving these things a status alongside himself. But if 1MoreMuslim is right, then wouldn't Allah also be free to worship idols and to pray to false gods?

Oddly enough, 1MoreMuslim can't deny this conclusion without contradicting himself. If he says that Allah can't worship other gods or pray to idols, then either Allah has subjected himself to laws about shirk, or his nature would never allow him to do things that qualify as shirk. But this would mean that Allah can't swear by anything other than himself, for his prophet has already declared this to be shirk.

And yet 1MoreMuslim will continue to blindly follow his god and his prophet.

Welcome to Islam.

125 comments:

Mahdi said...

David, you wrote:

"So according to 1MoreMuslim, Allah is free to lust after women (or men, or children). Allah is free to commit adultery. Allah can have all kinds of racist thoughts. Allah can send the best people to hell, and the worst people to heaven. Allah can torture babies and puppies for no reason whatsoever. Allah could wake up one morning and love everyone, then wake up the next morning and hate everyone. Allah might be worshipping Hindu gods right now, and he might be praying to Buddha. We have no way of knowing, for "God is over the law."

Allah can certainly do any of those things that you mentioned, he has the power to do anything, but doing so would contradict himself, and Allah swt does not do something against himself. Can he torture babies in Hell? Yes, he has the power to do so. Does he do it? No, it would go against his nature.

Mahdi said...

I just finished reading the entire article and I'm kind of surprised at Craig's statements. I do agree with some, but others I don't. Islam didn't spread it's message by the sword. We certainly don't view the world as something to enslave. I think Craig has a wrong view of Islam.

Also this notion of "God must love everybody unconditionally" seems illogical. If God does have unconditional love for everyone, then why would there be a Hellfire in the first place? Wouldn't everybody enter Heaven, regardless of their faith and actions?

He says that Allah only loves Muslims, yet the Noble Quran gives glad tidings to those of other faiths:
"Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Noble Qu'ran 2:62)

And where does Allah swt swear by his creation?

Anthony Rogers said...

Excellent post!!!

Radical Moderate said...

1milimeter

Again I say thank you.

Great post David

Kim said...

. "Allah has no love for unbelievers and sinners. Therefore, they can be killed indiscriminately. Moreover, in Islam God’s omnipotence trumps everything, even His own nature"

No they cant be killed indiscriminately. Study Jihad please.
And I suggest a read of Allah's names and attributes. That should clear up your mind.

And when Allah swears by something, and since He is the ultimate being in the universe and doesn't need to pray to anyone, it only shows how significant the object is to us. We human beings can commit shirk in our worship but Allah doesn't worship anyone. He created everything and if he does decide to take an oath by some object, it's meant to show how grand and important it is for us to ponder and increase our faith. If God is giving us an oath based on it, and He is the Supreme, then it must mean it is important for us to think about it. It doesn't bring the object any closer to his Majesty because it is reality that He is the greatest One God, and His throne is much larger and extends farther than the rest of his creation.

CristoTeAma said...

One of the best post i've ever read from you David, also i love the way Craig explains YHWH's nature and justice, both explainations together were totally worthy to read.
God Bless You

Dk said...

Even if Muhammad never said that, we could deduce by reason that a Creator swearing by the innately inferior (creation), is by reason absurd. A creator by definition cannot swear by anything but the ultimate source of all truth and reason, which in most religions is said to be itself. But thanks to the prophet of Islam for agreeing and supporting our case.

As for Craig's "morally sufficent reasons", I know that's not in essence what this post is about, however I have to add that THEORIES like this are infalsifiable. And I don't believe his reasoning process changes the fundamental likeness of Yahweh and Allah here is why.

If we can get Craig to name one moral action where God could not have a "morally sufficient reason". This challenge just proves the circularity, and unfalsfiability of Craig.

Craig also appeals to the "unknown" and can never know if he DOES or DOES NOT have good reason, he hold it on faith that he does have morally sufficient reasons due to a supposed good nature, yet he doesn't know what that reason is, so this is actually a faith based claim that inspite of all the pointless suffering and pain, all of it actually has a point. But how does he KNOW that is the case? Why can't the pointless suffering just BE pointless suffering?

God allowed humans to torture babies and bury them alive, so God could ultimately RESCUE the babies and cease their tears in heaven, and give them everlasting bliss nothing is IRREVERSABLE in this God scenario. Anything ultimately evil is permissible as long as God fixes his mess up.

However I can point out while neccsecary suffering/pain may cause growth and goodness for adults.

9 million children who die before the age of 5 ever year, what morally sufficient reasons can Craig give us that there pain/suffering and death was theologically NESSACERY. What hidden assumptions is CRAIG Hiding, that says God MUST have nessecary reasons to allow this? What are these reasons? Does Craig even know them? Or is he speculating about them, he is assuming since God has a certain 'good nature' therefore God can do anything and we must take it on faith that he has morally sufficient reasons.

The problem is because we "can't know" these reasons, Yahweh becomes similar to Allah. His will is unchallengable and unknowable, the only thing we are told about Yahweh is that since his nature is inherently good then he ought to have good moral justification. Yet his nature isn't good according to our standards as Craig already pointed out, we find that system of brutality foreign and immoral.

So his nature is goodness derived of it's own independability and nothing to do with our level of goodness, which ultimately leaves us clueless as when we see something evil like genocide and infanticide all of a sudden it's morally acceptable in God's good nature.

And this is the similarity of Yahweh and Allah. It's more of a SEMANTICAL issue. If you get to the nuts and bolts, both can order "evil" deeds, and both are not held to human standards, and the supposed "goodness" of Yahweh is his own independent nature of goodness, not what humans consider good, both are also said to be inscrutanable as they are the ultimate judge.

Dk said...

1MoreMuslim is atleast consistent in admitting his his Allah's standards are completely independent from humanity, he can do whatever he wants, even contradict the commandments given to humanity.

Christians on the other hand have to say "well we know he has this certain nature that makes him loving, and all the evidence of pointless suffering SEEMS contrary but we KNOW he has morally sufficient reasons which we don't know what they are".

Ultimately Yahweh can do whatever he wants by his own nature as his standard is not ours. And Allah has no standards at all, so he can do anything at all and essentially contradict his own properties and absolutes, this is a complete mockery and stupidity.

Both are left inscrutinable and totally worthless and meaningless, Allah being the slight worse off as it has no indefinite characteristics or properties by which we can even identify it.

Dk said...

Btw how does something that is not confined to any properties, rules, laws and regulations, or have any nature of it's own, how does it even exist?

If it has no nature, no indefinite characteristics, it is nothing...there is nothing

Allah can be A and NOT A.

Then Allah is also indefinable.

CristoTeAma said...

BTW i'd like 1MM tell this to Kim "One way to expose David wood's fallacy is to quote a more prominent and very respected Christian apologist William Lane Craig" when she tries to explain something that totally contradicts your most respected Muslim schollars trying to photoshop Islam..

1MoreMuslim said...

Every time I make a comment on David's posts, he feels the need to vomit another BS, kind of damage control.

"So according to 1MoreMuslim, Allah is free to lust after women (or men, or children). Allah is free to commit adultery. Allah can have all kinds of racist thoughts"

OF course a failed attempt of damage control should start by a mean misrepresentation. Like everytime, I feel like I should quit this blog for his owners.

Anthony Rogers ( guided the Holy Ghost), just minutes ago, washed his hands off Dr Craig, now David Wood has given him a reason to retract and embrace him once again.
Finally yes, We believe in a God who arbitrarily kills people on a daily basis. You don't believe that, be my guest, but that would a God for another world.

Kim said...

Now Cristo, you are accusing us Muslims of photoshopping Islam?
While your hate filled leaders dress Islam with the most unreliable sources and confuse you with the most misunderstood Hadith, we actually are proud to say that Shariah is the best solution for mankind and Islam will take over the world and we dress Islam with the best sources possible. We emit Hadith that have weak narrator links and not based on which Hadith we like or don't like.

It's their vain desires in believing in a Man-God, which I find absolutely degrading to the Supreme Creator of all things.

“Aisha, the Mother of the Faithful, was asked, ‘How did the Messenger of Allah behave?’ She replied, ‘His eye did not weep for anyone.’” Tabari VIII:40

Why should the Prophet "weep"?


“He (Mohammed) suffered from all but harmed none. He was affectionate and loving towards his friends and forgiving and merciful towards his enemies. He was sincere and honest in his mission; good and fair in his dealings; and just in deciding affairs of friends as well as of enemies. In short, all goodness and excellence have been combined in the person and personality of Hazrat Mohammed”.

Yes everything said is true no matter how much hate you have towards those qualities. He showed mercy towards his enemies in Mecca when he let them all go after the city had been conquered, he showed mercy to the Jewesd that poisoned him after Khaybar by not killing her, he showed mercy to the prisoners of war by giving them adequate food and no torture treatment as well as freeing some slaves captured from that. And he showed mercy to the Jews who were "massacred" by allowing them to be judged by their own laws for treason against the Muslims...and many more examples. He also showed justice using the best moral example of the Quran. Justice is justice

Everything else was false or twisted to a disgusting degree.

Radical Moderate said...

1milimeter wrote...

"“Aisha, the Mother of the Faithful, was asked, ‘How did the Messenger of Allah behave?’ She replied, ‘His eye did not weep for anyone.’” Tabari VIII:40

Why should the Prophet "weep"?"

No reason no reason at all, Socio and psychopaths never weep for any of their victims

SGM said...

Kim says, “We emit Hadith that have weak narrator links and not based on which Hadith we like or don't like.”

Can you please explain to me what methodology you use to determine “weak narrator links”. Is there a muslim encyclopedia that you consult, or is there a book that the rest of the world is not aware of other then muslims that tells you that such and such hadiths are weak. Can you please share this information? If there exists such books, can you please explain what methodology is used to come to such conclusions?

Will highly appreciate your help.

Kim said...

@SGM

There are tons of Islamic sites that accurately detail the process for you as well as YouTube videos.

Use your resources besides antiIslamic misinformation.
All you have to do is search "science of Hadith" and hopefully you'll do just that.

www.islam-qa.com
www.islamicawareness.net
www.call-to-monotheism.com



Why does a Prophet have to "weep" for everyone killed? He is a personal agent of God. He may shed tears, which he did when he was told by a man on how he killed his daughter because of shame in Pre-Islamic society, he mourned over his wives deaths, and also his dear Uncle Abu Talib when Abu Talib didn't take the shahada before his death. Yes he did shed tears but he doesn't "weep" and I'm pretty sure weeping is a sin in Islam if you do it too much (weeping excessively over how your life sucks for whatever reason). Go look up what weeping actually means, thank you!

CL Edwards said...

What hadeeth is considered strong or weak is highly subjective, it's mainly based on jarh wat ta'deel or a hadeeth scholars opinion about a narrator. Many times in Islamic history different scholars took different views on the same hadeeth narrator, one who says he is is thiqah(reliable) the other says he is not. That's why hadeeth like the ones were Muslims are told to seek intercession from Muhammad an He would answer from his grave, that Muhammad was made from Allah's light were considered authentic by early Muslims and disparaged by later Muslims.

CL Edwards said...

@ Kim you rant on and on about people using the wrong hadeeth as if you want to impress us with your authentic Islamic knowledge. now are you a muhaddith? Are you mujtahid? Or are you muqalid like 99% of the Muslims on earth? Who do you take from? Who do you make taqlid in for rulings on hadeeth, if you tell me scholar x says such and such hadeeth is weak, I can find you scholar y who says its good or even authentic.

Know one is smearing Islam its the cold hard truth.

Kim said...

@CL Edwards

Uhmm I follow the majority opinion by Hadith SCHOLARS, (which requires a lot of work which I know you severely underestimate).

"the other says he is not. That's why hadeeth like the ones were Muslims are told to seek intercession from Muhammad an He would answer from his grave, that Muhammad was made from Allah's light were considered authentic by early Muslims and disparaged by later Muslims."
I follow Sunni Orthodox Islam. There are deviants such as Shia and Sufi etc just like Christianity has it's denominations and deviants, perhaps Mormons.
There are differences of opinion but I follow the majority.

Who do you follow? Certain individuals who have no Hadith scholarship and say all Hadith are fake?
Their hearts and minds are fake.

Anthony Rogers said...

1 of 2

1MM said: "Anthony Rogers ( guided the Holy Ghost), just minutes ago, washed his hands off Dr Craig, now David Wood has given him a reason to retract and embrace him once again."

I said I am under no obligation to accept something merely on Craig's say-so, and also rejected his way of attenuating it as I originally understood it. Now that David has supplied the full context and the supporting argumentation given by Craig, things are not as they at first appeared.

