Enjoy, Brilliant piece

[flash=500,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNGqrzkFp_4[/flash]


The poet writes:

A poem I wrote to highlight the difference between Jesus and false religion. This is not an attack upon Christians, so please don't take this as offensive, it's just a means of education and let people know what Jesus was truly sent with. In the scriptures Jesus received the most opposition from the most religious people of his day. At it's core Jesus' gospel and the good news of the Cross is in pure opposition to self-righteousness/self-justification. Religion is man centered, Jesus is God-centered. This poem highlights my journey to discover this truth. Religion either ends in pride or despair. Pride because you make a list and can do it and act better than everyone, or despair because you can't do your own list of rules and feel "not good enough" for God. With Jesus though you have humble confident joy because He represents you, you don't represent yourself and His sacrifice is perfect putting us in perfect standing with God!

Future terrorist !

Funny he talked about swine and wine. Lord knows I can't do without them two.  I eat any animal.

There's more:

[flash=500,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4X6rfw12Hs[/flash]

frosbel:

Future terrorist !

That is so ignorant of you, smh

amazing. its impossible for a muslim to ignore christianity why?
Would a christian musician waste so much time arguing about mohammad?

davidylan:

amazing. its impossible for a muslim to ignore christianity why?
Would a christian musician waste so much time arguing about mohammad?

Well, Jesus is part of Islam, so it is understandable that muslims talk about him.

tbaba1234:

Well, Jesus is part of Islam, so it is understandable that muslims talk about him.

Let's flip the coin, Jesus Christ , our Lord and Saviour was plagiarised by Mo from the Bible

Case closed.

frosbel:

Let's flip the coin, Jesus Christ , our Lord and Saviour was plagiarised by Mo from the Bible

Case closed.

Who is MO? On your assumption, the Prophet had a library as big as the Alexandra library in Egypt,

Oh well, believe what you want,

tbaba1234:

Well, Jesus is part of Islam, so it is understandable that muslims talk about him.

Jesus, David, Abraham, Moses etc were never muslims. Infact,nothing like Islam existed during their time.
Mohammad made it up to lure the Jews,but forgeting that he was a cheap pork from the desert of Arabia.

tbaba1234:

Who is MO? On your assumption, the Prophet had a library as big as the Alexandra library in Egypt,

Oh well, believe what you want,

Library


I though he was illiterate, what was Muhammad doing with a Library

frosbel:


Library 


I though he was illiterate, what was Muhammad doing with a Library 

Exactly, that is one of the reasons the plagiarism argument does not fly,

Assuming plagiarism is assuming he has access to so many books at the same time. Most of the scripture existed as separate books in different locations, only accessible to the leaders(rabbi/monks) and were not available in the Arabic Language,  So assuming he was able to get all the books from all the parts of the middle east, he would have needed an Aramaic and Hebrew translator for his library too.

Then he must gone through scholarship to know what the prophets preached, this must have taken a few years. Then he would have removed some of the excesses in the stories and told it in a totally different style from the books, adding stories that do not exist in any scripture along the way. At the same time, he was a father, a husband, a law maker, a general, a community leader, a spiritual leader, what are the odds of that?,

It is hard enough being a boss at the office

The absurdity of this argument proposed by non-muslims shows the ridiculous attempt to discredit Islam by all means even those that are very improbable.

frosbel:


Library  


I though he was illiterate, what was Muhammad doing with a Library  

well i guess he forgot he was supposed to maintain the "mohammad was illiterate" charade.

tbaba1234:

Well, Jesus is part of Islam,  so it is understandable that muslims talk about him.

that's not the issue. the problem (as is epitomised by the video) is that muslims talk about Jesus ONLY in context of trying too hard to prove a contrast with the Jesus Christ divine saviour as recorded in the bible. NEVER do you see muslims talking about Jesus as anything other than a stick to beat christians with.

tbaba1234:

Exactly, that is one of the reasons the plagiarism argument does not fly,

Actually its the chicken and egg conundrum that muslims are trying to play here. The islamic trope of mohammad being illiterate was raised PURELY as an excuse for the sheer number of similar biblical stories that are found in the quran. The idea being as long as we all claim mohammad cant read then automatically he cant have read a bible and thus could not know what was in it. therefore he could only have obtained his knowledge through divine inspiration. Its the typical muslim shell game.

