₦airaland Forum

Emulating their ‘hero’

It is observable to the keen viewer that Islamic leaders say one thing to non-Moslem people and then a completely different thing to their own people. Why do they do this? Because they do not think anything about truthfulness just like Mohamed never did.

Mohamed used deception to trick his enemies into letting down their guard and opening themselves to massacre by pretending to seek peace. Mohamed used deception when he contracted a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that gave him access to their city while unknown to them he secretly prepared his own forces to overrun them. The unsuspecting residents were conquered easily when he broke the treaty two years later. Some of the people in the city who had trusted Mohamed’s word were executed.

Today’s apologists who will make us believe that Mohamed only attacked or killed those who were out rightly against him or directly attacked him are simply pursuing the same agenda their ‘hero’ employed. They want to deceive everyone else into believing the opposite of what actually happened.

Where there is no integrity there most likely will be NO feeling of guilt. When the Moslem therefore engages in Taqiya and feels he is doing exactly what Allah wants him to do to advance Islam, that end (doing what will advance the cause of Allah) is assumed by him to justify the means - deceit.

Emulating their ‘hero’
It is observable to the keen viewer that Islamic leaders say one thing to non-moslem people and then a completely different thing to their own people. Why do they do this? Because they do not think anything about truthfulness just like Mohamed never did.

Mohamed used deception to trick his enemies into letting down their guard and opening themselves to massacre by pretending to seek peace. [Is this tactic familiar today?] Mohamed used deception when he contracted a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that gave him access to their city while unknown to them he secretly prepared his own forces to overrun them. The unsuspecting residents were conquered easily when he broke the treaty two years later. Some of the people in the city who had trusted Mohamed’s word were executed.

Today’s apologists who will make us believe that Mohamed only attacked or killed those who were out rightly against him or directly attacked him are simply pursuing the same agenda their ‘hero’ employed. They want to deceive everyone else into believing the opposite of what actually happened.

Where there is no integrity there most likely will be NO feeling of guilt. When the Moslem therefore engages in Taqiya and feels he is doing exactly what Allah wants him to do to advance Islam, that end (doing what will advance the cause of Allah) is assumed by him to justify the means - deceit.

A Christian Look at Islam’s Doctrine of Deception – Al Taqiya

Al Taqiya, in Islam, permits and even recommends lying and deception in the interest of advancing Islam.

To truly understand Islam, the objective evaluator needs to rely on what Islamic books and ‘prophet’ prescribed rather than the propaganda spread by Moslems and their allies. Therefore, the true position of Islam on any issue is based not on what any supporter of Islam says but on what the driving documents of Islam’s philosophy state. At the end of the day this is what pitches Islam against every other faith and equally pitches Moslem against Moslem when one side perceives the other as not “fully” following the precepts set down by Islam’s sacred literature and figures.

The western world’s sense of justice, right or wrong, aesthetics, etc matters little to the Moslem who chooses to strictly follow the quran and Islam’s other ‘holy books’. His concepts of all these – justice, right or wrong, aesthetics – come from these books of Islam and nothing else. The ‘Liberal’ who therefore thinks he can ‘appeal’ to common sense when it comes to dealing with Islam is either deceiving himself or has simply refused to accept that he is faced with an uphill task.

Consequently when it comes to the issue of DECEPTION by Islam what the world needs to understand is that what drives it is not the individual integrity of the Moslem but the fact that it is a FUNDAMENTAL teaching of the religion. To the ‘faithful’ Moslem only what Mohamed presented through the quran and what he provided through Islam’s other books matters.

According to these books deception – Al taqiya – is permitted and even mandatory. For example, in Hadith (Bukhari) 5:59.369, Moslems can lie and pretend in some situations:
"Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, "You may say it."

Even among differing Muslim sects this Islamic doctrine of deception has become a lifestyle for those who feel that their differing positions on certain issues in Islam has become a danger to their lives. They can therefore pretend to go along with the other Muslim group as long as their safety is ensured by so doing. Q. 16: 106 taken as permitting such deception is used by such groups to justify their stance.

With respect to non-Moslems see here the endorsing of deception against them:
“Let believers (Moslems) not take for friends and allies infidels (non-Moslems) instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah – unless you guard yourselves against them, taking precautions.” Q. 3:28
A respected Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir (1301-1373) in explaining the above verse said: “Whoever at any time or place fears their (infidels’) evil, may protect himself through outward show.” He then went on to quote one of Mohamed’s companions who said: “Let us smile to the face of some people while our hearts curse them.”

Notable Islamic scholars say Al Taqiya is acceptable and extends to Moslems behaving like ‘infidels’. Moslems are permitted – in pretence – to bow down and worship idols and even the Christian cross. Anything can be done as long as it will eventually put them in a position to ultimately overcome the ‘infidels’. In fact against the non-moslem, practicing deception on them is regarded as appropriate.

Mohamed, who Moslems believe is an example to be followed, used Al Taqiya to gain advantage in many instances during his life.
Allah is even regarded as the “best deceiver” in the quran – Q. 3:54, 8:30 & 10: 21. This explains why in the quran you find contradictory verses. There are those verses that will say one thing and then another that state the complete opposite. For example, you find a verse like Q. 2:256 that says there is no compulsion in religion that appear to portray Islam as being accommodative of other religions, and then you find in the same quran verses that command Moslems to fight all non-Moslems until they either convert to Islam or be subject to Islamic regulations like Q. 9:5, 9:29. Even though Moslems attempt to explain these contradictions by saying that some portions were later abrogated (i.e. that later revelations to Mohamed abolished or rescinded the earlier ones) the fact the quran which is said to be a book that exists in heaven cannot give a single position by Allah on several issues leaves the book open to question as to whether an all-knowing Allah could have come up with all these inconsistencies.

Today, Islam still pursues the same agenda of deceit – where Moslems find themselves in a disadvantaged position they offer the ‘peaceful’ verses and pretend to live by them. But when they have the upper hand they go on the offensive with the aggressive verses claiming and pointing for all to see that they are following the quran!
Q.8:39 - “And fight them until there is no fitnah and the religion, all of it, is for Allah.” – seeks for the universal domination of Islam and as long as this has not happened Al Taqiya – Islamic deception – will continue. Anyone who thinks otherwise must show whether Islam has expunged the doctrine from its quran. Until then no agreement, negotiation, peace offers or cooperation that is genuine can truly be made with Moslems and considered secure. The Islamic Deception – Al Taqiya – allows the Moslem to stand only on the position that is profitable to Islam, NOT on any mutually beneficial position with others.

Mohamed is stated to have said in a Hadith “If I take an oath and later find something else better, I do what is better and break my oath” – Sahih Bukhari. Now, if the ‘exemplary’ prophet says he can go back on on a promise he makes then what makes anyone think that his followers, who seek to emulate him, will consider it a wrong or even a sin when they do so. No wonder Islamic countries engage in ‘dialogue’ with other religions and may even sponsor inter-faith programmes when at the same time they refuse any other religion from finding expression in their (Islamic) countries. Why many who engage in these engagements have never seem to see through such deceit is startling.