I still would prefer to say that Muslims have the wrong God and the wrong moral theory, but no longer do I see my reason for holding this to be different than what Craig is driving at when his remarks are contextualized.

As you admit, Muslims are voluntarists. Something is good because God wills it to be good. It is bad because he wills it to be bad. I demur. God is holy and His commands reflect His goodness. We know or learn what is good from God's command or revelation, but what determines their goodness is not that God, who could arbitrarily have commanded something else, woke up on the wrong side of the bed and decided that prostitution would be okay only to turn around and make it bad the next day by issuing commands against it.

In fact, by complaining that I changed my mind on Craig, which does not really do justice to what took place, you actually tell on yourself and your "god." Is there something wrong with someone changing their mind? If so, you might want to have a chat with Allah and ask him what is up. Moreover, if you don't like someone changing their mind, then things are even worse when it comes to Allah. After all, I "changed" my mind after being given REASON to do so, as you admit above, but Allah, by your own admission, flops around like a fish ARBITRARILY.

But now that you have agitated the issue, it causes me to think about your original appeal to Craig and whether it even is consistent with your view even as you quoted it. You quote Craig saying that God does not issue commands to Himself, and you approvingly quoted this statement to get Allah off the hook for commanding creatures to avoid shirk by not swearing by created things even though Allah does this with impunity. However, even though I do believe it follows from certain things taught in the Qur’an that Allah is arbitrary, nevertheless your ever equivocal Qur'an tells us in places that Allah does decree, command, and lay down a course of action for himself that he must follow.

Anthony Rogers said...

2 of 2

For example, the following verse of the Qur'an teaches that Allah, just like Muslims, follows a "straight path".

Truly, I have put my trust in God, my Lord and your Lord; there is no creature that crawls, but He takes it by the forelock. Surely my Lord is on a straight path (ala siratin mustaqeemin). S. 11:56

Who laid down this straight path for Allah? Who guides him on it? Are you not forced to say Allah himself?

Furthermore, we are also told the following in the Qur'an:

Say: "Unto whom belongs all that is in the heavens and on earth?" Say: "Unto God, who has willed upon Himself the law of grace and mercy. He will assuredly gather you all together on the Day of Resurrection, [the coming of] which is beyond all doubt: yet those who have squandered their own selves-it is they who refuse to believe [in Him], S. 6:12, Muhammad Asad

Here it is in some other translations:

Say: Unto whom belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and the earth? Say: Unto Allah. He hath prescribed for Himself mercy, that He may bring you all together to the Day of Resurrection whereof there is no doubt. Those who ruin their souls will not believe. Pickthall

Say: To whom belongs what is in the heavens and the earth? Say: To Allah; He has ordained mercy on Himself; most certainly He will gather you on the resurrection day-- there is no doubt about it. (As for) those who have lost their souls, they will not believe. Shakir

Say: "To whom belongeth all that is in the heavens and on earth?" Say: "To Allah. He hath inscribed for Himself (the rule of) Mercy. That He will gather you together for the Day of Judgment, there is no doubt whatever. It is they who have lost their own souls, that will not believe. Yusuf Ali

Say: To whom is whatever is in the heavens and the earth? Say: To God. He prescribed mercy for Himself. He will, certainly, gather you on the Day of Resurrection. There is no doubt in it. Those who lost themselves that Day, then, they will not believe. Dr. Bhaktiar

With this being the case, Craig's statement does not help you in the least in getting Allah off the hook for veering from the straight path and violating his own moral injunctions, particularly those that pertain to associating partners with him, something he does when he swears by creatures.

CristoTeAma said...

Kim said..
"Now Cristo, you are accusing us Muslims of photoshopping Islam?
While your hate filled leaders dress Islam with the most unreliable sources and confuse you with the most misunderstood Hadith, we actually are proud to say that Shariah is the best solution for mankind and Islam will take over the world and we dress Islam with the best sources possible. We emit Hadith that have weak narrator links and not based on which Hadith we like or don't like"

-How can you say "my leaders" use unreliable sources when most of them are Sahih or they are from the first biographers of Muhammad like Ishaq or Tabari? i mean do you even know how the reliability of a any document works? Then you say you are pruod of Shariah and any of us doubt it, i read you saying that you believe in the Quran in stuffs like not taking Jews and Christians as friends, so that's not a surprise, but here is where i find your comment funny because you say later "Shariah is the best solution for mankind" the why in all the countries we find Shariah all that we can see is intolerance, unpunished rapes (here in spain around the 50% of rapist come from the Muslims world like Morrocco, the difference is that here they end in Jail), marital violence again unpunished, dictators who has almost all your countries living in the 3th world, in the countries with "democracy" we see stuffs like women can't vote (why should you, you are mental deficient according to you prophet or maybe 2 women votes should count as 1 male), schools where no girl can go because it's a male stuff to think, Violence even towards other muslims like the Shia or Ahmadiyyas, no technologies or medical advances (yet you love using the "great satan's" tech and meds), etc etc, If Shariah is the solution we would expect at least 1 country in the whole Muslim world that can prove that to us, but it should be frustating to see it is not like that.

CristoTeAma said...

I almost forgot to addres this, Kim said : "and Islam will take over the world and we dress Islam with the best sources possible."

- We who? the westernized Muslims? because in Arab countries we see they dress Islam with Hadiths like women can't go out alone without a male of her family going with her, i think a Saudi man or woman would say that this is the proper way of dressing Islam (because that way she won't be molested by no man, because muslims mind is so filled of lust that it's necessary for them to establish such rules), or killing apostates,etc. So i think you are kinda egocentric when you say "we" considering that Muslims of the western world don't reach 100 million, and according to many muslims you are around "2 billion" in the world. The bottom line is that you have a religion like a restaurant menu, you pick the hadith you like at the momment you need it and you dismiss others if it doesn't help your case at that moment even if they are all Sahih (bukhari or muslim). To finish you say believing in the "god-man" is degradating, well think about how we feel when muslims try to say that YHWH the almighty is a God arbitrary, commanding to kill not for wickedness but for our religion beliefs or the lack of it, even if they are not based on terrible acts towards innocents, or a God promising orgies, and money and women here on earth or up in heaven, which are so unholy in many different ways, allowing raping of slaves, child marriage, wife beatings, etc.. Now you know why "my leaders are filled of hate" it's not hate, it is we must show the world that Allah is not God but the enemy of God.
BTW: Dominating the world as you say won't bring peace either, prove of that is Iraq attacking Kuwait, Iran vs Iraq war, Shia vs Sunni war all over the world (even in Saudi Arabia Shia ppl are treated like 2nd class citizens, they can't get good jobs in example, etc), or putting bombs one to another mosques,persecution of Ahmadiyyas, the massacres in Kurdisthan, if that comes to happen (which ofc i don't think) we will have muslims saudi arabia like imposing laws to muslims argelia like, or black muslims starting to feel discriminated for arab muslims (since Muhammad was kinda racist), the thing is that now you are all "united" because for you is enough ppl say they are muslims but if the whole world convert that will be the beginning of a new Zaid vs Aisha war, muslims can't understand the word "peace" since your Quran doesn't allow you such privilege.

1MoreMuslim said...

Anthony Rogers:

What part in this is out of context?:

Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself, He has no moral duties to fulfill. He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are

That we call a general statement , you can put it in Harry Potter's book, it would still have the same meaning. The conclusion of Dr Lane is straight without ambiguity. Muslims have the wrong God but the right Moral ethics, that is the same Christian Ethics. According to Dr Lane, if a Christian kills a person under Yahweh 's commandment, that is not a Sin. A Muslim who kills a person under God's command is wrong, not because the action is immoral, but because the God is a "false" one.

If you don't admit the above, then you will not recognize the truth even if it smashes your face. I You are trying to defend the indefensible. Dr Lane , at least, is consistent with reality. ( a part from that theory of burning people in hell while loving them).

CristoTeAma said...

Mahdi said..

"He says that Allah only loves Muslims, yet the Noble Quran gives glad tidings to those of other faiths:
"Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Noble Qu'ran 2:62)

- 2 ways i can think of how to approach this sura, The First is that it was said when Muhammad was in Mekkah starting his "prophethood" and he was all about peace and love since he didn't have his army, yet when he had it ready, this Surah was abrogated for others like 9:29-30, 9:111, etc.. you should remeber your prophet "is not crazy" when he changes a Surah it's because new one is better "allah knows and you don't". The Second is that he contradicted himself, and it doesn't come from God, and maybe that morning he was having a good day and he said that, yet when he started to see Jews and Christians were not so open to him, he started to have bad days and as a result you have all the other verses saying we are the worst of creatures, that we will go to hell (if we don't stop saying Jesus is the son of God, hence being Christians, not mattering our rightouness), kill the people of the book, or Sahih hadiths saying we will take your sins to hell just for being Christians and Jews. I am sure there must be another ways to see this verse of the Quran, but those 2 seems to be enough for me.

John 8:24 said...

Kim,

Why didn't you answer my earlier post about black dogs taken from your favorite Islamic source that you quoted here again? Why do you keep hiding? I am not going to let you go!

---------------------
Kim,

According to your own source that you posted to defend a point, your prophet Muhammad said that the black dog is a devil. Ha ha ha ha ha...

So do you agree with your prophet that the black dog is a devil? How do you explain it?

Islam is a stupid religion! LOL!!!
---------------------

Mahdi said...

20 posts later and not a single person has answered my question. I see people here spewing uninformed garbage about Islam based on something they have yet to verify.

WHERE does Allah swt swear by his creation?

David Wood said...

Mahdi wrote:

20 posts later and not a single person has answered my question. I see people here spewing uninformed garbage about Islam based on something they have yet to verify.

WHERE does Allah swt swear by his creation?

I guess you somehow missed the dozen or so quotations I gave from the Qur'an. Do you need more? (There are plenty more.)

David Wood said...

Mahdi said:

"Allah can certainly do any of those things that you mentioned, he has the power to do anything, but doing so would contradict himself, and Allah swt does not do something against himself. Can he torture babies in Hell? Yes, he has the power to do so. Does he do it? No, it would go against his nature."

Your view of God would be much closer to mine. But 1MoreMuslim's view is radically different. He believes that Allah could decide to lust, or torture babies, etc. (i.e. not merely that he has the power to do it, but that he could actually do it, because there's nothing guiding his behavior but his whims, which aren't influenced by anything.

David Wood said...

1MoreMuslim,

How long are you going to dodge the question. Allah commands you not to pray to other gods or worship idols. To do so would be shirk. But you believe that this law doesn't apply to Allah. So can Allah pray to other gods or worship idols? If so, wow! Interesting god you have. If not, please explain why Allah cannot commit shirk in one way, but he can freely commit shirk in another way. I'm waiting.

Anthony Rogers said...

1MM, you ignored the bulk of what I said, in particular the fact that Craig's position is not even helpful to you, and even misrepresented Craig again. But that is all neither here nor there: your god is still struggling on the hook, and he is desperately waiting for you to get him off. David is waiting as well. Perhaps you don't care about David or the rest of us, but for the love of your false prophet, please don't leave Allah hanging.

Kim said...

@ CristoTeAma

That's the thing dear. There is no state in the world that has 100% Sharia law. It's based on their own constitutions and they're not even properly following it due to corrupt governments.

And the Iraq vs Iran wars etc...
The world is NOT dominated with Islam, not yet...not even halfway..So yes those wars are happening due to corrupt reasons.

You say Muslim men are full of lust. Well men cant survive without women, (and stay sane) that's a fact. At least I don't hear Muslim men talking about oral sex and swallowing as Christian boys do in the hallways at school. All men have lust and that lust increases significantly when they see exposed parts of women everyday and every minute all around them.

And you say that Muslims kill people for their beliefs.
They only fight soldiers, and at least we have a religion that tells us to not harm women or children or even trees or animals in war. If Muslims actually followed this act of mercy and love then many lives would be saved unlike the Christian dominant nations with Christian leaders and army generals that decide to drop bombs and shoot down innocent civilians with the excuse that they are "suspected" terrorists.


Allah can't commit sins because it is against His nature. It is impossible for God to sin because then that wouldn't make Him God, a Perfect being, where morality originates, where his decisions are the result of his absolute Justice. How can he commit shirk if he does not pray to anybody, since He is God.

Why don't you want to understand that when God takes an oath based on an object, it just shows how that object has a high status (nowhere near God's) and we should ponder over His signs. Allah swears by the fig tree and the olive tree. The trees therefore must be very important to us. If he swears by something as great as the sun. The sun is much greater compared to the entire solar system especially us. Allah is simply pointing out the things that we should pay attention to to increase our faith.

Your claims simply don't make sense. You say that since God swears by something significant in our lives, therefore God is committing a sin and is worshiping that object. Seriously think about it.

Mahdi said...

