What do Nigerian muslims think about this guy;



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIlVGlbHMPI


Clearly I'm not a fan but I want to know your thoughts. He has many videos on youtube

No man is great...Everyone makes mistakes...

I love him for the sake of Allah; He does a number of debates with atheists... The atheists lose most of the time. He presents a logical/rational basis to faith.

He was also former atheist/humanist.

Maybe you can be like him someday. A former atheist finding peace in the truth.

tbaba1234: No man is great...Everyone makes mistakes...

I love him for the sake of Allah; He does a number of debates with atheists... The atheists lose most of the time. He presents a logical/rational basis to faith.

He was also former atheist/humanist.

Maybe you can be like him someday. A former atheist finding peace in the truth.

haha. Thank you very much but I think I will be an atheist for life.

Rearding Hamza, he can argue very well but he debates atheists with little knowledge of Islam which makes the debates on abstracts. His debates are intelliegent but they focus too much on philosophy. He is smart no, doubt

He isn't original, all his arguments are lifted from that of William Lane Craig. . .Why do muslims always plagiarize Christian work?. . .

mazaje: He isn't original, all his arguments are lifted from that of William Lane Craig. . .Why do muslims always plagiarize Christian work?. . .

Islam is a product of christianity

logicboy:
Islam is a product of christianity

Silly statement...

mazaje: He isn't original, all his arguments are lifted from that of William Lane Craig. . .Why do muslims always plagiarize Christian work?. . .

Not true... I think it is unfair for you to say that... He has had a variety of talks and debates,,, Many of which are original ideas .... Maybe some parts were taken from other theistic argument but he has developed many of these arguments (and taken the silly parts out) . He has built a pretty solid case for the existence of God and very few atheists have succeeded in really challenging his position from the debates, i have seen.

His humanist background gives him an edge.

How do muslims plagarize christians?? That is one of the silliest claims ever made .....

tbaba1234:

Silly statement...



Not true... I think it is unfair for you to say that... He has had a variety of talks and debates,,, Many of which are original ideas .... Maybe some parts were taken from other theistic argument but he has developed many of these arguments (and taken the silly parts out) . He has built a pretty solid case for the existence of God and very few atheists have succeeded in really challenging his position from the debates, i have seen.

His humanist background gives him an edge.

How do muslims plagarize christians?? That is one of the silliest claims ever made .....

Please tell me what Muhammad knew about Jesus christ

logicboy:
Please tell me what Muhammad knew about Jesus christ

What do you mean what he knew?

tbaba1234:

Not true... I think it is unfair for you to say that... He has had a variety of talks and debates,,, Many of which are original ideas .... Maybe some parts were taken from other theistic argument but he has developed many of these arguments (and taken the silly parts out) . He has built a pretty solid case for the existence of God and very few atheists have succeeded in really challenging his position from the debates, i have seen.

His humanist background gives him an edge.

Very false, his first cause argument are copied DIRECTLY from William Craig, so are his ontological, moral, design arguments and cosmological arguments, ALL his point are lifted DIRECTLY from William Craig, it is very false to say he uses other theistic arguments, he uses that of William Craig SPECIFICALLY. . .He isn't original but a plagiarist. . . I agree he has won most of the atheist I have seen him debate which are very poor debaters any way, if he meets atheist like Sam Harris, Hector Havalos, Victor Stinger, David Tabash and Daniel Rice he won't stand a chance, these are some of the best atheist debaters around, they are the only atheist I have seen debate and win William Craig whose arguments he uses. . .If he is such a debater why not for his own arguments why use that already established arguments of a Christian? William Craig sat down and formulated them himself. . .He is a plagiarist. . .I repeat, why are muslims always copying or plagiarizing christians and their materials, can't they be original on their own?. . .

mazaje:
Very false, his first cause argument are copied DIRECTLY from William Craig, so are his ontological, moral, design arguments and cosmological arguments, ALL his point are lifted DIRECTLY from William Craig, it is very false to say he uses other theistic arguments, he uses that of William Craig SPECIFICALLY. . .He isn't original but a plagiarist. . .
I agree he has won most of the atheist I have seen him debate which are very poor debaters any way, if he meets atheist like Sam Harris, Hector Havalos, Victor Stinger, David Tabash and Daniel Rice he won't stand a chance, these are some of the best atheist debaters around, they are the only atheist I have seen debate and win William Craig whose arguments he uses. . .If he is such a debater why not for his own arguments why use that already established arguments of a Christian? William Craig sat down and formulated them himself. . .He is a plagiarist. . .I repeat, why are muslims always copying or plagiarizing christians and their materials, can't they be original on their own?. . .

Again an unfair assessment, How does hamza's works translate to all of the muslim work? There are many classical views recorded in the Islamic books that address the same issues hamza talks about (the existence of God etc). Those views are not dependent on willaim craig or any other person. So, hamza using william craig's arguments on creation or even plagiarizing them is only hamza's problem not an average muslim's problem. So your criticism should be limited to hamza as an individual.

In addition, hamza debates are not only about the existence of God, he talks about a host of other issues like Islam and Humanism etc. In many of his other debates, he doesn't need william craig.

You do not know how he will fare with other guys until they have a debate.

tbaba1234:

Again an unfair assessment, How does hamza's works translate to all of the muslim work? There are many classical views recorded in the Islamic books that address the same issues hamza talks about (the existence of God etc). Those views are not dependent on willaim craig or any other person. So, hamza using william craig's arguments on creation or even plagiarizing them is only hamza's problem not an average muslim's problem. So your criticism should be limited to hamza as an individual.

