Revisiting the Issue of Messengership after Muhammad

[Abdur Rab]

Dear all truthseekers, The seemingly endless debate surrounding the issue of new Messengership in general is not a new one. Brother Edip has directed us to the relevant verses of the Quran (40:28-56), which show us that this issue was very much there among the people after Joseph’s death who contended that a messenger after him would never come (See particularly Verse 40:34). We should be grateful to Brother Edip to come out with a balanced and excellent statement on what is albeit an important issue. Earlier (on April 25) I questioned Brother “Truthseeker” (who initiated this discussion) about his narrow definitions of a messenger and a prophet, and about his claim that some past prophets were not messengers and some messengers were not prophets. The Truthseeker responded to me by saying that he was quoting what he understood as “Quranic definitions” and that he was concerned about rising sectarian divisions among Muslims with new messengers. (These discussions were not published in the forum). According to the Quran, Brother “Truthseeker” was wrong asserting that David was not a messenger. The relevant verses are as follows:   3:183 …Say, "Messengers (rasuls) came to you before me with proof and with what you had said, so why did you kill them if you were truthful?" 3:184 If they reject you, then messengers (rasuls) before you were also rejected. They came with proof and the Psalms (Zabur), and the book of enlightenment. Here the reference of a messenger to the person who brought Zabur is David. Verses 4:163 and 17:55 explicitly confirm that Zabur was sent to David. The expression “messenger of/from God” (rasul al Allah) is used in many places of the Quran, and in a rather broad sense. A messenger or messengers from God came to Mary (19:19), to Zachariah (angels came to him as messengers to give news of his son -3:39), to Abraham (11:69-71), and to Lut’s people (11:70). Therefore whoever carries a message from God to deliver to a person or to a nation is a messenger of God. Edip rightly points out that a messenger’s job is not limited to bringing in a new message; it also can be just to deliver a previously revealed but distorted message. We also should note that God’s signs or messages come not simply through books. Such messages are spread throughout the universe - they are evident throughout creation, history and nature. It is for us to decipher such messages, if we can, to the extent possible. Since we all believe that the Quran has been with us in an undistorted form, we should honor those who have taken enormous pains - some even at the risk of their lives - to emphasize and propagate this message alone. One may be concerned about sectarian divisions with the claiming of new messengership, but such divisions have been there even without such claims – the divisions into Shiites and Sunnis, Kharijites, Mutazilites, four Madhabs and Wahhabis of Sunnis, the Shia Ismailis,  etc. Striving to maintain unity among Muslims is, of course, a mandatory obligation for Muslims who follow the Quran. However, we should also admit that even among us there is no full unanimity in interpreting the Quran. There have been and will always be differences in interpretations on specific issues. We can’t possibly help it. How do you resolve such differences? We should try to resolve them by discussion with open minds and hearts. But some differences will always remain, and we will have to live with them. For one thing, our levels of understanding and knowledge and wisdom differ from person to person and even for the same person at different times. The Quran is a great source of wisdom for us. The deeper we can dig the meaning of particular verses, the deeper is the meaning we can extract from them. That is probably one of the important reasons why the Quran itself repeatedly urges us to ponder the verses. The Quran itself states that meanings of some verses are not evident except to those who are deeply rooted in knowledge. While Edip Yuksel has not touched on this, I think the door of divine revelation or inspiration to human beings after Muhammad also should not be closed. In my earlier response to the “Truthseeker” as mentioned above, I cited Iqbal quoting a Muslim Sufi, and I would like to repeat it here:   “[N]o understanding of the Holy Book is possible until it is actually revealed to the believer just as it was revealed to the Prophet” (From Iqbal’s Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, Lecture VII). Also worth pondering is the following verse of the Quran:   Nay, these are clear revelations (wahy) in the hearts of those who have been endowed with knowledge (29:49). Wahy or divine inspiration has come to even bees (16:68). Why shouldn’t human beings be able to receive divine inspiration at all times? Shouldn’t we strive to develop our receptive capacities in such way that we can reach the stage where we can receive or perceive divine inspiration? Indeed the Quran confirms that angels come to righteous people (should, of course, be righteous enough) in this very world with a message of reassurance about their rewards afterwards (41:30-32):   41:30 Surely, those who confirm, "Our Lord is God," and do right, the angels will descend upon them (and say): "Fear not nor grieve. Rejoice in the good news of the Paradise that you have been promised." 41:31 "We are your allies in this world and in the Hereafter. There you will have everything your souls desire, and in it you will have everything you ask for." 41:32 "A provision from the Forgiving, the Compassionate."   Peace. Abdur Rab Author, Exploring Islam in a New Light Website: www.explorequran.org

[truthse...@gmail.com]

Answer to: Abdur Rab
from: Truthseeker.

Salaam Abdur Rab

Thank you for posting your comments on this issue.
This reaction is for the sake of the unifying approach to stimulate
believers not to divide the Islam into groups, verses 3:105,
30:31-32.
To share the point of view that code 19 has to be appreciated in a non-
sectarian way.

If we would agree on the quranic definitions of this issue then the
discussion could be shortened.
The Quran is perfect, complete and detailed, so we should rely on the
Quran to find the meaning and implications of the concerning words
given by our Creator.

1. About the way of reading verses 40:28-56 following:

We know of only one case were finality of messengership is mentioned,
that was the moment of the departure of the messenger-prophet Joseph.
This was done by the people of Egypt then.
Both the Jewish people and the Meccans were not questioning the
principle of messengership, according to the Quran. But they had
difficulty in accepting the right one in the right way sometimes. The
same is happening nowadays.
Self-proclaimed messengers are followed and obeyed by scores of
misguided believers and thereby setting them as partners next to God
in following these persons in accepting one or more of their ahadeeth
as a source next to the Quran.

Logics dictate that there is a moment that the last human-messenger is
on the earth, a period before the last day arrives, this logic
statement would be contrary with the way you read verse 40:34, that
there would be no end to the stream of new messengers.

For me the last but lasting moment of messengership is the period of
the human messenger Muhammad, his message is protected perfectly by
our Creator and made known over all continents.
So the messengership of Muhammad is not ended, it remains via the
Quran until the last day, God knows best.
Characteristics of people who reject the signs of God are described in
verse 40:34-35, we are not allowed to reject the signs of God, indeed
we should be careful in this matter.
The best way to do this seems to be to follow the Quran alone, to
appreciate code 19 and to avoid sectarian division. Who denies the
signs of verses 3:105 and 30:31-32? I advice the believers to be very
aware of these signs.

The way one reads the Quran and thus the verses 40:28-56 is influenced
by one's frame of reference.
The Quran should be read without accepting any ahadeeth, it is highly
probable that one would not read these verses in a way to
support numerous messengers after Muhammad if one had not accepted the
ahadeeth of some humans about this subject.
The Quran is complete and clear, we are not allowed to use sources
next to the Quran to explain for instance verses that are clearly
referring to the tradition of the sharia-bringing messengers.
The last sharia-bringing messenger was Muhammad, we do not know of a
person that gave after Muhammad a purely oral message concerning the
sharia of Islam, a written message would be impossible, since the
messenger-prophet Muhammad is the seal of the prophets, verse 33:40.

2. Dawud as a messenger-prophet.

Thank you for this finding, according to the verses you mentioned
Dawud was a sharia-bringing messenger too.
As Isa according to verse 3:50, Dawud was a confimer of the Tawrah and
a bringer of some new sharia-rulings in changing Mosaic rules, for
instance: in priesthood, the place of the arc of the covenant,
introducing music in the remembrance of God.
This shows again how perfect and detailed the Quran is, the only
message that people can rely on until the last day.
Another adjustment is that Yusuf was a messenger as well; according to
verse 40:34.

These two findings bring no change in the system of God in sending
some men as messengers, some as prophets and some as messenger-
prophets.
I advice you to accept the quranic definitions of the the -rasul- and -
nabi- and not to follow human made assumptions in this realm.

- A messenger is a bringer of guidance and the religion of truth,
verse 9:33 and 61:9.
- A messenger has to be obeyed as God has to be obeyed, verse 4:80.

These two rulings on messengership give a compelling conclusion that a
messenger has to be obeyed because of the sharia-rulings. In what
other way should a messenger of God be followed and obeyed, as one has
to obey God?
One can not obey and follow a mathematical phenomena for instance.
We only can follow and obey a messenger via his guidance, not via a
sign that comes with the messenger.
Code 19 belongs as a sign still to the messenger-prophet Muhammad
because every word came via the heart of Muhammad to mankind,
also the mathematical structure of the total Quran, that was later
discovered.
Discovery is different from ownership.

A prophet has always a scripture to give to his people, verse 6:89 is
compelling in this.

Accepting the concerning verses we have to say that:
1 .Prophets who were sharia-bringers as well were messengers-prophets.
2 .Messengers without a scripture were not a prophet.
3. Prophets with a guidance but without sharia-rulings were only
prophets.

The Quran is perfect and detailed, so we should accept these
differences between a messenger and a prophet, all the verses are
signs of God, we can not be selective and ignore this difference. If
we believe that the Quran is clear and detailed, then we should accept
the details that are given by our Creator as well.

3. Angels as messengers.

You are right in saying that angels were sent to humans and that they
are mentioned as messengers in the Quran, as far as we can know they
always gave a message to individuals, never they had to be a messenger
for a people in contrast to a human-messenger.
There is no implication for the quranic definition of human-
messengers.
Human-messengers have to be obeyed and followed by the believers as
God has to be obeyed, verse 4:80, they are bringers of the religion of
truth, verse 9:33 and 61:9.
The human-messengers mentioned in the Quran were all sharia-bringers
compared to the men that are only mentioned as prophets. Dawud was a
messenger-prophet compared to the prophet Sulayman. Sulayman did not
change the existing sharia as his father did.

You wrote:
- a.Therefore whoever carries a message from God to deliver to a

person or to a nation is a messenger of God.

- b. We also should note that God’s signs or messages come not simply

through books. Such messages are spread throughout the universe - they
are evident throughout creation, history and nature. It is for us to

decipher such messages, if we can, to the extent possible-
- c. Since we all believe that the Quran has been with us in an

undistorted form, we should honor those who have taken enormous pains
- some even at the risk of their lives - to emphasize and propagate

this message alone.---

a. I ask you to be careful in drawing conclusions about the quranic
word messenger.
Whoever gave a guidance of God, was a messenger or a prophet or a
messenger-prophet.
As far as I know, correct me if this is incorrect: the word -risala-
is not found in the Quran.
The -rasul- gives a guidance, -huda- and the religion of truth.
The prophet only gives a -huda- without sharia-rulings. As Sulayman
did.
He was a great inspirer for the believers to serve God in a loving,
respecting way.
He did not change some sharia-rulings as his father did, as far as we
can know.

