Jesus speaking from the cradle (was Re: The Muslim View of the Ascension of Jesus)
John Smith
Accounts of a baby Jesus speaking (Qur'an 19:29-33) and a young Jesus
fashioning a bird out of clay (Qur'an 3:49; 5:110) can be found in
"The Arabic Gospel of the Infancy of the Saviour" and "The First
Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ". Thought you might be
interested.
http://wesley.nnu.edu/noncanon/gospels/infarab.htm
http://wesley.nnu.edu/noncanon/gospels/infgos1.htm.
Regards,
John
SILAS778
neighboring lands, he continued to be exposed. It could not have avoided
hearing their various religious stories. The parallels between his statements
found in the Quran, and the various myths he heard indicate that he borrowed
those stories.
Interestingly, the Quran records this charge of borrowing leveled against
Muhammad by his contemporaries:
Quran 25:5
And they say: "Tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written: and
they are dictated before him morning and evening."
Quran 16:103-104
"We know indeed that they say "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him
they wickedly point to is notable foreign while this is Arabic pure and clear.
Those who believe not in the Signs of Allah, Allah will not guide them and
theirs will be a grievous Penalty." (Yusef Ali's translation) [1]
The people who knew those stories heard Muhammad repeat them. Just as the Book
of Mormon borrows from the Bible, so to, perhaps to establish his credibility,
Muhammad borrowed from the religious stories he believed to be true.
MIRSE
1. That is, what makes you believe that the "gospel" is authentic?
2. And if you or anyone else believes that the "gospel" is authentic, then you
must also point out that Jesus not only spoke from the cradle, but Jesus also
said that he was the Son of God, a statement that Muslims say Jesus never
made.
3. I'm afraid that after reading the Koran, I have no doubt that Mohammed made
it all up, and the reference in the Koran of Jesus speaking from the cradle
soon after being born is a case in point that Mohammed made up the Koran.
4. And in the same "gospel", the description of the birth of Jesus does not
even come close to how the Koran describes the same birth of Jesus. Why is
that?
5. Yes, I have no doubt that Mohammed made up the Koran up.
6. As a Christian, I'm sticking with what St. Paul and St. Thomas Aquinas
wrote about Jesus, not what Mohammed made up about Jesus, even though neither
man promised me numerous virgins to play with when I die as a Christian.
7. Note: I still cannot figure out how or why Mohammed came up with the wild
idea that Adam, who was kicked out of Eden, could ever be considered a prophet,
a prophet to be considered in the same category as Jesus.
8. For Muslims to speak about Adam as being in anyway similar to Jesus---that
is, of both being prophets--- is an insult to all Christians. Mi...@aol.com.
Yahya Z.
SILAS778 wrote:
> The people who knew those stories heard Muhammad repeat them. Just as the Book
> of Mormon borrows from the Bible, so to, perhaps to establish his credibility,
> Muhammad borrowed from the religious stories he believed to be true.
One could show that the Bible "borrowed" from ancient Greek literature. But since the
Truth is the same everywhere, that does not "concern" me, like the "borrowing" of
Muhammad (p) does you. Could it be you have a vendetta?
Peace
John
Abdalla Alothman
sila...@aol.com (SILAS778) wrote in message
news:<9s1rpt$5em$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
> Muhammad was exposed to Christians and Jews in Mecca. During
> travels to neighboring lands, he continued to be exposed. It
> could not have avoided hearing their various religious stories.
> The parallels between his statements found in the Quran, and the
> various myths he heard indicate that he borrowed those stories.
Muhammad (s), the Messenger of God, did not borrow various myths.
He confirmed the truth.
37:37. Nay! he (Muhammad SAW) has come with the truth (i.e. Allâh's
Religion - Islâmic Monotheism and this Qur'ân) and he confirms the
Messengers (before him who brought Allâh's religion - Islâmic
Monotheism).
The way people confirm facts cannot be established without giving a
reference or mentioning the facts. So what's the big deal in giving
reference? How can anyone confirm a fact without mentioning it!?
If he confirmed the truth which is found in books which you consider
myths, it means that those books contain true statements, while the
fabricated books which you consider holy are incomplete.
We agree with the slave of the cross that IF the story is mentioned
in some Christian reference, this reference is fabricated. But that
does not mean that the reference in its whole is a fabrication, because
the Quran also confirms what is found in the books which the slaves
of the cross consider 100% authentic, but to us, those books are also
fabrications.
