Is Islam true?

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

Melco

Guest Group

Joined: 20 February 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 107

Posted: 21 February 2006 at 9:59am

Hello my friend Shams,

When Jesus is questioned about divorce, he steers the conversation to monogamy (see Matthew 19:2-, Mark 10:2-). He said it was God's intention (referring to Genesis 2:24) from the beginning that a man and a woman marry and become one flesh.

See below
But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.'^[a] 7'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,^[b] 8and the two will become one flesh.'^[c] So they are no longer two, but one. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

So, clearly Jesus teaching is that monogamy is the ideal.

Also, note that Jesus says:
"Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.

Polygamy was allowed under Mosaic Law, but nowhere is it spoken of with approval.

Melco

Guest Group

Joined: 20 February 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 107

Posted: 21 February 2006 at 10:13am

On the contradictions in the bible, yes there are some. Christians don't read the Bible as if it were dictated word for word by God to one person, it took over 1000 years for it to be written, and edited often. It cannot be read uniformly , as it contains many literary styles.

On point 9, you haven't convinced me that love has the utmost importance in Islam. This quote is frightening in its nastiness "let not hatred of a people...incite you to exceed the limits", there is no love there, just restrained anger, liking a dog pulling on a lead. Compare your examples to the following:
1 Corinthians 13
"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away."
See that, that's what God wants, simple, beautiful Love. God is Love and we must excel most of all in Love.

Melco

Guest Group

Joined: 20 February 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 107

Posted: 21 February 2006 at 10:21am

Shams Zaman, my good friend, you haven't heard of Muhammad's massacre?
This is in reference to my Point 2 above.

A consensus Muslim account of the massacre of the Qurayza has emerged as conveyed by classical Muslim scholars of hadith (sayings of Muhammad), biographer's of Muhammad's life (especially Ibn Ishaq), jurists, and historians. This narrative is summarized as follows. Alleged to have aided the forces of Muhammad's enemies in violation of a prior pact, the Qurayza were subsequently isolated and besieged. Twice the Qurayza made offers to surrender, and depart from their stronghold, leaving behind their land and property. Initially they requested to take one camel load of possessions per person, but when Muhammad refused this request, the Qurayza asked to be allowed to depart without any property, taking with them only their families. However, Muhammad insisted that the Qurayza surrender unconditionally and subject themselves to his judgment. Compelled to surrender, the Qurayza were lead to Medina. The men with their hands pinioned behind their backs, were put in a court, while the women and children were said to have been put into a separate court. A third (and final) appeal for leniency for the Qurayza was made to Muhammad by their tribal allies the Aus. Muhammad again declined, and instead he appointed as arbiter Sa�d Mu�adh from the Aus, who soon rendered his concise verdict: the men were to be put to death, the women and children sold into slavery, the spoils to be divided among the Muslims.

You see Muhammad, Peace be Upon Him, who was worshipping an all merciful and compassionate God, showed no mercy to them. He acted hypocritically. Imagine having innocent children sold into slavery? There is no Love emphasised in Islam. This is clearly the truth I am telling.

Edited by Melco

Melco

Guest Group

Joined: 20 February 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 107

Posted: 21 February 2006 at 10:35am

What happened to the men, women and children?

Muhammad ratified the judgment stating that Sa�d�s decree was a decree of God pronounced from above the Seven Heavens. Thus some 600 to 900 men from the Qurayza were lead on Muhammad�s order to the Market of Medina. Trenches were dug and the men were beheaded, and their decapitated corpses buried in the trenches while Muhammad watched in attendance. Male youths who had not reached puberty were spared. Women and children were sold into slavery, a number of them being distributed as gifts among Muhammad�s companions. According to Muhammad�s biographer Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad chose one of the Qurayza women (Rayhana) for himself. The Qurayza�s property and other possessions (including weapons) were also divided up as additional "booty" among the Muslims.

If you think about what happened to thousands of muslims in Srebrenica under the orders of Bosnian Serb leaders Gen. Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, you can get a sense of how awful an act this was. If Muhammad (PBUH) was alive today, he would be on trial in the Hague for war crimes. Don't you think that's true?

liberty

Groupie

Joined: 08 February 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 45

Posted: 21 February 2006 at 5:06pm

Servetus wrote:

Welcome, Liberty:

"Christians believe their religion to be correct, Muslims believe their religion to be the true religion, etc. blah, blah, blah. A persons religion is based upon faith, not in historical facts, rational discussions, etc."