To be precise: the Quran blocks any written message containing a
revelation of God, verse 33:40 states unambigiously that Muhammad is
the seal of the prophets.
So there could only be an oral message possible, concerning a
relevation on Islam.
I do not know of any person that had a pure oral message and was
rightfully allowed to change or replace the sharia of the Quran, as a
messenger of God.
If such a person would come, what would be the purpose of the perfect
undistorted Quran on the longer term?
If messengers could interfere with oral messages with the rulings of
the Quran given by the seal of the prophets.
Muhammad being the seal of the prophets means: the Quran is the last
scripture containing a revelation of God to mankind.
Both sharia-bringing and non sharia-bringing scriptures are not
possible anymore, we have to accept that as believers.
This is contrary to the works of probably well intended men like
Bukhari and other ahadeeth collectors and to well intended people who
write for instance appendices next to the Quran, hereby inviting the
people to use human writings as a source next to the Quran, that is a
form of idolworship, -shirk- according to verses: 42:21, 9:31 and
25:43.

b. We should not blend the word message and the word sign, signs can
be found in in nature for instance, the Quran mentions some signs of
nature as -ayaat-. As the Quran has -ayaat-. The Quran is a guidance
and an exclusive source of the sharia as well, because it is brought
by a human-messenger.
The assigment of a human-messenger is to bring a sharia or sharia
change.

c. I agree with you in honoring persons that made the greatest and
most courageous efforts, for the pure Quran. But we should not make
them into
saints or messengers of the covenant. The Quran does not give
permission for this.
The Quran allows to regard some of these people as martyrs, the ones
who gave their life for the sake of Islam.
And others may be regarded as persons deeply rooted in knowledge as
verse 3:7 has stated. A great prediction of the Quran.

I ask you to rank the people you regard as people with knowledge of
the multiple-meaning verses as people who are deeply rooted in
knowledge,
as for instance Rashad Khalifa was, concerning several verses.
We should not make them messengers of God, if God does not mention
them as such.
I advise you to be aware of the fact that human-messengers have to be
followed and obeyed as one has to obey God, verse 4:80.
So to see a man as a messenger is creates a great responsibility.
This is not just a matter of word-games done by interested people.
People are prone in needing idols in obeying and following them as a
source next to the Quran.
As the history around Rashad and other self-proclaimed messengers has
shown.
It belongs to the promise of Iblis to take the believers from the
right path.
Iblis might be successful here in very subtle ways.
We should make an effort in protecting people against this
misguidance.

You wrote:
- a.One may be concerned about sectarian divisions with the claiming

of new messengership, but such divisions have been there even without
such claims – the divisions into Shiites and Sunnis, Kharijites,
Mutazilites, four Madhabs and Wahhabis of Sunnis, the Shia Ismailis,
etc.

- b.Striving to maintain unity among Muslims is, of course, a
mandatory obligation for Muslims who follow the Quran.---

a. I have convidence in you that you do not see these other sects
within Islam as a pretext for endorsing the sectarian approach of
Islam, there is not a reason to be apologetic about this issue.
We should not make severe mistakes in creating extra chaos in the
ummah by saying that there are messengers sent to every nation every
period of time.
This a serious source of discrimination, pain, uncertainty (about who
to obey) and even of violence.
It is full of hardship to live in Iran as a member of the Bahai-group.

b. These are words straight from the heart, I advice you to reflect on
what is the best way is to achieve this unity among muslims:

1. By promoting sects and cults in Islam by accepting the human-made
assumption that the Divinely protected Quran is not enough for mankind
and that we need an arbitrary system of local messengers. What about
the poor believers who would have no protection against fake-
messengers because it is hard not to obey and follow a charismatic
person if he claims to be one.
What if one misses a "real" one, who could take this risk? As soon a
fake-messenger mentions the word hell: the people will follow in their
thousands. In reality they probably would be performing -shirk- then
because they set an idol next to the Quran as a source for the
religion.
God is the Decider.
Or:
2. By promoting the message of the Quran, and stating that this is the
final message to mankind concerning the religion. The message of
Muhammad, our messenger of the covenant, is here to stay until the
last day, since the Quran is the scripture of the seal of the
prophets.
Who would need an extra oral message? Who would not be satisfied with
the perfect, by God protected, Quran?
Why is the Quran protected so well until nowadays, if there would be
numerous messenger in all the nations always after the departure of
Muhammad?

I do not see a third way, may be you do.

You wrote:
- a. I cited Iqbal quoting a Muslim Sufi, and I would like to repeat
it here: “No understanding of the Holy Book is possible until it is

actually revealed to
the believer just as it was revealed to the Prophet” (From Iqbal’s

Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, Lecture VII). ---

Here we might come to the core of the problem:

The system of God, how to develop as muslims, is prescribed in the
Quran clearly.
This is an emancipating democratic system.
For instance these three verses deal with this issue:

- 42:38: the mutual consultation -shoora- is prescribed, so our
Creator has prescribed for the believers a universal democratic system
of developing
Islam on the several levels.

- 3:79: believers have to study the Quran and share their knowledge.

- 42:21: warns against following people instead of following the
Quran.

The point of view of the quoted muslim sufi is a sectarian one.
The sufi-sheiks in general are famous because of their saint-centered
religious concepts instead of the God-centered concept of the Quran.
Many sufi-sheiks even force/convince their followers to obey the
sheikh as if he is the messenger of God and thereby the followers have
to obey the sheikh, as if he has the authority of God, inappropriate
things can happen then.
In general, I warn you for sufism, it appears at first sight as a
loving, caring form of islamic brotherhood under the guard of the "-
maulana-".
But in depth it is a system of idolworship in more than one way.
Only God is -Maulana-, our Protector.
As you surely know the different sufi-groups have all their sets of
ahadeeth, sometimes to defend their particular religious thoughts and
practices.
I do not know of any sufi-sheikh that told his followers that the
Quran only is to be followed, because with this he would not have his
status of sheikh anymore.
All the believers should study and share the wisdom of the Quran, not
only an "elite" of sheikhs.
All sufi-sheikhs, as all people, will be judged according to their
believes and deeds.
I hope that they read the Quran carefully and will act upon it and
will dissolve all ummah-splitting groups, -tariqa's-.
And will advice their former followers that they should forget about
the ahadeeth of the sheikhs and of others.

The consequences of Iqbal's point of view is that there would be a
form of Islam that is dependent on a sort of extra revelation.
- Only a person with a kind of revelation as is given to Muhammad
could understand the Quran.- according to your quotation.
This sentence is contrary to the words and the message of the Quran,
because it suggests that the Quran would not be complete and clear.

The words of God are different:

54:17: And we have indeed made the Quran easy to understand and to
remember ... -

6:114: Shall I then seek a judge other than Allah? And He it is Who
has revealed to you the Book made plain; and those whom We have given
the Book know that it is revealed by your Lord with truth, therefore
you should not be of the disputers.-

22:78: You shall strive for the cause of GOD as you should strive for
His cause. He has chosen you and has placed no hardship on you in
practising your religion, the religion of your father Abraham ...-

These three verses are compelling, the Quran is easy to understand for
the sincere believers.
We should not make ourselves dependend on coming mehdi's, sufi-sheiks
or self-proclaimed messengers, to discover what is the meaning of the
Quran.
This leads to stagnation only, as seen in most countries who call
themselves islamic, the acceptance of mainly man-made rulings are
leading for instance towards discrimation of women and other shameful
practices.
All the believers should study and share their wisdom and consult
eachother, based on the Quran.
That is the Divinely prescibed system of developing Islam in practice.
Totally different from the truly misguiding words from the, in general
very respectable, person that you quoted.

You wrote:
- Also worth pondering is the following verse of the Quran:

Nay, these are clear revelations (wahy) in the hearts of those who
have been endowed with knowledge (29:49).
Wahy or divine inspiration has come to even bees (16:68). Why
shouldn’t human beings be able to receive divine inspiration at all
times?
Shouldn’t we strive to develop our receptive capacities in such way
that we can reach the stage where we can receive or perceive divine

inspiration? ---

I am sorry to say, but you have read this verse out of context.
The context is easy to see if you read verses 29:46-47.
Those verses refer to the people of the book, the Jewish- and
christian people.
Verse 29:48-49 clearly speak of the signs of the Quran, they are given
to mankind via the heart of Muhammad, as the previous scriptures were
given via the hearts of the previous prophets.
Verse 29:49 speaks about -ayaat- in the heart of the prophet, not
about a general inspiration, possible to bees and people in general,
it is just about prophethood in this verse and receiving the verses,
the -ayaat- of a holy scripture.

I advise you to reflect on the next verses:

3:105: Do not be like those who became divided and disputed, despite
the clear proofs that were given to them.
For these have incurred a terrible retribution.-

30:31-32: You shall submit to Him, reverence Him, observe the salat,
and whatever you do, do not ever fall into idol worship.
Like those who divide their religion into sects; each party rejoicing
with what they have.-

When I read these verses, years ago, I was startled, that so many
people are in a group within Islam, knowingly and sometimes
unknowingly.
Your way of endorsing the view of the acceptance of men as messengers
after Muhammad, has surely proven to lead to extra groups, sects and
cults within Islam.
Again I ask you, are you a part of the problem of the existence of
sects within Islam? Or will you help yourself and may be other
believers by avoiding being divided into groups, by accepting their
own "messenger".
That man should then be obeyed as God has to be obeyed and seeing this
person as a source of religion next to the Quran, thereby next to God.
You even can help misguided people in avoiding that they claim to be a
messenger of God.
How? Just by accepting verses 3:105 and 30:31-32 amongst many other
verses.
We have only to study and share the wisdom of the Quran. This is how
we can be muslims in the best quranic sense. People who are in a group
within Islam are described as -mushirks-, idolworshippers, by our
Creator.
What about the people then who stimulate this sectarianism, in
endorsing and publishing the ideas about the acceptance of messengers
after Muhammad?
It seems to be better to avoid this qualification.

If you want to pay respect to some wise people, I advice you not to
rank them higher as someone deeply rooted in knowledge, this is
allowed according to verse 3:7. This is a part of the system
prescribed by God.

