i believe Quran and Bible

According to the teachings of Islam, the Quran is the final and unaltered word of Allah, revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). It serves as a guide for all aspects of life and is the ultimate source of truth and guidance for us (muslims). While we hold the Quran in the highest regard, we also believe that earlier scriptures such as the Bible and the Torah, were divinely revealed to prophets such as Jesus (Prophet Isa) and Moses (Prophet Musa). These earlier scriptures have undergone changes and alterations over time, and thus the Quran was sent as a final and preserved revelation to correct and complete previous messages. The message of all prophets was the same: to worship Allah alone and to follow His guidance. The Quran confirms some aspects of earlier scriptures while also providing clarifications and correcting any distortions. 

Hi Ceo
No problem. There is no rush. We have plenty of time. Life can get busy and these posts can take time. I hope and pray life and work goes well for you.
Peace.

Hello Ceo.
Thank you for your interesting reply.

You say Quran and Sunnah have to be read, understood and applied in its entirety. Sure I agree entirety and context is important. However that does not hide reality and the authenticity of the Sahah hadith I have quoted to you. It still does not hide the fact in your own hadith that Mohamad had sex with a 9 year old, ordered his men to torture his enemies and condoned his men to have women sex slaves.
Lets look at the track record of a person. I agree. And my conclusion is if a �prophet� condones his men to torture, to have sex with a 9 year old and to allow his men to have women sex slaves then his track record disqualifies him from being a prophet.
You say I choose not to use history and am just throwing a handful of hadith . I�ve quoted from your Sahih hadith. Why are you dismissing your own Sahih hadith. As a Muslim you should know sahih al-Bukhari and sahih Muslim are the most authentic books of sunna. You appear to be undermining the authority of your own sunna and Sahih hadith as a means of avoiding the reality about Mohmad. If so you are not following orthodox Islam which defines Sahih (صَحِيْح) as genuine/authentic/sound there is something wrong with your argument. You should know the criterion for Sahih hadith Ceo. This being 1. -A connected Isnaad (chain) of narrators: Nobody narrates from their teacher's teacher, for example; everybody met in person and heard directly from the person who narrated to them.2.All narrators are known, trustworthy, and righteous: They don't commit major sins in public. We know them (their biography).3. Precision and Accuracy of Narrators: All the narrators in the chain are known to have strong memories and narrate accurately. 4. Doesn't Conflict Known Hadith: If there's one hadith that conflicts a well-known larger body of hadith, it can become rejected. 5. No Hidden Defects: This is a technical requirement, and refers to tadlees (subtly hiding who you are narrating the hadith from) among other things.)
No ammunition ? the ammunition is there. You need to face up and not deny your own hadith.

You say Christians believe everything we read without critical assessment. Actually Christians are far more inclined to be critical in assessment than Muslims due to their higher education standards and because they do not have Mullahs breathing down their neck threatening Fatwas for apostasy or blasphemy. Your example of the US criminal is not valid. We are talking about a prophet who you claim to be a mercy to all creatures and above all criticism and reproach. Such a prophet should have very high standards. It is obvious Mohamad does not meet this standard.

Regarding criticism of Mohamad you say there is no evidence from Mohamads critics. Actually your hadith does record the orders of Mohamad to have poets who were critics of him assassinated and murdered. But the reason there is no evidence from Mohamads critics outside of the Quran and hadith is because there is no evidence for early Islam at all. Absolutely nothing. Plus who would dear to criticise Mohamad with the sword hanging over their heads.
I think you are just wanting to hide and obscure the truth by getting into the technicities of isnad, the ulama and methodology. Let me ask you directly. Do you support or not Mohamad condoning of his men to put burning nails into the eyes of his enemies and to allow his men to have women sex slaves ? if so does this qualify him as a mercy to all creatures ? Also why are you saying critics of Mohamad claim other hadith to be lies. I never said that. All I�m saying is that your hadith and the Quran reveal Mohamad to be a man. Nothing special. And certainly not a mercy to all creatures.
Why would none of the critics at the time note Ayehas age as an issue ?There can be good reasons for this. Who would dear to criticise Mohamad with the sword hanging over their heads. Perhaps he had his critics murdered like the poets he had murdered. Perhaps the culture at this time supported child marriage to 50 something year old man. Even if the culture allowed this at the time it still does not make it right in the eyes of God. You say we cannot look at the customs or culture of a particular age and criticise it without having all available information at hand. I disagree. While culture is relative to time and place, Gods standards are absolute and through history Gods revelation has made it obvious what is acceptable and what is not.
Your comment about the criticisms of the customs of Mohamad and Islam starting with the crusades is just typical Muslim insecurity and denial. In all respect Ceo this is not facing the truth and is just an immature blame game typical of Islam. Besides you are wrong. Criticism of. Islam started right at the start of Muslim history. Mohmad ordering the murders and assignations of the poets that criticised him is an example. Also Muslims started the crusades. The crusades were a defensive response after centuries of Jihadi attacks and invasions against the Christian Byzantine Empire and Europe.