tbaba1234:

Assuming plagiarism is assuming he has access to so many books at the same time. Most of the scripture existed as separate books in different locations, only accessible to the leaders(rabbi/monks)

that is a huge lie. The books of the bible particularly the torah were widely in circulation in arabia. for example, Waraqah was not a rabbi . . . how did he get his own copy? By stealing it from a rabbi?

tbaba1234:

and were not available in the Arabic Language

this again is a lie.

tbaba1234:

So assuming he was able to get all the books from all the parts of the middle east, he would have needed an Aramaic and Hebrew translator for his library too.

He had Waraqah.

tbaba1234:

Then he must gone through scholarship to know what the prophets preached, this must have taken a few years. Then he would have removed some of the excesses in the stories and told it in a totally different style from the books, adding stories that do not exist in any scripture along the way. At the same time, he was a father, a husband, a law maker, a general, a community leader, a spiritual leader, How are the odds of that?,

you'd be surprised how many of those appear in aprocryphal books. We already know where the story on the queen of sheba came from.

tbaba1234:

The absurdity of this argument proposed by non-muslims shows the ridiculous attempt to discredit Islam by all means even those that are very improbable.

what is more ridiculous is the extent muslims will go to bend the truth to suit islam.

davidylan:

that's not the issue. the problem (as is epitomised by the video) is that muslims talk about Jesus ONLY in context of trying too hard to prove a contrast with the Jesus Christ divine saviour as recorded in the bible. NEVER do you see muslims talking about Jesus as anything other than a stick to beat christians with.

Who was Jesus?, This has always been a topical discussion. Between Jews, Christians and Muslims. It will always be. The video was in response to another video by a christian guy,

davidylan:

Actually its the chicken and egg conundrum that muslims are trying to play here. The islamic trope of mohammad being illiterate was raised PURELY as an excuse for the sheer number of similar biblical stories that are found in the quran. The idea being as long as we all claim mohammad cant read then automatically he cant have read a bible and thus could not know what was in it. therefore he could only have obtained his knowledge through divine inspiration. Its the typical muslim shell game.

that is a huge lie. The books of the bible particularly the torah were widely in circulation in arabia. for example, Waraqah was not a rabbi . . . how did he get his own copy? By stealing it from a rabbi?

this again is a lie.

He had Waraqah.

you'd be surprised how many of those appear in aprocryphal books. We already know where the story on the queen of sheba came from.

Waraqah must speak to the living too, he died very early in the message, unless he was talking from the dead. This is another ludicrous argument.

The Quran clearly called him unlettered, Don't you think his detractors who knew him from when he was little would have disputed this claim. Even his followers would have deserted him if it was a lie because he was a part of their community. That would have been the perfect verse for them to use to accuse him of lying.

There were no jews in Mecca, many Jews settled in Medina, The prophet only had major interaction with the Jewish community after he left Mecca.

If you place the similar stories in the Quran and aprocryphal books side by side: you can't even compare. The eloquence of the Quran exceeds that of any aprocryphal books. The differences in these stories exceed the similarities.

So the prophet must have aprocryphal books, the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator. All the while, escaping the glances of detractors and haters in his midst as he reads his scriptures and speaks to the dead.

If you can't see the absurdity in your arguments, I am sorry i can't help you

tbaba1234:

Waraqah must speak to the living too, he died very early in the message, unless he was talking from the dead. This is another ludicrous argument.

The Quran clearly called him unlettered, Don't you think his detractors who knew him from when he was little would have disputed this claim. Even his followers would have deserted him if it was a lie because he was a part of their community. That would have been the perfect verse for them to use to accuse him of lying.

There were no jews in Mecca, many Jews settled in Medina, The prophet only had major interaction with the Jewish community after he left Mecca.

If you place the similar stories in the Quran and aprocryphal books side by side: you can't even compare. The eloquence of the Quran exceeds that of any aprocryphal books. The differences in these stories exceed the similarities.

So the prophet must have aprocryphal books, the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator. All the while, escaping the glances of detractors and haters in his midst as he reads his scriptures and speaks to the dead.

