My my. I was just passing through, and I couldn't help but check this particular thread. It caught my eye.Amy, though I agree researching Islam diligently is the way to find whether it is true or not, the research you base yourself on must be solid. One of my favorite examples is the Skeptics annotated Bible, which one can purchase online. I own it, and I've rarely referenced it for anything serious. The arguments it makes against biblical passages are absurd, and completely disregard apologetics. Some might call it unbias, I call it uninformed. All this to say, the research you've presented needs to be scrutinized, and I don't see you doing that. For example, if I may;(Amy)
Additionally, This god Allah (with a little g) lies about Jesus. Islam says that Jesus not only is not the Son of God, but that He did not even die on a cross in Jerusalem... Allah is therefore proven to be a false pagan god... Jews also do not believe this about Jesus (Yeshua).
That logic is horrendous. First of all, Allah is the Arabic word for God. It is not a name, nor does it imply "God of Islam". It is used freely by arabic speaking Christians and Jews. The Idea that "Allah" depicts the Muslim God is as naive as the idea that "GOD" depicts the Christian God. So, the note about having denoted god with a little "g" is disrespectful and comically ignorant. The only existing, and equally ignorant, argument for Allah being a pagan god from before Islam, is to reference an old Arabic moon god "Allat". Now, while we modern day english speakers may not notice a difference between Allah and Allat, Arabic speaking who have done so from birth know that the difference is like "Cat" to "Dog".So, Allah is in no way a false God, nor is he a Pagan God. If you believe in the Scriptures of Allah, and profess that you believe in God, then you have pledged your allegiance with Allah. Let us not be childish about this.The research you gave, however, I must thank you for. I will look it over and try to take something out of it.An example of the research being off might also be given;(Amy)
Islam doesn't even have an original Qur'an. It was made up supposedly from "memory" and a few scraps found under a bed. This was about 150 - 200 years after Muhammad died at his wife Ayish's home in Medina, and he was lowered into a hole in the ground, where he remains.
Perhaps this refers to the institution of Zaid's Codex? However, it completely disregards the fact that other Codex's existed previously.I also noticed that you have made quite a few errs in your posts. For example;(Amy)
Muhammad also mistakenly thought the Trinity was the Father, Son and Mother (Mary).
This is not a simple mistake. This is a clue. It helps us figure out what influenced Islam. Collyridianism! Already the Qur'an is seen to have quite a great deal of references to the Pagan Gospels. Jesus' Birth Parallels that of the account in the "Evangelion of James", along with "the Gospel of Thomas". One of my favorite examples of Jesus making clay Doves in See more on this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legends_and_t...s_creates_birdsOne of my personal Favorites, which is unfortunately not on that page, is the imagery in Surah Yusuf. Though the story basically parallels the Bible's account, the imagery is much more obviously Christian. For example, in the prison out of the two with Joseph, who get their dreams interpreted, the servant who lives is said to pour out Wine for his Lord to Drink. Furthermore, he who dies is said to die Crucified, with a Bird plucking his eyes out. Without going into any great depth concerning this or other passages from this Surah, it is already easy to see that this was influenced by Christian teachings. As we know, Crucifixion was a Roman punishment, and was not known, or yet created, by Joseph's day in Egypt.So, the influences were Gnostic and Christian, which were likely not easily discernible for the first Muslims. It is Gnostic influence which likely accounts for the Trinity being denoted "God, Jesus, Mary". A note to Ricky;If you wish to learn about the Trinity from a source I recommend, then please read this Article by Archpriest Zachariah Butrus from the Coptic Orthodox Church.