You state if Aysha was upset by the marriage surely she would have mentioned something. The point is Ceo that is partly why sexual abuse is so wrong. Because the young victim often does not have the power to refuse the perpetrator. And in terms of king John of Englands marriage to Isabella when she was 12, the difference is King John of England never proclaimed himself to be Gods prophet like Mohamad did.
Yes I agrees back then both boys and girls matured early. However we are not talking about a young girl being married to a young boy. We are talking about a 9 year old girl being married to a man in his 50s which is not natural.
You say I only brought one Hadith however you have not refuted the sahih hadith I have provided. Ok. If you want more evidence here is Sahih Muslim this time �
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3311).
As I said above you appear to be undermine the authority of your own sunna and Sahih hadith as a means of avoiding the reality about Mohmad and Aysha. Your Sahih hadith is clear. Mohamad had sex with Aisha when she was just 9 years old.
Regarding your other arguments you have not refuted the authentic sahih hadith I provided and your quoting of Ibn Hisham, Nawawi, Tahzib al Asma estimating her age is nothing but mere conjecture based only on secondary sources.
You quote Ibn Hisham. However do you know that Ibn Hisham said -
He married �A�isha in Mecca when she was a child of seven and lived with her in Medina when she was nine or ten. She was the only virgin that he married. Her father, Abu Bakr, married her to him and the apostle gave her four hundred dirhams. (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasulullah (The Life of Muhammad), translated by Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi, tenth impression 1995], p. 792).
Also the Quran in Surah. 65:4 talks about the waiting period for divorce, and remarriage. The Quran tells Muslims to wait for a certain period of time before making the divorce final. The Quran exhorts men to wait a period of three months in the case of women who either are no longer menstruating or haven�t even started their menstrual cycles! Thus, Islam permits men to marry prepubescent girls and even divorce them if they so choose.
As said your arguments in estimating Aysha age are mere conjecture based on secondary sources. They do not explain away the authentic Sahih Bukhari or the Sahih Muslim hadith. It is you that is out of step in your poor understanding of the authenticity of Sahih hadith. Sahih al-Bukhari and sahih Muslim are the most authentic books of sunna and have far more reliability than the secondary sources you have provided.

A woman was punished for being cruel to a cat ? if anything all this shows is Mohamad was inconsistent and confused. On one hand he had mercy to a cat, but on the other hand he allowed his men to take women sex slaves, torture enemies with hot nails in their eyes and have sex with a 9 year old. I tried to find the hadith about this. In your quote of Sahih Bukhari 3295 all I could find was a very strange verse where -
The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "If anyone of you rouses from sleep and performs the ablution, he should wash his nose by putting water in it and then blowing it out thrice, because Satan has stayed in the upper part of his nose all the night."
Really ? do you believe Mohamad thought Satan stayed in a persons nose all night ?! Very strange !

Anyway if you want proof that Mohomad had his enemies tortured. Ceo. Sahih Bukhari Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 261 is very clear. It states �
�Then he (Mohamad)ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and whey were left in the Harra (i.e. rocky land in Medina). They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died ��
What is this Ceo if it is not torture ?
You say When Muhammad conquered Mecca there was not a drop of bloodshed. However look at Mohamads actions after this. Mnay battles were fought and many people were killed. Blood was spilt. Mohamad lived by the sword.