If you can't see the absurdity in your arguments, I am sorry i can't help you

Another puerile and dishonest defense of the quran. But we do know that even the quran explicitly notes that many even in the time of mohammad were well aware of the several folks they thought were major influences in his "religion" . . . for example - Surah 16:10 We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

Again we see in this hadith - Sahih Bukhari volume 4, Book 56, Number 814: , Narrated Anas: There was a Christian who embraced Islam and read Surat-al-Baqara and Al-Imran, and he used to write (the revelations) for the Prophet. Later on he returned to Christianity again and he used to say: "Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him." Then Allah caused him to die, and the people buried him, but in the morning they saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, "This is the act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and took his body out of it because he had run away from them." They again dug the grave deeply for him, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, "This is an act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and threw his body outside it, for he had run away from them." They dug the grave for him as deep as they could, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. So they believed that what had befallen him was not done by human beings and had to leave him thrown (on the ground).

Unless Anas is lying here, clearly a christian was involved in writing revelations for the prophet. It would not be a stretch at all to expect that mohammad himself must have heard certain stories from this christian that eventually found its way into the quran. This hadith seems very credible especially when you read this very convenient verse that allah sends down next - Surah 006.093 Who can be more wicked than one who inventeth a lie against Allah, or saith, "I have received inspiration," when he hath received none, or (again) who saith, "I can reveal the like of what Allah hath revealed"? If thou couldst but see how the wicked (do fare) in the flood of confusion at death! - the angels stretch forth their hands, (saying),"Yield up your souls: this day shall ye receive your reward,- a penalty of shame, for that ye used to tell lies against Allah, and scornfully to reject of His signs!"

Even allah was well aware that folks mocked his "prophet" for copying from jewish books - Surah 28:48 But (now), when the Truth has come to them from Ourselves, they say, "Why are not (Signs) sent to him, like those which were sent to Moses?" Do they not then reject (the Signs) which were formerly sent to Moses? They say: "Two kinds of sorcery, each assisting the other!" And they say: "For us, we reject all (such things)!"

Even though quranic scholars call these mockers "unbelievers", it is quite clear these were people who were either jews or where WELL VERSED in the jewish narrative and knew a great deal about the miracles of Moses from the Torah. So the false idea that somehow mohammad never had much interaction with jews or jewish narratives is debunked and another islamic lie.

tbaba1234:

Waraqah must speak to the living too, he died very early in the message, unless he was talking from the dead. This is another ludicrous argument.

The Quran clearly called him unlettered, Don't you think his detractors who knew him from when he was little would have disputed this claim. Even his followers would have deserted him if it was a lie because he was a part of their community. That would have been the perfect verse for them to use to accuse him of lying.

There were no jews in Mecca, many Jews settled in Medina, The prophet only had major interaction with the Jewish community after he left Mecca.

If you place the similar stories in the Quran and aprocryphal books side by side: you can't even compare. [size=18pt]The eloquence of the Quran exceeds that of any aprocryphal books.[/size] The differences in these stories exceed the similarities.

So the prophet must have aprocryphal books, the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator. All the while, escaping the glances of detractors and haters in his midst as he reads his scriptures and speaks to the dead.

If you can't see the absurdity in your arguments, I am sorry i can't help you

seriously? and here i was thinking tbaba was a well-educated, intelligent fellow. Calling the quran the epitome of eloquence is just nonsense.

davidylan:

Another puerile and dishonest defense of the quran. But we do know that even the quran explicitly notes that many even in the time of mohammad were well aware of the several folks they thought were major influences in his "religion" . . . for example - Surah 16:10 We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

Again we see in this hadith - Sahih Bukhari volume 4, Book 56, Number 814: , Narrated Anas: There was a Christian who embraced Islam and read Surat-al-Baqara and Al-Imran, and he used to write (the revelations) for the Prophet. Later on he returned to Christianity again and he used to say: "Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him." Then Allah caused him to die, and the people buried him, but in the morning they saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, "This is the act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and took his body out of it because he had run away from them." They again dug the grave deeply for him, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, "This is an act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and threw his body outside it, for he had run away from them." They dug the grave for him as deep as they could, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. So they believed that what had befallen him was not done by human beings and had to leave him thrown (on the ground).