I advice you to reflect on this: What do you have to lose in embracing
the unifying approach of Islam and taking your soul out of the
possible dangerzone of a severe punishment and out of possible
idolatry, verses 3:105 and 30:31-32, in your possible contribution to
the division of Islam?
Why should you take this risk? For whom? No self-proclaimed messenger
needs your confirmation.
His mistake would at least affect one person less, making this mistake
probably a bit smaller.
God is the Knower.
The Quran is a Divine warning, verse 50:45.
Who needs another warner then?

I hope that you will find the guidance of the Quran, inspiration and
wisdom in this probable decisive matter.

Take care and salaam,

Truthseeker.


Hereunder an improved list of messengers, prophets and messenger-
prophets.
The conclusion remains the same.
With thanks to Abdur Rahman for his findings.

A study of the list of men that are named by the Quran as prophet
(nabi) or messenger (rasul) or as messenger-prophet leads to a clear
conclusion:

- some messengers were not prophets
- most messengers were prophets as well
- some prophets were not messengers

- Idris - prophet 19:56 - not a messenger
- Nuh - prophet 6:89 - messenger 26:107
- Hud - not a prophet - messenger 26:125
- Saleh - not a prophet - messenger 26:143
- Ibrahim - prophet 19:41- messenger 9:70
- Lut - prophet 6:89 - messenger 26:162
- Isma'il - prophet 19:54 - messenger 19:54
- Ish'aq - prophet 19:49 - not a messenger
- Yaqub - prophet 19:49 - not a messenger
- Yusuf - prophet 6:89 - messenger 40:34
- Ayyub - prophet 6:89 - not a messenger
- Shu'ayb - not a prophet - messenger 26:178
- Musa - prophet 19:51- messenger 19:51
- Harun - prophet 19:53 - not a messenger
- Dawud - prophet 6:89 - messenger 3:184
- Sulayman - prophet 6:89 - not a messenger
- Ilyas - prophet 6:89 - messenger 37:123
- al-Yasa - prophet 6:89- not a messenger
- Yunus - prophet 6:89 - messenger 37:139
- Zakariyya - prophet 6:89 - not a messenger
- Yahya - prophet 3:39 - not a messenger
- Isa - prophet 19:30 - messenger 4:171
- Muhammad - prophet 33:40 - messenger 33:40

- Adam, Dhul-l-Kifl and Luqman are not mentioned as a prophet or a
messenger in the Quran.

In total the Quran mentions:
- 9 men as a prophet and not as a messenger
- 11men as a messenger and a prophet
- 3 men as a messenger and not as a prophet

- 20 men as a prophet
- 14 men as a messenger

It seems to be a justified conclusion that not all the prophets are
messengers as well, if the Quran mentions 12 men as a messenger and 20
men as a prophet.
So the saying: "every prophet is a messenger but not every messenger
is a prophet" is clearly wrong.
The relevant verses of the Quran, as seen above, also prove that the
sunni-saying: "every messenger is a prophet" is wrong, because Hud,
Saleh and Shu'ayb are only mentioned as messengers, not as prophets.

[Mehdi]

Dear Thruthseeker,

After all what had been said regarding this subject, I have only one
last thing to tell you:
” Either we or you are guided, or are clearly astray. You will not
be asked about our crimes, nor will we be asked for
what you do. Our Lord will gather us together then He will judge
between us with truth. He is the Judge, the
Knowledgeable, the Gracious; we acknowledge Him, and we put our
trust in Him. You will come to find out who is
clearly astray” (from 34:24-26 and 67:29)

Perhaps you will take heed.

Peace,
Mehdi

[truthse...@gmail.com]

To: Mehdi
From: Truthseeker

Salaam Mehdi,

Because I intend to take heed in finding the right way of Islam this
discussion has been started, to test and find the quranic arguments
for an unifying Islam.
I consider it as urgent to discuss the topic; Appreciating code 19 in
a non-sectarian way.

It is interesting that you quote verses 34:24-26, they are referring
to the difference between the idolworshippers and the monotheists, as
you can see in verse 34:22 and 34:27.
Both groups are not responsible for eachother.

I do not see the difference between you and me, as between an
idolworshipper and a monotheist.
So I wonder why you have chosen this verse to react to the quranic
arguments that I gave.

During our lifetime we have to judge ourselves according to the
standards of the Quran and sometimes we have to ask eachother to do
the same, as a matter of -shoora-.

The issue of endorsing sectarian division within Islam as done by
promoting the idea of messengers after Muhammad is linked to
idolworship by the Quran.
I hope the Grace of God will be with all the believers, but the Quran
gives a great warning to us concerning this issue in the verses
30:31-32.
Why should one take this risk?

30:31 You shall submit to Him, reverence Him, observe the contact
prayers (salat), and - whatever you do - do not ever fall into idol
worship.
30:32 (Do not fall in idol worship) like those who divide their
religion into sects; each party rejoicing with what they have.---

I do not hope that you have run out of quranic arguments, but I looks
this way at the moment.
Your answer shows that you want to wait and see; I prefer the mutual
consultation -shoora- (42:38) as long there are quranic arguments to
reflect on. We should avoid stagnation in important issues. The Quran
is our source of teaching and warning.

We do not know how long it takes to the last day, it is truly
worthwhile to resolve this issue in a quran-based manner as long we
are able to during this life.
For ourselves and may be for others as well.
Hopefully the quran-alone movement will grow and the best condition
for this seems to be that there is no sectarian division in this
movement.
The more united we are, the better defense we have against the sects
within Islam.
How can we tell others that they belong to a group within Islam, as
the sunni and shia, when within the quran-alone movement there are
groups that are divided by accepting their own messengers after the
messenger-prophet Muhammad?

From your reaction to me I see how easy people can draw back into
their own group; actually we still are in the same group, the ummah of
Islam.
People are prone to make groups within Islam to be in their comfort-
zone of old or modern traditions, as you know this formation of groups
is forbidden by the Quran in several verses.
We have a common interest to find the clearest quranic arguments,
since the Quran is complete, clear and perfect this should be
achievable, Godwilling.

I asked you in my last answer to you some very clear questions
concerning this issue.
I advice you not to be in denial about these issues.
If you are not willing or able to answer them for now, I hope you will
take time to reflect on these issues and will adress them at the right
moment.

Hereunder are some questions about this issue, may be it is good for
the readers to reflect on them,

Question 1
Why does the Quran concerning the period after Muhammad, only refer to
a creature out of the earth -dabbatan mina el ardi-, the computer,
that will speak to the people who are not certain about the signs, the
verses -ayaat- of the Quran, and does the Quran not refer to
messengers to all nations after Muhammad who would do this as well? -
verse 27:82.

Question 2
Are you willing to accept the quranic definitions of a messenger and
of a prophet?
Verses: 9:33 and 4:80 - a messenger is sent with the guidance and the
religion of truth and who obeys the messenger obeys God.
This can only refer to a sharia-bringer.
Verse: 6:89 - the prophets are sent with a guidance in the form of a
scripture.
All the prophets have a Divinely inspired scripture with them.

Question 3
Can you give me the name of one or more messengers after Muhammad who
brought a perfection of the quranic sharia?
This should have been done via a purely oral message, since Muhammad
is the seal of the prophets, so there can not be new prophetic
scriptures anywhere in the world. - verse 33:40.

Question 4
Would a system based on numerous messengers after Muhammad, that have
to be obeyed, as God has to be obeyed, not be contrary to the
democratic and emancipating system as prescribed in the Quran in the
verses 42:38 and 3:79, prescribing mutual consultation and the study
and sharing of the wisdom of the Quran?
The Quran has no contradictions - verse 4:82.

Question 5
How did the discoverer of code 19 confirm the Tawra, the Zabur and
Ingeel for instance, since he claimed to be the messenger of the
covenant, confirming the scriptures of the previous prophets?

Question 6
How is it possible to deny rightfully that Muhammad was the messenger
of the covenant of verse 3:81, while the verses: 3:84, 2:41, 2:91,
2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 state the confirming role of the messenger
Muhammad unambigiously?

Question 7
How can anyone claim that the Quran needs extra confirmation after the
departure of Muhammad, while the Creator declares the Quran confirmed
as Divine in verses 4:82 and 98:1-3?
Code 19 is a great unique phenomena but is never mentioned as a
confirmation -musaddiq- by the Quran, this is a man-made assumption.

Question 8
How can you explain if someone is supposed to be the messenger of the
covenant and thereby should have been supported by all the prophets,
that he missed many important issues of the sharia, that were already
clearly described in the Quran, while messengership is about the
perfection of the sharia?

Question 9
Why do you adhere to the man-made hadeeth that all messengers are
prophets, while the Quran mentions 20 men as a messenger and 14 men as
a prophet?
Does the Quran need correction in this, in blending the difference
between a messenger and a prophet?
Is the Quran not perfect and complete?

Question 10
How do you know that the discoverer of code 19 has to be regarded as a
messenger, when you just have the Quran as source for the religion?
Nobody could get to know and accept this, without accepting human-made
assumptions, ahadeeth, as a source next to the Quran.
Is the Quran really complete and clear for you in this issue?
The fact that calculations can point to the name of the discoverer
does not mean at all that he has to be regarded as a messenger.
These calculations can point to the omniscience of the Creator, the
persons deeply rooted in knowledge are perfectly predicted by the
Quran, verse 3:7.

Question 11
What would you have to lose in regarding for instance Rashad Khalifa
as a person deeply rooted in knowledge, according to verse 3:7? As he
explained verse 74:30 in the best manner.
For this way of honoring some persons the Quran gives clear
permission, but the Quran warns against dividing the ummah into
groups, as can be done via the acceptance of self-proclaimed
messengers that would have to be followed and obeyed.

Question 12
Has the acceptance of men as messengers after Muhammad led to further
sectarian division of the Islam?

Question 13
Would the absence of groups (with their own messenger-ideas) within
the Quran-alone movement not be better for the spreading of the
message of the Quran?

Question 14
How important is it in regard to verses 3:105 and 30:31-32 for
yourself and for others, to get out of this probable danger-zone for
the soul, of endorsing the division of the Islam into groups, by
accepting and promoting the possibility of messengership of men after
Muhammad?

Salaam and take care,
Truthseeker.