In addition, hamza debates are not only about the existence of God, he talks about a host of other issues like Islam and Humanism etc. In many of his other debates, he doesn't need william craig.

You do not know how he will fare with other guys until they have a debate.

I have seen him argue about the existence of God and the moral argument wit some atheist, and I was wondering if it was William Craig speaking, most of his arguments for the existence of God and his moral arguments are lifted DIRECTLY from Craig. . .The guy is very good no doubt, but he would have earn my respect if he was original on his own instead of being a plagiarist. . .I am talking specifically about his arguments on the existence of God. . .Sure he talks about Islam very well no doubt but that is not my point. . .Any body that can win William Craig will win him since their arguments are the same. . .

tbaba1234:

What do you mean what he knew?

I said that Islam is a product of christianity. Why is Jesus in the Koran? Was he not plagiarised from the bible? What would Muhammad or other Arabs haveknown about Jesus Christ to put him in the Koran

^Can you point to a place where Jesus (AS) said: "I am Jesus (AS) and I have brought Christianity to you as a religion?" All Prophets including Jesus (AS) were Muslims.

You argue from a disadvantaged position- Of course, you will not accept that.

logicboy:
I said that Islam is a product of christianity. Why is Jesus in the Koran? Was he not plagiarised from the bible? What would Muhammad or other Arabs have known about Jesus Christ to put him in the Koran

Well, that is not the Islamic position:

Islam basically means to submit and surrender. those who submit and surrender to the will of God are called Muslims. Jesus, Moses, Salih, Abraham all submitted to the will of the creator and were therefore muslims. Jesus did not come with a religion called christianity (from christ) and moses did not come with a religion called Judaism (from judah). They both came with the message of obedience to a creator...

Now, these messengers were given revelation and knowledge they couldn't have possibly known otherwise. The Quran is one of such revelations. So whilst the prophet couldn't have known about some of these people. It was revealed to him by the master/owner of the heavens and the earth.

As regards plagarisation,
1. the bible was not translated into Arabic throughout the time of the prophet.
2. There is no way the prophet could have obtained that kind of knowledge, since there were very few christians in mecca and medina.
3. Religious books for christians was limited to the priest/monks (there were no printing press). The only person in mecca was Waraqa who died within a few days after the 23 year revelation started. The prophet only met him twice in his life.
3. There are no valid (or reasonable) claims of any one teaching him...
4, He was unlettered (could not read/write), The Quran makes that clear

So where did he plagarise from? You will have to provide evidence to make that kind of claim..
.
The Quran also tells the prophet that he was oblivious of these stories:

That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad]. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed. (Surah 3:44)

And you, [O Muhammad], were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the witnesses
[to that]. (Surah 28:44)

The news is from the unseen....

maclatunji: ^Can you point to a place where Jesus (AS) said: "I am Jesus (AS) and I have brought Christianity to you as a religion?" All Prophets including Jesus (AS) were Muslims.

You argue from a disadvantaged position- Of course, you will not accept that.

Where did Moses or Abraham mention Allah as his God?. . .The talked about a God who says his name called Jehovah Yahweh and NOT Allah. . .The God talked about in the OT is very different from that of the Koran. . .Deny all you want but that is the fact. . . .

tbaba1234:

Well, that is not the Islamic position:

Islam basically means to submit and surrender. those who submit and surrender to the will of God are called Muslims. Jesus, Moses, Salih, Abraham all submitted to the will of the creator and were therefore muslims. Jesus did not come with a religion called christianity (from christ) and moses did not come with a religion called Judaism (from judah). They both came with the message of obedience to a creator..

Africans who also submit to the will of their traditional God like Sango are muslims according to your logic. . .Moses was NOT a muslim, he never talked about Allah, the God hr talked about has a name and it is not called Allah according to the bible. . .

Now, these messengers were given revelation and knowledge they couldn't have possibly known otherwise. The Quran is one of such revelations. So whilst the prophet couldn't have known about some of these people. It was revealed to him by the master/owner of the heavens and the earth.

This would have made any sense if the Koran as we know it was written during the time of the prophet but it wasn't. . .

As regards plagarisation,
1. the bible was not translated into Arabic throughout the time of the prophet.
2. There is no way the prophet could have obtained that kind of knowledge, since there were very few christians in mecca and medina.
3. Religious books for christians was limited to the priest/monks (there were no printing press). The only person in mecca was Waraqa who died within a few days after the 23 year revelation started. The prophet only met him twice in his life.

Even the hadiths say that waraqa said he taught the prophet, he claimed according to the hadith that the prophet did not know anything and he helped him write the Koran. . .

3. There are no valid (or reasonable) claims of any one teaching him...
4, He was unlettered (could not read/write), The Quran makes that clear

Waraqa claimed he taugt him according to the hadith. . .The claim that Mohammed was unlettered is the muslims joker to counter the claimed as to why most of the stories found in the bible were also found in the koran. . .The Koran as we know it was not written during the time of Mohammed.

So where did he plagarise from? You will have to provide evidence to make that kind of claim..
.
The Quran also tells the prophet that he was oblivious of these stories:

Where else but from the bible. . . .You do not know how exposed there were back then, you only accept their claim of Mohammed being an illiterate and the Koran's divine authorship. . . .

That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad]. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed. (Surah 3:44)

And you, [O Muhammad], were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the witnesses
[to that]. (Surah 28:44)

The news is from the unseen....