Islam permits the Moslem to lie, feign loyalty, offer fake peace treaty, give appearance of toleration, and generally cover up all in a bid to deceive the non-Moslem and gain advantage over him. Because Islam aims for world domination, deception (justified by its holy books) will continued to be used by it to justify its push for that end. As long as the Moslem sees DECEPTION as ‘divinely approved’ the problem of Al-Taqiya will be a long way from being solved.

hushpapi:
“Oh you who be believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians as protecting allies [lit. awliya – plural of wali, mistranslated often here as “friends” ]! Each of them are protecting allies within their own. And the one amongst you who turns to them as protecting allies, then he is one of them. And truly, Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.” [al-Quran, 5:51]

Right away, I’d like to establish that there is no problem with Muslims keeping casual friendships and cordial acquaintances with people of different faiths, as long as those people do not oppose or dislike Islam and Muslims, do not engage in or wrongly influence Muslims towards immoral behaviour, and are not unjust and oppressive to anyone, especially Muslims. This is established by the words of Allah Most High Himself when He says:

“Allah does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you due to your faith or driven you out of your homes. Allah loves those who deal justly. Allah only forbids you from those people that fought you because of your faith, drove you out of your homes and helped in your expulsion, that you take them as intimate associates. And whosoever takes them as intimate associates, then it is they who are the wrongdoers.” [al-Quran, 60:8-9]

The Kaaba was originally a pagan place of worship. Mohamed forcible removed all the small idols he did not want and retained the big idol for his god. So Moslems bow down to a structure that was erected for pagan gods. If that is not a continuation of pagan practice I wonder what else is.

When did bowing down to a stone, going round a stone and kissing a stone become worshipping the creator of the universe? Are all these not acts of veneration to PHYSICAL OBJECTS?

Is the Almighty God inside that structure?

Mohamed borrowed things from other religions to make the one he was setting up appeal to people of those other religions. Unfortunately when many of these people reacted against his new religion he turned against them.

Borrowings from pagan religious practices make up much of what Mohamed eventually created as his religion even though he still skilfully made linkages to the major faiths around him – Judaism and Christianity.

Islamic sources – Sahih al-Bukhari (Vol. 5) – tell us that many Arabian tribes were stone worshippers. Mohammed apparently incorporated this pre-Islamic pagan practice into his then new religion in order to appeal to those people and make Islam attractive to them.

Mohamed had tried to appeal to Jews and Christians by at a time selecting Jerusalem as the direction of prayer. When some time later these people – Jews and Christians – rejected him thoroughly he changed the direction of prayer to Mecca – the center of pagan worship. He even approved of the worship of pagan goddesses – Lat, Uzza, and Manat with the intention of gaining the favour of the pagan Arabs that worshipped at the Kaaba.

Mohamed did all these to try to attract the peace of all those around him but when things changed 'PEACE' became irrelevant to Mohamed.

When Mohamed eventually grew in power he decided what rituals to retain and which ones to do away with. Even some of his followers were initially troubled by some of the things Mohamed sanctioned – Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 2 No. 667. But as long as Mohamed claimed he got directive from his god to his followers were obliged to follow blindly.

The Kaaba and all the other rituals (no. of prayers per day, Eid, fasting, etc) associated with it are pagan rituals that Mohamed succeeded in making foundational to his newly created religion – Islam.


Is it not strange that Mohamed who claims his central belief is in one God, would now incorporate pagan practices as part of the worship of the one true God?

Religion of Peaceful Coexistence?
"...The government will not be responsible to the security of any Christian who behaves irresponsibly by eating while Muslims are fasting. Christians must understand that eating in the month of Ramadan is hate behaviour and incitement as well. Government will not hesitate to arrest those guilty of incitement and hate

What a country!!

Angel196:
Hahaha Hahaha, defeat indeed.

I can never go against the prophet cause what I've been saying is exactly what he meant. The fact that you can't even understand it is pathetic. But I'm not wasting anymore time here with ignorant people like you.

If feeling you've defeated me will make you happy, pathetic but hey, keep on thinking it.

Even in the face of facts there are those of you who will still choose to hold on to the contrary.

Note that no one can face a wrong direction and find himself in the right destination.

Self-deception can be a terrible thing.

If the quran and Mohamed said "the sun sets in a pool of water" and you come now to say " what I've been saying is exactly what he meant": and what have you been saying? - " Yes, he found it going down into the sea, which was what the sun was doing in that picture even though it wasn't literarily." and you can't see yourself being dishonest then that is the height of self-deception.

Is "the sun sets in a pool of water " the same as "(is like) the sun was doing in that picture even though it wasn't literal"?
You have allowed yourself to be brainwashed by a terrible propaganda.

If you choose wrongly your eternity is at stake.
You have been warned!

Angel196:
This a big waste of time. Discussion with people like you seriously ain't worth it, sorry to say. Anyone who's been going through all my discussion will know. You can never accept the truth about something you've clearly decided to see the bad of even if its true. One day, everyone will know the truth.

Have a wonderful night.

I take this as an admission from you that you're defeated.
You cannot go against your prophet, can you?
Cheers!

Angel196:
God, what will it take for you people to keep away their ignorance?

1. There are some things common sense will tell you is not literal. If I wanted to describe something like that to people with little understanding that's how I'll put it for them to understand just as i will tell people that the water found far down a road is a mirage.

2. Yes, he found it going down into the sea, which was what the sun was doing in that picture even though it wasn't literarily.

3. Yes it said found by it a people, which meant by the water not by the sun. Or don't tell me you thought it was by then sun..

4. Yes, the Quran is clear to those literate enough to understand it not those who are only seeking for errors without any understanding of it.

5. The way I interpreted it is the real meaning, nothing else. That's the way it was revealed to him and that's the way he put it and interpreted it. If you can't understand it, don't blame anyone. It's just like not understanding a medical statement then saying there's an error with it.

It's all the more AMAZING that many of you Moslems are so ignorant of what your religion is all about.

So you now need 'common sense' to FILTER OUT or 'see' which portions of the PERFECTLY CLEAR quran is not literal.

Did it even occur to you that the portion was a narration of a person's experience?

You're being deceptive when you begin to twist things. Was Mohamed presented the picture you're now trying to use to cover up your ignorance or is it deception?

What is the focus of that portion of the quran - the SUN or the SEA? Don't tell me you think it's the sea that the portion is talking about.

The clear quran should be understandable to all; shouldn't it?

Now let's look at Mohamed's own interpretation in the hadith and see if it agrees with yours so as to know who is right or wrong - Mohamed or yourself. Perhaps you may have received better UNDERSTANDING than your prophet.

Let's see where and how:
Let's see the hadith.
In Sunan Abu Dawud 3991 we find this:
Abu Dhar said: I was sitting behind the Apostle of Allah who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: Do you know where this sets? I replied: Allah and his Apostle know best. He said: It sets in a spring of warm water.

You can immediately see then that there is absolutely no room for your kind of reinterpretation of what the quran said. So the PERFECTLY CLEAR quran tells us that the sun sets in a pool of water.

So do you agree with your quran and your prophet or you prefer to still rely on your "COMMON SENSE" interpretation?

Do you agree there is at least this 'fault' in the quran?

Angel196:
Very funny. Seriously you people are amazing.

First of all we were talking about violence and war not errors but anyways let me enlighten you.