[Khalil]

Dear Truthseeker,

Let us just stick to and follow 2:177.
Let us just listen to the guy in 40:28 and leave the messenger
alone.If he was lying, his lie will be upon him. No one carries the
burden of another in the Hereafter.
Let us not worry too much about division in "ummah". Guidance is God's
alone. Judgment is also His alone.
Let us stop beating around the bush back and forth playing jigsaw
puzzles with the Qur'an.
Let us not make decisions for God. He picks and sends messengers from
among His creation whether human, jin, angel or any other creature as
He Wills.
Let us ask God to guide us in the right path in His light and increase
us our knowledge and guidance.

With Salaam,
Khalil.

[9TEEN.ORG]

All The Guidence is all there it is practical andf very plain to see
there will be many messengers after the phrothet Muhamand and any one
that doubts this should go back and read the quran ad thoughourly,
because it is very obvious and easy to understand! the firts vers i
would point to is Surah 3: Verse 81.

[truthse...@gmail.com]

From: Truthseeker
To: 9teen.org

Salaam brother/sister in Islam

There can be found at least four quranic reasons why Muhammad, our
messenger-prophet is the messenger of the covenant of verse 3:81 and
not anyone else.

1.
Verse 3:84 clearly states that Muhammad is the messenger of the
covenant, according to this verse Muhammad and his followers, have to
say that they believe in the mentioned messengers and the prophets and
that they make no difference between the prophets.
Verse 2:41, 2:91, 2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 state that the Quran confirms
previous scriptures. Mind the Arabic word - musaddiq - , used in verse
3:81 and the mentioned verses, another quranic proof of Muhammad being
the messenger of the covenant.
The word -musaddiq- is absent in the verses around code 19.
So Muhammad is the messenger of the covenant of 3:81 not one of the
supporting prophets.
Muhammad is both adressed as a messenger and a prophet in the Quran.

2.
Verse 3:81 mentions that the messenger will confirm the scriptures
that are with the prophets of this covenant. Code 19 refers to the
Quran alone, not to the scriptures of the previous prophets who were
part of the covenant.
So how can Rashad Khalifa be the messenger of the covenant?

3.
It is a really wrong assumption that the Quran needs confirmation by
anyone after the departure of Muhammad.
Our Creator has stated in verse 4:82 that the absence of
contradictions in the Quran is the proof of its Divine origine.
And also verses 98:1-3 state that the Quran itself is a clear proof.
So it would be rather obstinate to say that the Quran was confirmed
centuries later, when God already declared the Quran itself a proven
Divine sign.
God does not have shortage of words, as you know of course.
Code 19 is a great phenomena but is not called a confirmation by it's
Creator, as said above, we can not find the Arabic word -musaddiq-
related to the code in the Quran, this is only "possible" via an abuse
of verse 3:81.
Muhammad is the messenger of the covenant of 3:81 since the word -
musaddiq- is used in the verses 2:41, 2:91, 2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48, a
furhter confirmation that Muhammad is the confirmer of the previous
scriptures of the prophets, who had to support the messenger Muhammad
according to verse 3:81.

4.
The covenant of verse 3:187 relates to the assigment of the prophets,
not to hide their scriptures for their people. This covenant should
not be ignored in this issue of messengership.
Verse 3:81 speaks of prophets who are given a book, that is consistent
with the ones who where given a book mentioned in 3:187.
The difference is, this covenant of 3:187 includes Muhammad as a
prophet and 3:81 includes Muhammad as the confirming messenger.
Muhammad has kept his promise of spreading the scripture of Islam in
the best way, since his message can be known in all continents.
I hope that you see that I try to rely only on quranic arguments, not
on man-made assumptions.
Verse 3:81 has been abused by several self-procaimed messengers,
hereby creating extra division, chaos and uncertainty within the -
ummah-.
I think you do not like that either, so I advice you to read the Quran
carefully, within the unifying context, I ask you not to be among the
people who divide the Islam into groups, take care of verse 3:105 and
verses 30:31-32.
A severe punishment and the qualification of idolatry can be a
consequence of the contribution to the division the Islam into
groups.
As you know there are several Khalifite groups.
I advice you to accept verse 3:7 and then accept Rashad Khalifa as
someone deeply rooted in knowledge, he explained several verses with
multiple-meaning in the best manner, for instance over It is nineteen,
verse 74:30.
For this the Quran gives clear permission, not for dividing the Islam
by following several self-proclaimed messengers.

Can you answer me next question?

Can you give me the name of one or more messengers after Muhammad who
brought a perfection of the quranic sharia?
This should have been done via a purely oral message, since Muhammad
is the seal of the prophets, so there can not be new prophetic
scriptures anywhere in the world. - verse 33:40.

What are your answers to these questions?

Question 1
Why does the Quran concerning the period after Muhammad, only refer to
a creature out of the earth -dabbatan mina el ardi-, the computer,
that will speak to the people who are not certain about the signs, the
verses -ayaat- of the Quran, and does the Quran not refer to
messengers to all nations after Muhammad who would do this as well? -
verse 27:82.

Question 2
Are you willing to accept the quranic definitions of a messenger and
of a prophet?
Verses: 9:33 and 4:80 - a messenger is sent with the guidance and the
religion of truth and who obeys the messenger obeys God.
This can only refer to a sharia-bringer.
Verse: 6:89 - the prophets are sent with a guidance in the form of a
scripture.
All the prophets have a Divinely inspired scripture with them.

Question 3

Would a system based on numerous messengers after Muhammad, that have
to be obeyed, as God has to be obeyed, not be contrary to the
democratic and emancipating system as prescribed in the Quran in the
verses 42:38 and 3:79, prescribing mutual consultation and the study
and sharing of the wisdom of the Quran?
The Quran has no contradictions - verse 4:82.

Question 4

How did the discoverer of code 19 confirm the Tawra, the Zabur and
Ingeel for instance, since he claimed to be the messenger of the
covenant, confirming the scriptures of the previous prophets?

Question 5

How is it possible to deny rightfully that Muhammad was the messenger
of the covenant of verse 3:81, while the verses: 3:84, 2:41, 2:91,
2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 state the confirming role of the messenger
Muhammad unambigiously?

Question 6

How can anyone claim that the Quran needs extra confirmation after the
departure of Muhammad, while the Creator declares the Quran confirmed
as Divine in verses 4:82 and 98:1-3?
Code 19 is a great unique phenomena but is never mentioned as a
confirmation -musaddiq- by the Quran, this is a man-made assumption.

Question 7

How can you explain if someone is supposed to be the messenger of the
covenant and thereby should have been supported by all the prophets,
that he missed many important issues of the sharia, that were already
clearly described in the Quran, while messengership is about the
perfection of the sharia?

Question 8
Why do you, may be, accept the man-made hadeeth that all messengers
are prophets, while the Quran mentions 14 men as a messenger and 20

men as a prophet?
Does the Quran need correction in this, in blending the difference
between a messenger and a prophet?
Is the Quran not perfect and complete?

Question 9

How do you know that the discoverer of code 19 has to be regarded as a
messenger, when you just have the Quran as source for the religion?
Nobody could get to know and accept this, without accepting human-made
assumptions, ahadeeth, as a source next to the Quran.
Is the Quran really complete and clear for you in this issue?
The fact that calculations can point to the name of the discoverer
does not mean at all that he has to be regarded as a messenger.
These calculations can point to the omniscience of the Creator, the
persons deeply rooted in knowledge are perfectly predicted by the
Quran, verse 3:7.

Question 10

What would you have to lose in regarding for instance Rashad Khalifa
as a person deeply rooted in knowledge, according to verse 3:7? As he
explained verse 74:30 in the best manner.
For this way of honoring some persons the Quran gives clear
permission, but the Quran warns against dividing the ummah into
groups, as can be done via the acceptance of self-proclaimed
messengers that would have to be followed and obeyed.

Question 11

Has the acceptance of men as messengers after Muhammad led to further
sectarian division of the Islam?

Question 12

Would the absence of groups (with their own messenger-ideas) within
the Quran-alone movement not be better for the spreading of the
message of the Quran?

Question 13

How important is it in regard to verses 3:105 and 30:31-32 for
yourself and for others, to get out of this probable danger-zone for
the soul, of endorsing the division of the Islam into groups, by
accepting and promoting the possibility of messengership of men after
Muhammad?

Who is the person you follow and obey nowadays, as God has to be
obeyed., - verse 4:80.
The best way for followers of the Quran is, to obey God in obeying the
messenger Muhammad via the Quran.
I ask you to reflect on this; what do you have to lose in stopping the
contribution to the division of Islam, and what could you win in
this?

You still can appreciate code 19 and honor Rashad Khalifa in the best
manner, without sectarian division.

Take care and salaam,
Truthseeker.

[truthse...@gmail.com]

to: Khalil
from: Truthseeker

Salaam dear Khalil,
thank you for your reaction.

You have quoted a verse that is very essential.
But this verse does not mean that we can have a "wait and see"-
attitude in the development of Islam.
It has been long enough that the woman-discriminaters, the supporters
of dictatorship and the sectarians have been the "leaders" of the -
ummah-.
We are hopefully turning to a new era in which the tolerant,
democratic way of Islam is acknowlegded by the believers, based on the
Quran.
The next verses make this system prescribed by our Creator clear :

42:38 states - the mutual consultation (shoora) is prescribed, so our

Creator has prescribed for the believers a universal democratic system

for the development of the several levels of Islam.-

3:79 states - believers have to study the Quran and share their
knowledge.-

42:21 gives - a warning against following people instead of following
the Quran.-

We can have the guidance of God in following His guidance, the perfect
and detailed Quran.

May be the believers will be on earth for millenia, so it is
worthwhile to contribute to a pure form of Islam that is 100 percent
Quran-based.
A democratic Islam based on mutual consultation is the way that is
prescribed for us - verse 42:38, and not to wait for mehdi's, super-
sheikhs, new "messengers" and new "messengers of the covenant".
The last two of the list would have to be obeyed, as if God has to be
obeyed; in the next centuries there would be many dictatorships
possible because they would claim to represent or to be a "messenger"
of God.
So I hope you are aware of the possible social implications of your
"wait and see"-attitude.
We as believers have to try to take an active role in building a non-
sectarian Islam that is according to the Quran.
The following verse can endorse this:

33:23 Of the believers are men who are true to the covenant which
they made with Allah: so of them is he who accomplished his vow, and
of them is he who yet waits, and they have not changed in the least
---

The context of this verse is a battle, we are unfortunately still in a
battle of idea's about the rigth way of Islam.
We can not say that we trust in God and do nothing, we have to trust
in God and act, to unify first the people who accept the Quran in the
purest way, from there a growth may be more possible of a non-
sectarian way of Islam.
Many sunni's or other sectarians see our weak point, because the Quran-
alone movement is also divided into sectarian groups.