Sorry. Are you meaning to suggest that St. Augustine, for example, employed neither facts nor rationality in his works? What about Hans K�ng? Finally, if rationality has nothing to do with it, why would the Prophet Isaiah (1:18) write:

"Come now, let us reason together ..."

Serv

I know that many people much more intelligent than I have attempted to use reason to prove their religion is true or correct. I worked for a woman that believed that Albert Eistein proved to himself using reason and rational thinking that god exists.

I can not prove the existence of god, nor can you prove that one religion is right and another is wrong. It is ridiculus to argue the merits of Islam vs Christianity.

Do you deny that most people accept their religion that they were indoctrinated in growing up? That their parents pretty much decided which religion would be theirs?

If reason had anything to do with it, then the United States would be more evenly divided between Muslims, Jews, Christians, etc, and the Middle East would not be predominately Muslims. If we did not program our children to accept a certain religion then there would be a great variety in each society. As it is, there is not!

Maryga

Senior Member

Joined: 10 July 2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 143

Posted: 21 February 2006 at 10:36pm

Melco, your last post clearly indicates that your sources of information are very dubious. Many of them are written by non-Muslims with the clear intention of slurring Islam. If you use those sources and argue there is no one but only yourself in loss. However, Brs Shams Zaman and Ahmed Joyia who have better knowledge of the Bible I am sure will answer you.

Regarding your question: 5) Many of the Qu'ran's lines look like paraphrases of the Bible's verses, which is immediately suspicious. The Qu'ran is an amalgamation of Judaic, Christian and Arabic Polytheistic and cultural ideas, therefore, it doesn't appear to spring from a pure source, a Divine Mind, ie God. There are too many references to theological disputes of the day to convince me otherwise than it all came from the mind of Muhammad, however poetic the words might have been.

The Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) only because the earlier religions were corrupted. The main corruption in the Bible is attributing divinity to Christ. What you find in the Qur'an is certainly also there in the Bible, but not in its original form. I know that some of the Christians read a translation of the Qur'an which is translated by a Christian/Jew. You will certainly be mislead if you read those translations. I suggest you get hold of a copy of the translation & commentary by Yusuf Ali and read it. It may help clear a lot of your confusion which is clearly arising from wrong sources of information.

Melco

Guest Group

Joined: 20 February 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 107

Posted: 22 February 2006 at 10:34am

Maryga, this is what I wrote
A consensus Muslim account of the massacre of the Qurayza has emerged as conveyed by classical Muslim scholars of hadith (sayings of Muhammad), biographer's of Muhammad's life (especially Ibn Ishaq), jurists, and historians.
Maryga, this is what you wrote
your last post clearly indicates that your sources of information are very dubious. Many of them are written by non-Muslims with the clear intention of slurring Islam.

This is totally based on Muslim historical records. I've seen it reported and futile attempts to defend in innumerable books. The truth is what matters, we haven't the luxury of burying our heads in the sands.

The earlier religions were corrupted, but Islam isn't - listen to that. If "Love is patient, love is kind" is corruption, give me corruption any day. All you get instead is charity biased towards muslims and restrained anger. Muhammad had hundreds of men executed just because they double-crossed him. He formed alliances via marriage most cunningly in order to increase his hold of the tribal system, not for love's sake. It's possible Muhammad was a charlatan, who used religion to gain power. I wouldn't want to be someone who refused three pleas of mercy and had hundreds of men executed. How can that be holiness?

AhmadJoyia View Drop Down

Senior Member

Joined: 20 March 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1647

Posted: 22 February 2006 at 10:48am

Melco wrote:

AhmadJoyia, I hope I answer your questions. The truth is more important than anything else. Folklore and myth need longer periods of time than we have with the Gospel, a couple of decades doesn't count as sufficient time. Go around telling a story at that time, especially of miracles and you would need witnesses to back you up. The fact is that Christianity spread at a remarkable rate across the middle east, if these things didn't happen it would only need one person from any of the towns to dispute them for the whole misadventure to fall down.

So, essentially speaking, there is no proof other than conjecture. Am I right? Do let us know about �conjecture� being the right word.

Melco wrote:

The Acts of the Apostles record that in those 2 decades after the events of Christ, the apostles performed miracles, healings, etc. Paul was converted having had seen Christ on his way to persecute Christians.