18:86 Until when he reached the place where the sun set, he found it going down into a black sea, and found by it a people. We said: O Zulqarnain! either give them a chastisement or do them a benefit.

Have you ever lived near a sea or any pool of water in general? Have you ever seen sun setting in those areas? Let me attach a photo to make you see better but before that, that verse wasn't saying the sun fell into the water or any of that misconceptions but was explaining the pattern sun sets in some areas with water bodies.

What will you use in explaining the pattern of sun set in that photo? What does it look like?

Note the following:
1. That portion of the quran DID NOT say "it looks like". It clearly says "he reached the place where the sun sets".
2. Also that "he found it going down into".
3. In addition "and found by it a people"
4. By the way, the quran is supposed to be perfectly CLEAR, isn't it?
5. So it shouldn't take posting photos of sunset to explain it. Those who initially read it had no photos, did they?

Let me ask you another question: how did Mohamed interpret that portion of the quran?

halarho:
U are a liar I have gone through that verse nothing like sun there.........sura 18 is kahf...I will be glad if u can paste the Arabic and English text here respectively.... Bloody liar

BUT your 'partner' quoted the exact place i referred to.
So how come you didn't see it?
Don't be too quick to react.
Go back to your quran and check then come back here and apologize for your rashness.

Angel196:
Seriously, why do you guys keep turning in circles? Haven't I explained giving valid proofs from the Quran itself? It's left for you to bring your own proof from that same Quran to debunk it. It's all recorded.

Talking about history, where you there when it all happened? How are you so sure it's a lie? Because you hate Islam and don't care about the truth?

I don't see points arguing with you any more cause I can see you aren't interested in proofs or the truth. If you are tired of running in circles then maybe we can have a reasonable discussion. When I debate, I deal with facts and proofs not thoughts and opinions.

Keep hating but beware, hatred darkens the soul and blocks the heart.

I presented a proof of 'fault' in the quran to your partner.
Here it is again:
A case in point – an example:
Sura 18:83-86 claims the sun sets in a spring or pool of muddy water.
Does the sun set in a pool of muddy water?

halarho:
Pls if u are to object any opinion, sincerity and truthfulness matter most, some of you said Muhammad killed to call people on to the path of God without evidence...... U said Quran is fallible bring any fault in it....unlike your Bible where love letters are found there day to day.......be objective in you analysis

There are 'faults' in the quran.
A case in point – an example:
Sura 18:83-86 claims the sun sets in a spring or pool of muddy water.
Does the sun set in a pool of muddy water as claimed by the quran?

The main purpose of James's message is this: knowing the word of God but failing to do what it says results in zero spiritual production as well as divine punishment from God.

James does not contradict Paul.

The 'faith' James talks about is 'what is belived' i. e. Biblical doctrine. It is not trust in Christ for salvation.

The word 'dead' and 'useless' are used interchangeably - see v. 20.

James' reference to Abraham's justification has to do with justification for rewards not for salvation.

James already told us that salvation is a grace gift - James 1:17-18.

What he goes on then to say is that positional justification by faith alone for salvation needs experiential justification by works for the believer to qualify for a reward.

iceboy4752

Maybe you need to see this thread:
https://www.nairaland.com/3679451/muslims-believe-dr-zakir-naik#54540001

Muslims Who Believe Dr. Zakir Naik Are Doomed

The quran’s errors include factual errors, moral errors and theological errors.

When taken up with muslims such as Zakir Naik a problem passage with one of these errors is usually approached by their coming with -
The “marvel” of “smart” interpretation

They say something like “Yes, you find that said there, BUT what it REALLY MEANT is bla, bla, bla, “

Why didn’t a book that is meant to be CLEAR plainly state what Allah meant?

Unfortunately, most of the time, for such “smart” interpreters their prophet Mohamed blocks their reinterpretation. When the hadith and muslim commentaries are consulted we see how Mohamed and his companions TOTALLY contradict such reinterpretation.

A case in point – an example:
Sura 18:83-86 claims the sun sets in a spring or pool of muddy water. In his attempt to ‘explain’ this problem passage that says the sun (which is 1.3 million times bigger than the earth) sets in a pool of water, Zakir Naik comes up with his “ingenious” reinterpretation to “clarify” what Allah REALLY means. He says what the passage really says is that Alexander the Great – Dhul Qarnayn in the quran passage – reached an unspecified place ‘at the time of sunset’. Not that it was the sun that set in a place – the pool. It was ‘at the time of sunset the quran wanted to tell us.
Now, that would appear to be more logical, wouldn’t it?
Looks brilliant?
Problem solved?
Not quite!

What we see is that in order to explain the ”SUN GOING INTO THE SPRING OF WATER” brilliant Dr. Naik comes up with this his “smart” interpretation (actually reinterpretation) which is that – “it means it appears to Alexander the Great……… So Allah was really saying what Alexander the Great thought he saw” and not making a claim about WHERE the sun sets.
Looks brilliant? Yes?
No! Because Mohamed blocks Dr. Naik’s reinterpretation.

Let’s see where and how:
By turning to hadith.
In Sunan Abu Dawud 3991 we find this:
Abu Dhar said: I was sitting behind the Apostle of Allah who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: Do you know where this sets? I replied: Allah and his Apostle know best. He said: It sets in a spring of warm water.

We can immediately see then that there is absolutely no room for the kind of reinterpretation of what the quran said.
So the PERFECTLY CLEAR quran tells us that the sun sets in a pool of water.

It turns out then that Dr. Zakir Naik in a bid to defend his religion has ended up insulting his prophet and Allah because he claims to speak more clearly than his god and a better interpreter than his prophet

It is a CLEAR FACT that the sun does not set in a pool of water.
Can a book – the quran – which says this and by so doing clearly propagating error be trusted?
Those who join and follow Dr. Zakir Naik’s reinterpretation end up in blasphemy of their prophet and god. By so doing can they be assured of Paradise or end up in hell for blasphemy?

Way Out!
Follow the only unique and supernatural One – Jesus Christ who said:
“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (Jn. 14:6).
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:3)
“He who believes in the Son (as Saviour) has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (Jn. 3:36).

iceboy4752:
So you agree after all that Muhammad(S.A.W) said the truth about Jesus?
This proves nothing other than he is God's Messenger.
Why did Muhammad not make himself superior to Jesus in the Qur'an? Besides why is only few events from his life recorded in the Qur'an?
Why are the names of his closest friends not mentioned in the Qur'an?

Mohamed said some "truth" about Jesus but not all the truth.

Reputable Muslim scholars know for sure that Mohammed had knowledgeable people in Jewish and Persian religion and Christianity around him who influenced him and his composition of the Quran. A number of Islamic books confirm this. Mohammed’s contemporaries knew this and must have challenged him on this. This is why he tried to argue against them in Sura 9: 127; 16:103; 25;4-6.


Mohammed did not just get these people to help him write down his ‘revelations’, he was actually helped by them in getting some of the stories he then had written down. This was a common knowledge in Arabia and particularly Mecca.

iceboy4752:
Written by Adamu Abubakar✍✍


Asālamūalaīkum Warahmatullahi wabarakatuhu.