The news is from people that copied it from another source. . .NON of the stories written by the prophets in the Koran have external sources to back them up. . .Read about Moses, Abraham, Issac, Jesus, NOTHING outside the Koran backs the story of Jesus as portrayed in the Koran for example the stories about Jesus found in the Koran are to be found in the Koran alone and some gospels that were not included in the bible, compare that with what some secular historians have written about biblical prophets and their sources. . . .When historian want to find out about these prophets the bible and what it says about them is what they run to NOT the Koran. .

tbaba1234:



As regards plagarisation,
1. the bible was not translated into Arabic throughout the time of the prophet.
2. There is no way the prophet could have obtained that kind of knowledge, since there were very few christians in mecca and medina.
3. Religious books for christians was limited to the priest/monks (there were no printing press). The only person in mecca was Waraqa who died within a few days after the 23 year revelation started. The prophet only met him twice in his life.
3. There are no valid (or reasonable) claims of any one teaching him...
4, He was unlettered (could not read/write), The Quran makes that clear

So where did he plagarise from? You will have to provide evidence to make that kind of claim..
.

Bel'am, Yaish, Addas, Yessar, Cebr, Salman the Persian.

What does the Quran say about this?

The ”God ” in the Quran explains this with the customary oath:

"We take an oath that we know they (the unbelievers) say, ‘A mortal taught him,’ but the man to whom they allude speaks a foreign tongue, while this (The Quran) is eloquent Arabic speech. (Nahl (The Bee), verse: 103)

In the verses following the one above, the ‘infidels’ are threatened and defined as ‘liars’, ‘slanderers’ and they are informed that ‘a grievous punishment’ awaits them.

In the verse above, it is said that the person who was said to be instructing Muhammad was a foreigner, not an Arab.

Some people claim that it was a Greek slave named Bel'am who taught Muhammad.

Muhammad’s cousin Ibn Abbas conveys:

The Prophet was teaching a slave in Mecca. The slave was a foreigner. He was worshipping idols. His name was Bel’am. The idolaters saw him when he was going in to pay a visit to Muhammad or while he was leaving. And they said, “The one who taught Muhammad everything was Bel’am.” (See Taberi, Cami’ul-Beyan, 14/119).
Some sources indicate that other slaves named Yaish and Cebr could have been teaching Mohammad, too.

It is also possible that the teachers of Muhammad could have been CEBR, YESSAR, and ADDAS, who were all from Yemen.

The Hadramis had two young slaves. One of these two was Yessar and the other one was Cebr, both of whom were from Yemen. The testimony of the owners of those two slaves is as follows:

We had two young slaves. They read their books in their own language. Prophet Muhammad used to visit and listen to them. Just for this reason, the idolaters said, ‘Muhammad is learning from them…’ (Tebari, 14/119).
In the quotation from Fahruddin Razi, there is a 3rd slave: Huvaytıb’s slave Addas. (See F. Razi, interpretation, 24/50)

It is noticeable that whether Greek or Yemeni, the viewpoints about the relationship between Muhammad and the slaves were different.
The viewpoints of Muslims regarding this relationship are somewhat different than the viewpoints of the idolaters, who the Muslims called “infidels”.
According to some Muslims, there was a relationship of ‘teaching and learning’ between Muhammad and the slaves, but the teacher was Muhammad, the learners were the slaves. According to idolaters, the truth was just the opposite. That is, the teachers were the slaves. Muhammad was learning from them.

According to some other Muslims, the relationship between Muhammad and the slaves never went beyond a ‘reading- listening’ relationship. The slaves read their holy books in their own language, and ‘the Prophet’ only ‘listened’ to them.

However Muslims cannot answer the following questions:

1.If Muhammad did not know their language, what was Muhammad constantly doing amongst them? And what benefits did Muhammad get by listening to the slaves if he did not know their language?
2.In short, the defence Muslims put forward is far from logic. From where does the Muslims’ faith come?

Muhammad’s own explanation to this question is very illuminating:

“The Moslems’ faith is from Yemen.”

The following hadith (sayings attributed to Muhammad) exists in the books of Hadiths containing the contribution of Buhari’s ‘e’s-Sahih’ and is regarded as the most authoritative. According to this hadith, ‘wisdom’ is also from Yemen. What is more, ‘canon law’ comes from Yemen, too. (See Buhari, e’s-Sahih, Kitabu’l-Meğazi/74; Tecrid, hadith no: 1362; Muslim, e’s-Sahih, Kitabu’l-Iman/81-91, the hadith n: 51-52 and other books of hadiths.)
This hadith, according to researchers, is amongst the ‘mutevatır hadiths (it is quoted directly from Muhammad), conveyed from the most reliable sources, and it was conveyed from eleven people who were all the Prophet’s friends. (See, Ebu'l-Feyz Muhammad, Lukatu'l-Lai'l-Mütenasire Fi Ahadisi'l-Mutevatıre, Beirut, 1985, p.42-43, hadith no: 10).

Some commentators, with some far-fetched interpretations, try to show that what’s meant with Yemen here is ‘Mecca and Medina’. (See, Tecrid, 1362 numbered hadith, explanation of Kamil Miras). But in some quotations of the hadith, it is clear that the place mentioned here is Yemen that is known to anyone in geographic sense.

So, according to this hadith, with ‘faith’, ‘wisdom’ and ‘comprehension (fıkh) (here fıkh should be used in its dictionary meaning)’ Islam originated from Yemen, so it was foreign to Arabs.

The one who taught Muhammad was a Persian called Salman or… (Selman Farisi)

Some agree that the foreigner who taught Muhammad was the one who was mentioned in Nahl Sura (The Bee), verse 103 is Salman the Persian. (See, Taberi, the same reference above).