The Quran is perfect and detailed, we have to study very carefully
what the meaning of some words are because the implications can be
very big.
The quranic prescriptions for, for instance the salaat are very
precise and have to be read very carefully, then only we can read that
we have to pray three times a day.
You name it playing jigsaw-puzzle, may be you can try to imagine what
the difference could be between a unified Islam and an form of Islam
that is divided, in eachother disrespecting, groups.
The next verses show clearly that it is important for our souls to
have this detailed discussion.

3:105 Do not be like those who became divided and disputed, despite
the clear proofs that were given to them. For these have incurred a
terrible retribution.-

30:31-32 You shall submit to Him, reverence Him, observe the Contact
Prayers (Salat), and - whatever you do - do not ever fall into idol
worship.
(Do not fall in idol worship,) like those who divide their religion

into sects; each party rejoicing with what they have.-

Again; discrimination, seperation of families, bloodshed and chaos
have been a result of the sectarian approach, also via accepting
messengers after Muhammad.
For the future it is very important to accept the unifying way of
Islam in accepting the Quran as our guidance and thereby Muhammad as
our true messenger.
Or would you like to replace him by another man to follow and obey as
if God has to be obeyed? - verse 4:80.

I invite you to reflect on the next questions:

Question 1
What is the name of the messenger that you do follow and obey
nowadays, in the same way as you have to obey God? - verse 4:80.

Question 2

Can you give me the name of one or more messengers after Muhammad who

brought a perfection of the quranic sharia, speaking in the name of
God?

This should have been done via a purely oral message, since Muhammad
is the seal of the prophets, so there can not be new prophetic
scriptures anywhere in the world. - verse 33:40.

Question 3

Are you willing to accept the quranic definitions of a messenger and
of a prophet?

Verses 9:33 and 4:80 state - a messenger is sent with the guidance and

the religion of truth and who obeys the messenger obeys God.
This can only refer to a sharia-bringer.

Verse 6:89 states - the prophets are sent with a guidance in the form
of a scripture.
Only the prophets have a Divinely inspired scripture with them.

Question 4
Why does the Quran, concerning the period after Muhammad, only refer

to a creature out of the earth -dabbatan mina el ardi-, the computer

that will speak to the people who are not certain about the signs, the

verses -ayaat- of the Quran; and does the Quran not refer to

messengers to all nations after Muhammad who would do this as well? -
verse 27:82.

Question 5
Would a system based on numerous messengers after Muhammad, that would

have to be obeyed, as God has to be obeyed, not be contrary to the
democratic and emancipating system as prescribed in the Quran in the
verses 42:38 and 3:79, prescribing mutual consultation and the study
and sharing of the wisdom of the Quran?
The Quran has no contradictions - verse 4:82.

Question 6

How did the discoverer of code 19 confirm the Tawra, the Zabur and
Ingeel for instance, since he claimed to be the messenger of the

covenant, confirming the scriptures of the previous prophets - verse
3:81?

Question 7

How is it possible to deny rightfully that Muhammad was the messenger
of the covenant of verse 3:81, while the verses: 3:84, 2:41, 2:91,
2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 state the confirming role of the messenger
Muhammad unambigiously?

Question 8

How can anyone claim that the Quran needs extra confirmation after the
departure of Muhammad, while the Creator declares the Quran confirmed
as Divine in verses 4:82 and 98:1-3?
Code 19 is a great unique phenomena but is never mentioned as a
confirmation -musaddiq- by the Quran, this is a man-made assumption.

Question 9
How it possible that, if someone is supposed to be the messenger of

the covenant and thereby should have been supported by all the

prophets, he missed many important issues of the sharia, that were
already clearly described in the Quran; while messengership is about

the perfection of the sharia?

Question 10
Do you adhere to the man-made hadeeth that all messengers are
prophets, while the perfect and detailed Quran mentions 14 men as a
messenger and 20 men as a prophet?

Does the Quran need correction in this, in blending the difference
between a messenger and a prophet?

Is the Quran not perfect and detailed?

Question 11
How can a believer know that the discoverer of code 19 has to be
regarded as a messenger, when just the Quran is the authoritative

source for the religion?
Nobody could get to know and accept this, without accepting human-made
assumptions, ahadeeth, as a source next to the Quran.

Is the Quran really complete and clear in this issue?
The issue that calculations can point to the name of the discoverer

does not mean at all that he has to be regarded as a messenger.

These calculations can point to the omniscience of the Creator; the

persons deeply rooted in knowledge are perfectly predicted by the
Quran, verse 3:7.

Question 12
What would a believer have to lose in regarding for instance Rashad
Khalifa not as the messenger of the covenant, but as a person deeply

rooted in knowledge, according to verse 3:7?
As he explained verse 74:30 in the best manner.
For this way of honoring some persons the Quran gives clear

permission, but the Quran warns against dividing the -ummah- into

groups, as can be done via the acceptance of self-proclaimed

messengers that would have to be followed and obeyed, by the groups
that would accept and follow him.

Question 13

Has the acceptance of men as messengers after Muhammad led to further
sectarian division of the Islam?

Question 14

Would the absence of groups (with their own messenger-ideas) within
the Quran-alone movement not be better for the spreading of the
message of the Quran?

Question 15
How important is it in regard to verses 3:105 and 30:31-32 for a
believer, to get out of this probable danger-zone for the soul, of

endorsing the division of the Islam into groups, by accepting and
promoting the possibility of messengership of men after Muhammad?

Take care and salaam,

Truthseeker.

[Khalil]

Salaam, Dear Truthseeker.

“Wait and see attitude” was not what I conveyed. On the contrary, I
mentioned verse 2:177, because God outlines all the practical Islamic
duties of a true Muslim in this very verse. When I mentioned the
guidance is God’s only, I meant that if we follow what is lined up in
2:177, God takes care of the rest because we have announced that we
have heard and we have obeyed, The Covenant, 5:7. Remember?

Now, if someone has a larger than life idealistic and unrealistic,
empty slogan-based impractical verbal agenda on mind thinking God Has
picked him to save the “ummah”, then that’s something else! These
sorts of “saviors” are in abundance, dime a dozen.

Following are my answers to some of your questions. 1st question:
Presently, I do not follow or obey any messenger. They are all dead. I
do not follow the dead. I do believe in, worship and obey The Ever
Living, Ever Lasting God, Allah, Sobhaanahoo Wa Ta’alaa. We are the
inheritors of The Qur’an and nothing but The Qur’an Alone for our
guidance, 35:31,32. The verse 4:80 is for those who lived at the same
time with the prophet. God, time and time again in The Qur’an ordered
the prophet himself, to follow The Qur’an only.

2nd question:
A messenger vs. a prophet just confirms the existing scriptures and
does not bring any new scripture. His mission is mainly to purify the
religion God, i.e., Islam, which has been polluted by false man made
interpolations.
I believe the late Rashad Khalifa was one of those messengers. He,
through undeniable mathematical proof, purified The Qur’an by exposing
two verses that had been interpolated to the end of chapter nine. He
also removed the polytheistic pollutions within our daily contact
prayers. He purified our way of performing ablution. He made
correction to the number of months we can perform Hajj according to
The Qur’an. Most importantly he is the discoverer of the mathematical
structure of The Qur’an.

3rd question:
Like I said, we are not to follow the dead messengers, but the
message.
As for the second part, I understand from The Qur’an that every
prophet is also a messenger, but not necessarily the other way around.

4th question:
I believe God Has sent tens of thousands of messengers to the people
all over the world in the past, but the names of just a few has been
mentioned through the scriptures.
Regarding the creature you have mentioned, I believe the subject is
among the MUTASHAABIHAAT/ allegorical and according to 3:7 God
himself, alone, knows the real meaning of it and I try to stay away
from that category.

> ...
>
> read more »

[Mehdi]

Dear Truthseeker,
Find hereunder my answers to your questions.

Question 1
Why does the Quran concerning the period after Muhammad, only refer to
a creature out of the earth -dabbatan mina el ardi-, the computer,
that will speak to the people who are not certain about the signs, the
verses -ayaat- of the Quran, and does the Quran not refer to
messengers to all nations after Muhammad who would do this as well? -
verse 27:82.

ANSWER: You are mixing two different things. 27:82 is specifically
about a creature from earth/earthly materiel which will prove that
people are doubtful (La Youqinoon). Messengers have another mission
which is the delivery of God’s message without caring about the result
(acceptance or rejection). The coming of Messengers after Mohammad is
announced by other verses than 27: 82 (See 3: 81; 7:35; 10:47;
33:40).
By the way, Ayaat (Signs/ proofs /miracles) do not mean verses of the
Quran. God indicates in 2:23 and 11:13 that the Quran, which is an
Aya, is composed of surat (chapters) that contain many Ayaat (universe
creation, embryology, zoology, mathematical structure, etc…). There
are many verses that are not Ayaat but sentences that we use in our
everyday life (e.g. 81:26; 82:12; 90:3; 92:21; 96:18). The first Arab
scholars has abused of the word Aya by giving it to every segment
(verse) that compose a chapter. This was necessary for their satanic
theory of abrogation within Quran.

Question 2
Are you willing to accept the quranic definitions of a messenger and
of a prophet? Verses: 9:33 and 4:80 - a messenger is sent with the
guidance and the religion of truth and who obeys the messenger obeys
God. This can only refer to a sharia-bringer. Verse: 6:89 - the
prophets are sent with a guidance in the form of a scripture. All the
prophets have a Divinely inspired scripture with them.

ANSWER: The definition of messenger vs prophet has been dealed with in
my previous message. Edip and Abdur Rab did the same thing. So, there
is no need for repetition.

Question 3
Can you give me the name of one or more messengers after Muhammad who
brought a perfection of the quranic sharia? This should have been done
via a purely oral message, since Muhammad is the seal of the prophets,
so there can not be new prophetic scriptures anywhere in the world. -
verse 33:40.

ANSWER: Rashad is one of God’s messengers. He brought the attention of
sincere believers to the perfection of Quran and God’s laws (Sharia).
Just look at what a sunni say in his Sallat and compare it to the
Sallat of a Quran follower. The way how I look now to the Quran is
different from the past. This changed was triggered by the work of
Rashad.