What the Quran does is that it points out the truths and filters out
the lies. This is what it does to the Christian and Jewish sources
which the Jews and the Christians consider true, and the sources which
both consider false.
Basically, an uncontaminated book is a book which we can hold in our
hands and say, "Allah revealed this (entire) book." We cannot do this
to any Christian reference--regardless of what the slaves of the cross
think of this book--but we can safely match it with what the Quran says.
If the examined book contains one line which is confirmed in the Quran,
we will be fair and admit that this line is a fact. But this single fact
does not change the status of the book examined.
Notice that, to us Muslims, when the Quran mentions an event which is
mentioned in the references which the slaves of the cross hold, to us
this is a confirmation. I mean the Quran clearly says that it confirms
what Allah (tt) has revealed before. Now how does any act of confirmation
take place? It's not that complicated; you mention the event and accept
it. You have to mention it. And this is what God does in the Quran--He
(tt) confirms what He previously revealed, or true events which happened
to other nations. When He (tt) does that, we believe He is confirming, but
Silas, the slave of the cross, believes Muhammad is borrowing.
You say you are confirming, and the slave of the cross says you are
borrowing. It's just like a person who says, "I told you a joke," and
the other person says, "No it's a fact." Twisting the intentions of
others is not nice.
5:64. ... Verily, the Revelation that has come to you from Allâh increases
in most of them their obstinate rebellion and disbelief.
This is the truth which God revealed to Muhammad, and which people like
Silas prove to us. If the Quran was not true, it wouldn't move fanatic
Christians like Silas, who is well known to many Muslims in this newsgroup.
> Interestingly, the Quran records this charge of borrowing leveled against
> Muhammad by his contemporaries:
>
> Quran 25:5
> And they say: "Tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written:
> and they are dictated before him morning and evening."
Same thing happened to your human god by the Jews. It's enough to point
out that not even 100 people followed your human god. And if that's the
case, then the people didn't believe he was truthful. But if I am
mistaken, and there were more than 100 or 50 people who followed your
human god, please name them.
It's easy for me as a Muslim to list more than 10,000 names of people
who followed Muhammad (s), the Messenger of Allah. But you can't do
that, because the people who wrote your books for you were very busy
fabricating lies (a word-god which came all by itself, a creature who
is part god and part human, a god who begets a human being, etc.)
instead of focusing on what the human mind can accept.
If you believe that it is impossible for the Messenger Jesus to speak
in the cradle, why do you believe that a stick can become a snake? I
mean the baby is nevertheless a human; the ability to talk is not so
distant from a baby. Talking is in the nature of human beings. But it
is not the nature of a stick to become a snake or vice versa. If you
wait for the baby to talk, he or she will talk. But if you wait for
the stick to become a snake, you will not see this happen.
So why do you ridicule what we believe, and accept what your Bible
says? If you're not behaving out of bias, what meaningful criteria
do you use?
If you say that the stick became a snake because it is a miracle; and
the Red Sea was split in two halves for the Jews because it is a miracle;
and the Nile became blood because it is a miracle; and Jesus healed the
sick because this is a miracle; and Jesus raised the dead because it
is a miracle; and if you allege that Jesus was crucified, died and
rose again because that's a miracle. And if you believe that Jesus,
your human god, cursed fig trees when he was hungry, and told you that
you can miraculously move mountains (Which is a big lie)--we tell you
fine. Here's another decent miracle which you can add to your huge
list: Jesus spoke in the cradle.
Speaking in the cradle is not a big issue compared to getting crucified,
dying, and then coming back to life. So just like the Messenger Noah said
to his people, we say to you:
11:38-39. ... "If you mock at us, so do we mock at you likewise for
your mocking. And you will know who it is on whom will come a torment
that will cover him with disgrace and on whom will fall a lasting
torment."
Salam,
Abdalla.
M.S.M. Saifullah
> Accounts of a baby Jesus speaking (Qur'an 19:29-33) and a young Jesus
> fashioning a bird out of clay (Qur'an 3:49; 5:110) can be found in
> "The Arabic Gospel of the Infancy of the Saviour" and "The First
> Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ". Thought you might be
> interested.
"The style of the Arabic of this apocryphal Gospel, (Gospel Of The
Infancy) however, is so bad that it is hardly possible to believe that it
dates from Muhammad's time. As, however, Arabic has never been supposed to
be the language in which the work was composed, this is a matter of little
or no consequence. From a study of the book there seems little room for
doubt that it has been translated into Arabic from the Coptic, in which
language it may have been composed."