Unless Anas is lying here, clearly a christian was involved in writing revelations for the prophet. It would not be a stretch at all to expect that mohammad himself must have heard certain stories from this christian that eventually found its way into the quran. This hadith seems very credible especially when you read this very convenient verse that allah sends down next - Surah 006.093 Who can be more wicked than one who inventeth a lie against Allah, or saith, "I have received inspiration," when he hath received none, or (again) who saith, "I can reveal the like of what Allah hath revealed"? If thou couldst but see how the wicked (do fare) in the flood of confusion at death! - the angels stretch forth their hands, (saying),"Yield up your souls: this day shall ye receive your reward,- a penalty of shame, for that ye used to tell lies against Allah, and scornfully to reject of His signs!"

Even allah was well aware that folks mocked his "prophet" for copying from jewish books - Surah 28:48 But (now), when the Truth has come to them from Ourselves, they say, "Why are not (Signs) sent to him, like those which were sent to Moses?" Do they not then reject (the Signs) which were formerly sent to Moses? They say: "Two kinds of sorcery, each assisting the other!" And they say: "For us, we reject all (such things)!"

Even though quranic scholars call these mockers "unbelievers", it is quite clear these were people who were either jews or where WELL VERSED in the jewish narrative and knew a great deal about the miracles of Moses from the Torah. So the false idea that somehow mohammad never had much interaction with jews or jewish narratives is debunked and another islamic lie.

And the absurdity increases:

So he learnt from a man who could hardly speak the Arabic language
And from a christian who worked as a scribe for a few yrs in medina, Before whom most of the stories of the prophets had been revealed (in mecca) and after whom revelation continued.

Let's modify it now:

So the prophet had aprocryphal books,  the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator and a translator who could not speak the Arabic language, 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 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 and gets a visitor from the future.

There were prominent rabbis  at the time who became Muslims. Never did a Jew accuse him of copying their book,  The stories in their books were already revealed before Medina.

You guys are clutching at straws, and  this is getting more ridiculous by the minute, 

Thanks.

tbaba1234:

And the absurdity increases:

So he learnt from a man who could hardly speak the Arabic language
And from a christian who worked as a scribe for a few yrs in medina, Before whom most of the stories of the prophets had been revealed (in mecca) and after whom revelation continued.

Actually that's false because we know that waraqah could read and write in hebrew AND arabic.

Bukhaeri Sahih Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605: Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), "What do you see?" When he told him, Waraqa said, "That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."

I know islam has already come up with a myriad of excuses to justify mohammad's fraud.

davidylan:

Actually that's false because we know that waraqah could read and write in hebrew AND arabic.

Bukhaeri Sahih Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605: Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), "What do you see?" When he told him, Waraqa said, "That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."

I know islam has already come up with a myriad of excuses to justify mohammad's fraud.

I wasn't talking of waraqa, waraqa is the dead dude and he was Arab,

You quoted:

davidylan:

Another puerile and dishonest defense of the quran. But we do know that even the quran explicitly notes that many even in the time of mohammad were well aware of the several folks they thought were major influences in his "religion" . . . for example - Surah 16:10 We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.

At this point, you are no different from the idolaters who accused him from learning from a foreigner who couldn't speak Arabic because they were at a loss to explain what was going on,

tbaba1234:

And the absurdity increases:

So he learnt from a man who could hardly speak the Arabic language
And from a christian who worked as a scribe for a few yrs in medina, Before whom most of the stories of the prophets had been revealed (in mecca) and after whom revelation continued.

Let's modify it now:

So the prophet had aprocryphal books,  the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator and a translator who could not speak the Arabic language, 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 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 and gets a visitor from the future.

There were prominent rabbis  at the time who became Muslims. Never did a Jew accuse him of copying their book,  The stories in their books were already revealed before Medina.

You guys are clutching at straws, and  this is getting more ridiculous by the minute, 

Thanks.

Again that's false.