It is known by everyone that Salman later identifies himself as a Muslim and becomes famous among Muslims, and has a close relationship and co-operation with Muhammad. Being a Muslim provides him with many benefits; first, freedom, that is to say getting out of slavery. Later, fame, esteem, and material and moral benefits…

It is also claimed by some that the foreigner who is said to have taught Muhammad was a “scribe”, who was converted to Islam first but later left this belief. (see, Taberi, the same reference). This is what happens to the “scribe”;
This slave first becomes a Muslim. He also co-operates with Muhammad like Salman did. But later, something happens and he denounces Islam and makes an explanation:
“It was me who taught Muhammad and whatever I taught him took place in the Quran as revelations…”
Shortly afterwards, the man either died or was killed. As for his corpse, somehow it never stayed where it was buried.

Muhammad’s men were spreading rumours:

“This event is the reflection of God’s wrath. The man angered God very much. Now the situation is apparent. He is buried, but the earth does not, cannot admit him. The earth is afraid of God. For this reason, it rejects the unbeliever. This should be ‘taken as a warning from God to others…”
The man was buried but after a few days, in the morning he was seen lying out of the grave. This happened a few times. (The fact that the corpse was found out of the grave specially in the mornings arises suspicion because it is a high possibility that Muhammad’s followers took the corpse out at night by digging the grave. If it was God who took out the corpse to give warning, why did he do it at night?) Certainly the dark was the best condition to conceal the truth.

One of Muhammad’s friends Enes (son of Malik), a long time later, would narrate the event as follows:

There was a man from the House of Neccar…He was a Christian, who later became Muslim. He read Al Baqara and Ali Imran Suras. He also wrote revelations for the Prophet. Later, he converted back to Christianity. He started to say, ‘Muhammad only knows what I taught him. He does not know anything else. (See, Buhari, e's-Sahih, Kitabu'l Menakıb/25,v.4,p.181-182;Tecrid, hadith no: 1477)

According to Enes, God got angry with this man and killed him by breaking his neck. The Christians buried him. In the morning, however, they found his corpse outside the grave. And the corpse was without a shroud. The Christians said, ‘Muhammad’s men took off his shroud, and left him just like that.’ They buried the man again, deeper this time. The next morning, the same thing happened. Later, again the Christians buried him, even deeper. The next morning, the same situation and the same speculations.... Then they thought that it would go on like that, so they gave up burying the corpse.

However there was another man who said similar things like the man from the House of Naccar. He was Abdullah, son of Sa’d son of Ebu Serh. But he did not experience the same faith as the man from the House of Naccar although Muhammad declared his execution. By means of the mediation of his foster brother Othman, he was forgiven. Later, he even became the Governor of Egypt. (Death, 656-657. See Islam Encyclopaedia).

The answer in the verse

How satisfactory is the answer in the Quran to the people who claim that it was a mortal – not God - who taught Muhammad?

The answer, as can be inferred from the verse cited above, is as follows;

The person who is claimed to have taught Muhammad is not an Arab but the Quran is in clear Arabic, so it can’t be him who taught Muhammad.

However, a foreigner who knew Arabic could have given Muhammad some information from ‘the rumours of the old’; from the Torah, the Bible and other ‘holy texts’. This is what has been put forward.
Isn’t it possible that Muhammad presented the information that he got from others in his own style by pouring them into Arabic moulds.

Moreover, even Muslim researchers write with examples that the ‘clear Arabic’ Quran contains many words from different languages like ‘Hebrew’, ‘Greek’, ‘Syrian’, and ‘Coptic’… (See, Suyuti, el Itkan Fi Ulumi’l-Kur’an, Arabic, Egypt, 1978, 1/178-185)

Doesn’t the presence of so many foreign words in the Quran support the allegation that ‘a foreigner’ (or foreigners) gave information to Muhammad?

It is also possible that one or more Arabs did teach Muhammad as well as some foreigners. One example that is very important for Islam was a man called ‘Museylime’. Museylime was a degrading name. In addition, Muslims called Museylime ‘a big liar’. This is a blasphemy for a Muslim. It is clear that his name was ‘Muslim’. It is very important to notice that his name takes us to the roots of the words ‘Islam’ and ‘Muslim’.

This man who was degraded and looked down on by Muslims was called ‘Compassionate’. He was also called ‘The Compassionate of Yemame’. In fact the man was well known with this name. This is also very interesting.

Another interesting thing is these words that people from Mecca say to Muhammad:

According to the information we have received, the one who teaches you is that man of Yemame, the man called Rahman (not God). We tell you this under oath to God, we don’t believe Rahman. (see, Ibn Ishak, Siyer, verification and stall: Muhammad Hamidullah, Arabic, Konya, 1981, p.180, paragraph: 254).

Is there no ground for people of Mecca to say this?

Museylime, actually ‘Muslim ’, or with his other name ‘Rahman’, was from The House of Hanife, which belongs to Yemame tribe. Interesting three names: ‘Muslim’, ‘Hanife’, ‘Rahman’. These names, especially when the first two come together, become more interesting.

In the Quran, Abraham, who was introduced as the ‘name father’ for the ‘Muslims’, (See, Hacc, verse: 78), was called as both ‘Hanif’ and ‘Muslim’. (See, Bakara: 135; Ali Imran: 67, 95; Nisa: 125; En'am:161; Nahl: 120,123.). Abraham is the Prophet of Sabii Religion, which short means ‘star worshipping’. This is the conclusion that I reach by research from the Islam sources: Muhammad was also called a Sabii when he first appeared in his struggle.(see, Buhari, e’s-Sahih, Kitabu’t Teyemmüm, /6, v.1, p.89). The language of Sabii Religion is also Syriac. ‘Islam’, ‘Muslim’, ‘Hanif’ and ‘Rahman’ come from this language just like ‘Allah’, ‘Quran’, Furkan’, ‘Book’, ‘angel’ and so many other words (See Aziz Günel,The History of Turk Syrians, Diyarbakır,1970,p.46-48;Suyuti el Itkan,1/180-184;Orientalist Arthur Jeffery, The Foreign Vocabulary of the Quran,Kahire,1938,p.12 and others).