Rev. W. St. Clair Tisdall, The Original Sources Of The Qur'an, 1905,
Society For The Promotion Of Christian Knowledge, London, p. 42.
There you go!
Wassalam
Saifullah
M.S.M. Saifullah
> Interestingly, the Quran records this charge of borrowing leveled against
> Muhammad by his contemporaries:
>
> Quran 25:5
> And they say: "Tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written: and
> they are dictated before him morning and evening."
And interesting the next verse replies to this charge:
Say: "The (Qur'an) was sent down by Him who knows the mystery (that is) in
the heavens and the earth: verily He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."
One would see that the Qur'anic style of discourse is that of engaging a
reader in an argument. The answer is provided at the place where the
argument is made. The missionaries, as the readers of SRI are aware, are
well known for their misquotations and partial quotations.
> Quran 16:103-104
> "We know indeed that they say "It is a man that teaches him." The tongue of him
> they wickedly point to is notable foreign while this is Arabic pure and clear.
> Those who believe not in the Signs of Allah, Allah will not guide them and
> theirs will be a grievous Penalty." (Yusef Ali's translation) [1]
This is an old charge used by the "ten wise Jews" also. A refutation of it
is available at:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/BBwise.html
> The people who knew those stories heard Muhammad repeat them. Just as the Book
> of Mormon borrows from the Bible, so to, perhaps to establish his credibility,
> Muhammad borrowed from the religious stories he believed to be true.
Shall we also add to this list the borrowing of the Gilgamesh epic and
Ugaritic sources by the Bible.
Wassalam
Saifullah
John Smith
> the lies. This is what it does to the Christian and Jewish sources
> which the Jews and the Christians consider true, and the sources which
> both consider false.
So Muslims pick and choose from the Old and New Testaments. A verse
which supports the Quran is a "confirmation". A nearby verse which
contradicts the Quran is a "corruption". Is this correct?
Can you name a prophet in the Old or New Testaments who did something
similar? Did David call the Law of Moses corrupt? Did Isaiah call
the Law or the Psalms corrupt? Did Jesus call any of the Old
Testament corrupt?
Jesus only confirmed the previous scriptures. References upon
request. This is a major difference between Mohammed and the prophets
of the Old and New Testaments.
Regards,
John
MENJ
sila...@aol.com (SILAS778) wrote in message news:<9s1rpt$5em$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
> Muhammad was exposed to Christians and Jews in Mecca. During travels to
> neighboring lands, he continued to be exposed. It could not have avoided
> hearing their various religious stories. The parallels between his statements
> found in the Quran, and the various myths he heard indicate that he borrowed
> those stories.
[SNIP]
And there you have it...the constant beating of the drum of
"borrowing" charges levelled against the Prophet (P) by the
missionaries the likes of 'Silas'. However, Silas' "theory" has one
major flaw in it: there were no evidence of Jews or Christians living
in Mecca at the time of the Prophet (P). This has been documented by
my article at:
http://bismikaallahuma.faithweb.com/hejaz.html
Silas wants us to believe his claims even if it is argumentum ad
nauseam. Well, he thinks wrong!
> The people who knew those stories heard Muhammad repeat them. Just as the Book
> of Mormon borrows from the Bible, so to, perhaps to establish his credibility,
> Muhammad borrowed from the religious stories he believed to be true.
So any proof of the claim? Evidences? Citations? Nothing, only
conjecture. And that is what the missionary is only good at!
Wassalam.
MENJ
me...@maxis.net.my
http://bismikaallahuma.cjb.net
SILAS778
Without going into great detail, my whole argument can be found at the URL
below.
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/borrow.htm
Previously, even Saifullah has begrudingly admitted that Muhammad was exposed
to Christians and Jews in Mecca. If he hasn't removed it, one of Saifullah's
webpages contains a quote from a Muslim scholar (?) that details the activities
of Christian missionaries in Mecca. The point is that Muhammad could not have
helped but to have learned about Christianity and Judaism while living in Mecca
and Medina.
The stories that Muhammad learned, unbeknowns to him, were myths made up by
various people. And, these myths were identified by the early church as such,
and were never really considered to be anything of worth. On the other hand, I
suspect that if Muhammad had learned of the story of Alice in Wonderland, from
the mouth of Jew or Christian, he would have probably borrowed something from
that as well and put it into the Quran.
Abdalla asks that if I believe that a stick could turn into a snake, then why
can't I believe that God could have a baby speak?
It isn't a question of God's power to perform miracles, it is a question of
Muhammad borrowing stories that were well known myths.