You ask ifs Hitler should have been executed or if someone kills a loved one of mine would I not seek justice or if a criminal/murderer can remain free in a Christian ruled state if his heart has not changed. He awaits God to change his heart then his outside changes?? Yes. Of course to both of these. However what is important to understand is Christianity believes in the separation between state and religion. The Bible makes the distinction between the individual conscience of a person and the responsibilities of the government / the state in Romans 13.4 and Mark 12.17. As a result Christians are subject to the state government and authorities, and it is the state government that punishes a murder. It is up to the individual person to forgive or to turn the other cheek or not. It is the government that� holds the sword. �it is the government / state that is responsible for justice.
Yes the people of Noah, Ad, Moses, and Lut AS all punished heavily for their indiscretions but they were punished by God, not a person.
You are wrong when you say turning the other cheek only feeds fuel to the fire and allows more innocent lives to be killed. If you look at human history and human nature through time you will see war after war due to revenge and retribution. Only forgiveness breaks that cycle for individual believers. However the government / state is responsible for justice.

You mention Waraka ibn Nawful a priest that believed in Mohamad as a prophet. He was the exception to the rule. Check out Wiki. A quick search states � �In the Middle Ages, it was common for Jewish writers to describe Muhammad as ha-meshuggah ("The Madman"), a term of contempt frequently used in the Bible for those who believe themselves to be prophets.[2]
And-
The earliest (documented) Christian knowledge of Muhammad stems from Byzantine sources, written shortly after Muhammad's death in 632. In the Doctrina Jacobi nuper baptizati, a dialogue between a recent Christian convert and several Jews, one participant writes that his brother "wrote to [him] saying that a deceiving prophet has appeared amidst the Saracens". Another participant in the Doctrina replies about Muhammad: "He is deceiving. For do prophets come with sword and chariot?, �[Y]ou will discover nothing true from the said prophet except human bloodshed".[3]�
In terms of why was Mohamad not considered as the anti Christ. Actually he was seen by some at the time as the anti Christ-
From the 9th century onwards, highly negative biographies of Muhammad were written in Latin,[7] such as the one by �lvaro of C�rdoba proclaiming him the Antichrist.[8]

You ask why would think such a significant figure would be mentioned, perhaps Jesus AS would have said watch out for this man ? many significant figures throughout history were not mentioned by Jesus. Atilla the Hun of the Mongols was not mentioned. Neither was Hitler. I have read many verses from the bible that Muslims claim refer to Mohamad and none of them line up.
You ask what does the bible say is the religion of the anti Christ. My understanding is that it mentions a spirit of the anti Christ that is in the world which produces many anti Christs. In terms of the religion of the anti Christ it is not clear but it says many will be deceived. It also seems to say it will include an economic and political dimension. If you read the books of Daniel and Revelation you can learn more. I hope this is helpful.

In terms of Christianity evolving from the Old testament to New testament and why are the laws changing? It is not so much they have evolved or change. It is more about the Old testament promises being fulfilled in Jesus. The difference is what is termed the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.
The Old Testament prophet Jeremiah talks about the New Covenant when he said �
But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. (Jeremiah 31:33).
Centuries later Jesus said �Do not think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil the law.� (Matthew 5:17)
Jesus took the cup of wine and said, �This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.� (Luke 22:20).
So with Jesus' birth, life, death, and resurrection the Old Covenant was fulfilled and a new covenant was instituted.
The foundation documents of Islam are the Quran and hadith. The foundation document of Jews is the Old Testament Bible and the foundation document is the Old Testament Bible and the New Testament Bible. The New Testament is the fulfilment of the old and supersedes it. The Bible's message is directly inspired by God, and though he used human vessels to transport this message it remains accurate and trustworthy. God breathed his spirit upon humans to inspire them to write his message and laws. Gods standards are made known this way. The total collection of the bible is called the canon (measuring line) and the canon was closed centuries ago. No one has authority to open the canon and add or subtract from it. This includes the Pope. Gods laws are preserved.
Some coming back to things like slavery or apostasy. While there have been periods in Church history where the church was heavily influenced by the culture at the time on things such as apostasy or slavery for example, the non negotiable principles found in the foundation document of the New Testament is non negotiable and absolute.

Im not sure why you have mentioned a constitution instituted by Mohamad with Christians and Jews ?
Where you say the Quran wasn�t changed over time and not to please man (slave ownership) and there are Quranic laws to the well treatment of slaves What are you saying? Are you saying that slave ownership is condoned by the Quran ?
How do you know Christians are doing very little as Jesus ordered them to do? Christians are encouraged to pray daily, fast and read the bible daily. Christians only go to Church on Sundays ? And Muslims only go to the Mosque on Fridays. The Muslim Salah is nothing but dead robot rituals in a language most Muslims don�t even understand. Any educated person knows Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny have nothing to do with Jesus so no �pleasing of adherents� there.