@David Wood

David, the word for swear in Arabic is Qasam/Uqsum (قسم). You said that there are dozens of quotations in the Noble Qu'ran where Allah swears by his creation. If it's not much trouble, could you post these ayats where Allah swears by his creation?

Kim said...

No insults intended but, who are the Christians to even think about falsely criticizing Islam when their own god was brutally murdered on a piece of wood, tortured, spit on, beaten, slapped, and then that very same 1/3 trinity god (the Son) was asking why the other 2/3 god had forsaken him.

The Christian God had to defecate, eat, drink, have sexual urges, getting tempted by the devil.
Not only that but the remarkable difference between the OT and NT God. Why the radical change? Apparently God in Christianity is not Absolute and changes like we humans do. After all the "Father" in heaven has very similar features to an old man. Correct me if I'm mistaken. 2/3 of God is/was here on Earth, the Holy Ghost and the Son, and the other 1/3 of God is a superman, very close to Zeus in description.
And yet you criticize the perfect Tawheed of Islam, the pure monotheism of 1 God and 1 PERSON
(sheesh).


That is what I can easily detect a false religion.
And the claim that the NT is reliable. Well how in the world can anyone trust it when so much of it doesn't have a 100% known author. Also the authors themselves if we ever found out who they are, how can you tell if they are trustworthy? Many people fabricate things for their agenda as we see in sects of any religion worldwide. Not only that but follow a person (Paul) who claimed to see Jesus and then decides to refute the Torah and the Jewish laws and make his own ideology up.

How much faith does that take? I'd say a lot. Paul himself said that Satan can disguise as an agent of light. He might as well have disguised himself when Paul had his "visions". It's like some people today who claim to be communicating to God saying that God came to them in a dream and told them to do this and that. That's obviously, the most obvious indication of a false agent.

David Wood said...

Mahdi,

You obviously didn't read the comments in "Does Allah Commit Shirk?" Your objection was obliterated, using the Arabic text of the Qur'an and your most trusted commentators. Do we need to repost the comments, or can you look through them?

jimlas said...

Kind'a like 'do as I say, not as I do'

1MoreMuslim said...

David Wood:

"1MoreMuslim's view is radically different. He believes that Allah could decide to lust, or torture babies, etc"

Again David don't quote me on God making Lust, I am not intellectually disabled. Since you read comments before approval, you should have read my comment on that in the previous post.
Since sexual desire is created by God. Therefore God would not do such thing, otherwise we will believe in Greek gods who love and lust after each other and beget children, because they are half humans half Gods, or as Christians say: fully God fully human.
This is the same mean argument as to say : can God create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift.



Let's now expose the situation:

David Wood believes God does not torture Babies.
We know Babies face torture everyday: by diseases, natural disasters, starvation...
So we have to conclude one of the two conclusions:

1/ David Wood's God has no control over what happens in our world.
2/ David's God doesn't exist in reality. he is only in his imagination.


Which one is it David?

Fernando said...

Someone said: "I follow the most relieable hadiths"... ok... can you present us the ortodox list off those "relieable hadiths" once and for all? no you can... you muslims will neber be hable to do so because tis list is flutuating according to the circunstances and conveniences... isn't that so?

The Purple Marquise said...

@Mahdi:

As a child didn't you memorize:

۲و التین و الزیتون By the fig and the olive
۳و طور سینین By mout Sinai
۴و هذاالبلد الامین And by this safe city....

What kind of Muslim boy are you? Or like always you memorized without understanding the meaning of what you parrot much less its theological implication?

The Purple Marquise said...

I personally actually did ask my religion teacher at school upon memorizing Sura 95 why did God swear by the fig and by the olive. What is so significant about olive and fig. She just waved her hand and said: "UH! It just rhymes well!!!"

Muslims usually don't go that far and don't think that deeply. Islamic theology is an illogical ad hock mishmash of things that many time can even be mutually exclusive. Nobody has sat down to harmonize all of its components and give it solid structure.

They also have this childish obsession to show that God is so TOTALLY powerful that can do anything that He damn well pleases and who are we to ask! They think it would be a weakness to God if he would be moral and have some obligations towards his creatures.

The concept of a God who enters into the mutual obligation of a covenant with his creation is alien to Muslims. They even have no idea how they are exactly going to be judged in the afterlife. Because Allah is so totally whimsical. He will put your deeds on a scale and check the list where all your deeds are recorded, but he might wave his hand in the end and forgive you if his heart suddenly melt. Or he might not melt and decide to punish you fully. Nobody knows. Maybe if you beg him enough before death you might get a chance. But it ultimately remains to be seen.

You have all kinds of responsibility towards God but he really has non towards you. He is more than capable of changing his mind.

Non of these are really very well thought through and its implications weighed properly by Muslim theologians since they are usually quite busy finding out with which leg to enter the toilet and how to perform Qusl (ritual bath) and meaningless stuff like that to actually sit down and develop a kind of coherent and reasonable systematic theology to help the believers know and understand and relate to their God!

CristoTeAma said...

Kim said..

"That's the thing dear. There is no state in the world that has 100% Sharia law"
- So when exactly is that suppose to happen? or when they start doing the same as their muslims countries and start killing Christians, Atheists, Jews, i will have to say "well it's because this is not 100% shariah law". Thx God there is not a 100% shariah law country, i think it's better some countries don't believe in those hadiths which say adulterous should be stoned to death. Besides you should check the laws of countries like Saudi arabia, which follows the hadiths and Quran, so you just want to be blind thinking that if it doesn't work it's because of the corruption,it's like we Christians saying "hey if there is no peace in the world it's because the whole ppl are not real christians" the difference is that our statement would be true since Jesus commands us to live in total peace, yet your statement is not valid because we find those Hadiths commanding to kill apostates and other stuffs we see in Iran, S. Arabia and many other muslims countries WHO FOLLOWS THE HADITHS AND QURAN AND THE EXPLAINATION OF THE RESPECTED MUSLIMS SCHOLLARS, those you decide to dismiss when it doesn't help you photoshopped Islam.
-About "christians" talking about lust and "oral sex" etc, according to my Bible they are commiting sin and they will be judge for that, yet that's not the case on the quran, Muslims are allowed to lust and keep on their faith because of their 72 virgins paradise, sex slaves, 4 wives, child marriage, etc etc. So while in Christianity they are wrong and accordong to "their" God they might be cast into hell for such lust, in Islam it is just the way it is.
-then you said something about Islam only allows to kill soldiers and not to harm women etc, This is just nonsense you say such things in this blog where you can find all over the place ISLAMIC SOURCES like quran+hadiths+tafsir or Schollars saying the opposite, i.e sura 9:29 he doesn't say "soldiers" who having received the message don't believe in Allah or his messenger. But you has proven all over your posts that you just misquote all the verses that may put your "Islam light" in troubles.
I really hope you may find the light Kim, because if you keep comming to this blog it's because maybe somewhere inside of you, you are looking for the truth, as i did some time ago when i started to read the Quran.

CristoTeAma said...

Kim said..
"No insults intended but, who are the Christians to even think about falsely criticizing Islam when their own god was brutally murdered on a piece of wood, tortured, spit on, beaten, slapped, and then that very same 1/3 trinity god (the Son) was asking why the other 2/3 god had forsaken him."
- He died for love to us, and as he said, he gives his life, none takes it from him, but then again muslims love to forget that lil part. About the "forsaken thing" i think you should read Psalms 22 it might shock you, because it is a prophecy of Jesus even describing his hands being pierced.

- Perfect tawheed? If that's the best argument, then i think we all should keep the Jewish doctrine then, because it's way better than Islamic one, Yet Allah liked our doctrine to the point of making us victorious according to the quran.

- And about Paul being deceived by a "Demon" you have a problem there, because we see Peter and John and others (who had the holy spirit on them) accepting Paul, and even more Peter and John in his letters say stuffs that put Islam again in the group of false religions, yet Muhammad was the only one who heard the voice of "Jibriel" and his companions (with no spiritual guidence) had to trust him, or trust in the rewards he offered them "slaves, money, orgies in heaven, kids, etc"
So i think you shouldn't even try to use Paul to help Islam considering this angel didn't behave at all ass an angel in the bible, besides Paul doesn't contradict Jesus teaching as Muhammad totally did.

John 8:24 said...

Kim,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlRMQtVET-g

Fernando said...

Muslims are getting more and more fanatics and do not eben understand they're going throught thate pathe...

let's see Kim's example, for instance: she lies; she accepts the most obnoscious moral behaviours; she insults other people's religion [wasn't it supposed to block people around here when someone offended the Holy Spirit? I thought so...]; she uses her hand to spread a barbaric and vile ideology founded by a mith uppon other miths [yesterday I found thate the moon crescent was a pre-muhammadic simbol used by pagan tribes]; she's pornographic uponn behaviours she considers "accepted";...

so: whate has islam, as a "religion", brought to the world that other previous religions did not?

let's pray to our commun God, the undiviseble Trinity, for her (or as it is being more and more evident, him)...

curly said...

The Purple Marquise,
I do love to hear from you, The Purple Marquise. You are so good.

John 8:24 said...

Kim said: "Paul himself said that Satan can disguise as an agent of light."

No. Paul didn't say that. Paul said that "And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light." 2 Corinthians 11:14

So its angel of light and NOT agent of light. And it perfectly fits the alleged Gabriel's appearance to Muhammad. The Holy Spirit through Paul warned Christians hundreds of years before Muhammad so that people would not be deceived! Let us look at how 'Gabriel' appeared to Muhammad and the appearance of Gabriel in the Bible. Which is an angel of God and which is Satan?

Gabriel to Muhammad (Sahih Bukari):

" ..the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, "I do not know how to read.The Prophet added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, 'I do not know how to read.' Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, 'I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?' Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said, 'Read in the name of your Lord, who has created (all that exists) has created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous. (96.1, 96.2, 96.3) Then Allah's Apostle returned with the Inspiration and with his heart beating severely. Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, "Cover me! Cover me!" They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, "I fear that something may happen to me." Khadija replied, "Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you. You keep good relations with your Kith and kin, help the poor and the destitute, serve your guests generously and assist the deserving calamity-afflicted ones." Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight. Khadija said to Waraqa, "Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!" Waraqa asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?" Allah's Apostle described whatever he had seen. Waraqa said, "This is the same one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out." Allah's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?" Waraqa replied in the affirmative and said, "Anyone (man) who came with something similar to what you have brought was treated with hostility; and if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly." But after a few days Waraqa died and the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while."

(Cont..)

John 8:24 said...

(Cont..)

Gabriel to Zechariah (Luke): "Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right side of the altar of incense. When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and was gripped with fear. But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to call him John. He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth, for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born. He will bring back many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” Zechariah asked the angel, “How can I be sure of this? I am an old man and my wife is well along in years.” The angel said to him, “I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to tell you this good news. And now you will be silent and not able to speak until the day this happens, because you did not believe my words, which will come true at their appointed time.”

Gabriel to Mary (Luke): In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.” Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.”

1) The being that appeared to Muhammad did not identify itself as an angel of God when it first appeared nor was it recognized by Muhammad as such. Gabriel was identified in the Bible and Zechariah and Mary recognized it as an angel. (Now, Kim, which being would likely benefit from keeping its identity secret the one who has nothing to hide or the one who wants to deceive?)

2) The being that appeared to Muhammad strangulated him forcefully till he could not bear anymore. No strangulation is reported in case of Zechariah and Mary. (Kim or any other Muslim, please tell me, which is more likely to strangulate a man who was just meditating - an angel of God or Satan?)

3) Muhammad was terrified and the being did nothing to calm him but as mentioned in the previous point strangulated him forcefully again and again. He was left fearing for his life for days! Imagine he had to travel from the cave to Khadija and then for many days this fear did not leave him. The being that appeared to Mary and Zacharia calmed their fears down by saying, "Do not be afraid"! (Another easy question to smart Muslims out there, which being would likely keep someone in fear - an angel of God or Satan?)

4) It was Muhammad's uncle Waraqa who identified the being as the angel Gabriel by his gut feeling. Waraqa did not see the angel himself nor was he alive to witness further revelations to verify that his initial hunch was indeed true. No second-hand testimony was needed to identify the being in the case of Zechariah and Mary. (One more easy question to the wise Muslims reading this, which testimony do you find as trustworthy?)

(Cont..)

John 8:24 said...

(Cont..)

Moreover, Sahih Bukari and Muslim, your authentic books, narrate hadiths which tell how Muhammad used to receive revelations - sweating profusely, hearing the ringing of a bell, reddening of face, breathing heavily, snoring like a camel and moving of tongue and lips in a way that was hard for him. Now all those open-minded Muslims, if any, answer me, in addition to the above, why do these symptoms of your prophet's 'divine' revelations appear similar to that of a demonic possession or a seizure?