Question 4
Would a system based on numerous messengers after Muhammad, that have
to be obeyed, as God has to be obeyed, not be contrary to the
democratic and emancipating system as prescribed in the Quran in the
verses 42:38 and 3:79, prescribing mutual consultation and the study
and sharing of the wisdom of the Quran? The Quran has no
contradictions - verse 4:82.

ANSWER: Firstly, I see no relationship between the number of
messengers and God’s system. Secondly, No messenger will contradict
God’s system and all messengers will proclaim the truth. Mohammad is
not different from other messengers (46:9), they are all the same and
they all proclaimed that there is no god but the God. So, following
the teaching of one messenger is like if we follow all messengers.

Question 5
How did the discoverer of code 19 confirm the Tawra, the Zabur and
Ingeel for instance, since he claimed to be the messenger of the
covenant, confirming the scriptures of the previous prophets?

ANSWER: How did Mohammad confirm the the Tawra, the Zabur and Ingeel?
By just proclaiming and recognising that they are the books of God and
that within them there are guidance for believers (5:44,46). Mohammad
even challenged the Jews to bring him a book better than the Tawra and
the Quran that he may follow (28:49). Rashad did the same thing; he
proclaimed that these books are God’s book. Furthermore, by proving
the authenticity of the contents of Quran (code 19), he proved the
divine origin of the other books mentioned in Quran. The word
“Musaddiqun’’ in 3:81 must be understood as to approve/confirm/agree
with the meaning of accepting something not with the meaning of
proving or demonstrating such thing, because the opposite of
“Musaddiqun’’ is “Mukaddibun” (See Saddaqa vs Kaddaba in 75:31-32;
92:6,9). Thus, 3:81 apply to ANY messenger (Before and after Mohammad
and not only Rashad) that comes after a prophet. A true messenger will
ALWAYS recognise and acknowledge any book of God brought by a previous
prophet. A fake messenger will willingly deny in part or the whole
teaching of God’s book.

Question 6
How is it possible to deny rightfully that Muhammad was the messenger
of the covenant of verse 3:81, while the verses: 3:84, 2:41, 2:91,
2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 state the confirming role of the messenger
Muhammad unambigiously?

ANSWER: There is no Quranic evidence to exclude Mohammad from among
the prophets who took the covenant with God in 3:81. This covenant -
where Mohammad is mentioned by name - is again confirmed in 33:7. In
the 2 verses we find the two key words together: COVENANT and
PROPHETS. It is the Mohammedans who gave their idol (Mohammad) the non
Quranic title of the last messenger and you accepted it. Beware of
6:112.

Question 7
How can anyone claim that the Quran needs extra confirmation after the
departure of Muhammad, while the Creator declares the Quran confirmed
as Divine in verses 4:82 and 98:1-3? Code 19 is a great unique
phenomena but is never mentioned as a confirmation -musaddiq- by the
Quran, this is a man-made assumption.

ANSWER: For you, code 19 is just another allegory (74:31) but for me
is the ultimate proof of the divine origin of the Quran and its
authenticity. Code 19 is the answer to anyone who mentions that the
Quran is a man made book (74:25-30). I do not need the word “Musaddiq”
to understand the finality of code 19. God do not run out of words
(18:109). There are many books that contain no contradictions (e.g.
books of mathematics and physics) yet they are not from God. The
almighty God knew that there will be people who will ask for a proof
just for their reassurance as Abraham did before even if he was
already a believer (2:260).

Question 8
How can you explain if someone is supposed to be the messenger of the
covenant and thereby should have been supported by all the prophets,
that he missed many important issues of the sharia, that were already
clearly described in the Quran, while messengership is about the
perfection of the sharia?

ANSWER: The messengership has nothing to do with the perfection of
God’s sharia which is already perfect (5:3; 6:115). The messengership
is about the correction of the deviation from the perfect Sharia. The
messengership is there to help people who deviate to return to God’s
path. Rashad is not a perfect man. Mohammad made many mistakes too
(33:37; 40:66; 42:52; 66:1; 80:1-10; 93:6-8). How can you explain the
many errors made by Mohammad? Surely, Mohammad made more than what the
Quran mentioned, but the purpose of Quran is not to publicise ALL
Mohammad’s errors but only to show us through some examples that
Mohammad is as fallible as any human being.

Question 9
Why do you adhere to the man-made hadeeth that all messengers are
prophets, while the Quran mentions 20 men as a messenger and 14 men as
a prophet? Does the Quran need correction in this, in blending the
difference between a messenger and a prophet? Is the Quran not perfect
and complete?

ANSWER: I said the opposite. All prophets are messengers too (read my
message of May 15, the 5th paragraph for more details)

Question 10
How do you know that the discoverer of code 19 has to be regarded as a
messenger, when you just have the Quran as source for the religion?
Nobody could get to know and accept this, without accepting human-made
assumptions, ahadeeth, as a source next to the Quran. Is the Quran
really complete and clear for you in this issue? The fact that
calculations can point to the name of the discoverer does not mean at
all that he has to be regarded as a messenger. These calculations can
point to the omniscience of the Creator, the persons deeply rooted in
knowledge are perfectly predicted by the Quran, verse 3:7.

ANSWER: I have already answered this question and Edip also did. So,
to be short, please see our previous message.

Question 11
What would you have to lose in regarding for instance Rashad Khalifa
as a person deeply rooted in knowledge, according to verse 3:7? As he
explained verse 74:30 in the best manner. For this way of honoring
some persons the Quran gives clear permission, but the Quran warns
against dividing the ummah into groups, as can be done via the
acceptance of self-proclaimed messengers that would have to be
followed and obeyed.

ANSWER: I do not negotiate with my God; I just obey him 100%. I don’t
have any problem by accepting the messengership of Rashad. Only those
who have seen there idol (Mohammad) deprived from his title of the
last messenger are in grievance.

Question 12
Has the acceptance of men as messengers after Muhammad led to further
sectarian division of the Islam?

ANSWER: There were always sects before, during and after the
revelation of Quran. I don’t care if we went from 4 to 40 sects. Every
person will be recompensed for what it had earned and there will be no
injustice (2:281; 3:25,161; 40:17). Furthermore, the Quran teaches us
that the majority of people will not be believers (12:103,106)

Question 13
Would the absence of groups (with their own messenger-ideas) within
the Quran-alone movement not be better for the spreading of the
message of the Quran?

ANSWER: This is not relevant because God says:” We will show them Our
signs in the horizons, and within themselves, until it becomes clear
to them that this is the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is
witness over all things?”(41:53). God will spread his message so that
there will be no excuse for the people with God (4:65).

Question 14
How important is it in regard to verses 3:105 and 30:31-32 for
yourself and for others, to get out of this probable danger-zone for
the soul, of endorsing the division of the Islam into groups, by
accepting and promoting the possibility of messengership of men after
Muhammad?

ANSWER: I am certain that I am not concerned by 3:105 and 30:31-32.
Groups will always exist in the matter of God’s system but at the end
there will be only one winner: The party of God (Hizbu Allah) (5:56;
58:22).


Salam,
Mehdi

[truthse...@gmail.com]

to Mehdi
from Truthseeker

Salam Mehdi, thank you for your anwers.

regarding question 1
You wrote that the creature out of earth only will show that people
will be doubtful about the signs.
This is a peculiar interpretation.
The way verse 27:82 should be read according to amongst others
Pickthall, Sher Ali and Shakir is, that the creature will speak to the
people because they are not convinced of the signs of God.
So first the people are not convinced of the verses of the Quran and
then a -creature out of earth- will speak to them because they are not
convinced of the verses.
That is totally different from your statement, you have interchanged
cause and effect.

Verse 27:82 is as far as we know a multiple meaning verse and is
probably explained very well by Rashad Khalifa, a man deeply rooted in
knowlegde, verse 3:7.
He explained it in this way: --- The Quran has predicted that at the
right time God will produce a creature that will be instrumental in
unveiling God's signs.
This was fulfilled, the creature was the computer which was
instrumental in unveiling the Quran's numerical code, and proclaiming
that the world has neglected God's message.
- 27:82 ", made of earthly materials, declaring that the people are
not certain about our revelations." (Rashad's translation)
Note that the digits that make up 27:82 add up to 19. ---

Rashad's translation of this verse is particular, but Pickthall, Sher
Ali and Shakir mention the word because, as is compatible with the
explanation of Rashad; why the computer will declare, it will declare
because people are not convinced of the signs of God.
Code 19 can help to convince people as stated in 74:31, the word
convinced is also used in 27:82.
So verse 27:82 is very relevant, as a prophecy of the Quran that a
creature of earthy materials, the computer will be the central means
by which code 19 is to be found and the message of Quran alone is to
be spread.
This is the only verse that refers to the future from the perspective
of Muhammad concerning giving an extra incentive for the people to
accept the -ayaat- of the Quran.

You are right about the plural use of the word - ayaat-, but I had not
asserted otherwise before, so we agree in this.
But I think it is not to be judged by us which verses of the Quran are
signs, -ayaat- and which would be not.
To me all the verses of the Quran are the ayaat, the signs of the
Creator, all the verses together form the Quran, the greatest sign to
humankind we have with us.

Verses 7:35 and 10:47 which are used to support the idea of messengers
after Muhammad, are clearly written in present time.
They are concerning the moment that Muhammad had to tell that he is in
the tradition of the prophets.
You can not just say that this also refers to our present time and
thereby say that nowadays there are new messengers present in all
nations.
The Quran gives clear evidence for this point.
Verses 7:65, 7:73, 7:85 are written in present time and refer to Hud,
Saleh and Shuaib.
Muhammad could not say that these messengers were sent during the same
time as he brougth his message.
The present tense is from the perspective of Hud, Saleh and Shuaib.
So if we assume that there are messengers with us nowadays based on
the present time form of the concerning verses, we would also have to
accept that the messengers Hud, Saleh and Shuaib would be still giving
their message to their peoples.
This is incorrect since for intstance their tribes have been punished
because of their rejection of the messages they received.
Conclusion: verses like 7:35 and 10:47 should be read within the clear
time-context, the present time of the all mentioned verses refers to
the time-frame that they are dealing with.
And that is not the future, there is no shortage of words in the
Quran.
If there would come messengers after Muhammad, than there would be
reference to the future, as is with the creature out of earth.
The Quran has future tense when it is needed (-at the right time, we
will produce for them a creature-).
We should not make our own time-changes concerning the Quran.
We should read and accept the quranic verses as they are and be
grateful for these verses and we should not try to change there clear
meaning or time-frame for whatever purpose one has.