http://www.the-good-way.com/eng/article/a06.htmNow, I was reading through, and I caught a few things along the way.(Amy;16026)
Yeah I am reading the link. Don't muslims believe that Jesus was born from a virgin? That his birth was a miracle? How can you call such a child ''Son of Man'' (as per your link) who was not born of Man but God?Why such hypocrisy? If you can accept and believe as a muslim that Jesus was born from a virgin why is concept of trinity so unacceptable?And that is just one argument
First of all, Christians are the ones who adorn the Messiah with the title "Son of Man" Which at once speaks of his humanity, and his messianic fulfillment. Daniel 7:13-14Also, this is not an argument. There is no hypocrisy in accepting something such as a miraculous Birth by the Grace of God, and then rejecting Trinity. Just as I may believe Mary gave Virginal Birth, beloved by God and blessed, yet reject Theotokos. The Trinity has nothing to do with the manner of Birth of the Messiah. Yes, in Christianity these two facets work together in perfect unison and they make perfect sense. However, unless you assumed that Ricky knew that, how can you say that he is a hypocrite? Furthermore, the views expressed on that website are not necessarily his. In fact, I believe he said a few times that the views expressed were those of Muslim scholars.Now, at this point I don't want you to think I'm blindly attacking you. However, I see that you have said something very honorable. (Amy;16020)
...I am sorry if you feel hurt. My intention is to seek truth and spread truth, ...-Amy
Your goal is brilliant, and I'm confident that if you follow it zealously, you will come to a better understanding of Islam and proper apologetics. Now, it is not you I am attacking really. The site you directed us to, is the origin of the false content. However, I do wish to share with you my thoughts about how you went about this. Recall that Truth without Love is Brutality. While that website does contain much truth which would likely make devout Muslims search their faith and question it, it has many innacuracies as well. If I were a Muslim today, I would be more frustrated by the misconceptions presented in that paper. Just as, because I am Christian, I am often frustrated when Muslims bring up the Gospel of Barnabas. Not because it is at all a challenge to my faith, but because it is simply a burden to try to explain yet again to another mislead Muslim, that the Gospel is a forgery and contains a wide assortment of the most comical of errors.What I do hope for you, is that you will learn to apply your method of questioning and seeking truth to Christianity as well. Question everything to the fullest extent. If you wish to have a good source, then perhaps the one I posted for Ricky will be of interest to you.
http://www.the-good-way.com/eng/I would also very very highly recommend that you look into getting a book called "Facing the Muslim Challenge" by John Gilchrist, which is sitting on the shelf in front of me. When I have lent this to Muslims, even the most devout have given it back saying that it was very respectful, though they disagree. Something can be learnt from him; He first made sure to consume his heart with love for Muslims, then he proceeded to evangelize to them. He makes some mistakes here and there, but overall his work is genius.Ricky, perhaps you should look into getting it yourself.Another useful writing I would point you both to, is called "Dear Abdullah". It is a pamphlet from "Life Challenge Africa". It is the most worth while read in so few pages I have ever had the pleasure of learning from.Amy, while I appreciate your goal, and even appreciate your zeal, I feel compelled to give a helping hand here. What you want is for confused Christians to be no longer confused. Let us endevour not to, then, sent our brothers and sisters to a site that seems credible, but will only end up confusing Christians more.I have spent much time evangelizing to Muslims. They are not of inferior intelligence, nor can Islam's challenge be taken lightly. First one must endeavour to understand Islam. Then one must consider Islam's Case. Then one must, once a stance is taken, seek to learn more, and hopefully help lead people to the Truth.The problem here is that people don't know better. So that articles like this, which are not loving, not logical, and have some erronous material, are praised.eg.(thesuperjag;16056)
Amy...thank you for the posts. I throughly enjoyed it...Becuse it spoke truth, about these false religion. (I read some of it)Lovest
thou in Christ Jesus (Yahshua) our Lord and Saviour.