Abdalla Alothman
> So Muslims pick and choose from the Old and New Testaments.
Sir, first, we don't pick and choose from the old and new
testament. We are not obliged to refer to those books. Those
books are not a source for us.
> A verse which supports the Quran is a "confirmation". A nearby
> verse which contradicts the Quran is a "corruption". Is this
> correct?
Yes, sort of. In addition, the Quran came up with a new system.
You know, it's like when people upgrade their personal computers
or operating systems. In other words, conflict is not limited
to corruption, but it also includes change.
Christians shouldn't object change, because as we all know, the
Christians accepted change when they disregarded the laws in
Deuteronomy, Numbers, and Leviticus. Who told the Christians they
can eat pigs? Who told the Christians that there's no punishment
for adultery?
> Can you name a prophet in the Old or New Testaments who did something
> similar? Did David call the Law of Moses corrupt? Did Isaiah call
> the Law or the Psalms corrupt? Did Jesus call any of the Old
> Testament corrupt?
Sir, you don't need a prophet or a Biblical character to tell
you how good are your books. You can use your own book to judge
its truthfulness.
The Quran tells us in Surat Al-Maa-ida:
5:68. Say (O Muhammad SAW) "O people of the Scripture (Jews and
Christians)! You have nothing (as regards guidance) till you act
according to the Taurāt (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel), and what has
(now) been sent down to you from your Lord (the Qur'ān)." Verily,
that which has been sent down to you (Muhammad SAW) from your Lord
increases in many of them their obstinate rebellion and disbelief.
So be not sorrowful over the people who disbelieve.
This aaya tells us that the Jews and the Christians have no
guidance until they apply what's in their books, and apply what
is in the Quran. If they do that, they will discover that their
books were distorted and given to them. If their books tell them
"if you do such and such God will allow you to do such and such,"
then they should be able to apply what their books tells them they
can, or should do. That's basically applying, or judging with a
given criteria. We go back to aaya 47 and read:
5:47. Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allāh
has revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allāh
has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fāsiqūn (the rebellious
i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree) to Allāh.
Allah revealed a book to the Christians, this book was given to
Prophet Jesus (a). They should rule according to that book which
Allah (tt) has revealed if they have it. If they don't have it,
the Quran is enough for them. If the ruling in that book conflicts
with the general message of God, this means that they are on
nothing. Same thing applies if the book they have does not enable
them to rule over a crucial judgment related to their faith or
their daily life affairs.
Let's take one example from the Christian book.
In John 14 we read:
12. I tell you the TRUTH, anyone who has faith in me will do what
I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these,
because I am going to the Father.
He is telling them that the truth, is that, whoever has faith in Jesus
will be doing what he does. And what does Prophet Jesus do? He does
miracles. He brings the dead back by Allah's permission, and he heals
the blind by Allah's permission, and he is claimed to moves mountains
and he also curses fig trees.
So if the fanatic Christians like Silas778, for example, believe in Jesus
they should be able to do the same. If not, then either their human god
is a liar, or they have no faith, or the book they hold in their hands
was fabricated and given to them. I'm afraid there is no other excuse
which comes to my mind.
Continuing, we read the next verse:
13. And I will do WHATEVER you ask in my name, so that the Son may
bring glory to the Father.
The people who wrote their books for them are saying that their
human god will do whatever they ask in his name. Their human god
clearly said "whatever" as their notable writers claim.
14. You may ask me for ANYTHING in my name, and I will do it.
Now, he is telling them that they can ask for "anything."
In Matthew 17 we read:
19 - Then the disciples came to Jesus in private and asked, "Why
couldn't we drive it [The demon] out?"
20 - He replied, "Because you have so LITTLE FAITH. I tell you the
TRUTH, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say
to this MOUNTAIN, `Move from here to there' and it will move.
NOTHING will be impossible for you."
Here, we see a clear testimony from Jesus telling the 12
disciples that they have little faith. Someone who has little
faith is closer to disbelief than being a believer. Now those
twelve are also considered infallible by the Christians, but
they are considered people of "little faith" to the Christian
god. There's something wrong here. Something is not computing
properly.
If they can't control demons (that's a horrible test, IMHO)
they have little faith. If they can't cast out demons, they
obviously can't move a mountain from one place to another. Moving
a mountain from one place to another is accomplished by anyone who
has faith as small as a mustard seed. I just wonder how little
their faith was when they had a problem with the demon.
In other words, the Christians took their religion from unbelievers
who had little or no faith. That's what their books say not the Quran.