Many non-Muslims especially the Christians today do claim that Jesus is the greater than Muhammad in the Qur'an because he's mentioned most.
The name of Jesus is mentioned more than that of Muhammad. Jesus' name occurs 25 times in the Qur'an while that of Muhammad is 5 times only. This assertion is so illogical.
If we should judge by this logic then it means Moses/Musa is the greatest of all because his name occurs *136 times!* In fact, Pharaoh/Fir'aun's name occurs *74 times!* Using this logic to judge, it means Pharaoh is greater than Jesus. Ibrahim/Abraham is mentioned *69 times.* Adam's name is also 25 times exactly as Jesus'
So based on these, the naming does not matter.
This further proves that the Qur'an wasn't written in favour of Muhammad(S.A.W). It means that he wrote down the truth he got from Allah.
The names of his family members or friends are not even mentioned. The only companion of the Prophet mentioned is Zaid bin Harith in S.33.
Blessings of Allah be on all the 124,000 Messengers and the Believers as well.

The QUALITY of Jesus’ person and the works he did (and is still doing because the quran states that he is with God – not in a temporary place awaiting what his fate will be) far outstrips that of Mohamed.

Of note from the quran are the following:
1. Jesus was conceived by a chaste virgin – Q. 3:42
2. Jesus was pure in conception and birth – Q. 4:171
3. He had the Holy Spirit – Q. 2:253
4. He is declared to be sinless – Q. 19:19
5. Those who follow JESUS are to be made superior to others – Q. 3:55
6. He is right now with God – Q. 4:158
7. He is called CHRIST JESUS (Q. 3:45 & 4:157). “Christ” meaning one that is anointed or CHOSEN to be special in all respect; chosen to save others; chosen with a special God-given purpose. A man that stands above all other men, including all the other messengers of God. One who has a superior and more excellent position above all other men. According to the quran he is “distinguished in this world and the hereafter and among those brought near”.
None of ALL THESE applied to Mohamed.


What Are the Implications of All these?
If Jesus Christ is indeed all these then it means he is the TRUE LINK between man and God. It is just not enough to give him a PASSIVE acceptance as a person or as a ‘PROPHET’. He must be seen as one who is MORE THAN A PROPHET. If there is no name greater than his, then salvation AND ETERNITY WITH GOD can be found in none else apart from him.


“For God so loved and dearly priced the world, that He gave His uniquely born Son, so that whoever believes and trusts in Him (as Saviour) shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world but that the world might be saved through him.” Jn. 3:16-17

Islamic Jihadists Bomb Churches Again


It has been repoted that at least 44 people were killed in bomb attacks on the symbolic cathedral seat of the Coptic Pope and a second church on Palm Sunday, causing anger and fear among Christians and troop deployments across Egypt.

This asault shows clearly what muslim stickers to the quran do when they have opportunities. ANYONE and indeed EVERYONE who does not believe in Islam is regarded as infidel fit only for the slaughter.

Whilst the world sees and decries Egypt church bombings only as as 'cowardly' what it fails to see is that the TRUE MOTIVATION for these acts is the perpetrators choice to go with what the quran propagates.

Until this is understood and seen as the key driver to all these violence not much progress will be made in combating these modern day jihad wars. At the end of the day that is what they are - jihad wars - whether the world accepts them as that or not.

GRACE GUARANTEES ETERNAL SECURITY
What Is Grace (2)

We give more time explaining the meaning of the word ‘GRACE’ because the understanding of it will make for clarity in its usage and ultimately its application.

A definition of the word ‘grace’ given by The Lexical Aid to the New Testament is as follows:

“A favour done without expectation of return; absolute freeness of the loving kindness of God to man finding its only motive in the bounty and freeheartedness of the Giver; unearned and unmerited favour”

From this definition what should immediately be clear is the emphasis on the character of the giver. The one extending the favour is doing it from the virtue he possesses; his good intention in reaching out to another freely WITHOUT ANY STRINGS ATTACHED. His action in extending favour is not because he is reciprocating something the beneficiary has done nor is it because he expects or perceives that the recipient will in future extend some benefit to him or reciprocate him for his kindness.

Expecting something in return for a favour or for something done is common with men, but thinking that God would think the same way as a man does would be blasphemous.

“God is not a man, that he should lie, nor the son of man, that he should repent” (Numbers 23:19).

If God says something or does something he stands by what he has said or done. Because many Christians fail to understand that God’s favours are done without expectation of return they miss out in truly understanding grace. Using human nature to look at God, they find it difficult to believe that God derives his pleasure ONLY from what he does for man and not from what man can do for him.

Let’s look a little more closely at the definition presented above and see how it applies to God.

The first part states:
“A favour done without expectation of return ….”

Another story in the life of Christ illustrates this. In Luke 17:12 – 18 we read:

“As he was going into a village, ten men who had leprosy met him. They stood at a distance and called out in a loud voice, “Jesus, Master, have pity on us!” When he saw them, he said, “Go and show yourselves to the priests.” And as they went, they were cleansed. One of them, when he saw he was healed, came back, praising God in a loud voice. He threw himself at Jesus’ feet and thanked him – and he was a Samaritan. Jesus asked, “Were not all ten cleansed? Where are the other nine? Was no one found to return and give praise to God except this foreigner?”

To show that Jesus’ action in healing all 10 lepers was not based on an expectation of return from them, there is no record that Christ caused the leprosy to return to those who did not come back to show gratitude. It that had happened then their healing would not be considered a gracious act of mercy but an anticipated “Thank you”. Their attitude which he knew well in advance did not stop him from healing them in the first place.

From the 2 stories we’ve looked at so far – the story of the Good Samaritan and the healing of the 10 lepers, it is clear that the beneficiaries DID NOTHING to add to the gracious acts in order to make the acts complete. It is also clear that the favours were done without the givers doing so because they expected a future reciprocation; a future return of the favour in kind or in value.

God saves man, not because of any good deed man has done nor is it because he (God) hopes or expects man to continue to maintain a certain measure of ‘goodness’ or righteousness to be able to sustain or retain what God has already chosen to do. God’s saving of man is “ a favour done without expectation of return”.

“But when the kindness and love of God our Saviour appeared,
he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done,
but because of his mercy ……. So that having been justified by his grace,
we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life”
Titus 3: 4 – 7

RABIUSHILE04:
we Muslims follow Jesus (pbuh) more than Christians...i will tell you why

1. Jesus ( Pbuh ) taught that there is only One God and Only God should be worshipped as taught in
Deut 6:4, Mark 12:29. Muslims also believe this as taught in the Qur’an verse 4:171.

2. Jesus ( Pbuh ) didn’t eat pork as taught in Leviticus 11:7 , and neither do Muslims as taught
in the Qur’an verse 6:145.

3. Jesus ( Pbuh ) greeted with the words “as salaamu alaikum” ( Peace be with you ) in John 20:21. Muslims also greet each other this way.

4. Jesus ( Pbuh ) always said “God Willing” ( Inshallah ), Muslims say this too before doing anything as taught in the Qur’an verses 18:23-24.

5. Jesus ( Pbuh ) washed his face, hands, and feet before praying. The Muslims do the same.

6. Jesus ( Pbuh ) and other prophets of the Bible prayed with their head to the ground ( See Matthew 26:39 ). Muslims do too as taught in the Qur’an verse 3:43.