Notice that Superjag didn't even read it in whole. Superjag didn't bother to scrutinize it, and I'd be willing to bet that Superjag wouldn't hesitate to show it to others in confidence (even perhaps vouching for it's integrity). Now, Superjag is simply an example. There are others here who have had similar reactions, and I imagine there are already guests who have taken the article link and are reading it already.I am not here to try to stop people from debating these matters. I am not here to put anyone down. However, as a Seeker of Truth, my personal Credo being in my signature, I could not idly sit and watch as such things are passed around.I have not read the article in it's entirety, but I have found errors. I will not go into many example, but allow me to pick one.{I looked for one. It was the second paragraph I randomely picked. This should tell you something of it's integrity, or of my stupidity. It's one or the other.}"
This same quality of transmission cannot be said of the Islamic Qur'an. The Islamic Qur'an was mostly written down from 3rd and 4th hand accounts; and from a few thoughts written on scrap papers, palm leaves and stones --and compiled over 150 years after Muhammad died in 632 A.D. In the Mishtatu ‘lMasabih, chapter 3, we are informed that by the command of the first Caliph, Abu Bakr, the text of the Qur’an was “collected” by Zaid ibn Thabit “from palm leaves and stones and from the breasts of those who had learned by heart” the various revelations." Abu Bakr’s copy came into the possession of Hafsah, one of Muhammad’s widows. Qustalani states that after Hafsah’s death her copy was torn to pieces by Mirwan, who was governor of Medina." 1. The Caliph who ordered that the Zaid ibn Thabit Codex be collected, copied, and sent out with an order to burn the other extant codex', was Uthman Ibn Affan, who was a friend of Caliph Abu Bakr. He actually converted in thanks to Abu Bakr. However, at least according to what I have learnt, Uthman was the one responsible for ordering the Zaid Codex to become the standard.2. The first writings are only esteemed to come from so late by some radical modern scholars. The same scholars, in fact, who believe the Gospels to be fabrications and compilations of stories long after the lives of even the apostles.3. The word "Qur'an" means Recitation. This is because that's exactly how it comes down to us. Muhammad the prophet would receive what were recognized as experiences of revelation, where the Hadith speak of his nature changing. For example his becoming heavier than a Camel in one instance. Once these experiences happened, they were proceeded by Muhammad giving a revelation. A message. This message was to be repeated by his followers until they knew it inside out. While it is interesting to note that a few Hadith tell us that there are Surah's that some early believers recalled that were not in the Qur'an they had, and that there are, between the extant variant codex's of the Qur'an today, over 2000 variant readings, just the same, the Qur'an is not a fabrication. All Qur'an's have the same layout, they have the same Surah's. They are practically Carbon Copies of each other. The Book may be false, but it is no more a fabrication then are the Gospels.4. "
Abu Bakr’s copy came into the possession of Hafsah, one of Muhammad’s widows." - "
The Islamic Qur'an was mostly written down from 3rd and 4th hand accounts; and from a few thoughts written on scrap papers, palm leaves and stones --and compiled over 150 years after Muhammad died in 632 A.D."Does nobody else see a problem here?While these problems do not seem serious, this was a randomely selected Paragraph.. For fun, let me do it again." Among other things, the religion of Islam is a brain-washing religion, and that is why so many Muslims turn into crazy mindless zombies. The Muslims are required to pray 5 times a day in Arabic to a God who is not there, from the moment they embrace Islam; and when they do so they touch their head to the floor. That is one reason they get so brain-washed, this repetitive prayer. You can often spot fanatical Muslims by the marks on their foreheads resulting from this repetitive touching their head to the floor, where they may whack their head if they really get into it. As an example, take a look at the below image (and all others released) of Osama's Al Qaida second in command, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, who always gives an anti-U.S. rant; Dr. Ayman has this tell-tale bruise on his forehead from too much head-whacking."{I almost laughed. It was the fourth this time, but this is terrible.}1. They do not turn into Zombies,
nor are they any more or less brainwashed then church goers who pray every day.2. They are not praying to a God who is not there. They are Praying to God, and he is there.3. "
You can often spot fanatical Muslims by the marks on their foreheads resulting from this repetitive touching their head to the floor, where they may whack their head if they really get into it."
...