Kim said: "That is what I can easily detect a false religion."

Kim, your false religion is being exposed here every day in plain sight for everyone to see! Please tell me that you are joking! Please!

Toll said...

Kim said: "Yes everything said is true no matter how much hate you have towards those qualities. He showed mercy towards his enemies in Mecca when he let them all go after the city had been conquered, he showed mercy to the Jewesd that poisoned him after Khaybar by not killing her, he showed mercy to the prisoners of war by giving them adequate food and no torture treatment as well as freeing some slaves captured from that. And he showed mercy to the Jews who were "massacred" by allowing them to be judged by their own laws for treason against the Muslims...and many more examples. He also showed justice using the best moral example of the Quran. Justice is justice"

From which we must conclude that Mohammed broke either Allah's or his own commands, which makes him either irrational like his god or an infidel. Which is your choice Kim?

Kim said...

It was during this time when the Prophet began to see pleasant dreams which in turn proved true.  He also felt an increasing need for solitude, and this lead him to seek seclusion and meditation in the rocky hills which surrounded Mecca.  There he would retreat for days, taking provisions along with him, and would return to his family for more provisions.  In the blaze of day and during the clear desert nights, when the stars seem sharp enough to penetrate the eye, his very substance was becoming saturated with the ‘signs’ in the heavens, so that he might serve as an entirely adequate instrument for a revelation already inherent in these ‘signs.’  It was then that he was undergoing a preparation for the enormous task which would be placed upon his shoulders, the task of prophethood and conveying the true religion of God to his people and the rest of humanity.
It came on a night late in the sacred month of Ramadan, the night known to Muslims as Laylat-ul-Qadr, the ‘Night of Decree.’

 
Cave of Hira (aerial view).  Prophet Muhammad used to meditate in this cave frequently.  The first revelations of the Quran came to him here.
 
Prophet Muhammad was in solitude in the cave on Mount Hira.  He was startled by the Angel of Revelation, Gabriel, the same who had come to Mary, the mother of Jesus, who seized him in a close embrace.  A single word of command burst upon him: ‘Iqra’  - ‘Read![1]’  He said: ‘I am not able to read!’  but the command was issued twice more, each with the same response from the Prophet.  Finally, he was grasped with overwhelming force by the angel.  Gabriel released him, and the first ‘recitation’ of the Quran was revealed to him:
“Read in the name of your Lord who created -created man from a clot.  Read: for your Lord is Most Bountiful, who teaches by the pen, teaches man that which he knew not.” (Quran 96:1-5)
Thus began the magnificent story of God’s final revelation to humanity until the end of times.  The encounter of an Arab, fourteen centuries ago, with a being from the realm of the Unseen was an event of such momentous significance that it would move whole peoples across the earth and affect the lives of hundreds of millions of men and women, building great cities and great civilizations, provoking the clash of mighty armies and raising from the dust beauty and splendor unknown previously.  It would also bring teeming multitudes to the Gates of Paradise and, beyond, to the beatific vision.  The word  Iqra’ , echoing around the valleys of the Hejaz, broke the mould in which the known world was casted; and this man, alone among the rocks, took upon his shoulders a burden which would have crushed the mountains had it descended upon them.
Prophet Muhammad was forty years old and he had reached an age of maturity.  The impact of this tremendous encounter may be said to have melted his substance.  The person he had been was like a skin scorched by light and burnt away, and the man who descended from the mountain and sought refuge in the arms of his wife Khadeeja was not the same man who had ascended it.
For the moment, however, he was as if a man pursued.  As he descended, he heard a great voice crying: ‘Muhammad, thou art the Messenger of God and I am Gabriel.’  He looked upwards, and the angel filled the horizon.  Wherever he turned, the figure was there, inescapably present.  He hastened home and cried to Khadija: ‘Cover me!  Cover me!’  She laid him down, placing a cloak over him, and as soon as he had recovered himself a little he told her what had happened.  The Prophet was in fear for himself.  She held him close and solaced him:

The Purple Marquise said...

Kim said: "Yes everything said is true no matter how much hate you have towards those qualities. He showed mercy towards his enemies in Mecca when he let them all go after the city had been conquered, he showed mercy to the Jewesd that poisoned him after Khaybar by not killing her, he showed mercy to the prisoners of war by giving them adequate food and no torture treatment as well as freeing some slaves captured from that. And he showed mercy to the Jews who were "massacred" by allowing them to be judged by their own laws for treason against the Muslims...and many more examples. He also showed justice using the best moral example of the Quran. Justice is justice"

Wow! Kim! The level of brainwash in you puts you in the hopeless category that I call "beyond the reach of reason"!

If you think those acts listed above are merciful then I simply hope I will never be subject to your Islamic mercy!!! Funny how Muhammad creates all the problems and then shows "mercy" to the victims of his problems!

First he captures free people and make them slaves, then he frees a few of them and then calls it mercy! First he rob the Meccan caravans and forces them to fight him, then goes and captures their city and then because he kills only a few of them he is called merciful! First he wrongfully accuse the Jews of treason and then pretends that he is executing their whole tribes' men because of so-called jewish law and calls that mercy! He first captures prisoners of war during his numerous raids on unsuspecting beduins and then the fact that he doesn't starve them to death is called merciful.

You know what Kim, what you call merciful we call barbaric. What you called merciful we call slavery, we call genocide. We don't give awards to people who don't starve their POWs to death. We send to tribunal for war crimes those who do! We don't considers people who don't massacre the inhabitants of a surrendered city as committing an act of mercy, but performing a duty! And we call those who don't abide (like Muhammad in relation to the Jews of Banu Quraiza) war criminals.

I am sure if Americans would have behaved half as barbaric as your prophet in Iraq and Afghanistan you would be the first one to scream for the criminal prosecution of Bush or Obama. In fact you muslims already do even though the Americans abide by the Geneva convention which let's face it is far more civilized than Muhammd's rules of engagement!

Go on Kim, demonstrate to all how barbaric your prophet is and how Islam is brainwashing you too, to become another barbarian like him! Don't fall into this trap Kim. You are in the West and live amongst a people with MUCH HIGHER standards of morality, civility and mercy. Stop the arrogance and learn from them. It will do you good!

Kim said...

@Toll
What commands did he break?

@John8:24
Try concentrating real hard and realize that after a while you will sweat.  The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) received revelation in his mind by the Angel Gabriel and he had to memorize it perfectly at the same time.  Imagine how much concentration it takes to do that.  The Prophet heard Gabriel recite and he repeated it afterwards and told the scribes to write it down.
Yes Gabriel's first revelation he embraced the Prophet and tell me what did he say? Tell me? Did he tell him to go rape people? To get drunk? To massacre indiscriminately? No. He told Him yo recite in the Lord of the worlds who taught men to write and created them from Alaq.

That doesn't sound like Satan. That's not even the nature of Satan.  
Aldo in the rest of the encounters between him and Gabriel, Gabriel appeared in the form of a man, fresh,clean, handsome, no sign of travel on him even though nobody had ever seen him before, and one time  the Angel sat before the Prophet and placed his hands on his thighs and asked him what the 5 pillars of Islam are and the articles of faith. Would Satan want you to remember your Lord through fasting, pilgrimage, giving charity for the poor, spending time in prayer?

No my friend that is 100% opposite of Satan.  In fact Paul negated the teachings of the Jewish Torah and started his own religion because he had fallen off his animal and got his head smacked hard, then saw "Jesus" aka his own personal Satan in that vision. 

And btw what was the Prophet doing in the cave of Hira? Just to remind you, he was meditating, trying to seek Allah without worshipping idols and engaging in weird practices.
God answered his call and sent the Angel Gabriel with the first revelation. 
Taken from:
http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/183/

The Purple Marquise said...

@Curly: Thank you brother! God bless you most abundantly!

1MoreMuslim said...

Purple Marquise:

I personally actually did ask my religion teacher at school upon memorizing Sura 95 why did God swear by the fig and by the olive. What is so significant about olive and fig. She just waved her hand and said: "UH! It just rhymes well!!!"



I think it's time for you to change the teacher.
Tell your "teacher" to read tafsir Ibn Katheer. Reading Tafsir, is something Islamic "teachers" would do from time to time.


The concept of a God who enters into the mutual obligation of a covenant with his creation is alien to Muslims.

And (remember) when We made a covenant with the Children of Israel. Q 2:83

When Allah made (His) covenant with the prophets, (He said): Behold that which I have given you of the Scripture and knowledge Q3:81

(And remember) when Allâh took a covenant from those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) to make it (the news of the coming of Prophet Muhammad SAW and the religious knowledge) known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it, but they threw it away behind their backs, and purchased with it some miserable gain! And indeed worst is that which they bought. Q3:187

CristoTeAma said...

Kim said..

"Would Satan want you to remember your Lord through fasting, pilgrimage, giving charity for the poor, spending time in prayer?"

-Fasting for Christianity: Matthew 6:16 “When you fast, do not look somber as the hypocrites do, for they disfigure their faces to show others they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 17 But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, 18 so that it will not be obvious to others that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who is unseen; and your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

So for us doing Ramadan would be useless because that would makes us hypocrites. We fast but we do it as we are taught, and since you didn't even know we fast, it shows we are doing great according to Jesus.

- Pilgrimage is a pagan practice for Hubal (Allah) and his daugthers, and also for the other Gods in Kabba, so we don't do that because that would be worshipping those Gods, besides Pilgrimage to Kabba or something like it is not found anywhere on the Bible, so Paul couldn't corrupt that (No Jew does pilgrimage).

- Charity for the poor:
>Luke 12:33 "Sell your possessions and give to charity; make yourselves purses which do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near, nor moth destroys." Yet Muslims gave charity from the money they got as war booty, so they were kinda Robin Hood? the only problem is that Jews and Christians, and Pagan who they stole that money from weren't The Sheriff of Nottingham or Rich people.

Also
>Matthew 5:42. "Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you."

>Luke 6:33 "And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, in order to receive back the same."

>Acts 4:32-35 "And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them. And with great power the apostles were giving witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all. For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales and lay them at the apostles' feet; and they would be distributed to each, as any had need" (continues)

CristoTeAma said...

Also Kim said..

-Spending time in prayers

Matthew 6:5 jesus said “And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him."

So if we pray as you do that would make us hypocrites and pagans, so again Kim you show you have never read the bible, not even the gospels.

1 Timothy 2:1 "I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior."

More verses about we must be praying constantly: Hebrews 4:16, 1 Timothy 2:8, 2 corinthians 1:11, Colossians 4:3, 1 Thessalonians 5:25.

JESUS: Matthew 5:44 "But I tell you, love your enemies and PRAY for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven" Muhammad said totally the opposite, he cursed us and despised us.

Luke 6:27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, PRAY for those who mistreat you." Agin we see Muhammad failed at this totally, yet Paul didn't fail even being guided by "a demon" according to you Kim.

Kim i hope you take your time to read the bible, even if it's just to search some verses you can use against Christinity, but even so i think at least you will know that we are following what YHWH the almighty taught us to do.

Kim said...

@ the Purple Marquise

There is a limit on the amount of mercy given to criminals and that is called justice. It might sound cruel to you because that is the tendency of human nature, but justice by God's commands has to be followed and paid for.

Deleting said...

@kim
You are so blind!
1st when Jesus is on the cross 'My God My God why have you forsaken me' is the first line in the 22nd Pslam!!!!
2nd...We don't say Jesus is a third of God. That is the backward author of the koran said in surah five.
That's not what Christians say.
3rd...not everyone who is not a muslim is a christian. I've heard of muslim Girls receiving anal sex so they could be considered 'pure' considering how fond you are of youtube links I can show you one of a muslim convert saying just that)..are you saying that's somehow better?
Then you said 'They only fight soldiers, and at least we have a religion that tells us to not harm women or children or even trees or animals in war.'
Explain what happen to the Banu Quaryze (sp) at khabar. It was a jewish tribe who wanted to remain neutral.
And just as a personal aside, if tawheed is so 'perfect'...why does this word not appear in the koran? It's an arabic word, isn't it?

Kim said...

@CristoTeAma

You're telling me that all of those good deeds are for hypocrites. Wow....

All the verses you selected show us how NOT to act the way the hypocrites do. They do good things to be seen by others and we have the same concept in Islam. Study deeper into Islam please.

I do good deeds to get closer to Allah.

Toll said...

@kim

which commandments did he break?

"and kill them wherever you find them and drive them out from whence they drove you out"

Toll said...

@kim

"And he showed mercy to the Jews who were "massacred" by allowing them to be judged by their own laws for treason against the Muslims"

What allegiance did the Jews owe to Mohammed? By what law?

The Jews owed allegiance to Jehovah and no one else.