7. Jesus ( Pbuh ) had a beard and wore a throbe. It is Sunnah for Muslim men to do the same.

8. Jesus ( Pbuh ) followed the law and believed in all the prophets,
( see Matthew 5:17 ). Muslims do
too as taught in the Qur’an verses 3:84, and 2:285.

9. Jesus’ mother Maryam ( Pbut ) dressed modestly by fully covering her body and wearing a headscarf ( hijab ) as found in 1 Timothy 2:9, Genesis 24:64-65, and Corinthians 11:6. Muslim
women modestly dress the same as taught in the Qur’an verse 33:59.

10. Jesus ( Pbuh ) and other prophets of the Bible fasted up to 40 days (see Exodus 34:28, Daniel 10:2-6. 1Kings 19:8, and Matthew 4:1-Muslims do so also during the month of Ramadan.
Muslims are required to fast the full obligatory 30 days ( See Qur’an 2:183 ), and others take it a step further by fasting an additional 6 days to increase their rewards.

11. Jesus ( Pbuh ) taught to say “Peace to this house” when entering it
( See Luke 10:5 ), and to also greet the people in the house with “peace be unto you”. Muslims do exactly what Jesus did and taught. When we enter our homes and the homes of others we say “Bismillah” and also greet with “as salaamu alaikum” ( Peace be upon you ) as taught in the Qur’an verse 24:61.

12. Jesus ( Pbuh ) was circumcised. Circumcision is 1 of the 5 fitrah in Islam, so Muslim men are required to be circumcised. According to the Bible in Luke 2:21, Jesus was eight days old when he was circumcised. In the Torah, Allah/God stated to the Prophet Abraham ( Pbuh ) that it is an
“Everlasting covenant”
( See Genesis 17:13 ). In the Qur’an verse 16:123 Muslims are required to
follow the religion of Abraham. The Prophet Muhammad ( SWS ) said, “The Prophet Abraham circumcised himself when he was eighty years old.”
( See Sahih hadith Bukhari, Muslim, and
Ahmad ).

13. Jesus ( Pbuh ) spoke aramaic and called God”Elah”, which is pronounced the same as
“Allah”. Aramaic is an ancient, Biblical language. It is one of the Semitic languages that also include Hebrew, Arabic, Ethiopic and the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian language of Akkadian.
The Aramaic”Elah” and the Arabic “Allah” are the same.

The Aramaic “Elah” is derived from the Arabic “Allah”, and it means “GOD”. “Allah” in Arabic also means”GOD”, the Supreme GOD Almighty. You can easilysee the similarity in their pronunciation so this concludes that the God of Jesus is also the God of the Muslims, of all mankind, and all that exist.

Now tell me who is the real follower of jesus ( Pbuh ) ? Obviously Muslims. Now I believe am a true follower of Jesus PBUH.

Copied

To "follow " Jesus Christ means to believe he is the SAVIOUR (Messiah) and to OBEY HIS TEACHINGS.

It is not just to engage in some physical activities or motions.

Jesus doesn't want people who:
".... honour me with their lips, but their heart is far away from me" Matthew 15:8

So if you claim to "follow" Jesus, apart from these physical observances, which of his teachings do you accept and follow and do you merely pay lip service or you believe in your heart that he is the CHRIST (Saviour, Messiah)?

After all, even the quran says he is the CHRIST, doesn't it?

khalling2008
I am trying to let you understand is that Abraham was not a jews, Abraham was born in Ur of Chaldees could not have been a Jew. First because Ur of Chaldees was in Mesopotamia, which is now a part of Iraq. He was then more an Arab than a Jew. Secondly the name "Jew" came after the existence of Judah, the great-grandson of Abraham. Read further, Genesis 12:4 and 5.

Here again are my questions:
1. Is Islam’s God YAHWEH?

2.
- Is the Muslim saved from sin?
- Does Islam provide any assurance now of eternal salvation or is it a maybe, maybe not religion?

3. Did Paul MENTION Jesus Christ in his teachings? Yes
Did he mention him sparingly or frequently? Very frequently
Did he say Jesus Christ was not the saviour? No
Did he say he did not believe in Jesus? No
So, where does the idea of Paul ‘building a new religion’ come from?

4. Does Islam and the quran teach love for enemies, even those who come against you outrightly and directly?

I don’t intend to repeat areas I believe others have responded to you appropriately.

On Abraham
If we are to go by your logic we might as well say that today’s Jews who are descendants of Abraham are Arabs since you say Abraham “was then more an Arab than a Jew”. The question is: if the present day Arabs understand this ‘relationship’ why are they so much opposed to Israel today. The truth however is that the issue is not as simplistic as you want to paint it.
By the covenant of CIRCUMCISION Abraham CHANGED from whatever previous RACE he was to a NEW RACE – Genesis 17. NOTICE that when God was making this covenant with Abraham he SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED that the covenant will continue through Isaac – verse 19: “Then God said, “Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him AS AN EVERLASTING COVENANT FOR HIS DESCENDANTS AFTER HIM.” Again in response to Abraham’s plea for Ishmael God again repeated himself – verse 21: “But my covenant I will establish with Isaac …”

So, God not only changed the race (whatever it was, whether Arab, Acadian, Summerian or whatsoever) of Abraham but also CLEARLY stated through which progeny (or child) the new race was to be perpetuated. NOTICE also that Isaac was born after Abraham’s circumcision and the enactment of the covenant – not so Ishmael. Never lose sight of this.

Reply B base on Jesus Christ

Jesus was not the founder of Christianity as we know it today. The teachings of Jesus were based on the Law, Matthew 5:17;
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

The message of Jesus was pure and simple, the complete submission and surrender to God alone. He preached the religion of Islam; he fasted and prayed in the manner taught by the Prophets before him. He abstained from eating pork and drinking wine.

The Apostle Paul and his followers define what became Christianity.
After Jesus, christianity was formed by Paul in Acts 11:26;

....and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch

On the founder of Christianity
If you insist in your claim that Jesus was not the founder of Christianity, against every known fact, then I must ask you to show me CLEARLY where it is said that Paul founded Christianity because that passage you referred to NEVER SAID THAT.

Paul Opposes Peter
Paul condemns all Jewish Christians including Peter and Barnabas. We only have Paul’s side of the story but Peter’s recollection of this story is not given to us in the New Testament.

PLEASE!!! Don’t try to put into a clear narrative what is not there.
Paul’s point of DISAGREEMENT with Peter was clearly stated. It was on a particular issue. It had NOTHING to do with the CORE issue of who Jesus Christ is.

Don’t you think your statement that “Paul condemns ALL JEWISH CHRISTIANS” is too general when nothing in that portion you quoted said that?
You are beginning to appear to be deceptive all in a bid to justify your assumed position.

Someone pointed out in another post how you removed some words from a verse in 1 Corinthians 11:1 where you quoted – “Be ye followers of me… that ye remember me …” conveniently OMITTING the critical part where it said “even as I follow Christ”. Paul DID NOT SAY “follow me and not Christ”. He said follow me AS I FOLLOW CHRIST. There is a difference. I think readers should note this about you.

yes, God sent Jesus Christ to jews not gentiles, in Matthew 15:24;
He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Jesus also said: "These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: 'Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.
Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. ' Matthew 10:5-6
These are the words of Jesus in the Bible. It is quite obvious that Jesus was NOT sent to Mankind and Christianity isn't a religion for Mankind.
Even if Jesus did die on the cross for people's sins, he didn't do it for all nations' sins, but for the Jews alone who believed in him.