4. "
Dr. Ayman has this tell-tale bruise on his forehead from too much head-whacking." ... more laughterWas that not enough? I shall proceed to do it one last time, so that we can be assured this is not by chance.{oh my.. the first one this time}"Islam claims to be a religion of the people of "The Book", or Ahel al-Kitab, which would have one believe it is a continuance of that Book God revealed to His Jewish Prophets. If it were, it would not deny what is in that "Book", especially after confirming the authority of the Jewish Torah and Christian Gospels. If Islam was true, Muslims would know the name of the true God is not Allah, but Yahweh. See more about Mohammed found in the Bible Codes here. These matrixes say: "Mohammed Profanes My Holy Name" and "Mohammed, Blaspheming, Demon"."1. Bible code can and does say anything.2. Allah is not a name. It is a Word. God is not a name. It is a Word. Elohim is not a name. It is a Word. The Tetragrammaton is a name. Ahura Mazda is a name. Allah is not.3. If Islam was true Muslims would necessarily know the Tetragrammaton? If the Gospels are true, and a new believer has access only to them for a few years, do they then magically know the Tetragrammaton, or are they by some reason not believing in Truth?It is unfortunate that the last two were so horrible; I was aiming to find actual scholastic errors. However, the fact that I have found errors born of ignorance should perhaps say something of the Articles origins.I wish to observe another example from Superjag at this point.On Page 3 Superjag's first post is brimming with ignorance. First of all 1 john 5:7 in the KJV is a false reading. There is not one Biblical manuscript, in Greek or Latin, from before the 16th Century, which has this reading. Furthermore, I don't see any evangelism going on, just preaching. {sorry for picking on you Superjag, but you make yourself a good example.}As the discussions went on it became clear to me that your knowledge of Islam is not insignificant. However, I would urge you to grow more in knowledge.(Amy;18273)
Strange thing is that you are pulling all the references out of Old Testament. Can you find any in the New Testament??? Do you know the difference? The law given to Mosses was twisted and misused in practise much like muhammed did or you are doing right now. Therefore the New testament preaches about forgiveness, love, cleaniness of thoughts, soul and spirit and not just a fancy dress show.My religion would never make sense to people vaccinated to reason. Therefore, like I have said many times before, I will not be distracted or waste my time in justifications. Therefore, carry on my friend for our concepts are clear.Having said all that, I will keep on digging into muhammeds grave no matter how much muslims twist and turnOh Yes, I really admire Ali Sina's knowledge
1. The New Testament does not change the Torah. The Torah and the Gospels are inseperable. Both are truth. However, let's not have misconceptions about this, the verses Ricky pulled from are very valid indeed, and were not examples of Torah being used apart from God's will, but in accordance with God's will. An Example from the New Testament, which is overused is Acts 5:1-11. God is a Wrathful God.2. Ali Sina? Well, if what Saleem said is true, I would question that source greatly.3. You disregard apologetics? "But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,"~1 Peter 3:15In my estimation, you haven't yet properly done either.(Saleem;18270)
Dear Amy, I was upset about some of the lies an misinformation, not by the actual allegations. For one you say I should see the reference's now there is a problem here, the reference's are too ambiguous, no numbers are provided or names are provided to the actual verses. Muslims cannot be shaken in their faith, evangelical Christians have tried and always lose debates with Muslim scholars. Our scholars have debunked many of these orientalist claims evangelical Christians like to quote. You should refer to scholars such as Ahmad Deedat, Dr Zakir Naik etc, etc.
Saleem, it's nice to see a Muslim speak with reason. You seem to have done well to roll your tongue when you were upset and return later. The only suggestion I have for you is; Drop Ahmad Deedat. His arguments are so incredibly weak that it's painful. Christian apologists and scholars have long since answered his allegations. Yet, he continues, unvexed, to bring those points up. Dr. Zakir Naik is a great source. I disagree with him and I point to things he gets wrong, but on the whole his arguments inspire respect. Of course, this is just a suggestion from a Christian who is not uneducated in his religion (nor in yours).I'm sorry. I cannot continue this at length. It's incomplete, but I must leave. In any case, my 2 cents; continue seeking knowledge, but be more discerning with your sources.
. And that is FACT. If you told me to follow your BIBLE, oh my GOD, i don't know what would happen to the world
.[url="http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/book_with_no_limits.htm]http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami...h_no_limits.htm[/url]I'm sorry with what i'm doing, i don't know that this is the way of christian threated a guest. Well God has foretold me kind of yours in the Quran, so i'm not to really shocked about it.Wallahu a'lam.