"judged by their own laws"

Where are these laws in the Old Testament that you refer to here?

CL Edwards said...

@ Kim I didn't know we knew each for you to comment on what I know.

You say:
"Uhmm I follow the majority opinion by Hadith SCHOLARS, "

what majority opinion.. the majority opinion? What mathab do you follow or are you ghair muqallid? And who did you study with?

you say:
"I follow Sunni Orthodox Islam."

which school? Shafi'i say if you touch a women you break your wudoo Hanbali's say you don't which one is the "orthodox" view?

You say: "There are differences of opinion but I follow the majority."

then according to the majority Sunni view you are a deviant, a layperson must follow a mathab according to the majority of the ulamah of all times. you must be a neo-salafi, you are upon Saudi's revised polished version of Islam.

I follow Yesu Al Masih the one who is morally and spiritually superior to Muhammad even in the Quran and sunnah. The one whom your Quran says is Kalimatullah Allah's uncreated eternal speech made flesh, whom when your prophet was questioned about this by the delegation from Najran lowered his head and tried to get out of the deabte he was losing by claiming these ayat were from the mutashabihat.

D335 said...

Blogger Kim said...

@ the Purple Marquise
There is a limit on the amount of mercy given to criminals and that is called justice. It might sound cruel to you because that is the tendency of human nature, but justice by God's commands has to be followed and paid for.

Means Allah is supreme JUST, but what part is the MOST merciful?

again David Wood been explaining that BOTH mercy and just is water and oil as Jesus is the actual buffer.

donna60 said...

Kim,

the god allah you describe, who swears by created objects, is not the God described in cannonized scripture. You should know that this allah who you worship, is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

This is the God of Abraham:


Hebrews 6:12-14
12 so that you will not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

13 For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself, 14 saying, “I WILL SURELY BLESS YOU AND I WILL SURELY MULTIPLY YOU.”

donna60 said...

Kim,

A husband and a wife are one, according to the Book of Genesis, and yet, you don't call men and women who are married 1/2, do you?


Genesis 2:23-24
23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”

24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.


As for my precious Creator, who paid the price for my sins, this was prophesied by the prophet Isaiah, pbuh


Isaiah 53:3-6
3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

You are mocking the anguish of your Savior, my dear friend. He did this for you.

donna60 said...

Kim,

I have read Muslim commentaries about Hadiths, and all I can say, is that none of them agree with another.

You will see denominational Christians argue about the meaning of a bible verse, but I can't think of one single Christian denomination who would tell me, that I can trust Matthew, but I can't trust Mark. Can you?

That is what Muslims are saying. They are insisting that you can trust this Hadith, but not that Hadith. They disagree with each other, and they say nasty things against each other. Can you blame Christians for not understanding which one you personally disagree with, when other Muslims agree with them?

But, Kim, this proves that Islam is not from God. God is not the author of confusion!


1 Corinthians 14:32-33
32And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

33For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

William said...

Excellent post indeed

taomeano said...

Kim
I have bad news for you. You said Islam will dominate the world.

For 1400 years Islam had a free reign, because no one seriously critiqued its doctrine or teachings, but thanks to the information age we live in, Islam and its prophet are being examined and have been found wanting.

Moslems who are seeking for the truth wherever it leads them are leaving Islam in droves when the real teachings of Islam are exposed to them.

So Islam will never dominate the world because you can fool some of the people all the time but you can't fool all the people all the time.

Jesus Christ is coming back to rule the world, Mohammad is not coming back. Jesus is alive, Mohammad is dead, does it make sense to follow someone who is dead and cannot help you. The illogic of the moslem mindset is baffling indeed.

The Purple Marquise said...

@Kim when I look at the history of your prophet the only criminal that I see is him and his gang of robbers, slave-traders, murderers and rapists. They are the ones who need punishment not the poor Jews who were living their lives and cultivating their land and actually had sheltered your ingrate prophet in his time of need.

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMulsim: you said:

"I think it's time for you to change the teacher.
Tell your "teacher" to read tafsir Ibn Katheer. Reading Tafsir, is something Islamic "teachers" would do from time to time."

I know! She wasn't a great teacher like most teachers of Islamic religion. They keep their students in the dark. But then I was only 9 years old. I didn't know about Ibn Kathir!

But don't worry! Later on I read his tafsir and I must say it didn't reduce my questions. But it made them even more poignant. For example why on earth God calls the so called "Bait al Maqdis" Zeitun or olive! Or the supposed mosque of Noha the fig?!! Where does Allah or Ibn Kathir come up with this nonsensical stuff?! Besides according to other Tafsirs Olive and Fig are just our normal olive and fig and not anything else's symbols.

Anyway whether they are fig and olive the fruits that we know and eat or those mentioned mosques they are all part of the creation. So the problem that David Wood alluded to still exists. Why does God have to swear to these things even if they are rather important stuff like mosques or your average fruits! What kind of vapid stylistic posturing is that?

You See 1MoreMuslim, the whole Quran is like this. When it is clear it is talking mostly (with some exception) about horrible stuff or it is plagiarizing other scriptures. But when it is "mystical" and unclear it sounds just rhapsodic, nonsensical and irrelevant. This Tin chapter is a really good example. Such a vapid sura!

After reading Ibn Kathir actually I came to the conclusion that despite the "mysticism" nonsense my teacher unwittingly told me the truth! You see, 1MoreMuslim, The Emperor has no clothes! Muhammad only said Fig and Olive (Al Tin Val Zaitun) to make rhymes with (Tur sinin) mount Sinai and with (Balad Al Amin) the safe city and the other verse endings which in Arabic also ends with the sound (een). What they mean was not of much importance to Muhammed! He would have sworn to something else if he wanted to rhyme with some other word!

He was just looking for a good rhyme and the awful poet that he was he could find non that both make sense and rhyme at the same time so he sacrificed substance for style. I think in the end he achieved neither! No wonder Meccans mocked him and didn't take him seriously!

The Purple Marquise said...

@ 1MoreMuslim:

As long as your list of mentions of the word "covenant" in Quran may have been I must say you didn't get the point and I am not surprised.

Many Biblical words like "covenant" or "Messiah" or "Holy Spirit" and things like that appear in the Quran but the theological content and background that is very well developed in the Bible is totally absent in the Quran. It is so obvious that the word is uprooted and lifted out of its original and organic context and planted in an alien environment where the word loses all its content and true meaning and becomes and empty shell carrying no theological significance.

A great example is the word "Messiah". What does it exactly mean in Islam and why on earth the Islamic Jesus should be called TheMessiah? He didn't do anything Messiah-like! He was a random prophet who just went around warned people and foretold the coming of Muhammed! It makes no sense to call him Messiah. The Messiah in Jewish context has a very clear and distinct meaning and a distinct functions and Islam not only doesn't seem to even know or teach about those functions his Jesus fulfills non of them.

The same goes with the word "covenant". God's covenants are mutual obligations between him and his people and in the Torah this concept is fully developed and the characteristics of the Judeo-Christian God is relational and covenantal. But Islamic God is not like that at all and as you said before yourself he is not obliged to abide by his own rules. That is the antithesis of a covenantal God.

Now I don't care how many times Muhammad plagiarized biblical vocabulary like the word "covenant" in his book! The content and substance is not there and that is actually a very strong evidence of his plagiarism.

To put it shortly he parroted some Biblical words to give his Quran an authentic aura of divinity and legitimacy, but he basically didn't have a clue what he was talking about! As simple as that!

1MoreMuslim said...

Purple Marquise

First ZayTOUN doesn't rhyme with SININE or AMINE.

"He didn't do anything Messiah-like! He was a random prophet who just went around warned people and foretold the coming of Muhammed! It makes no sense to call him Messiah. The Messiah in Jewish context has a very clear and distinct meaning and a distinct functions and Islam not only doesn't seem to even know or teach about those functions his Jesus fulfills non of them.

Can you tell me , according to the Bible what makes Messiah a Messiah? What does the Messiah fulfill to be called a messiah? Please enlighten us.

Billy said...

“…we actually are proud to say that Shariah is the best solution for mankind and Islam will take over the world…”(Kim on October 18, 2011 10:32 AM).


This is the view of Islamic terrorists, including late Osama Bin Laden. There is a picture of an Islamic extremist holding a placard on the right side of this website’s home page, Kim, that states “ISLAM WILL DOMINATE THE WORLD”, and you said “…Islam will take over the world….”

It would appear that the ultimate objective of the moderate Muslims (e.g. Kim) and the radical Muslims is the same.

Radical Moderate said...

1milmeter

You asked...

"Can you tell me , according to the Bible what makes Messiah a Messiah? What does the Messiah fulfill to be called a messiah? Please enlighten us."

The title Messiah is one who is annointed by a Levite Preist as in terms of a king. However if that is all there was to this, then David would be the Messiah, as well as other kings who where anointed. Obvioulsy this is not sole case for Jesus being the MESSIAH as even the Quran testifies, that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, with out even knowing what it means.

See we have a definition we know what it means, you DONT unless you reley on our scripture and understanding.

For instance if Jesus is the Jewish Messiah according to the Quran, then who annointed him?

If Messiah is only in reference to one who is annointed then why isnt David or Solomon also called the Jewish Messiah?

When we as well as Jews speak of THE MESSIAH, it is in terms of a savior, a deliverer.

SGM said...

@ Kim,

Kim, I asked you a simple question earlier, what is the logic used to come up with the conclusion that one hadith is true and the other is not. And to remind you that all of the hadith are written by Moslims. And all you can do is point me to some websites. Is this the best logic you can provide. Do you even understand what logic means. What you read on some website, you believe that it is true. Has moslim scholars explained to you from these websites what logic did they use to arrive at such conclusions? It is so obvious, all the malice, envy, lust, raping women, murder, satanic influence etc, etc which we find in Muhammad’s life is so embarrassing for moslims, that the best explanation they can provide is, “oh it is not true”. The funny thing is that all this material is provided by Muslim scholars themselves, and that these scholars are suppose to be the best among all.

If you combine all the bad things which the (true) prophets of God did in their lives, it does not equal to even 1% of what Muhammad did in just last ten years of his life. Do you know Kim, that even your quran does not have any logic. This is the only book in the world that has no context or chronological sequence. All books in the world, no matter how bad the author is, has it first chapter in the begging, then it has its middle and an end. Quran on the other hand has its first chapter in the end and last chapters in the beginning. It is all a mumbo jumbo thrown in a pile.
Now I am not trying to degrade you for believing in such mumbo jumbo. What I want for all moslims is to see the beauty of our Savior Jesus Christ and come to the true knowledge of God and have eternal life.

Toll said...

1MoreMuslim said:

Let's now expose the situation:

David Wood believes God does not torture Babies.
We know Babies face torture everyday: by diseases, natural disasters, starvation...
So we have to conclude one of the two conclusions:

1/ David Wood's God has no control over what happens in our world.
2/ David's God doesn't exist in reality. he is only in his imagination.

Which one is it David?"

In the case of the biblical God sin comes before suffering. A free rebellious act had to occur before man became subject to suffering and death. With Allah innocent beings suffer solely because it is his will that they do so. There is no necessity in Islam for suffering arising out of sin and the reaction of God's holy nature to it. Allah is free to cause suffering or not but in spite of this suffering never goes away.

In the case of the biblical God there is a redemptive event, the death of his Son, that will cause all suffering, except that which is caused by retributive justice, to cease for ever. There is no corresponding action on the part of Allah that would allow him to guarantee the removal of the evil of suffering for a vast multitude of mankind for ever. Both bliss and suffering are reversible by Allah's decree should he so will.

In the case of Allah there appears to be no desire on his part for the suffering of infants or mankind in general to decrease or cease altogether in this life even though he has had every opportunity since the beginning of creation. If he has already caused innocent infants to suffer daily since the creation of man, AND if he has taken no steps to guarantee it's prevention in the future, it would appear that causing or inflicting pain is a necessity of his nature. If even innocent infants are made to suffer at his hand then it is a safe bet that nobody can be safe from him, not even if they are already in paradise.

If Allah is really in control of all things, including himself, then why does he never will to cease the suffering of innocent infants at least? Can he be free if he has never exercised his liberty to cause the elimination of suffering at least in the case of infants who are declared to be innocent according to the teaching of Islam?

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMulsim: you said:

First of All "Tin" does very well rhyme with "Sinin" and "Amin" and "Safelin" etc… "Zeitun" also rhymes .It also ends with the sound "n" . Only the end consonant can rhyme as well although it is a bit weaker than when you have both end vowel and consonant rhyming. He even uses "Taqwim" as a rhyme. In that case the vowel rhymes and the consonant is different although "n" and "m" are very very close consonants and can be used sometimes to rhyme with each other. These are questions of esthetics really. It does rhymes although it is not the best thing he could come up with but that just goes on to show that your prophet was a subpar poet which I think the vast majority of the Meccans at his time would totally agree!