And when Jesus told his disciples to go "to all nations" and teach them the words and baptize them in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit (Mathew 28:18-20) , it is obvious that "all nations" is a mistranslation, because in the Middle East, the words for "People" and "Nation" are the same word.

Jesus knew and showed that he had other people that would come into his fold: “I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.” John 10: 16 – did you notice “ONE FLOCK” and also “ONE SHEPHERD”?

Jesus said “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations ……” Matthew 28:19.

Also in Acts 1: 8 he said “…. You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and TO THE ENDS OF THE EARTH”. Notice that he started from a location – Jerusalem – then on to one region – Judea –, and another – Samaria and then to the rest of the world.
And please don’t come up with the crap that the portions I quoted are not right or anything to that effect.

SO, your insistence that God sent Jesus Christ only to the Jews does not hold water as far as the Bible is concerned.

You are only trying to find a way to justify islam’s claim that other prophets ended with their generation and Mohamed, the ‘final prophet’ is sent to the entire world. You must wipe out the portion of the Bible that prove you wrong if you want to use the Bible to prove your case.

My questions again, in case you may have become ‘lost’ in all the maze you are trying to wriggle through:

1. Is Islam’s God YAHWEH?
2.
- Is the Muslim saved from sin?
- Does Islam provide any assurance now of eternal salvation or is it a maybe, maybe not religion?

3. Did Paul MENTION [/b]Jesus Christ in his teachings? Yes
Did he mention him sparingly or frequently? Very frequently
Did he say Jesus Christ was not the saviour? No
Did he say he did not believe in Jesus? No
[b]So, where does the idea of Paul ‘building a new religion’ come from?

4. Does Islam and the quran teach love for enemies, even those who come against you outrightly and directly?

annunaki2:
And you didn't report when your fellow scumbag called me stupid. Fvcking hypocrite.

My exact thoughts!
Even he is not excluded. Imagine reporting others and using a different standard for himself and cohorts.
That shows how vindictive he is.
Some of these guys may resort to physical violence if we were to see face to face.

khalling2008:
@plainbibletruth; I don't want to quote all your post but I will reply you in A, B and C.

Reply A base on Abraham;
I am trying to let you understand is that Abraham was not a jews, Abraham was born in Ur of Chaldees could not have been a Jew. First because Ur of Chaldees was in Mesopotamia, which is now a part of Iraq. He was then more an Arab than a Jew. Secondly the name "Jew" came after the existence of Judah, the great-grandson of Abraham. Read further, Genesis 12:4 and 5.


Reply B base on Jesus Christ (as)

Jesus was not the founder of Christianity as we know it today. The teachings of Jesus were based on the Law, Matthew 5:17;
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

The message of Jesus was pure and simple, the complete submission and surrender to God alone. He preached the religion of Islam; he fasted and prayed in the manner taught by the Prophets before him. He abstained from eating pork and drinking wine.

The Apostle Paul and his followers define what became Christianity.
After Jesus, christianity was formed by Paul in Acts 11:26;

....and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch.

This is not yet a full response from me.

That will come later.

I just want to note one or two things.

Do you remember where I started this discussion with you? If you've forgotten you may go back and check.

If you must use the Bible I think you have NO RIGHT to decide that a portion I use is not supposed to be in the Bible whilst the ones you use are ok. We MUST be ready to use ALL that is in the same Bible and not cherry-pick.

I'm sure many Christians reading your posts will laugh at the way you ATTEMPT to explain the passages you pick. You don't impose your opinion on a Bible passage. You seek out what that passage is saying.

Lastly, for now, I noticed you never responded to the questions I raised. Is that deliberate or are you still going to respond?

Abdulgaffar22:
Is it possible for an impersonator and deliberate liar against God to be the author of all these noble verses especially when we call to mind that the first set of people the Qur’an was admonishing were idol-worshippers living in ancient Makah? Has God ever sent a liar to guide people who were in error to the right path? All these verses of Qur'an are too marvelous to originate from corrupt mind of a liar who deliberately lied against God.

Are you trying to tell the world that nobody uses the name of God to lie?
Are you saying that there can be no BRILLIANT LIARS?
Are you saying that liars only have CORRUPT minds?
Are you saying that men do not lie against God?

khalling2008

That's reason Allan said in Quran 3:65
O People of the Scripture (jews & Christian), why do you argue about Abraham while the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed until after him? Then will you not reason?

My previous post had addressed this issue. Unless you come out clearly with your point of disagreement it will be impossible for people to know your particular argument.

For example, can you say that your forbear who lived 1000 years ago is a citizen of the country you belong to today even though you live in the same geographical location he lived in? The answer may be NO! But does that diminish your genealogy? The answer again is NO!

One thing is certain; Abraham is much more related to the Jews of today than he is to many Arabs. The God he served is the one he passed on to them (the Jews) to serve. The Torah and the Gospels which came before the Quran clearly show us the relationship between Abraham and the Jews and their God – YAHWEH.

Is Islam’s God YAHWEH?

The word "Christian" is mentioned only three times in the New Testament and first by pagans and Jews in Antioch about 43 A.D., long after Jesus had left this earth.
The teachings of Jesus were based on the Law,
Matthew 5:17
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
yet the Law is rejected by Christians today, so how could they be called Christians?

Moreover, the “Christians” do not follow the Gospel of Jesus; they follow the Gospel of Paul. The Nazarenes and Ebionties were followers of Jesus’ Gospel, which no longer exists today.

Again, one does not know your clear issue on “CHRISTIAN” or “Christianity”; whether your grouse is with the name or with something else. The Christian goes by many names – e.g. if you say ‘church’ it refers to Christians, same with other ‘names’. The Christian is however not fixated on mere name or terminology. The CORE issue is who and what the Christian believes in.
Irrespective of whatever name a Christian group calls itself, one cardinal thing is this:

They believe that Jesus Christ is the Saviour who came to pay the ransom for the sin of mankind.

- Is the Muslim saved from sin?
- Does Islam provide any assurance now of eternal salvation or is it a maybe, maybe not religion?

Paul was not part of disciples of Jesus Christ.
Paul gave evidence that he was building a new religion, a complete deviation from Jesus’ teachings:

Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation: (Romans 15:20)

The “Christians” of today are not implementing the teachings of their “lord and savior” (see John 8:31) The Nazarenes/Ebionites never degraded Jesus by calling him “lord and savior”; they considered him a great Prophet and Messenger


The Pauline “Christians” that exist today do not follow Christ, they should be called Paulians. The true Christians were the Nazarenes and Ebionites that no longer exist.

Let me give you Historical Quotes Concerning Paul and his doctrines from Historians, Philosophers and Theologians:


“If Christianity needed an Anti-Christ, they need look no further than Paul”

-- The English philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)

“We have already noted that every teaching of Jesus was already in the literature of the day….. Paul, the founder of Christianity, the writer of half the NT, almost never quotes Jesus in his letters and writings." (Professor Smith in his “The World Religions”, p 330)

Whether Paul was ORIGINALLY part of the disciples of Jesus Christ is irrelevant.
The billions of today’s Christians were not part of the original disciples but AT A POINT IN TIME they came to BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ as their Saviour and became part of his disciples. Paul had the same encounter.
The book of the Acts of the Apostles – which, by the way, was NOT WRITTEN BY PAUL – shows clearly that he ASSOCIATED WITH the Church and other Apostles; the Christians.

