Is Islam true?

Thanks bro Melco for your kind response though incomplete and therefore unsatisfactory.

Melco wrote: As I have been teaching Mark's Gospel for 2 years, I can say with certainity there are many references to Jesus' divinity, however, John above all gives it most emphasis.

Bro, that is why I posted from your own Biblical scholars and nothing is from my own side. Do you intend to confront them?

Melco wrote: I was a little lazy and undefined in what I last wrote, because I lost the first two attempts before posting. We do make silly mistakes, exactitudes and truth aren't quite the same.

Niether it is for only believing through blind faith.

Melco wrote: Public revelation ends with New Testament.

What ever suit you, my brother, though you yourself acknowledged that NT took almost 1000 years to canonize in the form that we now have. Despite this, I know several �Christian� denominations who do consider many apostles/saints still under the direct communication with divine Jesus, regulating their lives on day to day basis. Public or private communication is not an issue. The moment people claim to have a visionary visitation of Jesus to them, for whatever reason they may provide to inform, their claim doesn�t remain private anymore. Isn�t it?

Melco wrote: My experience was a private revelation, and it had a private purpose. I did wonder if it was a trick by Satan. I asked many others if they could see it and they couldn't. I was attacked by the devil when I was a child and when it failed (my prayers protected me), another person near became possessed and proceded to say and do as you would expect in these circumstances. The following day (I was at a Summer camp), he asked me to help him and I exorcised him in Christ's name (very  reservededly). I  waited many years for God to send me some consolation to ease my pain, especially for what was said to me.  I feared God's judgement, but Jesus showed me the side of his suffering face to remind me that suffering is a sign of being close to God.

It�s no more a private revelation. Simply because, now you are using it as a tool to impress/convince others, even if your nose skin get changed or not.

Melco wrote: I meant to say in an earlier message, that God the Father (Lord) is unseen, but Christ is the image of the invisible God. I know that doesn't make sense. These aren't different Gods, but "roles" within God. ("roles" isn't quite right, but near enough)

O my dear brother, if you are not clear yourself, kindly give yourself a break. Think logically and rationally. You would also acknowledge this fact that �Trinity� is just a human explanation to numerous inconsistencies present in the NT just to make it appear as having some divine origin. Even the word �Trintiy� itself is alien to NT. Never used by any of the Gospel writers, whosoever they might be. So why would any logical thinker, a person like you, to get stuck with this confusing notion. Leave this notion away, and let us pray together to the same God, the God to whom Jesus also used to pray. Jesus bowed down in his prayers to the God and we should also bow down to pray like him. He came to guide us to the God and we Muslims do revere him same as we revere our Prophet Mohammad; nor more nor less. This is the best course of action that we must all look forward to adopt.

Welcome, Tim, and you are by no means an intrusion.

�If faith requires no proof, why do all religious arguments and religious intellectual struggles require and insist on using materialist evidence to make a point?�

I am not sure that I fully understand the question, but, to my view, the opening premise, that faith requires no proof, might be called into question.  Although the term is at this point somewhat ill-defined, faith, it seems to me, at least a type of it, does not invariably operate in the absence of proof.  Consider, e.g., that Judaism recalls the revelation of the Torah to Moses on Mt. Sinai, an event which it contends was in actuality witnessed by the children of Israel, and early Christians broadcast, at the risk of both life and limb, the resurrection of Jesus.   Islam, for its part, presents an apparently illiterate prophet as having received, or recited, what stands to this day as the definitive work of Arabic Literature.  In short, then, the faithful also inhabit the material world.

�Those who do not believe in material as primary and absolute, resort to it in order to exemplify or justify the existence of something they readily admit cannot be proved.� 

I enjoyed reading Ahmad�s response to this paragraph.   I might add that it is no doubt difficult for Judaism, at this point, and again as an example, to prove that Moses existed and that he received the Torah.  Does memory, myth, legend, etc., count for nothing?     

�If an 'element' which somone believes exists, is not on the Periodic Table of Elements, it is not possible to demonstrate the existence of that new 'element' if that 'element' has not been discovered, but only described by reference to those 'aliments' which have been discovered.  I'm open to persuasion.�  

I don�t know.  This I will say, and despite especially modernist objections to the contrary, I am rather of the opinion that there still exists a relationship between physics and metaphysics and between chemistry and alchemy.  I am not one to disparage the at times keen faculties of the ancients, my forefathers and yours (this is not to suggest that you are one to disparage them either), and I do, I hope, remain open to persuasion as well.

Servetus