So if the Christians of today have faith in God as they claim, they
are much better than the 12 who were with the one whom they call God
and son of God. I wonder who would believe that the Christians of
today are guided, when their book clearly says that the first source
which they took their religion from is no more than a bunch of
unbelievers.
As Muslims we don't believe that the followers of Jesus had little
faith. We believe they were believers, but the Christian testament
says that they had little faith. That's why we don't take the Christian
sources seriously. Those who followed Jesus are better than many people
who relate themselves to Islam in this age.
In Matthew 21, we read:
21. Jesus replied, "I tell you the TRUTH, if you have faith and do
not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but
also you can say to this mountain, `Go, throw yourself into the
sea,' and it will be done.
What happened to the fig tree? They claim that Jesus, their living
human god, was taking a walk, he became hungry, and he passed by a
fig tree that had no fruits. They say that he cursed the tree, and
it went dry (Far are the prophets of God from this nonsense).
Also notice that the Christian human god implicates that his
disciples have no faith, they have doubts. The Prophet (a) has
to keep on pumping his miracles so that the disciples would believe
(And notice they were threatened by Allah at the end of Surat
Al-Maa-ida).
And in Mark 11 we read:
12. The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry.
13. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out
if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but
leaves, because it was not the season for figs.
14. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you
again." And his disciples heard him say it.
[...]
20. In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered
>from the roots.
21. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you
cursed has withered!"
22. "Have faith in God," Jesus answered.
23. "I tell you the TRUTH, if anyone says to this mountain, `Go, throw
yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes
that what he says will happen, it will be done for him.
24. Therefore I tell you, WHATEVER you ask for in prayer, believe that
you have received it, and it will be yours.
Let's not comment whether a god will curse a tree when he gets
hungry--of course, Prophet Jesus is innocent from these hallucinations
attributed to him by the pens of the ignorant unbelievers, and the
confused people who wrote this superstition for them. But, let's
ask some questions.
If we were to ask the slaves of the cross who believe that their
books are from god the following questions:
1 - Do you believe in Jesus as described in the Bible?
2 - Do you believe that Jesus or God answers your prayers?
3 - Is Jesus your God?
4 - Do you believe that what's in your book is from God?
5 - Do you believe that Jesus spoke the TRUTH when he talked about the
"truth" in the passages above--which are found in the book which
you call holy?
6 - Do you really want us to believe that this Injeel is the Injeel
which the Quran said you received?
They will probably answer "yes" to all the questions above.
According to the passages above, if the Christian asks Jesus anything
(As Jesus supposedly says in these distorted passages), Jesus will
give it to them. This is what their books say, and this is what the
Quran invites them to do: To go to their books and judge by what Allah
has revealed and to apply what their books tell them to do. If they
cannot judge, as in this case due to the falsification of their books,
then they should know that what they have is not from God. Therefore,
they should not come to us and say, "This Bible is from God."
So we ask the Christians who challenge Muslims to find a mountain and
ask the mountain in the name of Jesus to move from one place to another.
Or we ask them to find a fig tree and curse it until it dries. If they
can do that, then we tell them: Congratulations! The size of your faith
is that of a mustard seed! Please come back again and show us what you
can do when the size of your faith becomes equal to the size of an
coconut.
If they cannot do what their book says they can do, we ask them to
find a hill or a tiny rock or a pebble or a piece of paper which they
can place on their fingertips, and ask Jesus to move it for them 2
inches forward. And this is how Abu Muhammad, Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi
(raHimahu Allah), challenged the Christians of his time.
This is the superstitious test that their holy book gives them in
order to measure the amount of faith in their heart. If they cannot
move a mountain, or even a tiny pebble, then their faith is not even
the size of a mustard seed; which means they have no faith at all.
And that's why we Muslims do not believe that the books they hold in
their hands are from God. I mean that's really a serious problem, but
it's not the only problem in their books which they call holy. And
this problem is not our problem, it's their own problem. If, however,
the Quran told us that it confirms what the Jews and the Christians
hold in their hands, such problems would be our problems as well,
wal-'iyaathu billaah.
What Allah said is that the Quran confirms what He (tt) has revealed
before (What is in His (tt) hands), not what the Jews and the Christians
hold in their hands.
So, we ask them: What belief in God are you talking about? What
holy book are you holding in your hands? If they don't have faith, we
shouldn't take a word from them. They should work on developing their
faith before they think about propagating their false beliefs to the
Muslims. But if they have faith, then their human god should give them
what they were promised. Until then, we should wait for them to invite
us for the show.