Likewise, from my research I have concluded: “Star Worshipping”, while it became an institution as a religion, and a source for Christianity and Judaism, also comprised the Muslims and the Hanifs in the Middle East. First there were Muslims, and then Hanifs, a subdivision, appeared. Abraham was the Prophet of this subdivision. Muslim (Museylime) known as ‘Rahman of Yemame’ and Muhammad, who had obviously learned many things from him, belonged to this subdivision. (For further information about Sabii Religion, see, Eren Kutsuz-Turan Dursun, 'Saçak Magazine', February 1988, volume: 49.)

Rahman of Yemame could have been only one of the sources that Muhammad benefited from. Of all the people mentioned above and others, either just one of them or all together, could have been ‘teachers’ of Muhammad. According to 4th verse of Al Furqan Sura, Muhammad’s helpers, in other words his teachers, were described as ‘a community’, in other words ‘a group of people’. This verse and two verses following this one means;

“Deniers claim ‘this Quran is the fabrication of Muhammad. A group of people have helped him.’ They said, ‘The Quran is full of stories from the past. Others wrote it and read it to him all the time.’ O, Muhammad, say, ‘The Quran has come from the one who knows the secrets of the earth and the skies’. Without a doubt, he is the forgiver’ “(Al Furqan, verse: 4-6).(Official translation of the Quran by the Presidency of Religious Affairs of Turkey)

People who say the Quran is a ‘fabrication’ also say the following:

1.A group of people helped Muhammad,

2.Muhammad got the Quran verses from others and had them written down,

3.The verses were constantly read to Muhammad day and night,
‘The verses consist of ‘the tales of the old’.

As a counter argument, the Quran says:

“Those are lies and unfair claims. God brought down the verses of the Quran. He knows the secret of the earth and the skies.” Son of Hars Nadr felt the need to warn people in Mecca when Muhammad started to introduce himself as ‘God’s Prophet’ by putting himself in a rank between God and people, and undertaking the task of delivering God’s messages to people. And he said :

Never believe this man. All the things he puts forward and claims are from old tales. I can tell you more beautiful things than he can.” Nadr told them that he could tell them stories from Persian Tales, which were about the Persian Kings and heroes. (See, Taberi, Camin’l-Beyan, 18/137-138)

Was Nadr right?

Does anything from the tales of the old exist in the Quran?

As it is known, in the Quran there are a lot of stories called ‘kıssa’. Many of them take place, firstly in the Torah, in Jewish sources, and some in the Bible. When examined, some of those stories are the same as the tales of the past long before the Torah. For example, the tale about ‘the Deluge’ is almost the same in the Gilgamesh Legend. There are many more examples.

At the time of Muhammad, there were many believers of different religions in and around Mecca and Medina. The number of these people who knew old tales and ‘holy writings’ were not in short supply. It is known that there were some slaves who had this knowledge and that Muhammad promised to set them free and worked with them. Bel'am, Yaish, Yessar, Addas, Cebr and Salman the Persian are some of those slaves mentioned above in this article...

To think that they or some others helped Muhammad to create the Quran is not far from intelligence. Intelligence and logic can’t accept the claim that ‘a god’ sends messages from the skies choosing this person or that as a messenger. Human’s intelligence cannot accept such a thing but “faith”, which has nothing to do with intelligence, can.

http://www.turandursun.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=65&catid=38&lang=en

maclatunji: ^Can you point to a place where Jesus (AS) said: "I am Jesus (AS) and I have brought Christianity to you as a religion?" All Prophets including Jesus (AS) were Muslims.

You argue from a disadvantaged position- Of course, you will not accept that.

Huh?

Jesus was a Jew that reformed Judaism and that is why people have christianity. Jesus was not a christian, though he brought about christianity.

Jesus never spoke Arabic, neither did Moses.


I do not even have to talk much on this point. Majaze does a good job of destroying your argument. Kudos Majaze.

tbaba1234:

Well, that is not the Islamic position:

Islam basically means to submit and surrender. those who submit and surrender to the will of God are called Muslims. Jesus, Moses, Salih, Abraham all submitted to the will of the creator and were therefore muslims. Jesus did not come with a religion called christianity (from christ) and moses did not come with a religion called Judaism (from judah). They both came with the message of obedience to a creator...

Now, these messengers were given revelation and knowledge they couldn't have possibly known otherwise. The Quran is one of such revelations. So whilst the prophet couldn't have known about some of these people. It was revealed to him by the master/owner of the heavens and the earth.

As regards plagarisation,
1. the bible was not translated into Arabic throughout the time of the prophet.
2. There is no way the prophet could have obtained that kind of knowledge, since there were very few christians in mecca and medina.
3. Religious books for christians was limited to the priest/monks (there were no printing press). The only person in mecca was Waraqa who died within a few days after the 23 year revelation started. The prophet only met him twice in his life.
3. There are no valid (or reasonable) claims of any one teaching him...
4, He was unlettered (could not read/write), The Quran makes that clear

So where did he plagarise from? You will have to provide evidence to make that kind of claim..
.
The Quran also tells the prophet that he was oblivious of these stories:

That is from the news of the unseen which We reveal to you, [O Muhammad]. And you were not with them when they cast their pens as to which of them should be responsible for Mary. Nor were you with them when they disputed. (Surah 3:44)

And you, [O Muhammad], were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the witnesses
[to that]. (Surah 28:44)

The news is from the unseen....