So, like Paul, any convert can become the champion of faith, if he proclaims the visitation by Jesus to whom he never met. Hmm!! If that is the case, shouldn�t we expect some new epistles coming soon from bro Melco? Should they also be considered a part of holy Bible?? I shall definitely like to know your comments on this.

Melco wrote:

The authors of the Gospels didn't have to be the Apostles for them to be authentic.

Only according to your theory, since now we know that you also may have a ulterior motive behind it; publishing your epistles as part of new bible since you also claim to have seen the �Lord�. Isn�t it? I can understand your line of reasoning. Hmm!!

Melco wrote:

St. Paul was there dealing with the aftermath of the beginning of Christianity. Like you he didn't believe in the bizarre claims of the Christians.

That is not very true about me.

Melco wrote:

He put many of them to death by stoning. He was fervent in his stance against them. Yet, he was converted and later died a martyr, having witnessed many miracles.

Witnessing miracles performed by whom? By himself, probably?

Melco wrote:

Peter was killed too. So, was James in approx 45Ad.

I have a 10 page document of letters to and from Emperors and others, historical records of these events.

But unfortunately, we don�t have a gospel according to any of the disciples what to talk of gospel according to Jesus. Isn�t it?

Melco wrote:

Here are two examples:

Quadratus, to Emperor Hadrian about 125 AD:

"The deeds of our Saviour were always before you, for they were true miracles; those that were healed, those that were raised from the dead, who were seen, not only when healed and when raised, but were always present. They remained living a long time, not only whilst our Lord was on earth, but likewise when He had left the earth. So that some of them have also lived to our own times."

From the following, you can ascertain that at one time, there existed an official census recording Jesus' existence.

Justin Martyr, to Emperor Antoninus Pius about 150 AD:

After referring to Jesus's birth of a virgin in the town of Bethlehem, and that His physical line of descent came through the tribe of Judah and the family of Jesse, Justin wrote, "Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registers of the taxing made under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judea."

O my dear bro Melco, if conjectures are the only source of info on which gospels were written decades after, what follows a century later among emperors etc, is even more obscure. Isn�t it? Your partial response to my questions, especially avoiding the last part of it (seeing of �Lord�), is not understood.

Now, as I look back to your questions, I realize that since you didn�t respond to my comments on your question no 1, I can safely assume that at least this question has, not only been fully answered, but puts the burden on you to prove how present day Christianity can�t be viewed as deviant from the monotheistic preaching of Abraham?

Coming to your comments about as how Christians read the bible when you say �On the contradictions in the bible, yes there are some. Christians don't read the Bible as if it were dictated word for word by God to one person, it took over 1000 years for it to be written, and edited often. It cannot be read uniformly , as it contains many literary styles.�

I must appreciate your candid opinion here, nevertheless it is seldom seen in practice. It is more to do with being speechless/clueless to the logical realities attached with the composition of this book than with any thing else. When it comes to understand NT with the continuation of the message brought by OT, then the phrase �children of God� depicted in OT is taken more literally. Now the phrase �son of God� is taken as �the Son of God�. It is here, my brother that all the trouble starts to begin. Its only here, just on one single letter �captitalized S�, that drastically changes the whole message, and yet you argue that they don�t read �word for word�, beside the fact that all gospels are based upon conjectures, as discussed above. We, as Muslims, have no problem with Christian brothers as we also recognize the human Jesus, a prophet of God, who performed many miracles, rather much more than what canonical gospels tells us. Only trouble is the �capitalization of S�. Think about it.

As far as killing of men of banu Qurayza is concerned, suffice is to say that one can�t judge such decisions by present day treaties among the nations. These treaties have continuously been changed from time to time and from nations to nations. Only ignorant of this change can bring forward such allegations. A closer look at this �Alleged to have aided the forces of Muhammad's enemies in violation of a prior pact, the Qurayza were subsequently isolated and besieged.� would indeed reveal that this tribe not only violated the treaty at a most sensitive time, but also aided the enemy to remove the Muslims, once for all, from the face of the earth. This was treacherous and thus were treated accordingly. Again, mind it, it wasn�t Mohammad who decided this, but by a convert from their own brethren clan based upon their own law. Kindly note the fact highlighted in bold and underlined. I hope this shall suffice for any sane person to realize the difference between fact and propaganda.