The Christians don't need the Quran or the Muslims to tell them that
what they have in their hands is false, they can figure that on their
own. Since, however, they want to compare what they have with the Quran,
then they should accept what the Muslims will tell them about their
books even if what we say will taste bitter. Although, I see that there
is no comparison between their holy books and the Quran.
Prophet Jesus is innocent from the lies that the gospel writers
ascribed to him. No prophet of God will tell his people to examine
their faith with such superstitious tests. And that's one reason
why Christians love miracles so much. They get too excited because
they think they have faith, but the promises given to them by their
gospel writers cannot become true even if they were fully loaded
with faith. Why? Because they have faith in falsehood or their books
are not from God or Jesus lied to them--and far is he from telling
lies.
If the slaves of the cross say that the passages above resemble
a metaphor, we remind the Christians that Jesus supposedly said:
"Anything," "Whatever you ask in my name," "Nothing will be
impossible," "I tell you the truth," etc. Therefore, it can't be
a metaphor, and if it is a metaphor then the truth they have is
nothing more than a metaphor. So what good is the truth if it is
only a metaphor?
The ability to recognize the difference between the truth and
falsehood is part of our instinct. We know the truth when it is
given to us, and we know falsehood when we pass over it. The
Christian testament has some truths in it, but that's just
like the truth which Satan already knows.
It is passages like the above which makes it very hard for Muslims
to believe that the Bible has a divine source backing it up.
> Jesus only confirmed the previous scriptures. References upon
> request. This is a major difference between Mohammed and the prophets
> of the Old and New Testaments.
Mr. John, we gave you a small test from your book above. If
you can move a mountain 1 meter in any direction in the name of
Jesus, I will listen to you. If you fail the test, please see how
the book you are advocating outlines your status above.
Salam,
Abdalla.
Altway
news:9se3l8$jm9$1...@samba.rahul.net...
> So Muslims pick and choose from the Old and New Testaments. A verse
> which supports the Quran is a "confirmation". A nearby verse which
contradicts the Quran is a "corruption". Is this correct?
Comment:-
Wrong.
Muslims go by the Quran which is the criterion of what is right or wrong.
Somethings which might have been right under the conditions of the past have
been abrogated and replaced by other things, more suitable for the new age.
Somethings in past scriptures have been misinterpreted and somethings have
been reformulated.
The same is true as between the NT and OT. Were it not so all Jews would
have been Christians and all Christian would have been Jews.
--
H. S. Aziz
"The Alternative Way" at
www.altway.freeuk.com
Abdalla Alothman
sila...@aol.com (SILAS778) wrote in message news:<9sjdiv$lnu$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
We asked for the criteria in which Silas778 depends on when calling
a certain event a myth. And he gave us his criteria; it isn't any better
than we predicted:
> The stories that Muhammad learned, unbeknowns to him, were myths
> made up by various people. And, these myths were identified by
> the early church as such, and were never really considered to be
> anything of worth.
So as we see his criteria is pretty shallow; the church identified it as
such. So whatever the church Silas778 follows said, it has to be the truth.
We consider this criteria nonsense. If what he calls a myth is a myth, he
has to explain why it is a myth. Just because some people said it was a
myth, it doesn't have to be a myth.
Indeed, IF there were Christians who had a book which contained the event
related to the Messenger 'Eesa (Jesus) speaking in the cradle, they most
likely were tied to a church which approved this event. But later churches
who were affiliated with the Jews tried to label this event as a myth. That's
because the whole event exposes the Jewish quarrelsome nature with the
messengers, prophets, and the sincere believers. Those Christians did not
say that when their human god cursed fig trees--they didn't say that was
a myth. When their human god promised all of them that if they had 1% of
faith, they can move mountains--they didn't call that a myth either.
Their book is with them, if they can curse fig trees and move mountains
just like their human god promised them, then they have something. If
not, we just wonder where the myth is!
What the Quran says about Maryam and 'Eesa is the truth as we believe it.
To us, what the Quran says about the Messenger 'Eesa makes more sense
than Christian theology which is not even based from their so called holy
book. If some Christian fanatics want to believe that this is a myth,
because a group of people thought so, they are free to take that opinion.
2:109. Many of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) wish
that if they could turn you away as disbelievers after you have believed,
out of envy from their ownselves...
Salam,
Abdalla.