Moses was a Jew. Jesus was a Jew but Jesus brought about a reformation of judaism and that is why we have christianity.

I wont arue much as Majaze has destroyed your argument. Kudos Majaze

@Mazaje, it is easy to copy and paste falsehood. You are even quoting rebuttals of your argument from the Qur'an, the next question that one will then ask is: how blind can you be? It is clear that as Muslims all the other Prophets especially Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus (Peace be upon them) share similarities with Prophet Muhammad (SAW). It is quite obvious that the Prophet did not learn religion or history from anybody except through divine revelation because he clearly contradicted the false teachings of the Jews and Christians about the Prophets with the revelations that he received.

A great example is that of the encounters detailed in Suratul Kahf, Chapter 18 of the Qur'an. It instructive to note that you have no knowledge of what you speak of and only rely on the false analysis of third parties. The likes of you are the the spiritual descendants of the Unbelievers in Mecca and beyond during the lifetime of the Prophet. You want to critique a concept, you have to study it independently rather than rely on the works of those who hold contrary opinions to it.

Now it is the points that you seek to assert that Suratul Kahf dispels. Read the circumstances that brought about this Chapter.

Circumstances of revelation
Muslim historian and hagiographer, Muhammad bin Ishaq, reported in his book Sira that the eighteenth chapter of the Qur'an (which includes the story of Dhu l-Qarnayn) was revealed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad by Allah on account of some questions posed by rabbis residing in the city of Medina – the verse was revealed during the Meccan period of Muhammad's life. According to Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad's tribe, the powerful Quraysh, were greatly concerned about their tribesman who had started claiming prophethood and wished to consult rabbis about the matter. The Quraysh sent two men to the rabbis of Medina, reasoning that they had superior knowledge of the scriptures and about the prophets of God. The two Quraysh men described their tribesman, Muhammad, to the rabbis.

The rabbis told the men to ask Muhammad three questions:

They [the rabbis] said, "Ask him about three things which we will tell you to ask, and if he answers them then he is a Prophet who has been sent; if he does not, then he is saying things that are not true, in which case how you will deal with him will be up to you. Ask him about some young men in ancient times, what was their story For theirs is a strange and wondrous tale. Ask him about a man who travelled a great deal and reached the east and the west of the earth. What was his story And ask him about the Ruh (soul or spirit) – what is it? If he tells you about these things, then he is a Prophet, so follow him, but if he does not tell you, then he is a man who is making things up, so deal with him as you see fit."[7]

According to Ibn Ishaq, when Muhammad was informed of the three questions from the rabbis, he said that he would have the answers in the morning but did not say "if God wills it". For fifteen days, Muhammad awaited eagerly for the revelation. Muhammad did not answer the question until then. Doubt in Muhammad began to grow amongst the people of Mecca. Then, after fifteen days, Muhammad received the revelation of al-Kahf as an answer to the questions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Kahf

logicboy:

Huh?

Jesus was a Jew that reformed Judaism and that is why people have christianity. Jesus was not a christian, though he brought about christianity.

Jesus never spoke Arabic, neither did Moses.


I do not even have to talk much on this point. Majaze does a good job of destroying your argument. Kudos Majaze.

Who says all Muslims speak Arabic. The most basic definition of Islam is: Total Submission to the will of God.
This definition does not say anything about any language- does it?

logicboy:

Huh?

Jesus was a Jew that reformed Judaism and that is why people have christianity. Jesus was not a christian, though he brought about christianity.

Of course, you are bewildered because you are ignorant and think yourself wise. When you see superior knowledge, you will get confused. So, you are so slow that you cannot distinguish between ethnicity and religion. Yes, Jesus (AS) was a Jew (ethnicity) but he was a Muslim (Islam was his religion, same for the other Prophets).

So simple but difficult for slow people to comprehend.

maclatunji:

Who says all Muslims speak Arabic. The most basic definition of Islam is: Total Submission to the will of God.
This definition does not say anything about any language- does it?



Of course, you are bewildered because you are ignorant and think yourself wise. When you see superior knowledge, you will get confused. So, you are so slow that you cannot distinguish between ethnicity and religion. Yes, Jesus (AS) was a Jew (ethnicity) but he was a Muslim (Islam was his religion, same for the other Prophets).

So simple but difficult for slow people to comprehend.

You must be joking. So you believe that Jews practiced islam? Moses or Abraham or Jesus were muslims? Jews in the Roman empire practiced islam when it is historical fact they practised Judaism, christiaity and other cult relgions but never Islam?

Historical fact; Islam had nothing to do with Nazareth until the first century.

Jesus never spoke Arabic. Why was the Koran then written in Arabic? Jesus was Jewish, both in ethnicity and religion.

Judaism was practiced

^The biggest festival in Islam, Eid-ul-Adha is based on the life of Abraham and his son Ishmael (AS). We follow them because they were Muslims. Abraham was the grandfather of Jacob the father of the Jews. So, if their Great grandfather was a Muslim, does it shock you that his descendants who followed the true religion of Abraham (Islam) are also classified as Muslims?

You are handicapped my friend, no matter where you turn to for inspiration, your arguments will be defeated. If we keep quiet, it is because we cannot continually babysit you, not because you have valid points against us.

maclatunji: ^The biggest festival in Islam, Eid-ul-Adha is based on the life of Abraham and his son Ishmael (AS). We follow them because they were Muslims. Abraham was the grandfather of Jacob the father of the Jews. So, if their Great grandfather was a Muslim, does it shock you that his descendants who followed the true religion of Abraham (Islam) are also classified as Muslims?

