It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was Muhammed a Christian?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Some time back we could read in a Newsweek edition about a German expert in Semittic languages, who claimed that the Koran was originally written in Aramaic. For like he says, Arabic didn't exist as a written language until 150 years after the death of the prophet, and when rewritten in Aramaic many of the verses which makes no sense in Arabic suddenly make perfectly sense. For instance:


The commandment for women to cover themselves is based on a misreading of the text, he contends, according to Newsweek. The verse calling women to "snap their scarves" over their bags becomes in Aramaic "snap their belts around their waists," says Luxenberg.

An Aramaic reading of Sura 33, calling Muhammad "the seal of the prophets" or the final and ultimate prophet of God actually should read "witness of the prophets," he claims.
(From this source. Note that the original Newsweek article has been deleted off the internet, possibly in fear of a fatwa).

Is it really so that the Adversary managed to confuse the Arabs by translating the Koran to another language just like he had managed to fool the Chistians by translating their works into Latin and Greek, and how he nearly managed to destroy sound Judaism with the Talmud before that again? Is the Koran we know today the product of Arabic nationalism 150 years after the death of the prophet? Just like the Christian Bible we know today is the product of Roman imperialism a little earlier? For it is indeed strange that at the same time kalif Usman (the third kalif after Muhammed) burnt all existing manuscripts of the Koran he could find, in order to standardise the Koran, by making a new one based on the "original" manuscript kept by Hafsa. All this happened at the very same time that Arabic as a written language was born, about 150 years after the death of the prophet who alledgely received the book in the Arabic language, something which scholars nowdays have great problems understanding. If the Koran was written in Arabic, then why don't we have any other written material written in Arabic until 150 years after Muhammed's death?

Anyway, when translated (back?) into Aramaic, which was the common language at the time of Muhammed in the area where he lived and served, the text suddenly makes perfect sense also in a Christian and even Jewish perspective, and many of the suras which today is nearly impossible to understand in Arabic, suddenly makes perfect sense. Like in the two simple examples above. My question is then: Was the Koran Muhammed received by the tongue of Arch Gabriel infact a Christian doctrine meant for the gentiles and as a blessing for the children of Ismael, the brother of Isaac? Will Muhammed return in these days like one of the two endtime Witnesses which is spoken of in the Book of Revelation? And is he just as misunderstood as Jesjuah is?

Blessings,
Mikromarius




posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Muhammed was a prophet like Christ but much of his works have been distorted deliberately for purposes of negative control over people.



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 04:01 PM
link   
No, mohammed and Christ were not alike at all, to say that neo means you misunderstand who christ was.

However I have read that as well about the Koran, being written in Aramaic. But the parts about the mistranslations is interesting. Its a pity though that even if it were true, nothing would ever come of it and even to suggest it could get you the death penalty in some islamic countries.

Makes me wonder about the corruption of a religion and the twisting of it that turns it into the malignant thing that it is today...



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 04:05 PM
link   
you talk of islam as if its any different from your own



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 04:22 PM
link   
NC,

no offense meant but I think you are mistaken,

consider this:

Both were prophets
Both had similar beliefs
They came at relatively same era.
Both founded great religions
Both resulted in major religious study and works being produced about their exploits
Both had similar roots in their faiths
Both came from nearly the same geographic area

when reading the Koran I even see similarities with the old testament and less so with the new testament. Since I have strong reason to believe that the Koran is like the bible, corrupted then we may find that the differences between Christians and Muslims are even less than we now believe.

Oh and to assuade your fears I am not globalist desiring the unification of all churchs into world church. I find that idea abhorrent especially if people are not for it themselves and it is being forced upon them by some unseen hand.



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
NC,

no offense meant but I think you are mistaken,

Certianly no offence taken




consider this:

Both were prophets Nope, Jesus was the one to whom the prophets pointed to, John the Baptist was the prophet, Jesus what the person he was prophesising about
Both had similar beliefs ... such as? so did many people. Mohammed got his ideas from a christian sect in the desert, so he would have the same ideas.
They came at relatively same era. Mohammed was 500 years later

Both founded great religions, Both resulted in major religious study and works being produced about their exploits, similar does not mean the same, one of these leads on from the other anyway

Both had similar roots in their faiths yes the old testament
Both came from nearly the same geographic area doesn't mean a thing


when reading the Koran I even see similarities with the old testament and less so with the new testament.

well you would the OT is part of the Koran and the eye for an eye precepts are carried on. The Koran is what the OT might have become if Christ hadn't come along.