You ask why God does not forgive Satan. No God will never forgive Satan. On the Day of Judgement Satan will be cast into hell. What is the Islamic perspective ? Why according to Islam has Satan not yet been defeated ?
Your definition of extremism seems ok. However we need to look at the merits of each individual. Ghandi was pacifist. Mandela resorted to violence only after years of trying peaceful means and Malcolm X promoted violence. Ghandi and Mandela did not condone taking women as sex slaves, torturing their enemies with hot nails in their eyes or having sex with 9 year old girls. Malcolm X Im not so sure about. Also none of them claimed to be �the last prophet of God� with Gods �final revelation.�

You state Christianity condoned slavery and now condemns it. No. Christianity never condoned slavery. Jesus never mentioned it. However what he did preach was �to treat your neighbour as you would want to be treated�. As a result slavery does not fit with this.
When you ask how do I know that other important commandments of Jesus have not changed? There was no change. However the reason I know there have been no other changes is because the New Testament is the most reliable of all ancient writings in terms of there being more early copies than any other ancient document.
In terms of you comparing slavery between the Roman Empire and Islam my mention of the Roman Empire and slavery was to prove you wrong that Mohamad was the first to have progressive laws regarding slaves. I don�t believe either you or me know enough about slavery in the Roman or Islamic Empires to make an accurate comparison.

Regarding your question of does the Bible not prohibit the charging of interest on money. In the Old Testament the Israelite Jews were not permitted to charge interest when they loaned money to an impoverished brother. They could, however, charge interest on loans made to other, more affluent Jews and to foreigners. This rule was part of the Mosaic Law: �If you lend money to one of my people among you who is needy, do not be like a moneylender; charge him no interest� (Exodus 22:25.) In the New Testament, Jesus tells us not to �turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you� (Matthew 5:42). He applied this principle even to our enemies in their time of need: �But love your enemies and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great� (Luke 6:35,). The clear teaching of the Bible is that God expects His children to act righteously when lending money.

You ask where does Islam still allow slavery? And does every Muslim own a slave? Or do we see it in certain cultures and environments which just happen to be Muslim majority. I believe the foundational documents of Islam (the Quran and hadith) do teach and condone slavery. That�s where ISIS get their ideas from.

I agree the situation for women was still probably better than that of women prior to the rise of Islam. However, Muhammad permitted spousal abuse with husbands allowed to beat their wives (Qur�an 4:34) he stated repeatedly that women have inferior minds ( Sahih Muslim Number 142), claimed that most of the people in hell are women (Sahih Al-Bukhari- Number 14 Number 1462)and allowed his men to have sex with their women captives.
Yes Abraham did have a slave wife. However this does not mean it was Gods perfect will. Abraham like all the other Old Testament prophets did not have the full revelation of Gods will and standards. Gods revelation through the centuries of the Old Testament was a progressive revelation. This means the truth of Gods perfect will and nature was revealed gradually over time. The Old Testament verses such as Deuteronomy 19:21 have been replaced by the full revelation of love through Jesus as made known in the Injeel. As mentioned above, the Old Covenant was changed to the new Covenant as prophesied by Jeremiah and fulfilled by Jesus.

You keep mentioning the moral problems of the West with divorce and extra marital affairs. Compare Western society with Muslim society. The Muslim world is being ripped apart by extremism and religious fundamentalism and Muslims are falling over each other to live in the stable and prosperous West. Why is that ?

You mention nuclear and if the benefits of science will be outweighed if nuclear war occurs. I agree with you. As I have said earlier I am not here to defend science. All I have said it that it has brought benefits. In regards to Somalia with a Muslim country not having Shariah not properly instituted. My belief is that it never will. The ISIS Caliphate was unable to do it. The Ottoman Empire was unable to do it and even the �Rightly Guided Caliphs� were able to do it. It has never happened and will never happen. It is a fantasy.