You are handicapped my friend, no matter where you turn to for inspiration, your arguments will be defeated. If we keep quiet, it is because we cannot continually babysit you, not because you have valid points against us.

Who cares about festivals? Christmas is celebrated because of the birth of Jesus worldwide. However, it was stolen from pagan traditions. Festivals are based on myths and Legends.


Abraham spoke hebrew. Tell me why the Koran is in Arabic? Also, if Abraham was a muslim, tell me why circumcision is not compulsory in islam. Why is compulsory in Judaism?





Abraham was more likely to be a Jew and so, you are talking nonsense.

^Christians will deny that. We celebrate the exact event that involved Abraham and Ishmael (AS). We have not changed anything. The comparison you made shows desperation, give yourself a break! Muslim men are circumcised and evidence exists from the Qur'an that Abraham was ordered to do so and we follow from there as our Prophet also did. You enjoy disbelief, no amount of facts will help you if you have decided to ignore the truth.

maclatunji: @Mazaje, it is easy to copy and paste falsehood. You are even quoting rebuttals of your argument from the Qur'an, the next question that one will then ask is: how blind can you be? It is clear that as Muslims all the other Prophets especially Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus (Peace be upon them) share similarities with Prophet Muhammad (SAW). It is quite obvious that the Prophet did not learn religion or history from anybody except through divine revelation because he clearly contradicted the false teachings of the Jews and Christians about the Prophets with the revelations that he received.

Falsehood?. . .You were indoctrinated since childhood and made to accept the stories and culture of a particular group of people as divine, yet you open your mouth and talk about other copying and pasting falsehood. . .It was VERY common knowledge that people accused Mohammed for plagiarizing his stories from the Jews and christians at that time, the writers of the Koran sought to brush it aside by declaring their accusations as false and claiming divine authorship. .They claim that Mohammed was an illiterate to brush aside the fact that most of his stories were copied from the bible, even some of the hadith talk about others(Greek and Jews) teaching him about what he knows. . .Everything we know about Mohammed we know through the mouth of muslims and the VERY twisted and one sided history they wrote and recorded. . .Their own narrative including their lies were written as the truth and presented for other people to accept. . .There is NO external source that corroborates any of the stories about Mohammed or any of the prophets found in the Koran the way their stories were written in the Koran. . .You were not there, you did not know what happened, you just believe and accept the stories you were indoctrinated with since childhood as factual when they are NOT. . .

A great example is that of the encounters detailed in Suratul Kahf, Chapter 18 of the Qur'an. It instructive to note that you have no knowledge of what you speak of and only rely on the false analysis of third parties. The likes of you are the the spiritual descendants of the Unbelievers in Mecca and beyond during the lifetime of the Prophet. You want to critique a concept, you have to study it independently rather than rely on the works of those who hold contrary opinions to it.

Now it is the points that you seek to assert that Suratul Kahf dispels. Read the circumstances that brought about this Chapter.

Circumstances of revelation
Muslim historian and hagiographer, Muhammad bin Ishaq, reported in his book Sira that the eighteenth chapter of the Qur'an (which includes the story of Dhu l-Qarnayn) was revealed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad by Allah on account of some questions posed by rabbis residing in the city of Medina – the verse was revealed during the Meccan period of Muhammad's life. According to Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad's tribe, the powerful Quraysh, were greatly concerned about their tribesman who had started claiming prophethood and wished to consult rabbis about the matter. The Quraysh sent two men to the rabbis of Medina, reasoning that they had superior knowledge of the scriptures and about the prophets of God. The two Quraysh men described their tribesman, Muhammad, to the rabbis.

The rabbis told the men to ask Muhammad three questions:

They [the rabbis] said, "Ask him about three things which we will tell you to ask, and if he answers them then he is a Prophet who has been sent; if he does not, then he is saying things that are not true, in which case how you will deal with him will be up to you. Ask him about some young men in ancient times, what was their story For theirs is a strange and wondrous tale. Ask him about a man who travelled a great deal and reached the east and the west of the earth. What was his story And ask him about the Ruh (soul or spirit) – what is it? If he tells you about these things, then he is a Prophet, so follow him, but if he does not tell you, then he is a man who is making things up, so deal with him as you see fit."[7]

According to Ibn Ishaq, when Muhammad was informed of the three questions from the rabbis, he said that he would have the answers in the morning but did not say "if God wills it". For fifteen days, Muhammad awaited eagerly for the revelation. Muhammad did not answer the question until then. Doubt in Muhammad began to grow amongst the people of Mecca. Then, after fifteen days, Muhammad received the revelation of al-Kahf as an answer to the questions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Kahf

What is all this?. . .You accept what the muslism wrote and regurgitate them as factual events when they are NOT. . .Where are the external sources out side the Koran that corroborate anything written about Mohammed by his cronies?. . .We have external documents non interested people that talk about biblical characters that agree with what is written in the bible, where are the external sources that agree with the story of Ishmel or Jesus as written in the Koran for example?. . .

maclatunji: ^Christians will deny that. We celebrate the exact event that involved Abraham and Ishmael (AS). We have not changed anything. The comparison you made shows desperation, give yourself a break! Muslim men are circumcised and evidence exists from the Qur'an that Abraham was ordered to do so and we follow from there as our Prophet also did. You enjoy disbelief, no amount of facts will help you if you have decided to ignore the truth.