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
No, mohammed and Christ were not alike at all, to say that neo means you misunderstand who christ was.


No, it's the other way around. You show that you have no idea who you are voting for. Jesjuah and Muhammed are not unlike at all. They are both prophets like Mosche. Worthy of being called rightious and children of God. Don't mix Sharia with the Koran and Muhammed's teachings. They are as far appart as Jesuah's teachings and the doctrines of the Catholic Church.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
Muhammed was a prophet like Christ but much of his works have been distorted deliberately for purposes of negative control over people.

This is probably one of the few things I agree with you THENEO, that both the Prophet Muhammad and Christ were delivering the same message, as were the wrest of the Prophets. All they were saying is to love all.

[Edited on 16-2-2004 by TheCatalyst]



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Common misconception.
Jesus and Mohammed did NOT have the same message...

Where does mohammed say .."I am the way,. the truth and the life, NO ONE will come to the Father except by me"

Where does Muhammed raise the dead?

Where does Mohammed claim that the OT has been fulfilled by his birth?

When was Mohammed worshiped as the messiah?

So many more things I could add, Mohammed only points the way to God, like the prophets of the OT did. Jesus said he WAS God, thats why the Jews stoned him, the two had completely different messages.

If I had the time I could post copious quotes where they are different.

some more quotes here...
www.biblecenter.com...


[Edited on 16-2-2004 by Netchicken]



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
Common misconception.
Jesus and Mohammed did NOT have the same message...


Laws about rightiousness in war, general wisdom, and common food precautions and a strong aversion against adultary, and ofcourse they both taught to to treat your neighbors with respect etc. These are mostly the same things, only suited for another nation.


Where does mohammed say .."I am the way,. the truth and the life, NO ONE will come to the Father except by me"


Muhammed didn't have to fight for his rights. Jesjuah had to all his time. If Muhammed had been under similar ongoing pressure from Quissling like clerics and politicans who worked for Rome, like Jesjuah was, I bet you would have found that he would have said similar things. Muhammed has never claimed he was whether a king or some messiah. He was a prophet and a witness. He was a humble and rightious man. And Muhammed recognise Jesjuah like a prophet. That's more than enough for me.


Where does Muhammed raise the dead?


When did Daniel raise the dead? When did Mosche ever do the same? Mosche did infact kill a man with his bare hands. Would you have to kill someone to be called a prophet these days?


Where does Mohammed claim that the OT has been fulfilled by his birth?


Nowhere. Why should he? Jesjuah already did that. Besides he was not Jewish. The Word of the Tannakh is strictly Jewish. Did Jesaiah have to claim that he was the fulfillment of the Torah in order to prophecy about Jesjuah and his Messiah?


When was Mohammed worshiped as the messiah?


Never, because Messiah is a Jewish royal title. It's the title given to kings of David's family, branch of Solomon who have been called to service by God, either through prophecy or directly. He must rule above all 12 Israeli tribes, and his rightiousness must be spotless. This together with many other things you seem to ommit in your crucade, signify your ignorance even clearer this time. And one of the last thing anyone rightious wants would be to be worshipped as a king. That's equal to idolatry. Try again.

Blessings,
Mikromarius

[Edited on 16-2-2004 by Hamilton]



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Hi all,

No Muhammad(pbuh) was not a christian, he was a Submitter, like Moses and Jesus and other prophets of God(pbut).

"Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 5:17-18)"

As you can see in this verse, Jesus(pbuh) did not come to the people of Israel to abolish the Law(OT, Torah) he came to FULFILL them.

NC, God Almighty made the Prophets have differant Miracles for the current Time.
Moses(pbuh): At his time people saw all kinds of Magic done by the Egyptions and so Moses(pbuh) with the Will of God had Magic that noone can produce/imitate, and so that caused the people to follow him.

Jesus(obuh): At his time of his arrival, there were alot of Deaths from Viruses, So BY THE WILL OF GOD, he could cure people and raise them from the dead.

Muhammad(pbuh): At his time there were lots of people doing poetry, and so by the will of God Muhammad(pbuh) gave the best poetry that anyone has ever heard
and none could match it. Thats why when a Muslim says that the Miracle that Muhammad had, they will say "The Knoble Qur'an"

So to say that Muhammad(pbuh) or even Christ(pbuh) was a Christian, is not accurate at all.

Salaam

Guerilla



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 06:25 PM
link   
That is pure NONSENSE!