M.S.M. Saifullah
> The stories that Muhammad learned, unbeknowns to him, were myths made up by
> various people. And, these myths were identified by the early church as such,
> and were never really considered to be anything of worth. On the other hand, I
> suspect that if Muhammad had learned of the story of Alice in Wonderland, from
> the mouth of Jew or Christian, he would have probably borrowed something from
> that as well and put it into the Quran.
Now this is interesting. The early Church did not have one single book
called Bible. The crystallisation of the numbers of books of the Bible
came much later and in different parts of the world different churches
accepted different number of books as inspired. For more information one
can see:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/BibleTex.html#Bible
Further, the early Church, as opposed to Silas' claim did not consider the
books of New Testament that we have are as "inspired". Bruce Metzger and
other scholars have already mentioned this point of which many
missionaries are complete ignorant about.
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/BibleTex.html#Fathers
So much for the "early church". To be honest we really do not know how
various Churches in different parts of the (Christian?) world arrived at
the conclusion that the books in the Bible were "inspired". One man's
apocrypha was other man's inspired scripture. So, to claim that the early
Church did reject the "myth" is akin to Alice in Wonderland. Further,
apocrypha does not translate itself as untrustworthy or not being
historical. If Christians and Jews were able to spin myths then how are we
to believe what is there in the Bible being true? Silas has simply shot
his foot!
If one avoids the dupilcation of the life of Jesus in New Testament it
would even fill two columns of the newspaper. How many years did Jesus
live on this earth???
In essence, if we find stories of the past present in the Qur'an, it
simply means that the Qur'an is authenticating it. If the story goes
contrary to the Bible, then well Silas has already kindly informed us that
the myths were propagated by Jews and Christians.
> Abdalla asks that if I believe that a stick could turn into a snake, then why
> can't I believe that God could have a baby speak?
>
> It isn't a question of God's power to perform miracles, it is a question of
> Muhammad borrowing stories that were well known myths.
Red Herring.
Wassalam
Saifullah
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/
Rx
This would seem so.
R-x
Steadfast
>
>
> 5. Yes, I have no doubt that Mohammed made up the Koran up.
>
well if you really believe so, I am sorry to say,
he made a better job than all the other people put together who made
up the previous scriptures
> 6. As a Christian, I'm sticking with what St. Paul and St. Thomas Aquinas
> wrote about Jesus, not what Mohammed made up about Jesus, even though neither
> man promised me numerous virgins to play with when I die as a Christian.
when the truth is hidden by so much piles of other stuff it is so
difficult to see the light
but opening your eyes in the dark you can still see shreds of lights
here and there
e.g. if God says that there is no God but Him then another says He is
three
if Jesus says follow the law and another says do not follow the
law
I think there is hint here, but if you do not see the hint, you
might as well flunk it is up to you.
Also to know God the creator who no one can see is by seeing his
actions and gisfts that he bestowed on earth.
so if he gave you food here on earth
and made males and females
and gave you the pleasure of eating and having sex and playing etc.
(Just for about 70 years)
then you would wonder what would you be doing in paradise living
eternity.
well God told us that in paradise there will bliss in a way that no
Human brain imagine
for those simple people who want to imagine he gave such examples that
bring it close
to what they know on earth
so if you are a person that you are not interested in food or sex or
what ever
do not worry God will find things for you to do
>
> 7. Note: I still cannot figure out how or why Mohammed came up with the wild
> idea that Adam, who was kicked out of Eden, could ever be considered a prophet,
> a prophet to be considered in the same category as Jesus.
>
> 8. For Muslims to speak about Adam as being in anyway similar to Jesus---that
> is, of both being prophets--- is an insult to all Christians. Mi...@aol.com.
for the above I have replied to these points I will copy the reply for
your benefit and others
regards
*************************************************
Re: Adam as Prophet: Insult to Christians
*************************************************
not two people are equal before God
each individual has a different relation and closenesss to God
and the Prophets are like wise
though Muslims profess that not to differentiate between prohphets
but this in regards to the general faith article
as the Quran states in
****
[2.285] The apostle believes in what has been revealed to him
>from his
Lord,
and (so do) the believers; they all believe in Allah and His
angels and
His books
and His apostles; We make no difference between any of His
apostles;
and they say: We hear and obey, our Lord! Thy forgiveness (do we
crave),
and to Thee is the eventual course.
*****
but surely there are higher ranks in prophets the Quran makes this
clear in
****
[2.253] We have made some of these apostles
to excel the others among them are they to whom Allah spoke,
and some of them He exalted by (many degrees of) rank;
and We gave clear miracles to Isa son of Marium, and
strengthened him with the holy spirit. And if Allah had pleased,
those after them would not have fought one with another after
clear
arguments had come to them, but they disagreed;
so there were some of them who believed and others who denied;
and if Allah had pleased they would not have fought one with
another,
but Allah brings about what He intends.