We know of the christian scribe Abdallah Bin Sa'd who was killed for reverting to christianity and for whom the hadith in sahih bukhari (which i just quoted earlier) was written - Mohammad bin Al-Hussein spoke to me, he said: Ahmad bin Al-Mufdil narrated: Asbat narrated from Al-Sudy: "Who doth more wrong than such as invent a falsehood against Allah, or said: "I have received inspiration,' when he hath received none" until his [Allah] saying, "ye receive your reward, a penalty of shame". He [Al-Sudy] said: This verse was revealed about Abdullah bin Sa'd bin Abi Al-Sarh, he embraced Islam, and used to write [Quran revelations] for the Prophet (SAW). So when the Prophet dictated him: "Who heareth and knoweth all things", he'd write it: "All-Knowing, All-Wise". So he doubted and reverted. Then he said, "If Mohammad gets inspiration, then I get inspiration too, and if Allah sent him his revelation then I was sent the same thing. For when Mohammad said, 'Who heareth and knoweth all things' I'd say, 'All-Knowing, All-Wise'" So he followed the Pagans, and he blew the cover of Ammar and Jubar [secret Muslims] to Ibn Al-Hudrumi or to Bani Abd Al-Dar, so they took them and tortured them until they reverted. Ammar's ear was cut off that day, so he [Ammar] went to the Prophet (SAW) and told him what had happened to him, but the Prophet (SAW) refused to handle his issue. So Allah revealed about [Abdullah] Ibn Abi Al-Sarh and his companions, "Anyone who, after accepting Faith in Allah, utters Unbelief, - except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their bosom to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty" Who was "under compulsion" is Ammar and his companions, and who "open their bosom to Unbelief" is [Abdullah] Ibn Abi Al-Sarh. (Tafseer Al-Tabari)

Right here is the first evidence we have that much of what we read in the quran was not exactly as dictated. Some of it was changed on the whim on the scribes!

tbaba1234:

I wasn't talking of waraqa, waraqa is the dead dude and he was Arab,

You quoted:

At this point, you are no different from the idolaters who accused him from learning from a foreigner who couldn't speak Arabic because they were at a loss to explain what was going on,

Actually you're the one projecting here. How do you know the foreigner could not speak arabic? It is NOT inferred from that verse at all. If a French man were to speak English it would be clearly apparent that he is no american because of the accent . . . does that mean the french man is completely ignorant of english language? Dumb and dishonest as usual.

davidylan:

Actually you're the one projecting here. How do you know the foreigner could not speak arabic? It is NOT inferred from that verse at all. If a French man were to speak English it would be clearly apparent that he is no american because of the accent . . . does that mean the french man is completely ignorant of english language? Dumb and dishonest as usual.

How do i know?

Ibn Kathir says of the man:

, he was a foreigner who did not know much Arabic, only enough simple phrases to answer questions when he had to.

tbaba1234:

How do i know?

Ibn Kathir says of the man:

, he was a foreigner who did not know much Arabic, only enough simple phrases to answer questions when he had to.

and where is the hadith that supports this? Can you provide the entire paragraph here so we can read it in context to know if we are refering to the same person? Mooslims and their dishonest ways.

tbaba1234:

I wasn't talking of waraqa, waraqa is the dead dude and[b] he was Arab[/b],

Waraqa was actually a jew and could read and write in hebrew as well. Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 1, Number 3: Narrated 'Aisha:

……Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, w[b]ho, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew[/b] as much as Allah wished him to write……

davidylan:

and where is the hadith that supports this? Can you provide the entire paragraph here so we can read it in context to know if we are refering to the same person? Mooslims and their dishonest ways.

Waraqa was actually a jew and could read and write in hebrew as well. Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 1, Number 3: Narrated 'Aisha:

……Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, w[b]ho, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew[/b] as much as Allah wished him to write……

With all pleasure,

Ibn kathir says:

Allah tells us about the idolators' lies, allegations, and slander when they claimed that this Qur'an which Muhammad had recited for them, was actually taught to him by a human. They referred to a foreign (i.e., non-Arab) man who lived among them as the servant of some of the clans of Quraysh and who used to sell goods by As-Safa. Maybe the Messenger of Allah used to sit with him sometimes and talk to him a little, but he was a foreigner who did not know much Arabic, only enough simple phrases to answer questions when he had to.