Royal Son said...

1MM: I'd actually be quite interested to know how you or any other muslim would convince a Jew that Jesus is the Messiah.

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMulsim: Now we go to the Messiah issue. At first I was pondering whether I should let you go first and tell us what does Messiah mean to you or should I enlighten you right away. By that I don't mean telling me what the dictionary meaning of the word is (that's easy!) but what is the function of The Messiah in Islam and what makes Jesus qualified bear this title. But then I thought if I ask you to go first you might get the idea that I am dodging the question, so I changed my mind and I decided to enlighten you right away.

This is going to be long so bear with me. Here we go: According to the Hebrew scriptures the children of Israel are awaiting for this character called "The Messiah" (dictionary translation The Anointed One). Throughout ages, I mean hundreds and hundreds of years prophet and Bible authors have prophesied many aspects of this character called The Messiah and by reading and analyzing their writings the full picture of The Messiah emmerges. There are numerous verses in the Old Testament that allude to that. The Messiah has certain signs and characteristics, some certain things aught to happen to him as prophesied by the prophets of Israel, and he is to perform some tasks and functions.

1. Lets start the with the most obvious one. The dictionary meaning. According to the Old Testament The Messiah is the anointed one. Why? Because the Kings of old became officially kings by the act of anointment by the high priest. The Messiah was the one anointed by God himself! The Jews mostly saw him as a mighty earthly King ruling a mighty earthly Jewish Kingdom. But the New Testament reveals that Jesus the Messiah has a heavenly Kingdom. He says that his kingdom is not of this world. He is the King of Kings who sits at the right hand of the father (meaning a place of honor) in heaven. We believe that is where he is now after his resurrection.

But what about the Muslims Jesus? What is his justification for being called The Messiah? He was just a prophet like any other except he supposedly had a book like Moses and some miracles like Moses and he was a Muslim too by the way just like Moses and Mohammed. According to Islam he had neither an earthly nor a heavenly Kingdom! So why Moses is not called The Messiah and neither is Mohammed? What makes Jesus The Messiah and not them?

2. The Jews believed that The Messiah is a divine character. He was called the Son of God or The Mighty God in many places a most famous case being Isaiah 9:6. We believe that Jesus WAS the Son of God. The Jews are still waiting.

But what about the Muslim Jesus? In which way did he fulfilled the divine aspects of his Messiahship? In no way! He was just a man and just a prophet and is not in any way shape or form divine! Even saying that he was divine is considered to be a mortal sin and a heinous blasphemy! So why then is he called The Messiah?

.....to be continued

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMuslim
......continuation:

3. The Messiah according to Jewish scriptures was supposed to be The Savior and The Salvation. We Christians believe that Jesus IS The Savior! He came to save us from the bondage of sin. The Jews are still waiting.

But what about the Muslim Jesus? How did he have any especial power to save people from their sins? He had no power to save people from their sin. He was just a warner. And so were all the other 124000 prophets of Islam. What makes him The Savior or The Messiah?

4. The Messiah according to the Jewish scripture is supposed to bring a new covenant both to the Jews and the Gentiles. We believe that the blood of Jesus Christ IS the new covenant that was shed for the remission of our sins(a contract between God and his people, as in "you do X and I Thy God will do Y in return! No ands, ifs, or buts!). The Jews are still waiting.

But what about the Islamic Jesus? Well… he brought no new covenant. The old one is not that clear in Islam either, but it is sure that there has been no new one brought forth by Jesus. He was there just to warn, teach Islam and prophesy Mohammad! So yet again what sets him apart from the rest of 124000 to make him messiah?

You see? I just scratched the suffice here! I can go on and on! I simply think this should suffice for you to realize that the word Messiah means nothing at all when it is used in connection to the Islamic Jesus. Now you might not accept any of the things that we believe about the Christian Jesus and that's fine! This is not part of our argument at the moment. What matters here is why then you disagree with everything that qualifies Jesus to be called The Messiah and yet you don't give up the use of the title The Messiah! Why do you still insist on calling him The Messiah when he was neither a king, nor divine, nor the bringer of a new covenant and not a savior!?

The Jews also disagree with us about Jesus being divine or The Savior, etc.. but they are consistent and don't call him The Messiah. They are still waiting for the Messiah! But you Muslims want to have your cake and eat it too. Your position is inconsistent.

Why did Mohammed insist on taking such a logically inconsistent position? I think simply because he didn't know what the word Messiah meant and what it entailed and didn't know that by adopting it he is bringing in a foreign and incompatible theological concept at odds with the theological view that he was trying to promote. Basically he didn't know what he was talking about because he wasn't a Jew and was not familiar with the Jewish theology and terminology and simply was pretending to belong to the Jewish tradition while he actually was a pagan Arab whose knowledge of Judaism was very superficial and shallow and based on hearsay. That's the only way that I can explain this phenomenon.

Now the ball is in your court. Tell us; what Messiah means to you as a muslim? Tell us; what makes the Islamic Messiah, Messiah and what makes Jesus qualified to bear that title?

CristoTeAma said...

Kim said...

"You're telling me that all of those good deeds are for hypocrites. Wow....

All the verses you selected show us how NOT to act the way the hypocrites do. They do good things to be seen by others and we have the same concept in Islam. Study deeper into Islam please.
I do good deeds to get closer to Allah."

-First than all i am shocked that after all the verses i quoted and totally refute your claims about Christianity (i.e Fasting) you answer me that. So i must think that i was right when i said you have never read the gospels since it was easy to reprove you, but then you tell me you do good deeds to get closer to Allah, and that doesn't make you hypocrite, and i would say that you do good deeds because that's the way you can enter heaven according to Islam (according to some hadiths, just observing the 5 pillars of Islam hence deeds is enough). Anyway when i said that doing that would be an hypocracy it's because what Jesus taught us about praying not trying to make appear yourself to others that you are a "good religous man" or a "righteous man", but when Muhammad told his ppl to do such acts, that's exactly what he wanted, he needed to make appear Islam more "spiritual" so all his non-spiritual teachings could appear so, dressing Islam with all that liturgy which according to Jesus is useless, and makes you like the pagans "7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words" but we find you praying 5 times per day the same prayers, just like Pagans did and just like Jesus said pagans do. Also i refered about you doing Ramadan, Muslims love to say that they re so spiritual and faithful because they do fasting like Ramadan, and that's exactly what Jesus refered, and that's why he taught us to do fasting in secret as we Christians do.
-But i also find you post interesting because according to your photoshopped Islam, almost all the muslims in the world who do these "good deeds" are still Bad Muslims since they are willing to kill, rape, steal, torture, beat wives, get marry with kids, etc, which according to you is not the "proper or real Islam" but they are "corrupted" and they don't practice "the real Shariah" So that would make them all hypocites because they are trying to show something they are not (i.e Good Muslims) so i think i can keep my statement thank to your view of Islam.

CristoTeAma said...

Bill said..

"It would appear that the ultimate objective of the moderate Muslims (e.g. Kim) and the radical Muslims is the same."

-Well spotted, yet they (western muslims) will tell you that it will be made by convertions, but that's just nonsense since ppl convert from one religion to another everyday, many Muslims are leaving Islam also so in the end muslims like Kim will just need some "great schollar" to quote her what this blog has been showing us for so much time and suddenly all the violence that must be comitted against the Kaffirs will sound great and the Jihad mode will be set ON, "war is deceit" according to their prophet. I wonder where is that command "you shall not lie" in the mind of Muhammad...

1MoreMuslim said...

David Wood believes God does not torture Babies.
We know Babies face torture everyday: by diseases, natural disasters, starvation...
So we have to conclude one of the two conclusions:

1/ David Wood's God has no control over what happens in our world.
2/ David's God doesn't exist in reality. he is only in his imagination.

Which one is it David?

1MoreMuslim said...

Purple Marquise:

Thank for your effort, you repeated very well what I hear Christians say all the time.

In 1 Sam 20 , Saul is called Messiah, as many others through the old testament.
Saul fulfills your criteria #1
Saul fails criteria #2 ( he is not Divine)
Saul fails your criteria #3 and also fails #4.

Now you are going , once again, you are going to say, this doesn't mean that . All the gymnastic that you have used with the Covenant issue.


I have one challenge for you:

Bring me one reference from the Bible that speaks EXPLICITLY about a "messiah" who is coming in the Future.

donna60 said...

1moremuslim

The word Messiah means the anointed one.

Here is Daniel 7, for starters:

9 I watched as thrones were put in place
and the Ancient One[b] sat down to judge.
His clothing was as white as snow,
his hair like purest wool.
He sat on a fiery throne
with wheels of blazing fire,
10 and a river of fire was pouring out,
flowing from his presence.
Millions of angels ministered to him;
many millions stood to attend him.
Then the court began its session,
and the books were opened.

11 I continued to watch because I could hear the little horn’s boastful speech. I kept watching until the fourth beast was killed and its body was destroyed by fire. 12 The other three beasts had their authority taken from them, but they were allowed to live a while longer.[c]

13 As my vision continued that night, I saw someone like a son of man[d] coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient One and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, honor, and sovereignty over all the nations of the world, so that people of every race and nation and language would obey him. His rule is eternal—it will never end. His kingdom will never be destroyed.

donna60 said...

1moremuslims

I know you only asked for one, but once I start thumping on my bible, it is hard to get me to stop.


Numbers 24:16-18
16 the message of one who hears the words of God,
who has knowledge from the Most High,
who sees a vision from the Almighty,
who bows down with eyes wide open:
17 I see him, but not here and now.
I perceive him, but far in the distant future.
A star will rise from Jacob;
a scepter will emerge from Israel.
It will crush the foreheads of Moab’s people,
cracking the skulls of the people of Sheth.
18 Edom will be taken over,
and Seir, its enemy, will be conquered,
while Israel marches on in triumph.

donna60 said...

1moremuslim

Here is 1morebibleverse, and then I promise to leave you alone.

Micah 5

1 “[a]Now muster yourselves in troops, daughter of troops;
[b]They have laid siege against us;
With a rod they will smite the judge of Israel on the cheek.
2 “[c]But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
Too little to be among the clans of Judah,
From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel.
[d]His goings forth are from long ago,
From the days of eternity.”
3 Therefore He will give them up until the time
When she who is in labor has borne a child.
Then the remainder of His brethren
Will return to the sons of Israel

donna60 said...

1moremuslim

I know, I know, I'm weak. I am addicted to bible-verses. I am the pathetic product of an abusive child-hood. My mother always made me go to church every time the door was opened. My father backed her up.

Just one more verse, just one more.


Isaiah 9:6
6 For a child is born to us,
a son is given to us.
The government will rest on his shoulders.
And he will be called:
Wonderful Counselor,[a] Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Zack_Tiang said...

1MM said,
"In 1 Sam 20 , Saul is called Messiah, as many others through the old testament. "

I read the whole chapter... and it barely spoke anything about King Saul, let alone that he is called the Messiah.

Please try again, 1mm.

curly said...

aaah, 1MoreMuslim SEEMS that he knew very well about Old Testament and New Testament. I am open and listen from him.
Common Muslim claimed Jesus prophency to Mohammad from the book of John like The Counselor, The Comforter, etc. It is a poor. It is little annoy me because why they point to Muhammad instead Joseph Smith, Mirza Ahmad, Guru Nanak (founder of Sikhism), etc. Fact, the follower of mormon and Sikhism is more peace than Muslim. I have not seen the follower of Muslim fight each other even Sikh. Muslim do have civil war after the death of Muhammad.
I hope 1MoreMuslim better than common muslim.

The Purple Marquise said...

1MoreMuslim said: "In 1 Sam 20 , Saul is called Messiah, as many others through the old testament"

You are really silly 1MM! First of all there are two books of Samuel. Which one did you mean? I checked both and here there is 1st and 2nd Samuel 1:20

"20 It came about [a]in due time, after Hannah had conceived, that she gave birth to a son; and she named him Samuel, saying, “Because I have asked him of the LORD.”

"20 Tell it not in Gath,
Proclaim it not in the streets of Ashkelon,
Or the daughters of the Philistines will rejoice,
The daughters of the uncircumcised will exult."

Nothing about Messiah and Anointed there.

But anyway I already told you in my previous comment that the Jewish kings of old were anointed by the priests with oil and this ceremonious act made them officially the kings of Israel.

Those random kings were not The Messiah which was suppose to come and be the savior and King of Kings. donna60 already has mentioned a few of the Messianic verses over which Jews and Christians totally AGREE which shows The Messiah will come in the future and is divine, etc... The only difference between us and the Jews is that they think Jesus didn't fulfill those prophesies and we think he did.