Your private opinion that messengers did not care if their message was
accepted or neglected by their people seems to be very insensitive
towards the dedication that several messengers have shown towards
spreading the message in the best manner.
They did not have a - take it or leave it - attitude as your words are
suggesting; the Quran tells us for instance about the anger of Musa
towards a part of his people for taking the golden calf as an idol,
the Quran tells us about the hard times that Muhammad had in spreading
his message, about the battles that Muhammad fought as a leader of the
believers against the idolworshippers.
I think that you meant that the messengers had to know that God is the
Decider if someone accepts or rejects the message and that messengers
should not grieve about the rejecters - verse 3:176.
Verse 6:107 states that the messenger was not responsible for the
rejecters; but to say that messengers did not care if his message is
accepted seems not to be according to the Quran.
I hope you will reflect on this.

regarding question 2
I agree that a messenger and a prophet both give a message.
A -risala- is a revelation from God; there is no subjective
interference from the person that conveys it.
A -risala- given to a prophet is in the form of a scripture - 6:89.
A message that is given to a messenger always contains rulings
concerning the sharia.

It seems to me that you are still neglecting the next Quranic verses:
Verse 9:33 states - a messenger is sent with the guidance and the
religion of truth -
Verse 4:80 states - the messenger has to be obeyed, as God has to be
obeyed.-
This can only refer to a bringer of a sharia, not just to a confirmer.
A mathematical code for instance can not be obeyed.
Muhammad is mentioned as a prophet and messenger in the Quran, clearly
the Quran links the sharia-bringing properties to a messenger, in
verses 9:33 and 4:80, each word is perfect in the Quran.
I ask you not to be in denial about the list of men that are named
prophets and messengers, each word has a meaning; Sulayman as a
prophet only, brought a scripture without a sharia and for instance
Muhammad as a messenger-prophet brougth a scripture containing amongst
others: confirmation of previous scriptures according to verses 3:81,
3:84, 2:41, 2:91, 2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 and a perfect sharia.
I ask you not to be in denial about these verses and their
consequences.
There is no repetition, as long as you have not adressed this point
according to all the relevant quranic verses and not just by an
arbitrary selection of them.

regarding question 3
You are silent on the issue that the message should have been purely
oral, because Muhammad is the seal of the prophets according to verse
33:40.
Verse 6:89 states that the prophets are given the scripture.
So no part of a new revelation could be written down after the
departure of Muhammad, because that would make the messenger a
prophet.
This seems detailed but it is very essential for the understanding.

Before and after Rashad there were advocates of the Quran-alone
principle, you got your information via the works of Rashad as others
have received it in other ways.
There is no reason to assume that the people deeply rooted in
knowledge - verse 3:7 were there only during the last decades of the
20th century.
The computer is related to as source of the knowlegde of code 19, not
a messenger.
Rashad was the discoverer of the code, but the signs belong still to
the Quran and thereby to Muhammad.
So Rashad did not come with a sign that would make him a messenger.
He discovered an extra mathematical dimension of the signs that came
with Muhammad, the Quran.
This discovery was predicted by the perfect Quran.
Discovery about the Quran is different from bringing signs from God,
as Muhammad did.

Because Rashad still was influenced by the sunni tradition in many
aspects of the sharia, including the salat, I can not see him as
someone who had the duty of being a messenger of God, comparing to the
quranic descriptions of the real messengers, who brought perfect
sharia's to there peoples, as a contrast to Rashad.

regarding question 4
Rashad made understandable human mistakes while decribing the salat,
the wudu, the zakat and the hajj.
So as a fallible human being he was also able to make the mistake of
proclaiming messengership.
He invited believers to follow his appendix of the Quran as a source
next to the Quran, he made his own set of ahadeeth, thereby suggesting
that the Quran is not complete.
Hereby he was putting his followers in danger of committing idolatry.
These are examples of how a self-proclaimed messenger went wrong
regarding the system of the Quran.
Real messengers have come with 100 percent of the truth according to
the Quran, not just with a part of it.
Believers should not be in the dilemma of obeying the messenger or to
obey the Quran, this is how some extra groups came into existence.

The system is clear, we as believers need to follow the Quran based on
mutual consultation - 42:38 and sharing the wisdom of the Quran -
3:79.
Nowhere in the Quran a change of this system is predicted, that there
would be messengers to follow and obey as God has to be obeyed - 4:80.
A system of messengers after Muhammad would increase the chance of
abuse and fake-messengers and thereby would enhance greatly the chance
of the existence of dictatorships instead of quranic democracies.

regarding question 5
I advice you accept all the quranic verses and not to be in denial of
several of them.
Verses 3:81 and 3:84, 2:41, 2:91, 2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 prove that
Muhammad is the confirmer -musaddaq- of the previous scriptures.
If our Creator states this in these verses, why are you denying or
belittleling this?

Rashad did not do the the same thing as a messenger, he did not speak
the words that were given directly from God or via Gibril, into his
heart, as far as we know.
This is why when we obey Mohammad via the Quran, we also obey God,
because the message of Muhammad contains the litteral word of God.
This is totally different from Rashad's sometimes brilliant reasoning.
Muhammad received a revelation, a -risala-; the word of God.
Rashad was as far as we know gifted with: courage, opportunity and a
very good ability of reasoning, this is different from having to
transfer a revelation, the word of God.
The revelation is perfect, is not depending on the person, the
reasoning of a human being is subjective and has to be revised as
history has proven; 19.org is different from submission.org, for
instance.
There is no way to deny the quranic words that Muhammad did exactly
that the messenger of 3:81 was supposed to do, namely to confirm the
previous prophetic scriptures via a perfect -risala-.

I am concerned about the following:
You wrote:--- Furthermore, by proving the authenticity of the contents

of Quran (code 19), he proved the divine origin of the other books

mentioned in Quran.---

I have to warn you for a possible sincere mistake: you have suggested
hereby that you are believing the writings of Rashad and not the
verses 3:84, 2:41, 2:91, 2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 of the Quran, hereby
you have may be shown a dangerous level of sectarian behaviour.
You admitted that by proving that the Quran is of a Divine origine,
one proves the Divine origin of the other prophetic scriptures that
are mentioned in the Quran.
So the Quran and thereby Muhammad confirmed the previous prophetic
scriptures, as predicted in 3:81.
But you accept this appearingly only when Rashad "proved" this and you
deny the confirming role of Muhammad that is clearly stated by God in
several verses in the Quran.
I advice you to be aware of this and I hope you will get rid of this
probable obstinate, sectarian behaviour.
I hope that you will accept the Quran as your guide in this matter as
well.

You wrote: --- The word “Musaddiqun’’ in 3:81 must be understood as to

approve/confirm/agree with the meaning of accepting something not with
the meaning of proving or demonstrating such thing, because the

opposite of “Musaddiqun’’ is “Mukaddibun” ---

The fact that the word - mukaddibun - is mentioned in verses 75:31-32
and in 92:9 as a contrast to -saddaq- of verse 92:6 has no relevance.
Of course there are different levels of -musaddaq- for instance: to
agree - to accept - to testify - to confirm.
The reading of the word -musaddaq- depends on who is doing the act of -
musaddaq-.
A believer can only -"musaddaq"- a scripture in the way of accepting
that it is from God; only our Creator can -"musaddaq"- a scripture on
the level of confirming-proving it as given by God.
When God tells us something via the verses of the Quran, the believers
have to accept it.
Our Creator gave us the highest form of -musaddaq- in confirming the
previous prophetic scriptures as well via the holy verses of the Quran
as has been done via verses: 3:81 and 3:84, 2:41, 2:91, 2:97, 3:3,
4:47, 5:48.
Our Creator gave the highest form of -musaddaq- confirming the Quran
as a scripture from God in verses 4:82 and 98:1-3.
I ask you not to try to belittle the words of God, with your own
interpretation of the word -musaddaq-.

Your opinion about fake-messengers is very subjective, we can not know
how Iblis is able to hypnotise the individuals and masses.
The tests are given by God, so I advise you to try to be aware of the
fact that any of us can be tested, also in the issue of sects within
Islam.

regarding question 6
The quranic evidence for accepting Muhammad as the messenger of 3:81
and not as one of the supporting prophets of 3:81 is very clear for
believers with the non-sectarian approach.
Verses 3:81 and 3:84, 2:41, 2:91, 2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48 prove that
Muhammad is the confirmer of the previous scriptures.
I advice you to accept God's words and not to exchange them for human
assumptions.
We have been here before: there is another covenant, not to be denied,
but to accept.

The covenant of verse 3:187 relates to the assigment of the prophets,
not to hide their scriptures for their people.
This covenant should not be ignored in this issue of messengership.
Verse 3:81 speaks of prophets who are given a book, that is consistent
with the ones who where given a book mentioned in 3:187.
The difference is, this covenant of 3:187 includes Muhammad as a

prophet and 3:81 includes Muhammad as the confirming messenger -
verses 3:81 and 3:84, 2:41, 2:91, 2:97, 3:3, 4:47, 5:48.

Muhammad has kept his promise of spreading the scripture of Islam in
the best way, since his message can be known in all continents.

So he kept the promise of the solid covenant that is referred to in
33:7.

I advice you not to run into circles and not to deny anymore that
Muhammad has confirmed the previous scriptures, when our Creator has
stated this.
You can not say that Rashad confirmed all the previous scripture via
the Quran and deny at the same time that the messenger of the Quran -
Muhammad, was the one who really did this via the true revelation of
God.
A revelation of God is the sign of the messenger, as is the Quran.
Rashad did not say and or prove that he received a personal revelation
- wahy - that came from God, in which he had no interference with, by
his own free mind and will.

Muhammad is the last prophet and last known messenger, because there
has not been a bringer of a perfect sharia via a purely oral message,
who received this by a revelation -wahy- of God after the departure of
Muhammad.

Something to reflect on:
Verses 33:38-39 state that the prophets convey a -risala-.
Verse 33:40 state that Muhammad is the seal of the prophets.
Logic dictates then that Muhammad is the last person that gave a -
risala- from God to humanity.
So being the last nabi means also that Muhammad was the last messenger
according to these verses.