The Holy Qur'an was written in ARABIC, not Aramaic, let's be serious here.

First of all, The Qur'an wasn't written right when the Prophet was living, it was written many years after his death, many years.

That guy has no clue what he is talking about.

So Muhammad isn't the Seal of the Prophets like the man says?

Ok, name me another Prophet as great as Muhammad after his death?

YOU CAN'T NAME NO ONE BECAUSE HE WAS IT.

Total nonsense.



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 06:28 PM
link   
The bottom line is this:

not because I say it but those much better educated than I in these subjects:

that the differences between Judiasm, Christianity and Islam are not great differences.

In fact I would argue that these faiths represent a line, a continuum or a sort that is still moving forward today.



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
In fact I would argue that these faiths represent a line, a continuum or a sort that is still moving forward today.


Applause! God is a living God, not a static image. He didn't make his laws to punnish people, he gave his laws for protection and as a means to become wise and rightious. And both the Torah and the Koran have these qualities. But not all men are blessed with such a warm heart of Jesjuah and his ability to get nearly any person out of any trouble. However, I doubt you would find many men who could say they had greater rightiousness than Muhammed. I guess it would end with Mosche and Muhammed hand wressling or something. A thing I would have loved to see one day.

But Ill67: I don't mean to walk on the graves of the kalifs, they may have had noble reasons for translating it, but there are obviously evidence that points to the idea that the Koran was originally written down, or that it atleast contains material gathered from Aramaic sources. We have much the same things in the New Testament too. This isn't blasphemy. To refuse the Truth is blasphemy. Allah is a God who forgives great attrocities and gives people new starts. Again and again. For Allah is Love. And we are all God's children if we are true to our covenants.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 07:13 PM
link   


Ok, name me another Prophet as great as Muhammad after his death?

YOU CAN'T NAME NO ONE BECAUSE HE WAS IT.




Guru Nanak Dev Ji, and Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

Two.

Deep



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Zerodeep,

those people I am not aware of, I am sure that they are prophets too.

maybe there have been many and most forgotten, some murdered, and some never given the exposure they deserved.



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroDeep



Ok, name me another Prophet as great as Muhammad after his death?

YOU CAN'T NAME NO ONE BECAUSE HE WAS IT.




Guru Nanak Dev Ji, and Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

Two.

Deep


Ok, let me elaborate on this for those who don't understand.

There were many prophets. 128,000 prophets if I'm not mistaken. Some were big, some were small.

Muhammad is the LAST of the BIGGER Prophets.



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Illmatic67,

Two Prophets,

www.sikhs.org...
The First Master
Guru Nanak Dev (1469-1539)

Me, the bard out of work, the Lord has applied to His service. In the very beginning He gave me the order to sing His praises night and day. The Master summoned the minstrel to His True Court. He clothed me with the robe of His true honour and eulogy. Since then the True Name had become my ambrosial food. They, who under the Gurus instruction, eat this food to their satisfaction, obtain peace. By singing the Gurus hymns, I, the minstrel spread the Lords glory. Nanak, by praising the True Name I have obtained the perfect Lord. (Guru Nanak, Pauri, pg. 150)

Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji
allaboutsikhs.com...

It may not be out of the way to say here that throughout the annals of human history, there was no other individual who could be of more inspiring personality than Guru Gobind Singh. At its climax the tenth Nanak infused the spirit of both the saintlihood and the undauntedness in the minds and hearts of his followers to fight oppression in order to restore justice, righteousness (Dharma) and to uplift the down-trodden people in this world. It is said that after the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur, the tenth Master declared that he would create such a Panth (nation) which would not be cowed down by tyrant rulers but it would rather challenge the oppressor in every walk of life to restore justice, equality and peace for mankind. He further resolved that he would feel worthy to be called Gobind Singh only when any single member of his Khalsa Panth would successfully and undauntedly challenge the army of one hundred and twenty-five thousand opponents in the field. This point was rightfully proven at Chamkaur Sahib when Sahibzada Ajit Singh (Guru's about 18 years old eldest son) challenged the Mughal forces and their allies, the hilly Rajas.

Deep



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 07:21 PM
link   


Muhammad is the LAST of the BIGGER Prophets


How were these not BIGGER Prophets?

Deep



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 07:22 PM
link   
They were prophets, fine.

But they weren't one of the important ones.

If you think they were as big as Muhammad, Moses, and Jesus then let's throw in ummm, all the popes, JFK, MLK, Malcolm X, Mother Theresa and everyone else as big prophets.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join