But as far as Saul and David and Salomon and all the other Biblical/Quranic characters go they were anointed to be king. Why then Quran doesn't call them also Al Masih if just being anointed to be king was enough to make one"The Messiah"? Why not Dawood Al Masih, Solaiman Al Masih, but only Isa Al Masih who incidentally wasn't any king at all!!??

You said Saul fulfilled #1 of my conditions for Messiah. But he didn't fulfill the other ones. Yes, because he was only a random king! He was not "The Messiah"! But then Islamic Jesus fulfills ZERO of those definitions and characteristics so why is HE called The Messiah according to Islam?? You are still not off the hook!

You are the one running desperate and bringing up distractions and need to do gymnastics not me! I had told already the last time that anointing is what made kings kings! But the king is only A messiah not The Messiah, whom Jews are waiting as we speak and we Christians think it was Jesus. There is really no dispute there about The Messiah not being one of these random Kings but a especial figure coming in the future with certain characteristics.

You Muslims seem to agree that Jesus WAS The Messiah so you agree with us and disagree with Jews but it seems that you don't even know what the whole dispute was all about!

Now again I have to ask you to quit fooling around and stop the distractions and diversions and just answer my question. What make the Islamic Jesus The Messiah. What made him especial and worthy of bearing the title when he wasn't even an anointed king and what this title even entail in Islam. Now quit picking at the Bible and answer my question! Otherwise we will all come to the conclusion that you have no answer and you are trying to cover up for your ignorance!

Radical Moderate said...

@1milimeter

What is the definition of Messiah from the Quran?

Second why isnt Saul or David or anyone else who is anointed called the Messiah in the Quran?

1MoreMuslim said...

Zack Tiang:

"I read the whole chapter... and it barely spoke anything about King Saul, let alone that he is called the Messiah."

Because the Translators use deception, they translate the Hebrew "Mashiakh" to anointed.

1MoreMuslim said...

Donna60:
You FAILED miserably. I don't see any MESSIAH in all what you mentioned.

The Purple Marquise said...

1MoreMuslim: Remember we don't have to show you ANYTHING now! The ball is in your court. You tell us what Messiah means in Islam and justify for us why Jesus of Islam deserved the title.

In this argument as I said there is ZERO disagreement between the Jews and Christians about the fact that Messiah is coming in the future or that he is a great King or kings and that he is divine! Asking for a verses that lists these things in the wording that suite your whims is NOT your prerogative at this point in the discussion and it is really unnecessary since this concept is understood by Jews or Christians alike and both of us who believe in the Old Testament have no quarrel about it!

We don't have to prove to you ANYTHING! You Muslims are the ones who came and borrowed or shall I say stole a word from our vocabulary. You have to justify that your notions of it is correct and that your Islamic Jesus at least somehow fits the title!

So stop throwing in non-sequiturs and demand for evidence that one way or the other doesn't in anyway help you case!

Tell us what Messiah means in Islam and why Jesus was called The Messiah and show us why if your notion of Messiah differs from us, your notion should be accepted by us! We have been here in the Messiah business 1000s of years before you and your prophet! So the burden of proof is firmly rested upon your shoulders 1MoreMuslim. We are NOT going to waste one more second of our times bringing ANY further evidence to you until you first tell us what Islamic Messiah is and how jesus win the title in Islam! PERIOD!

We are not here to convince you! You are here to convince us of your false religion who came after our religion and therefore the burden of proof rest on those who follow it! Especially that it claims to be in line with Judeo-Christianity and from the same God! And so far you have said ZERO in defense of your Messiah and your faith. All you did was to wave your hand at all the evidence that we showed you and dismiss them by decree not by argument. Now stop this charade and get down to business!

That was exactly the reason why I had doubts whether I should demand that you explain your definition and characteristics of Islamic Messiah first before I enlighten you. Because knowing how dishonest and childish and illogical Muslims are I knew you most probably never get down to actually defending your religion. You would instead waste everyone's time trying to ask silly and irrelevant questions and demand unnecessary stuff to be shown from the Bible EXACTLY in the word order that you fancy!

We don't need any of that! As I say we Judeo-Christians own the title of Messiah! It was understood by Judeo-Christian theologians for centuries and therefore it means what we say it means! You new-commers should defend why you steal our terminology but empty it of all context and use it without any meaning! If I am wrong explain to me what Messiah means in islam. Why Jesus in Islam is called Messiah!

anything other than those answers is a sign that you have lost and you have no answer!

1MoreMuslim said...

Sorry Purple Marquise : I meant 1 Sam 26:11
God forbid that I should stretch out my hand against the Lord’s Messiah ( Saul).

Saul is called Messiah because he fulfilled just your criteria #1 : Anointed by God, Why shouldn't we call Jesus Messiah for the same reason?

Radical Moderate said...

1milimeter you wrote...

"Saul is called Messiah because he fulfilled just your criteria #1 : Anointed by God, Why shouldn't we call Jesus Messiah for the same reason?"

Why do you call Jesus the Messiah? WHo anointed him?

Also why doesnt the Quran call David and Saul and others Messiah?

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMuslim: First of all you totally ignored my explanation about the difference that Jews and Christians understand between "a messiah" like an anointed king or even an anointed meat offering at the alter of YHWH and "The Messiah" which is "The Anointed One" which is supposed to be divine and King of kings and the Savior, etc..,

But I let that pass because even if you totally deny that distinction between "a messiah" and "The Messiah" still your explanation doesn't wash? AT ALL! Why? Because it is logically inconsistent. How? Because Saul was called messiah or anointed because because he was actually anointed with oil (physically) by Samuel the priest to be the king of Israel! It was the equivalent of coronation for Israel. Saul was a messiah because he was a king.

Was Islamic Jesus a king? No! he wasn't. So why is he suddenly The Messiah?

By the same token David and Solomon were also anointed because they were kings. So they were also Messiahs in the same way that Saul was. But the Quran never calls them Messiah. But suddenly calls Jesus who was never anointed by priest and wasn't any king at all Messiah. Why the inconsistency.

If Jesus's messiahship in Islam is because he was a prophet and that means that God anointed him then why none of the other prophets were called the Messiah in the Quran? Not even Mohammed which was supposedly the most important prophet! What was especial about Islamic Jesus?

And last but not least notice that all the excuses and explanations that you are bringing about the various uses of the word Messiah or anointed are all taken out of the Our Bible! You never brought us any explanation from the Quran and Hadith! Saul's messiahship that you are banging on so much is never even mentioned in the Quran nor is the word Messiah ever mentioned about anybody else in the Quran other than Isa or Jesus and Quran never explained that the kings of Israel were called messiah. How then without any reference to the Bible which you consider corrupted and superseded you can even know about Saul or other kings of Israel being also Messiah to be able to make this feeble excuse for Islamic ignorance of what Messiah even means?? Without reference to our Bible you would have had NO CLUE what so ever about what this title can entails.

Deleting said...

1mm, you completely changed the text:
1 Sam 26:11
The LORD forbid that I should stretch forth mine hand against the LORD's anointed: but, I pray thee, take thou now the spear that is at his bolster, and the cruse of water, and let us go.


He was annointed KING. He was NOT the annointed one (Messiah).

1MoreMuslim said...

Purple Marquise:

AS I expected, you resort to Messiah here means this , but Messiah there means that...

Without reference to our Bible you would have had NO CLUE what so ever about what this title can entails.

Let's assume it's true, and then? Where does the Quran say throw the whole Bible in the garbage because it's worthless?

Radical Moderate said...

@The Purple

You laid the smack down on 1milimeter. His head must really be spinning if he now doesnt think the bible should be thrown in the garbage. LOL

Hey ever hear a Muslim try to convince a Jew that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah?

It is the funniest thing, they have to appeal to the NEW TESTEMENT to do so.

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMuslim: You said: "AS I expected, you resort to Messiah here means this , but Messiah there means that..."

And as I expected you didn't answer my questions which still stands very firmly whether you want to accept the difference between "The messiah" and "A messiah" or not!

Get it through your head already 1MoreMuslim! Your Islamic Jesus was no Messiah in ANY sense of the word whether "it means this" or "it means that"!!! Whether it means just an anointed king or whether it means The Messiah Savior of the world! In no sense was Islamic Jesus The Messiah!

You failed to provide any reason for his Messiahship either by referencing Quran and Hadith or by your resorting to The Bible. So I was right! Mohammed didn't know anything about what The Messiah is and he just parroted it without knowledge and fell into a contradiction!

You also said: " 'Without reference to our Bible you would have had NO CLUE what so ever about what this title can entails.' Let's assume it's true, and then? Where does the Quran say throw the whole Bible in the garbage because it's worthless?"

Wow!!! Outstanding! That was my whole point! That the Quran didn't teach anything about what a Messiah is because its author Mohammed didn't know anything about what exactly a Messiah is! So if you assume that what I said is true then it follows that I was right and you were wrong! That's "what then"!

Besides I am baffled by this confession of yours! You Muslims go around saying that our book is corrupted and unreliable and yet your Quran sends you to learn some important concepts and clarifying facts from this corrupted and unreliable book?!! How then are you going to understand which parts to believe and learn from and which parts to reject?



In this case when you don't have any explanation of what Messiah even means and you come to the Bible to learn from it you what do you see? You see that the Messiah at the very least should be anointed by a priest to become king of Israel. Then you see that Jesus in the Quran was never anointed by a priest and was not a king. Doesn't that arouse any questions in you? Aren't you curious to know why your prophet called Jesus the Messiah when according to the Quran he was neither a king, not a Savior, nor the Son of God, ....?

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMuslim: Hey I forgot to ask you if you Muslims are not supposed to throw the Bible in the garbage and you are actually allowed to learn some things from it then why is it that in most Islamic countries Bibles are strictly banned?

Why is it that in Saudi Arabia you will be severely punished if you even are a christian reading it in the privacy of your own home? Why is it that in Iran when I first started to get curious about Christianity and wanted to get my hands on a Bible and read to see for myself what is written in it I had to secretly go to an underground church that I accidentally heard about and risk my life and freedom to get one copy of It?

Please explain!

1MoreMuslim said...

Purple Marquise :
You continue speaking about THE Messiah, you didn't show me ONE single verse that EXPLICITLY mentions a Messiah that will come in the future. If you show me that , then we will talk about how Jesus is or is not the Messiah.

Note: The Messiah in Judaism, like in Islam is not a central doctrine. Muslims have no interest in proving that Jesus is the Davidic Messiah because :
1/ it has no value even if Jews believe that JEsus is the Messiah they will not become Muslims for that reason.
2/ A davidic Messiah is impossible to defend for a very basic reason: Jesus is not from the SEED of David to begin with. In addition to many requirements Jesus failed to fulfill.

Radical Moderate said...

@1milimeter

Daneil 9:25-26
"“Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One,[f] the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing."

So 1milimeter there you go, not only does it say the "ANOTINTED ONE" will come but also that he will be KILLED. Keep reading it says after that the city and the sactuary will be destroyed.

So answer us now 1milimeter or run back to Snowmans blog.

Royal Son said...

1MM: Jesus is not the seed of David? err yes He is, His genealogy descended from David. What are you talking about?

Please don't tell me Jesus was a Levite to support the mistake in the Qur'an which calls Mary the sister of Aaron and daughter of Harun.

curly said...

@The Purple Marquise,
Hey you are make the good argument with very well. Jesus bless you.

curly said...

I start to wonder the Quran book is come from Satan. Before that, I WAS thinking that Quran was just man made like Hinduism. Why? Mohammad command the apostate must be killed because Satan know ex Muslim can expose the Islam. Satan is deceiver so he do not always do bad but he can do good too. Strangely, In Hinduism, ex Hinduism do not have to be die in their law. Frankly, I do start to wonder that Quran book is come from Satan but not convince yet.

curly said...

I am not surprise that 1MoreMuslim is like common Muslim. I WAS expected 1MoreMuslim better than common muslim, but I was wrong. I notice 1MoreMuslim is JUST GOOD at “beating around the bush”. I bet 1MoreMuslim is concern more about glory to Islam THAN glory to the TRUTH. 1MoreMuslim is just hard head like Osama Abdallah. 1MoreMuslim would stubbornly stay in Islam as example as a Hindu man stay stubbornly stay in Hinduism instead pursue Truth.

1MoreMuslim claim “THE Messiah, you didn't show me ONE single verse that EXPLICITLY mentions a Messiah that will come in the future” is silly. I am sure he is play the smart game. The problem is there are no verse mention explicitly to “In the end, there will messiah come to earth” as example as “State and Religion must be separate” is not found in our Constitution. Although, the Constitution do explain clearly about the separate in between State and Religion. In Old Testament, there do explain clearly about THE MESSIAH even Jewish scholar acknowledge it.