What does the Koran say about Ishmael?. . .What is his mother's name?. . .How was Abraham a muslim?. . .Muslims claim that Jesus never spoke greek but the new testament was written in greek, they claim that Abraham never spoke hebrew but the old testament was written in hebrew, forgetting that most of the prophets do not even speak arabic, yet the Koran was written in arabic. . .Funny. .

This is usually my easiest refutation because they just throw everything to see what sticks: Unfortunately they all defy logic.....

mazaje:
Africans who also submit to the will of their traditional God like Sango are muslims according to your logic. . .Moses was NOT a muslim, he never talked about Allah, the God hr talked about has a name and it is not called Allah according to the bible.

This is an ignorant statement... Sango is not considered to be the one true God.. Jesus called God ALLAHA because that is the Aramaic name for God. The Jews call him Elohim (Hebrew).. These languages are semitic and related. These three words come from the same root letters. They are basically the same words...

See as a Jew explains


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQjefT51E40


He starts talking at 0.36... So yes Moses & Jesus spoke semetic based languages and the word for GOd have the EXACT same root letters.

This would have made any sense if the Koran as we know it was written during the time of the prophet but it wasn't. . .

This is not true, the Quran was written at the time of the Prophet... The prophet had 61 scribes and the verses were written... It was compiled into book form within a few years of his death by the first caliph and the third caliph.

Even the hadiths say that waraqa said he taught the prophet, he claimed according to the hadith that the prophet did not know anything and he helped him write the Koran. . .

That is a lie, waraqa was dead at the time revelation was coming... The accusation you mention comes from someone else and it makes no sense because he was not in mecca when most the stories were revealed anyway... So unless he had a time machine... It is an unreasonable account.

So unless waraqa came from the dead , and the other guy had a time machine.... They should not possibly be the source of revelation

maclatunji:


Of course, you are bewildered because you are ignorant and think yourself wise. When you see superior knowledge, you will get confused. So, you are so slow that you cannot distinguish between ethnicity and religion. Yes, Jesus (AS) was a Jew (ethnicity) but he was a Muslim (Islam was his religion, same for the other Prophets).

So simple but difficult for slow people to comprehend.

Repeating something over and over again does not make it true, Jews believe in a God and his name Jehovah Yahweh according to their religious book, he is NOT the same as Allah of the Koran. . .Jesus was NOT a muslim. . .Which external source outside the Koran says he was a muslim?. . .

Where else but from the bible. . . .You do not know how exposed there were back then, you only accept their claim of Mohammed being an illiterate and the Koran's divine authorship. .

Well, we have to make use of the knowledge we know from back then, We know that scripture was in the hands of the learned priests and monks usually. We know there was no arabic scripture.

We also know the prophet was illiterate. Why? The Quran mentions it so if it was not true... That will be an easy way to discredit the prophet and his sayings as untrue because these people grew up with him and could tell if he was one of the learned ones.

In addition, there are thousands of reports from so many books that attest to this dating to his life-time so unless you think it was some kind of grand conspiracy, he was an illiterate prophet.

Half of the rabbis in Medina became muslim.

Lets put all the claims of plagarism together ... You tell me if it makes sense:

The prophet had aprocryphal books, the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator (not in arabic) (waraqa) and a translator who could not speak the Arabic language,(the youth in mecca) one whose tongue was foreign. After he left mecca, (must have taken his library) where most of the stories had been revealed, there was a christian (salman, the other man) in medina who apparently taught him all he knew by taking a time machine to the past, and to the future to cover the period, he did not work with the prophet (since revelation continued).

All the while, escaping the glances of detractors and haters in his midst as he reads his scriptures, speaks to the dead, converses with a man who couldn't speak Arabic (apart from simple responses, that is) and gets a visitor from the future.

That is basically what all the claims of plagiarism amount to... So unless you have some other solid evidence you can believe the junk above....

This has been debunked thoroughly here!!

https://www.nairaland.com/847660/why-hate-religion-love-jesus

maclatunji: ^Christians will deny that. We celebrate the exact event that involved Abraham and Ishmael (AS). We have not changed anything. The comparison you made shows desperation, give yourself a break! Muslim men are circumcised and evidence exists from the Qur'an that Abraham was ordered to do so and we follow from there as our Prophet also did. You enjoy disbelief, no amount of facts will help you if you have decided to ignore the truth.

Circumcision is practiced in Islam but not compulsory. In Judaism, it is compulsory. You fail

Are you saying that Jews are lying about Abraham or that muslims have more claim to Abraham than Judaism? You fail

Why is the Koran in Arabic while Abraham spoke Hebrew (A Jewish Language)?


Muslims have no claim to Abraham, Moses or Jesus, none of them spoke Arabic and none of them talked about Allah. None of them did Hajj and none of them were for banning alcohol.

logicboy:
Circumcision is practiced in Islam but not compulsory. In Judaism, it is compulsory. You fail

Are you saying that Jews are lying about Abraham or that muslims have more claim to Abraham than Judaism? You fail

Why is the Koran in Arabic while Abraham spoke Hebrew (A Jewish Language)?

Muslims have no claim to Abraham, Moses or Jesus, none of them spoke Arabic and none of them talked about Allah. None of them did Hajj and none of them were for banning alcohol.

Abraham spoke hebrew?? what ignorance the jews have no claim to abraham either because he was NOT a jew.

O People of the Scripture, why do you argue about Abraham while the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed until after him? Then will you not reason. Here you are – those who have argued about that of which you have [some] knowledge, but why do you argue about that of which you have no knowledge? And God knows, while you know not. Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was one inclining toward truth, a Muslim [submitting to God]. And he was not of the polytheists

(surah 3 65-67)