I don�t need to defend the US with its crime stats. Unlike Muslim countries the US is a secular state and never promises �heaven on earth� as does Islam.
You ask If there was war in my country would I and my family facing starvation move to Muslim lands if I had to save my family ? Perhaps. However I would expect my Western / Christian / Secular neighbours to take me in first. Notice the Muslim refugees wanting to escape their failed Muslim lands are not wanting to go to other Muslim countries. They are wanting to go to the safe and prosperous Western / Christian / Secular countries. Why is this? Its because Christianity has provided a foundation of prosperity for the West while Islam has caused nothing but trouble. Notice the wealthier Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states are not taking them in. Why is that?
Western countries have no responsibility to be taking in the refuges because Jesus said love your neighbour. As mentioned earlier the Bible makes the distinction between the individual conscience of a Christian person and the responsibilities of the government / the state in Romans 13.4 and Mark 12.17. As a result Christians are subject to the state government and authorities, and it is the state government that decides to take in refugees based on secular principles. It is up to the individual Christian person to show mercy to refugees if they choose. It is the government that� holds the sword� and it is the government / state that is responsible to protect its borders.

You say the Quran is in the original Arabic, Christianity has no connection with the original texts and the Bible being diluted in translation. You are wrong. Firstly why would the all powerful God limit himself to just one language (Arabic) ? Is God that small ? The original language of the Gospels is irrelevant. What�s important is the accurate transmission of meaning. Not the original language. How many Muslims read the Quran in the original language of Arabic. Most do not. Muslims do not have the original Quran because Uthman burnt them all. Christianity can claim more than 5,300 early manuscripts in the original Greek, most written between the 1st and 5th centuries, before the time of paper. Most Christian leaders are trained in Greek and Hebrew.
Also even your Quran disagrees with you. In the Quran it says the Injil is correct - He [Jesus] said, "Lo, I am God's servant; God has given me the Book, and made me a Prophet." S. 19.30.
S 19.30 is clear. It states the Injil is accurate.

Regarding the nobility of Quraysh can you please provide evidence this tribe was any more noble than any other tribe. Where is your proof that their poetry was better.

You say computing math, science comes from the east. Muslim scientists borrowed from Greek and pre Islamic Persian computing, maths and science.

I suspect Boko Haram base any of their barbaric beliefs on the Quran and hadith.

You ask on what basis I say the 4 rightly guided caliphs did not institute a perfect Islamic state? It is obvious most of the �rightly guided caliphs� were murdered. In their time there was ongoing civil war and the Sunni / Shiite split occurred. This does not sound like a perfect Islamic state. If the �rightly guided caliphs� couldn�t achieve a perfect Islamic state what makes you think it will occur today ?

You ask me to name another empire that covered so much in so little time as the Muslim Empire. Many empires spread fast. The Mongol empire is one. The French empire under Napolean is another. Sure the Muslim empire had advanced civil, economic, laws and political ideas. But most of these ideas they gained from the Greeks and Persians.

You ask with the second coming of Christ, why according to the bible does Jesus need to come down again? The reason is at his first coming it was to bring mercy. His second coming will to bring judgement.

You say the west rapes the African continent and that Africa with the largest mineral resources in the world is the poorest?If it wasn�t for the west bringing Africa into the modern world they would not have had the benefit of modern medicine, engineering and trade, etc. Why is Africa still poor. It is poor because of its backward tribal mentality and corruption. You want an example of Africa being raped. Look at the history of the Muslim Arabic northern Sudan raping the non muslim southern Sudan.

Regarding balance of proof. If Mohamad is the �last prophet� and a �mercy to all creatures� and if Islam claims to be the final perfect revelation of God, then any doubt at all is enough to judge Allah and Mohammad as guilty. Your own hadith and Quran brings enough doubt that disqualify Mohamad.

Are we two sides of the same coin? I agree Islam and Christianity have a lot in common. However there are also huge differences. Both religions claim to have the final �word of God�. Perhaps for you the biggest denial is Mohamad as a prophet ? For me as Christian the biggest difference is the Muslim denial of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus on the cross. We will never agree on these things. At the end of the day only God knows. What I believe is important in the mean time is to agree to disagree, to show tolerance and respect to each other even where we disagree. I believe this pleases God. I thank you for your respectful posts Ceo.

May Gods Blessing be upon you and upon us both to lead us in His truth.
Acts2.