The issue then is: who do we believe – your historical quotes or what the Bible clearly says of Paul?

Apostle Peter in 2 Peter 3:15 referred to this same Paul and acknowledged his writings – “… just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given to him [by God].”

So, when a credible eye witness writes about a man, and a philosopher, separated from the person by over a thousand years writes, whose report should you believe?

Did Paul MENTION Jesus Christ in his teachings? Yes
Did he mention him sparingly or frequently? Very frequently
Did he say Jesus Christ was not the saviour? No
Did he say he did not believe in Jesus? No

So, where does the idea of Paul ‘building a new religion’ come from?

It is the teachings of Jesus Christ given through these Apostles that Christians follow today. Christians are implementing the teachings of their Lord and Saviour. He himself summarised it as follows: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind and love your neighbour as yourself – Matthew 22:37.

So do Christians say that they disagree with this summary by Jesus of his teachings for you to say that:
“The “Christians” of today are not implementing the teachings of their “lord and saviour”” ?

The Christian loves all persons – friends or enemies.

Does Islam and the quran teach love for enemies, even those who come against you outrightly and directly?

Paul degraded Jesus in the following verses:

"Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God", (Hebrews 6:1,)

Obviously you cannot understand the Bible if you think you can easily pick and choose verses at will. It is more well organised than that.
In addition, who told you Paul wrote the book you quoted from?

Jesus is the ONLY WAY to God. That is the hard truth. You need to follow him.
You may not have had a choice going into Islam but you certainly can have a choice in deciding your eternal destiny by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ.
You don’t have to become irrational in blind defence of a religion that promises you no guaranteed eternity with God.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his uniquely born Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life” John 3:16
“He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey [the command to believe] the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” John 3:36

khalling2008:
I don't know why you like this now, you said you wouldn't entertain my question until I answer your question but now I have answered your Question and instead you to answer my question you are now running up and down.

I will repeat my question again before I expose you because Muhammad (saw) and Jesus (as) prechead the same message until Christianity was founded

My questions again;

1. WAS ABRAHAM A JEWS OR CHRISTIAN?

You said Christianity is not a religion but a way to life.

2 Who was the founder of christianity? Was it Jesus or Paul?


Jesus said in Matthew 27:46;

About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli,[a] lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

3. why Jesus not shouted "Yahweh, Yahweh, lema sabachthani? " on the cross

First, we need to agree on a few things:
1. Do you accept that the Bible you’re quoting from is uncorrupted?
2. Can we stick to the issues at hand and deal with them fully before bringing in any other issue?

Abraham was a Hebrew. He is the biological ancestor of the Jews. His descendants came to be known as Israelites. Much later in Israel’s history they began to be associated with the word ‘Jew’. By the time of the New Testament this same word – ‘Jew’ - began to be uses interchangeably to refer to the children of Jacob. Jesus Christ is referred to as “king of the Jews” in Matt. 27:37.
Abraham believed in and worshipped YAHWEH, the Eternal God. This same God came to be referred to as ‘the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’. It is this same God Christians worship today.

Christianity is from the word ‘Christ’. In other words it is derived from Jesus Christ. So, the simple answer then is that “Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith” (Hebrews 12:2) is the founder of Christianity. He had categorically stated that he will build his church and the gates of hell will not overcome it – Matthew 16: 18. Jesus Christ is the Lord of the Christians; they derive their name from him because they serve and worship him. That name – Christianity – gives focus to the one who owns the faith. Jesus started it and owns it: Peter, Paul and the other Apostles and disciples ran with the ‘vision’.

Jesus was the God-man which means while on earth he had the two natures – divine and human - in one person. As man therefore, he expressed human attributes – hunger, thirst, etc. He needed to be man to be able to die for the sin of mankind. He was the PERFECT and SINLESS ‘Lamb of God’ who on the cross took the punishment for man’s sin. In his humanity he was lower than God the Father. When on the cross he experienced loss of intimacy with the Father, it was legitimate for him to cry “My God, my god, why have you forsaken me?”

“I am the way and the truth and the life. NO ONE comes to the Father except through me” John 14:6

Empiree:
Story story....Indeed, Quran is different. A Glorious Book that can not be produced except by Allah Himself. Quran says


"And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah , but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds." Sura Yunus 37


We(Allah) have, without doubt, sent down the Message; (Quran) and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). ~ sūrat l-ḥij'r verse 9

Anything else?

Yes!


The quran’s errors include factual errors, moral errors and theological errors.

When taken up with muslims, a problem passage with one of these errors is usually approached by their coming with - The “marvel” of “smart” interpretation

They say something like “Yes, you find that said there, BUT what it REALLY MEANT is bla, bla, bla, “

For a book that is said to be CLEAR, when it takes a lot of rigmarole to arrive at the meaning of words, phrases and sentences or even passages then it's either the book is not as clear as it says it is or set itself up to be interpreted incorrectly from the beginning.

When the quran is quoted muslim apologists run to the hadith. When the hadith is quoted they put up disclaimers. If this is not deception and confusion I wonder what it is.

Why didn’t a book that is meant to be CLEAR plainly state what Allah meant?

See what the “glorious” book says: (Or will you tell me the quran didn’t say this too?)
Sura 18:83-86 claims the sun (which is 1.3 million times bigger than the earth) sets in a pool of water!
Here’s the quote:
“And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about Dhul-Qarnayn [Alexander the Great]. Say, "I will recite to you about him a report."
Indeed We established him upon the earth, and We gave him to everything a way.
So he followed a way
Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people. Allah said, "O Dhul-Qarnayn[Alexander the Great], either you punish [them] or else adopt among them [a way of] goodness."

Notice the following about the passage in question:
"he FOUND it setting in a miry spring, or spring of dark mud" which is to say that HE FOUND THE SUN SETTING IN A..... It did not say "he SAW AN IMAGE of the sun. It says he FOUND THE SUN.

Look at the entire portion: "Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people"

Note what the last portion says: " ..........and he found near it a people" He found a people where?
Note that it started with: “Until, when he reached the setting of the sun......" He REACHED where?

Let’s see Mohamed confirming it:
By turning to hadith.
In Sunan Abu Dawud 3991 we find this:
Abu Dhar said: I was sitting behind the Apostle of Allah who was riding a donkey while the sun was setting. He asked: Do you know where this sets? I replied: Allah and his Apostle know best. He said: It sets in a spring of warm water.
We can immediately see then that there is absolutely no room for reinterpretation of what the quran said.

So the PERFECTLY CLEAR quran tells us that the sun sets in a pool of water. I hope you’re still laughing?

It is a CLEAR FACT that the sun does not set in a pool of water.

Can a book – the quran – which says this and by so doing clearly propagating error be trusted?

Way Out!
Follow the only unique and supernatural One – Jesus Christ who said:
“I am the way, the truth, and the life. NO ONE comes to the Father EXCEPT through me” (Jn. 14:6).
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:3)
“He who believes in the Son (as Saviour) has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (Jn. 3:36).