Waraqa was an Arab, not a jew, He became a Christian Ebionite priest when he travelled out of Mecca and learnt the scriptures, He learnt how to read hebrew in his travels,

so the absurdity still stands:

The prophet had aprocryphal books, the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator and a translator who could not speak the Arabic language, 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 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.

tbaba1234:

With all pleasure,

Ibn kathir says:

Allah tells us about the idolators' lies, allegations, and slander when they claimed that this Qur'an which Muhammad had recited for them, was actually taught to him by a human. They referred to a foreign (i.e., non-Arab) man who lived among them as the servant of some of the clans of Quraysh and who used to sell goods by As-Safa. Maybe the Messenger of Allah used to sit with him sometimes and talk to him a little, but he was a foreigner who did not know much Arabic, only enough simple phrases to answer questions when he had to.

another vague cop-out. Exactly who was Ibn Kathir refering to here seeing there were MANY FOREIGNERS mentioned in the hadiths? Was it the same individual that was spoken about in Surah 16:10? How? Evidence?

tbaba1234:

Waraqa was an Arab, not a jew,  He became a Christian Ebionite priest when he travelled out of Mecca and learnt the scriptures,  He learnt how to read hebrew in his travels,

Odd that an arab would become a "christian ebionite priest" considering ebionites themselves were a[b] jewish sect[/b] that that followed judaic laws but also believed in Jesus Christ as a Messiah. Do you even read the bullcrap you write?

Lets assume for 2 secs that waraqa was even an arab, the fact that he was fluent in the gospels in arabic blows the silly "mohammad was an illiterate" excuse out of the water. Waraqa would definitely have told him about some of the jewish torah and gospel. Infact we read from the hadiths that it was Waraqa who insisted that mohammad may have met angel gabriel, mohammad thought he had been seized by demons (perhaps he and not waraqa was right).

tbaba1234:

so the absurdity still stands:

The prophet had aprocryphal books,  the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator and a translator who could not speak the Arabic language, 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 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.

already debunked nonsense.

davidylan:

another vague cop-out. Exactly who was Ibn Kathir refering to here seeing there were MANY FOREIGNERS mentioned in the hadiths? Was it the same individual that was spoken about in Surah 16:10? How? Evidence?

This explanation was for the verse Surah 16:103 (the verse is not surah 16:10), Similar explanation can be found in older tafseers. who? Ibn Abbas said he was called Bil`am.

Ibn Jarir said: Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Tusi told me, Abu `Amir told us, Ibrahim Ibn Tahman narrated to us from Muslim Ibn `Abdillah al-Mila'i from Mujahid from Ibn `Abbas his saying: The Prophet, peace be upon him, used to teach a slave boy(??) in Makkah called Bil`am whose tongue was foreign.The pagans saw the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, enter his place and leave it, so they said that Bilcam taught him. Therefore, Allah revealed the verse "We know indeed that they say, "It is a man that teaches him". The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear".

davidylan:


Odd that an arab would become a "christian ebionite priest" considering ebionites themselves were a[b] jewish sect[/b] that that followed judaic laws but also believed in Jesus Christ as a Messiah. Do you even read the bullcrap you write?

Lets assume for 2 secs that waraqa was even an arab, the fact that he was fluent in the gospels in arabic blows the silly "mohammad was an illiterate" excuse out of the water. Waraqa would definitely have told him about some of the jewish torah and gospel. Infact we read from the hadiths that it was Waraqa who insisted that mohammad may have met angel gabriel, mohammad thought he had been seized by demons (perhaps he and not waraqa was right).

That is not even a point  of argument,  He was the son of Nawfal ibn Abd Manaf who was the half brother of  Hashim ibn 'Abd Manaf,  The head of the banu hashim tribe- the tribe that the prophet was born to,   Waraqa belonged to the  Banu Nawfal tribe.

Would definitely have told him,  The prophet met waraqa only twice in his life,  and only once after revelation because he died soon after.  Those must have been highly intensive classes,  Don't you think? lol, 

davidylan:

already debunked nonsense.

Debunked?? where?? I am just putting all your claims together,

The prophet had aprocryphal books,  the present gospels, the torah, maybe some other historical books in his library with a dead translator and a translator who could not speak the Arabic language, 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 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.