I am very aware of verse 6:112, that is why this subject was started
to share and test the quranic evidence for the approach of
appreciating code 19 in a non-sectarian way.
Because of the fact that I see you are denying, twisting and time-
warping several quranic verses, I advice you to be aware of verse
6:112 as well.

regarding question 7
It does not matter if you need the word -musaddiq- or not, the only
thing that matters in this context that God has declared the Quran as
a Divine scripture in verses 4:82 and 98:1-3.
For another time I see a clear obstinacy on your side against the
words of God.
I actually hope I understood you wrong here.
If God tells the believers that the absence of contradictions in the
Quran proves that the Quran is from God - verse 4:82, why are you
denying and disrespecting these sacred words, by telling that there
are other books without contradiction?
Are you really trying to outwit your Creator by this?
This can be a danger for your soul, to suggest that you know something
better than your Creator.
I advice you to take care of this issue.
God knows best, but as the words of God are endless, code 19 could
have been named as a -musaddiq- if God had ordered it to be a
confirmation.
The function of code 19 has been described in different detailed ways
in verse 74:3, clearly not as a -musaddiq-, because God has declared
the Quran already as a proven Divine scripture in verses 4:82 and
98:1-3.
We should accept the words as they are and we should not try to twist
them for our own purposes.

Your analogy with Abraham fails any objective, since Abraham received
the reassurances during his lifetime, code 19 came to be known to the
larger public centuries after Muhammad.
The reassurance was for Abraham himself, code 19 is for the different
groups of people, but not for the prophet as far as we know.
I advice you not to name Ibrahim a disbeliever concerning the period
before the history of the birds of verse 2:260.
The verse states clearly that Ibrahim believed in the resurrection,
Ibrahim is telling this to his Creator in this vers.
Ibrahim was allowed to ask for reassurance, but that does not make him
a disbeliever.
There is difference between belief and knowledge, as a messenger-
prophet he was allowed to receive compelling evidence.
I am concerned about your own statement here of Ibrahim not being a
believer, it is not found in the Quran.
Extra proof if needed can be read in verse 2:258, we do not know if
this history happened before the history of the birds, Ibrahim speaks
as a believer here.

It is really strange that your repeat that I do not appreciate code
19.
You can not know anything about this.
The fact that I intend to appreciate code 19 in a non-sectarian way
does not mean that I just see it as a allegory as you assumed.
Code 19 is not only to be appreciated by people who accept and promote
the division of the Islam into more groups, that would be may be a too
high price to pay.
My aim is to share the idea that code 19 should be taken out of the
sectarian context, so that it can be appreciated also by believers who
do not accept the human assumption of messengership after Muhammad and
thereby oppose the extra division of Islam into sects.

regarding question 8
The mistakes of the messenger Muhammad were corrected by God via the
Quran, that is why the messenger Muhammad via the Quran is perfectly
reliable, the mistakes of Rashad were corrected by some of his
followers and others mainly after his departure.

How can you assume that Muhammad made more errors concerning the
sharia than we know via the Quran?
I do not make Muhammad my idol as the Quran forbids that, but I avoid
to assume my own ideas about him and can not share the assumption that
Muhammad made more mistakes concerning the sharia than are told in the
Quran.
What extra sources next to the Quran do you have?

According to your opinion, the messengership is about the correction
of the deviation from the perfect sharia.
Of course the sharia given from God is perfect, that is why we have a
perfectly protected Quran with us.
But you can not claim that Rashad corrected the deviation from the
sharia, as you told yourself, there were still a number of essential
differences between his ideas and the clear writings of the Quran.
For me this is a proof that Rashad used his own mind and reasoning, he
was appearingly still influenced by the human-made traditions that
deverted many believers from the quranic sharia.
As a believer in the revelations of God, I have to say that Rashad did
not have one, because we can witness the mistakes of Rashad concerning
the sharia.
So he was not a messenger because he did not bring the perfect way to
return to the path towards God.
As you know Rashad invited his followers to commit idolworship in
writing his own appendix next to the Quran and thereby suggesting that
the Quran is not complete, especially concerning the -millat Ibrahim-
issue.
Musa, Jesus and Muhammad brougth a perfect sharia by bringing a new
one for their people or by a correction of the existing sharia; not by
there own mind and will, but because of a Divinely controlled
revelation.
Your claim that messengership is not about the perfection of sharia is
truly false, the messenger-prophet Jesus for instance brought an
adjustment of the sharia and thereby perfected the existing sharia for
his people - verse 3:50.

regarding question 9
The Quran mentions 14 men as a messenger and 20 men as a prophet.
We should take care not to make our own alterations of the Quran by
saying that all prophets are messengers.
One can only say that all prophets are messengers as well if the Quran
mentions 20 men as a messenger and the same 20 men as a prophet.
There are no mistakes or omissions in the Quran.
Again I ask you to accept the quranic definition of a messenger - as
done with question 2 - and not to follow human assumptions in this
matter.

regarding question 10
According to your previous anwer a messenger can be anyone who is a
true believer and strives to spread the word of God (your writings of
May 15th).
I advice you to compare your own defintion of a messenger with the
quranic definition of a messenger - question 2 -.
A messenger receives a revelation - wahy - according to verse 18:110.
A revelation is totally different from an incentive to spread the
message of the Quran, your definition of a messenger would make
everybody who tells other people about the Quran on their own level a
messenger.
What would be the criterium of being a messenger then, what would be
the minimum amount needed of people who listen to the words of someone
telling about the Quran?
A messenger has to be obeyed, as God has to be obeyed - 4:80 -, so it
is very dangerous for the soul to follow the wrong messenger.
In your system of messengers we would be in uncertainty all the time
about who to follow and obey or not.

The Quran clearly proves that the assumption that - anyone who is
inspired by God has to be a messenger -, is wrong.
I ask you to accept next quranic verses and not to remain in denial of
them.

4:163 - Lo! We inspire thee as We inspired Noah and the prophets
after him, as We inspired Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and
the tribes, and Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and as
We imparted unto David the Psalms ---

5:111 - And when I inspired the disciples, believe in Me and in My
messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have
surrendered. ---

The conveying of the message is by revelation -wahy- according to for
instance verse 4:163.
There are different groups of people that can have a revelation of
God.
The messengers have a special revelation that makes them a messenger.
This is a perfect message from God containing the religion of truth,
for instance the Tawrah, the Ingeel or the Quran.
Of course the messengers can have other private revelations for
guidance in for instance how to spread the message.
Other people like the disciples of Jesus had a revelation -wahy- to
believe in God and in the messenger.
The Quran proofs that only the process of revelation is not enough to
become a messenger, it depends on the content of the message if a
person is to be a messenger.
The disciples were not messengers after their revelation, they had to
believe in the messenger.
While these men were known for the spreading of the message of Jesus,
the Quran does not mention them as messengers even when they received
a revelation of God, a -wahy-.
We do not know if people received objective revelations from God since
the departure of Muhammad, but if a person claims to receive a
revelation from God, this does not make him or her a messenger.
We as believers have to use our -fooad-, our ability of understanding
to find the right way of understanding the Quran, we should not wait
passively for anyone who claims to have a kind of revelation.

17:36 -You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for
yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the heart,
and you are responsible for using them.---

Clearly the Quran refers to our senses to use them for our religion,
there is no reference made towards a new revelation in the form of
words to any person after the departure of Muhammad, that has to be
followed as a source next to the Quran.
I prefer to follow the messenger Muhammad in the way that God has to
be obeyed, not any person after Muhammad.
Because Muhammad had the objective revelation of the Quran with him.

You wrote that you had dealt with this question but your previous
answer was not quran-based, it was based on your own assumptions.
I hope you see that I try to use only quranic verses as proof, not my
own ideas.

regarding question 11
I believe that you intend to obey God in the best manner, so I advice
you to accept the Quran as your guidance in every detail.
And I hope that you will not follow any human-made assumption anymore.

regarding question 12
It is a pity that you do not care for the sectarian division of the
ummah and that you even are promoting the further division of the
ummah by accepting the idea of men as a messenger after the departure
of Muhammad.
Again I ask you not to be too self-assured about only the others being
not believers in the right way.
We all have to take care of ourselves, and we have to try to be true
believers in following the Quran in the best manner.
But the system relies on sharing the wisdom of the Quran with
eachother - verse 42:38 and 3:79.
So we have to take care, and warn eachother for possible mistakes,
especially now regarding sectarian division as is warned against in
verses 3:105 and 30:31-32 in a very impressive manner.

regarding question 13
Verse 4:95 - Those of the believers who sit still, other than those
who have a (disabling) hurt, are not on an equality with those who
strive in the way of Allah with their wealth and lives. Allah has
conferred on those who strive with their wealth and lives a rank above
the sedentary. Unto each Allah has promised good, but He has bestowed
on those who strive a great reward above the sedentary ---

This verse invites us to act and not to be passive and have a -wait
and see- attitude.
In your attempts in defending the sectarian approach there is a form
of action of course, but I am afraid this kind of action is
detrimental to the spreading of the message of the Quran alone.
We have to be aware of the quranic mission, to spread the word of the
Quran in a non-dividing way.
So we have to act against the sectarian division of the believers, and
may be it is best to begin with warning the followers of the Quran
alone not to be divided into sects, because they have to know that the
Quran forbids this.
The strenght of the quranic movements depends on how united we are.
The dividing powers within the Quran-alone movement are a sincere test
for the believers, we are all responsible for dealing with this matter
in the right way.

You quoted verse 41:53, may be you want to avoid hereby responsibilty
for contributing to the sectarian division of the followers of the
Quran, while your are promoting this division at the same time.
But this verse seems to relate to the day of judgement, in the mean
time we are responsible to act, in the capacity and as long we are
able to.

regarding question 14
This answer contains no logic reasoning at all, it seems to be just an
attempt to deny responsibility from your side in this important
matter.
How can you say that you are not in danger of verses 3:105 and
30:31-32 because there will always exist groups in the matter of the
system of God.
The point is if you are endorsing and stimulating the existence of
these groups or not?
The system of God requires the absence of groups, see verse 3:105 and
30:31-32.
Human beings are distorting the system of God that is prescribed in
the Quran, from the beginning of the messengership of Muhammad until
now.
Human beings are accountable for their deeds.
We have to follow the Quran in the best manner to be within the party
of God and so we have to avoid the sectarian division of Islam and we
have to promote the unifying appoach.
I advice you to be aware of the consequences of your point of view:
endless division of the believers into groups and sects, each group
rejoicing in what they have in following their national or regional
self proclaimed "messenger".
Still the question is: are you are part of the problem of sectarian
division of the followers of the Quran, or do you want to be a part of
the solution in this essential matter and will you contribute to the
unifying message of appreciating code 19 in a non-sectarian way?

Take care and salam,

Truthseeker

> the Quran-alone movement not be better for the spreading of ...
>
> meer lezen »