Hello Ceo
Thankyou for you well thoughts out and researched reply. I have found it interesting.
However on much, I disagree. Mohamad was not the first leader to prescribe kindness or release for slaves. The Roman Empire had humanitarian views toward slaves. Roman slaves could hold property . Skilled or educated slaves were allowed to earn their own money, and buy their freedom and allowed freed slaves to become citizens. After freedom a male slave enjoyed not only freedom from ownership, but active political freedom including the right to vote.
In tems of Islam however the fact remains that Allah and the Quran still condone and do not condemn slavery. Yes Mohamad may have ordered kindness to neighbours. Jesus went further than Mohamad however and ordered kindness to enemies.
You asked for references to the Chapters in the Quran about women sex slaves. The verses are 23:1-6 and 70.22-30.

Regarding your comment of how both Islam and the Bible support life for a and �Show no pity, life for a life...� (Deuteronomy 19:21) you misunderstand the Bible. Gods revelation through the centuries of the Old Testament was a progressive revelation. This means the truth of Gods perfect will and nature was revealed gradually over time. The Old Testament verses such as Deuteronomy 19:21 have been replaced by the full revelation of love through Jesus as made known in the Injeel.

Regarding the Church�s punishment for apostasy and heresy around science, the difference between Islam and the Church is the foundational documents of the Quran, hadith and the Christian foundational document of the Bible / New Testament. As far as the church was concerned this was merely a cultural thing not based on the New Testament. This has nothing to do with the New Testament. Perhaps you can educate me but I suspect Muslims who believe in apostasy and heresy base their arguments on the foundational documents of the Quran and hadith.
Im not sure why you are so strong in defending Mohamad prior to his Prophethood ? Surely he should be measured in terms of his conduct after being made a Prophet? After all this was when he had started to receive his revelations so this is the time when his and Allahs behaviour needs to be judged? Can you explain?


Ceo. Sahih Bukhari Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 261 is very clear. It states �
�Then he (Mohamad)ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and whey were left in the Harra (i.e. rocky land in Medina). They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died ��
Have a good read of Sahih Bukhari Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 261. Mohamad actually did order for hot nails to be passed over their eyes and it is actually not clear if the executioners acted on their own orders. I suspect from the way the hadith reads Mohamad ordered that too. He also ordered Cutting off both hands and legs, when he was supposed to cut off only one hand and one leg from the opposite sides.
Justice for the men of the tribe of Urkil ? Perhaps ? But barbaric justice definitely.
How can you say he was following the command of God ? you yourself said your Quran says in Surah 5. Verse 33-
"The reprisal against those who wage war on Allah and His Messenger, and go about the earth corrupting it, is that they should be killed or crucified, or have their alternate hands and feet cut off, or be banished from the land." (5:33)
Nothing about hot nails into eyes, having all limbs cut off or denying dying men water? But yet this it what Mohamad did as is made clear in Sahih Bukhari Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 261.

While Christians find it difficult or impossible to justify slavery due to the love teachings of Jesus, neither Christianity or Islam directly condemn slavery. The difference however is that Muslims claim the Quran to be the literal and universal Word of God. Christians however claim the Bible to be the Word to be God breathed through man. The Bible is written by men who had the breath of God upon them. As a result the Bible has a cultural context of which slavery was part of the cultural context at the time. The Quran however cannot have a cultural context because it is literal and universal. As a result because the universal and literal Quran does not condemn slavery then Allah and Mohamad are guilty of condoning slavery.

Ceo. Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 is clear. Mohamad had sex with Aisha when she was just 9 years old. The hadith reads -
�that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he CONSUMMATED his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
Consummated means - make (a marriage or relationship) complete by having sexual intercourse. It is a fact. Mohmad had sexual relations with a 9 year old girl when he was aged in his 50s. Whether he was King of Medina or Aishas father was noble or not does not hide this fact.

I looked at the www. christianitytoday.com web site but could see nothing about education and science being the West down fall? Can you reference this better so I can read it ?
If as you say the west is in such decline why is it Muslims from Muslim countries are desperate to migrate to the West ?