Empiree:
nonsense! Why does the other guy believe Jesus is God and this one says he is not? Isnt that confusion?. Even here on NL they are evident.
Let's see what's confusing. No muslims have doubt about staus of Jesus or prophets of God. So why are christians confused about who Jesus really was?. That's your homework


Ma Sha Allah !!! thank goodness you said it is different. It has to be different from counterfeits.

Indeed, that really described Arabic

It is interesting that when you are unable to defend the quran you resort to DEFLECTION – you shift to the Bible, confuse issues by bringing up different matters at the same time and excite yourself that you have done a good job.

In reality what you have succeeded in doing is behave like the Ostrich – bury your head in the ground and hoping that the ISLAMIC PROBLEM goes away. You prefer FANTASY LAND to the real world.

My comments about the Bible remain. The Bible is on a much higher class than the quran. You just have to live with that TRUTH.

When I said that the quran is different it was not a compliment but the opposite; but maybe you need to take some English comprehension lessons to improve your ability to know simple contrasts.

Quran makes claims that can be proven to be wrong. E.g. that the earth is flat Q.88:20; that sperm is produced between the backbone and the ribs Q.86:6-7, etc.
Quran advocates VIOLENCE against those who do not believe in islam.
The quran CLAIMS to be a copy of a book that existed in heaven and then revealed to Mohamed; how come then that portions of it were later ‘abrogated’ – did the abrogation take place also in the copy of the book in heaven? In which case Allah did not quite know what he wanted and even before creating man and was already changing his views on matters affecting man.

Is it about Adam’s creation, who the first muslim was, whether there is reward for unbelievers, the food people in hell eat, on whether there is compulsion in religion or not? The list is endless.

So on what basis do you believe that the quran is really the word of (a supreme?) Allah?

Have muslims been sold a LIE which they have swallowed hook line and sinker?

Jesus said “I am the way and the Truth and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me” John 14:6

Empiree:
And your take on this?

A man may be muddled up and do odd things. That may affect only him and no one else.

But when a religion’s holy book, the Quran is a confusing and a tedious book then that affects untold number of people.

You may or may not agree with the content of the Bible, but one thing you can agree with is that it is a readable book. Its stories are appealing and what it teaches are thought provoking. Its language is clear and makes for most people to understand it.

The quran is very different. The author(s) of the quran seems to be very confused, unable to communicate their thoughts sensibly and often jump from one subject to another in the same sentence. The only clear subject in that book is violence. Every other thing is confusing and needs interpretation.

You don’t need a book of interpretation to make sense of the Bible. Even though it claims to be a clear book, easy to understand, clearly explained, and with no doubts in it, Muslims know that without interpretation the quran cannot be understood. Hence the several voluminous books of interpretation written to help Muslims understand it.

The irony is that this has worked to the advantage of Islam. Because the quran is confusing, Muslims can twist it whichever way they want. They can literally talk from both sides of the mouth on any single issue quoting the quran as their source.

Consequently that single book has become a source of problem for both its adherents and others more than one man’s innocent odd behaviour can be to anyone around him.

OLAADEGBU:
How can you believe in salvation by faith alone when the only occurrence of 'faith alone' in the Bible (James 2:24) says that salvation is not by faith alone?

For a book of the Bible that has generated debates for centuries, short responses will just not cut it. However noting a few things can help clarify areas of fog.

The main purpose of James's message is this: knowing the word of God but failing to do what it says results in zero spiritual production as well as divine punishment from God.

James does not contradict Paul.

The 'faith' James talks about is 'what is belived' i. e. Biblical doctrine. It is not trust in Christ for salvation.

The word 'dead' and 'useless' are used interchangeably - see v. 20.

James' reference to Abraham's justification has to do with justification for rewards not for salvation.

James already told us that salvation is a grace gift - James 1:17-18.

What he goes on then to say is that positional justification by faith alone for salvation needs experiential justification by works for the believer to qualify for a reward.

Abdulgaffar is online.

I hope he's reading this and enjoying the thread!

Why Christians Should NOT Give The Quran A Hearing

Here's an interesting post that is fit for this thread. (Highlights are mine)

https://www.nairaland.com/3691138/where-quran-did-it-say/2#54895794

I want you to read this carefully.
Let me start from the beginning.
Sahih al- Bukharin 6.61.510: Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied and ordered that all the other Koranic materials, whatever written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt!

So here we can see that Uthman had already ordered some part of the Koran to be burnt. I didn't write this or make it up. You can confirm.

Now let's move on.
Sahih al- Muslim 2286 : Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: "If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it: "Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and "that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13).

So from this place you can see that some chapters of the Koran were missing because they were forgotten! Are you following me?

Sahih al-bukari 6.61.527: Ubay was the best of us in the recitation of the Koran. Yet we leave some of what he recites. Ubay says, I have taken it from the mouth of Allah's messenger and will not leave it for anything whatsoever.

Notice that Ubay was one of the four teachers of the Koran who Mohammed recommended that the Koran be learnt from. And yet some things in his recitation are left out of the present Koran. Follow me, let's keep going.

Now who put together the Koran we have today? Zayd ibn Thabit. Was he one of the top four teachers recommended by Mohammed? Nope. Who were they? Abdulla Ibn Mas’ud, Salim (a freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa), Mu’adh bin Jabal and Ubay bin Ka’b. (Sahih Bukhari 6.61.521).
So definitely, one of these four must have compiled the Koran we have today? Nope. Instead Zayd Ibn Thabit compiled it. Now notice that the first name Mohammed mentioned in the teaching of the Koran was Mas'ud? What did he have to say about today's Koran?
Jami At- Tirmidhi 3104: Az-Zuhri said: "'Ubaidullah bin 'Abdullah bin 'Utbah informed me that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud disliked Zaid bin Thabit copying the Musahif, and he said: 'O you Muslims people! Avoid copying the Mushaf and the recitation of this man. By Allah! When I accepted Islam he was but in the loins of a disbelieving man' - meaning Zaid bin Thabit - and it was regarding this that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud said: 'O people of Al-'Iraq! Keep the Musahif that are with you, and conceal them.
Now not only did ubay (best reciter) disagree with today's Koran, Mas'ud (number one teacher) did too. Let's not even go into Aisha's sheep eating verses on stoning and breastfeeding (more on this if you still want to discuss). Now let's sum this up.
Sahih al- Bukhari 6.61.509 : Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)."

So what do we have here? Many reciters of the Koran died in a battle and many of the Korans where lost. So Abu Bakr asked Thabit to compile what was left. I'm not done. Now read the entire passage of Jami At- tirmidhi you will find out that different people had their own different manuscripts. Disputes started to happen on what should be in the Koran and what should be left out. Ibn Mas'ud had 111 chapters according to Ibn Abi Daud, kitab al-masahif. Ubay had 116 while while Zayd had 114 chapters. Check the source, I didn't make this up. So you see? Koran has had its own dispute too.

Ubenedictus:
i dont know abt the other thread but each time i try to discuss islam the mods move the thread to islam subforum. It is like they are scared to allow u explain ur faith.

You're not alone.

I think it's a plot contrived to achieve some dubious thing.