Moreover, 1MoreMuslim claimed “it has no value even if Jews believe that JEsus is the Messiah they will not become Muslims for that reason”. It is poor argument. OBVIOUSLY, the messiah Quranic is not fit to the Jewish’s theology of messiah. If Muslim told Jewish scholar about Jesus is the Messiah, I bet Jewish scholar laugh at them because Isa(Jesus) is just warner in Quran.

Addition, 1MoreMuslim stated “A davidic Messiah is impossible to defend for a very basic reason: Jesus is not from the SEED of David to begin with”. Fine, Do you have a proof that Jesus is not come from David in Quran??

donna60 said...

1moremuslim

The word Messiah means "anointed" The word that KJV translates as Messiah is also tranlated as anointed, in the following verses

If the priest 3548 that is anointed4899 do sin 2398 according to the sin 819 of the people 5971; then let him bring 7126 for his sin 2403, which he hath sinned 2398 , a young 1241 1121 bullock 6499 without blemish 8549 unto the LORD 3068 for a sin offering 2403.

Lev 4:5 And the priest 3548 that is anointed4899 shall take 3947 of the bullock's 6499 blood 1818, and bring 935 it to the tabernacle 168 of the congregation 4150:

Lev 4:16 And the priest 3548 that is anointed4899 shall bring 935 of the bullock's 6499 blood 1818 to the tabernacle 168 of the congregation 4150:

Lev 6:22 And the priest 3548 of his sons 1121 that is anointed4899 in his stead shall offer 6213 it: [it is] a statute 2706 for ever 5769 unto the LORD 3068; it shall be wholly 3632 burnt 6999 .

1Sa 2:10 The adversaries 7378 of the LORD 3068 shall be broken to pieces 2865 ; out of heaven 8064 shall he thunder 7481 upon them: the LORD 3068 shall judge 1777 the ends 657 of the earth 776; and he shall give 5414 strength 5797 unto his king 4428, and exalt 7311 the horn 7161 of his anointed4899.

Messiah (Hebrew)
מָשִׁיחַ
Transliteration
mashiyach
Pronunciation

mä·shē'·akh (Key)


Part of Speech
masculine noun

Root Word (Etymology)

From מָשַׁח (H4886)

TWOT Reference
1255c

Outline of Biblical Usage 1) anointed, anointed one

a) of the Messiah, Messianic prince

b) of the king of Israel

c) of the high priest of Israel

d) of Cyrus

e) of the patriarchs as anointed kings



The LORD was anointed to save the world. (consecrated, inaugerated)
Psalm 2 is absolutely speaking of the Anointed God:

Psalm 2
1 Why are the [a]nations in an uproar
And the peoples devising a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth take their stand
And the rulers take counsel together
Against the LORD and against His [b]Anointed, saying,
3 “Let us tear their fetters apart
And cast away their cords from us!”
4 He who [c]sits in the heavens laughs,
The Lord scoffs at them.
5 Then He will speak to them in His anger
And terrify them in His fury, saying,
6 “But as for Me, I have [d]installed My King
Upon Zion, My holy mountain.”

7 “I will surely tell of the [e]decree of the LORD:
He said to Me, ‘You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.
8 ‘Ask of Me, and I will surely give the [f]nations as Your inheritance,
And the very ends of the earth as Your possession.
9 ‘You shall [g]break them with a [h]rod of iron,
You shall shatter them like [i]earthenware.’”

10 Now therefore, O kings, show discernment;
Take warning, O [j]judges of the earth.
11 [k]Worship the LORD with [l]reverence
And rejoice with trembling.
12 [m]Do homage to the Son, that He not become angry, and you perish in the way,
For His wrath may [n]soon be kindled.
How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!

And before you get ready to say that this Psalm is talking about David or Solomon, be careful, because the end of the Psalm states specifically that God will give His Anointed the very "ends of the Earth," and we are to "worship the Son." If you believe that this is a son of David, the Muslims had better give Mount Temple back to the Jews right now,or they are in big, big trouble.

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMuslim: Cut it out already! As I said whether it is "a messiah" or "The Davidic Messiah" that you want to believe the word means neither one suits the Islamic Jesus! He was neither an anointed king of Israel, nor was he the savior of the world. He was nobody!!! Period! And that was the whole discussion.

Now to try to divert the subject by asking us to prove if Jesus was the Davidic Messiah or not is really pathetic and totally besides the point. If he was not The Davidic Messiah which the Jews were waiting for and also not an anointed king of israel either then why on earth is he called The Messiah in your own Quran, you silly!???? By trying to disprove that Jesus was The Messiah you are trying to disprove your own Quran!!!!! Why you try to cut the branch that you sit on!???? Use your brain!

The question here was whether or not the author of the Quran understands what a Messiah is, not whether Jesus was the Messiah or not!!!! I thought that was a given since your own Quran affirms it! Now that you have no answer to my very legitimate questions you turn around and attack the premise of your own Quran?!! Way to go 1MoreMuslim!!! First you affirm that OUR Bible shouldn't be thrown into the garbage and should be used to fill in the data that are left unexplained in the Quran and now you are already attacking the Quran itself by attacking its premise that Jesus indeed WAS the Messiah!!? What's wrong with you?!!!

You desperately need to take a class in logic 101 1MM or you will soon incriminate yourself with more heretical statements! Maybe Dr. David Wood can teach you!

So now stop the irrelevant nonsense and just accept that Quran teaches nothing about what "a"(or "The", take your pick) Messiah is, and most probably Mohammed didn't know what it means and because of that he fell into a theological incompatibility dilemma. Because that was what we were arguing about and I think I have proven it beyond any reasonable doubt. Period!

And also as you admitted, you have to go to OUR Bible which your religion says is corrupted to find out what Messiah even means (whether you believe it means an anointed king or The Davidic messiah it doesn't matter so don't come back and argue that the future Savior Messiah is or is not in the Bible since the Quranic Jesus was not a random messiah king either!) .

1MoreMuslim said...

Daniel 9:25 exposes the dishonesty of Christian translations: The Hebrew reads " An Anointed one", not THE Messiah.

donna60 said...

1moremuslim

Another place where the word Messiah,Anointed (מָשִׁיחַ
--Transliteration:mashiyach )
is used, that can only be attributed to the foretold Jesus:


Dan 9:25 Know 3045 therefore and understand 7919 , [that] from the going forth 4161 of the commandment 1697 to restore 7725 and to build 1129 Jerusalem 3389 unto the Messiah 4899 the Prince 5057 [shall be] seven 7651 weeks 7620, and threescore 8346 and two 8147 weeks 7620: the street 7339 shall be built 1129 again 7725 , and the wall 2742, even in troublous 6695 times 6256.

My friend, there is no wiggle-room around this. The "Anointed" is God. He is the God in Daniel,pbuh "One like the Son of Man" He is the "Son who was given," who was called "God" by Isaiah pbuh. He is the God, whose "Coming and Goings have been throughout eternity." as prophesied by Micah pbuh

And He is the "Star and Scepter of Judah, coming in the distant future," as prophesied by the pagan Balaam."

Even Muhammad confessed Jesus. He confessed that He would return, and he confessed that the Gospels were the word of God. Mohammad and Balaam are in the same sorry pickle. They were forced to confess, but they refused to confess to the point of salvation.

These two pagan prophets, Muhammad and Balaam fulfilled the prophesy of Paul,pbuh that in the end, "every tongue will confess, and every knee shall bow."

Radical Moderate said...

1milimeter you wrote...

"Daniel 9:25 exposes the dishonesty of Christian translations: The Hebrew reads " An Anointed one", not THE Messiah."

Actully your comment exposes your dishonesty and more important it exposes how Muslims project that dishonesty onto others.

First what concordance are you getting your information from that the word in Hebrew is not "mashiyach"?

Second we have been saying all along that the word Mashiyach means "Anointed ONE" so I do not understand how you can say the word means ANOINTED ONE not MESSIAH?

Here is from the blueletterbible.com

Strongs Concordance H4899 mashiyach

1) anointed, anointed one

a) of the Messiah, Messianic prince

b) of the king of Israel

c) of the high priest of Israel

d) of Cyrus

e) of the patriarchs as anointed kings



Daniel 9:26

Deleting said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Radical Moderate said...

@1milimeter

YOu keep demonstrating more and more while I will never see a Muslim doctor if I have a choice

Dk said...

1MM said Daniel exposes the dishonesty of Christian translations, but first of all not all Christian translations , translate it without an "an", many do.

I also wanted to point out even if you translate it as "an annointed one", it doesn't change much?

why?

I wrote this when I was a believer along time ago:

http://dk-man.blogspot.com/2007/02/read-all-daniel-chapter-9-here-daniel.html

CristoTeAma said...

@ThePurpleMarquise you did very well defending the Messiah point against 1MM, he almost had to become Heretical to keep his "point".

The Purple Marquise said...

@CristoTeAma: Thank you very much brother! All glory to God and His Messiah for giving us such a logical, consistent rich and beautiful theology and spiritual tradition on top of his free gift of Salvation that can win against ANY false teaching rather easily!

Just let's pray for MoreMuslim and Kim and Mahdi and other Muslims who read this blog to shake off their pride and prejudice and face the facts bravely and honestly and with integrity and bow their knees before Christ so that they can be with us in heaven! Amen!

1MoreMuslim said...

Purple Marquise: A Pure Muslim will not bow the knee to a Generated God. WE bow to the generator of all things.

Radical Moderate said...

1mm

ALl will bend the knee to the author of life, the creator of all things, in whom all things hold together.

Right now he is sitting on the right hand of God waiting just waiting for his enemy's to be made his FOOT STOOL

Royal Son said...

1MoreMuslim - Jesus - a Generated God?

Nice misrepresentation.

The fact is, the earliest documents on Jesus have Him declaring His eternal existence prior to the creation.

The earliest known christians worshiped Him as God.

You have not a single reliable document from the 1st century to the 5th that teaches the Muslim Jesus.

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MoreMuslims: You said: "Purple Marquise: A Pure Muslim will not bow the knee to a Generated God. WE bow to the generator of all things.
"

Oh! Really?!! If your Allah is the generator of all things then why he didn't even know what "The Messiah" means!! He seems to be too ignorant to be the "generator of all things"! I suggest you check again and make sure you that have not been duped by an illiterate charlatan in the Arabian deserts 1400 years ago into thinking that you are worshipping the "generator of all things" while you are actually bowing your head to the ground every day in worship of a false god or even worse!

1MoreMuslim said...

Royal Son:

1MoreMuslim - Jesus - a Generated God?

Nice misrepresentation.


It amazes me how Christians are swift in denying the Son as a generated God. Wherever you say Jesus is the SON , you are saying Jesus is the generated. Unless words have no meanings to you.

1MoreMuslim said...

Purple Marquise:

The Funny thing, you didn't even oppose the fact that Jesus is a generated God. Instead, you made a red herring with your "Messiah" claim, that you are mishandling from Jewish sources. Calling Jesus the savior of the world, you are only showing how deep his failure was to save the world. Or may be you are a universalist Christian?

The Purple Marquise said...

@1MM: yOU SAID: "Purple Marquise:

The Funny thing, you didn't even oppose the fact that Jesus is a generated God. Instead, you made a red herring with your "Messiah" claim, that you are mishandling from Jewish sources. Calling Jesus the savior of the world, you are only showing how deep his failure was to save the world. Or may be you are a universalist Christian?"

Don't get ahead of yourself buddy! You are TOTALLY projecting your own numerous and pathetic attempts at red herring and distraction unto me! Your whole attempt at bringing up stuff about the meaning of Son and nonsense like that are a GIANT red herring to muddy the water and distract from the fact that indeed it was you who gave ZERO evidence for your position, NEVER delivered on the burden of proof that was yours, NVERE EVER managed to refute ANY of the evidence that I abundantly presented (you never even tried!!), NEVER answered any of my questions, NEVER brought any explanation of the word Messiah from Quran or Hadith and basically LOST miserably and got humiliated.

Now if I don't fall for your idiotic distractions and don't follow you red herrings that you throw in there left and right in a desperate attempt to change the subject and to save your face, and if I instead keep focusing on what our argument actually was it doesn't mean that the irrelevant and non-sequitur nonsense that you are peddling on the side are any valid!

Your last remark about the son being generated was just so stupid and off the topic that I didn't even dignify it with an answer.

But if you really insist on getting an answer for it Dr. David Wood just a short while a go posted a BRILLIANT response to your nonsensical statements that you can read on the main blog site and I hope that you learn from it! He is doing you a big favor by teaching you some elementary logic which you so sorely lack! So pay attention! You actually might learn something! I hope the next time you type something here you will use your brain and logical faculties a bit more vigorously!