I am not here to defend science. I agree with you that science not subjected to the Divine will be at our peril. The reason I made the comment about science was as a reply to your earlier comment (26 March) that said � I can however understand that from an early age Christians are taught to stay away from the Quran and Sunnah� where I replied that Christians are generally better educated than Muslims so Christians are not afraid of the Quran or any other religion. And yes while Western science has produced negative things it has also produced positive things for mankind , including the Muslim world. Examples are medicine, food technology, modern engineering, efficient trade and the internet for instance. We would not even be exchanging our different ideas on the internet if it were not for Western science.
Islamic traditional education? All I see are the likes of the primitive Boko Haram (meaning anti western education / ideas) and Muslim madrasas that are more interested in teaching boys (not girls) how to recite the Quran often without even knowing what they are reciting, to the exclusion of maths, science and learning about other societies.

In regards to crime - ok lets look at statistics for crime in Muslims countries. In Saudi Arabia as anywhere there rare murders, divorce, rapes and theft. The rates of crimes such as workers being exploited from South and Southeast Asia subjected to conditions which include involuntary servitude, non-payment of wages, confinement and withholding of passports as a restriction on their movement will be incredibly high.
Saudi Arabia is also a destination country for children trafficked from other Middle Eastern countries like Yemen, African countries like Nigeria, Mali, Somalia, South Sudan, and Sudan and Asian nations like India, Bangladesh , Pakistan and Afghanistan for the purpose of forced begging and involuntary servitude as street vendors. Some Nigerian women were reportedly trafficked into Saudi Arabia for commercial sexual exploitation.
The rates of this crime is unknown but will be incredibly higher than anything in the west and that is not even mentioning terrorism. Or lets look at Somalia. Its crime rates are probably not even recorded because the country is one huge disaster.
You say there is no �true Muslim state� but Ceo there has never been a true Muslim state and there never will be. It did not even exist under your �Rightly Guided Caliphs�. Crime and immoral behaviour has existed through out the 1400 years of Muslim history and paradise on earth will never exist until the Second Coming of Christ.

I disagree when you say extremism has nothing to do with Islam. The foundational texts of Islam are the Quran and Hadith. Even if Muslim extremists simply misunderstand the Quran and hadith the fact that the Quran and Hadith can even be misunderstood is a problem. I challenge anyone to find anything clear in the New Testament or as another example � Buddhist texts that could even be misunderstood that could lead to violence.

What I mean by �revolution of the heart� is that God first changes the heart of a person and then the outward behaviour of a person changes. This is the kind of change Jesus wanted. Not just a dead outward conformity.
In terms of is it the Christians duty to implement Gods divine will. If it is by enforcing some outward conformity of behaviour while the heart remains corrupt, then the answer is no. For the Christian his duty bring about a change of heart that will then bring about outward change. So no. You misunderstand Jesus. He never said to enforce Gods will with religious Poice as happens in some Muslim countries.
Do I prefer to live in a corrupt world? Muslims can enforce outward moral conformity all they like but it will never lead to paradise on earth. Islam has existed for 1400 years and never has paradise existed in Muslims lands. Jesus never said that paradise would come to earth. He said paradise will never arrive on earth until after his second coming.
Prosperity with 10% of the world controlling 90 % of the worlds wealth? I agree this is not prosperity as it should be. But the worlds population is generally more prosperous than what it was 100 years ago, 500 years ago or 3000 years ago. Western science has contributed to medicine, agriculture and trade that has benefited all. I agree the 10% of the world controlling 90 % of the worlds wealth that this is not prosperity as it should be. But it is better than what it was. In terms of Somalia they need to clean up their own house. Somalia is full of corruption and war. They have a mentality still in the Middle Ages and Islam is partly to blame.
The Tribe of Quraysh the most honourable tribe in Arabia ? Was that because of their poetry, wealth and holding the keys to the Kaba ? Were not all tribes at this time good at poetry? What made theirs better? How do you know they were the wealthiest ? What do you base this on? And why is holding the keys to pagan temple so special ?
As mentioned why you are defending Mohamad for the 40 year prior to his Prophethood? As I asked earlier, surely he should be measured in terms of his conduct after being made a Prophet? This was when he had started to receive his revelations so this is the time when his and Allahs behaviour needs to be judged?
Regarding balance of proof Ceo, God requires no balance of proof. If Islam is as it claims to be the final perfect revelation of God, then any doubt at all is enough to judge Allah and Mohamad as guilty.

Again my intention is not to cause offence Ceo. I value and respect your point of view and am simply stating things as I see it.
Thank you and kindest regards to you too Ceo.


Edited by 2Acts - 13 April 2017 at 5:06pm