****
and there are the most high prophets as it is mentioned in the Quran
****
[46.35] Therefore bear up patiently as did the apostles endowed
with
constancy
bear up with patience and do not seek to hasten for them (their
doom).
On the day that they shall see what they are promised they shall
be
as if they had not tarried save an hour of the day.
A sufficient exposition! Shall then any be destroyed save the
transgressing people?
****
they are five Prophets: Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammad
how did we know them; the Quran says in
****
[33.7] And when We made a covenant with the prophets and with you,
and
with Nuh
and Ibrahim and Musa and Isa, son of Marium, and We made with them
a
strong covenant.
****
Also
****
[42.13] He has made plain to you of the religion what He enjoined
upon
Nuh and that
which We have revealed to you and that which We enjoined upon
Ibrahim
and Musa
and Isa that keep to obedience and be not divided therein; hard to
the
unbelievers is
that which you call them to; Allah chooses for Himself whom He
pleases,
and guides to
Himself him who turns (to Him), frequently.
****
Though it was one message but each had unique characterstics to the
message
but more importantly each has different closeness to God
we can not say for certain who is closer it is understood though it is
not a
doctrine of faith that
Abraham, Moses and Jesus have a higher rank than Noah
it is also thought that Abraham has a very close relationship to God
like no
other
although God spoke to Moses it is felt that Jesus may have a higher
rank
but one would not find this as a faith article or something that is
agreed
upon by moslems
but from my many various readings I felt from the different views that
they
would go in this order
Noah then Moses is closer then Jesus or Abraham more propable is
Abraham to
be closer to God
I have not included Mohammad in the comparison since it is a uninamous
amongst Muslims that Mohammmad is the closest of all creations to God
so you can see that moslems cherich Jesus as second or third to
Mohammad in
closeness to God
However the comparison between Adam and Jesus is only in the creartion
Process
this is told to the people who say that Jesus is Son of God, God or
God
Incarnet
and calim the the virgin birth as one proof to this
so God points out that both Jesus and Adam where created from Mud
[3.59] Surely the likeness of Isa is with Allah
as the likeness of Adam; He created him from
dust, then said to him, Be, and he was.
and so if Jesus was created without Father then Adam is more complex
as he was created without either one and this leads you to Eve who
was
also created from a male which is more miraculous than being created
>from a womb of a woman so this item proof for the divinity of Jesus
is
unvalid
asimm...@yahoo.com
> Asalamu alaikum.
>
> sila...@aol.com (SILAS778) wrote in message news:<9sjdiv$lnu$1...@samba.rahul.net>...
>
> We asked for the criteria in which Silas778 depends on when calling
> a certain event a myth. And he gave us his criteria; it isn't any better
> than we predicted:
>
> > The stories that Muhammad learned, unbeknowns to him, were myths
> > made up by various people. And, these myths were identified by
> > the early church as such, and were never really considered to be
> > anything of worth.
>
> So as we see his criteria is pretty shallow; the church identified it as
> such. So whatever the church Silas778 follows said, it has to be the truth.
> We consider this criteria nonsense. If what he calls a myth is a myth, he
> has to explain why it is a myth. Just because some people said it was a
> myth, it doesn't have to be a myth.
>
Wa salaam
It is strange that anyone would consider the speaking of a baby from
its cradle as a myth.
They fail to see that the speaking of Jesus as a baby is proof for the
VIRGINITY of Maryam (AS). The Quran informs us of the humiliation,
"Oh that I would have died this day", that Maryam (AS) knew she was
going to face. Besides being such a noble, dignified and chaste lady,
being the daughter of a priest from the family of Haroon (AS) was
undoubtedly a position of honour and dignity. God reassured her that
he was the disposer of affairs and commanded her to act in a certain
way. No matter how much Maryam (AS) would have defended her
integrity, the people would have continued in their slander.
Undoutedly, God proved her innocence to the people through the
speaking of that noble and zahid, Isa (AS) when he was a mere baby in
the cradle. If one were to analyse the New Testament, it would be
impossible to prove the virginity of Maryam (AS).
In their hatred for Islam, they fail to even see the inherent wisdom.
Thus, once again the Quran restores the honour given to Jesus (AS) and
Maryam (AS).
Wa salaam