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.

 

Ten Myths Within Islam

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 06:16 AM
link   
Firstly, let me state this is NOT intended as an anti-Muslim thread. The vast majority of Muslims are friendly, considerate and pleasant human beings who want the best for themselves and their families, as well as live in peace and security. Thus, Muslims are no different than most Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Shintos or Atheists who also share these desires. We all know that an extremist minority within in any group of people are the ones who cause most of the problems and harm the reputation of the population as a whole. The problem I find is that in an attempt to strengthen the reputation of all adherents of Islam, people around the world (and especially in the West) are excusing and turning a blind eye to the threat of Islamic extremism.

My motivation for making this thread is to put forth what I consider to be very important information regarding Islam as a religious ideology. I do acknowledge that this website appears to have a Christian bias. Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to find a neutral, completely unbiased website when discussing these issues. This website is in my opinion honest, reasonable and concise - which is a rarity when dealing with controversial topics. I feel the author of this website was focussed more on honesty and truth as opposed to conjecture and outright lies. I have read MANY websites about Islam, both praiseworthy and critical alike, but this website seems to tie a lot of truths from both together pretty well.

He presents ten common ideas about Islam and how they are portrayed in both the Western and non-Western media. They are often presented by those who are apologetic to Islamic extremism and condemning of Western society. I strongly encourage anybody with an interest in Religion to read through each page as every statement made is backed up with a detailed analysis and commentary.

I could easily compile a long and detailed thread based on the major ideas, but I feel this does injustice to the hard work carried out by the author. I will present the titles of the ten articles, and if this appeals to you, simply click the link and read. I am sure you have heard some of these claims and probably never thought much about them. Well, imo, it is time to take notice and face truth and the reality of the situation.

******** Ten Myths About Islam ********

Table of Contents

The Qur'an

* Chapter 1 - The Qur'an is Preserved and Unchanged Revelation from Allah

* Chapter 2 - The Qur'an is Allah's Perfect and Complete Word

Theology

* Chapter 3 - Allah is the Same as the God of the Bible

* Chapter 4 - Muslims Reverence Jesus Christ

Mohammed

* Chapter 5 - Mohammed was a Prophet of Allah

* Chapter 6 - Mohammed was the Fulfillment of Biblical Prophecies

Social Impact

* Chapter 7 - Islam is a Peaceful Religion

* Chapter 8 - Islam is a Tolerant Religion

* Chapter 9 - Women are Respected and Equal in Islam

Eternal Efficacy

* Chapter 10 - Islam is a Religion Which Can Offer Eternal Salvation

Glossary of Arabic and Islamic Terms

---------------------------------------------------------

Some information about me and my beliefs:

- I believe the "War on Terror" is a farce where the Global Elite exploited a minor threat, and turned it into a very real and concerning one that the West faces today. (Effectively I am saying that I do not support the "War on Terror" or think the views of this website condone it either.)

- I do not think this website provides justification for those in the West to associate Islam with Palestinians - and thus try to justify the Israeli Army's often disproportionate reactions to Palestinian acts of provocation. Regardless of race or religion, Palestinians deserve to be treated with respect and dignity. Let us remember that it is an extremist minority within both the Israeli population and Palestinian population that are causing ill for the region and those around the world.

- I do not believe Iran is a real threat to Israel. But I do think the Global Elite are exaggerating the threat to the Israeli public and causing those living there to be panicked and worried about this. I think the Global Elite are trying to portray to the Muslim world that The West wants to show off its strength and arrogance by attacking a Holy Islamic site. Basically, they are turning the West and the Muslim world against each other. Why do I believe this is being done? There is so much anger and distrust between both sides that any significant spark would result in an official World War, or Holy Religious war at the very least.

- If you look at my post history, you will see I try my best to be fair and balanced in most issues. I have many times criticised the Islamophobia that some ATS members choose to bring forth. I have many times criticised the Jewphobia that some members bring forth. I have both supported and opposed policies of the State of Israel. I have made numerous posts that are defensive of Iran and show why an attack on them would be dire for pretty much everyone on this planet.

[edit on 8/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]




posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 06:42 AM
link   
israel having white racists in europe trying to kill their people off DURING WW2, and having muslim countries bring 4 wars trying to kill their people off AFTER WW2, they have a mentality of either fight or die. leave israel alone and don't threaten them, and muslims won't die. seems pretty simple to me. in their minds, this is about survival of their people, and they will use a hammer to swat a fly. why are others surprised?

land mass of the country of israel..............8,522 square miles
land mass of the country of iran.............636,374 square miles
land mass of the state of massachusetts...10,555 square miles

[edit on 8-10-2009 by jimmyx]

[edit on 8-10-2009 by jimmyx]



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Don,t expect much in the line of responses. A well thought out thread that asks the readers to think is too much for them to bear. To form an opinion or think outside the box is not to be expected. A star and flag from me though. Good post.

Respectfully

Reluctantpawn



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 10:07 AM
link   
I read several pages of the website. Unfortunately I can't agree that it is unbiased. It is in fact a very Christian perspective on things. The author, an Arab himself, seems to have a vendetta against Islam.

Yes, there is much to question about Islam. I particularly enjoyed the first section about the fact that the Qur'an is indeed a multi-version, many times edited document and not handed down intact from Allah as we so often hear.

The author also points out how its promotes violence. I think it is good that someone is pointing these things out; however, to say he is unbiased is incorrect.

I strongly believe that Muslims, Christians and Jews are all inheritors of the same archaic, barbarian belief system that promotes and encourages violence towards neighbours and anyone outside of their group.

The sooner we rid ourselves of all of these the better.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by wayno
I read several pages of the website. Unfortunately I can't agree that it is unbiased. It is in fact a very Christian perspective on things. The author, an Arab himself, seems to have a vendetta against Islam.


Thank you for your response wayno. I am not certain if you are referring specifically to me or another poster, but if you read the 2nd paragraph carefully, you will see I acknowledge there is a Christian bias.


I do acknowledge that this website appears to have a Christian bias. Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to find a neutral, completely unbiased website when discussing these issues. This website is in my opinion honest, reasonable and concise - which is a rarity when dealing with controversial topics.


It really is close to impossible to find a 100% balanced and fair website that is sympathetic to the plight of both sides. Why I hold this website in such high regard is because it is very detailed and honest when presenting the facts and the commentaries. It also underlines why religious ideology is so dangerous when it is adopted by an extremist minority and encouraged onto a majority that is suffering and in trouble.



I strongly believe that Muslims, Christians and Jews are all inheritors of the same archaic, barbarian belief system that promotes and encourages violence towards neighbours and anyone outside of their group.


I strongly agree with you on this. All of these religions have archaic, barbaric and violent elements. The shame is that even in their current form, there are so MANY similarities between all three that you would wonder why most people do not get along. We are told that religion is meant to unite, but look where we are now...

[edit on 8/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 





I strongly agree with you on this. All of these religions have archaic, barbaric and violent elements.


Religion is a curse, because hardly anyone "gets it". But they do try and force others to get it. How many teachings of Christ do they have to ignore before no one calls them Christians anymore?

"Jews"? Read the Kol Nidre prayer they just prayed and tell me how righteous they are.

Muslims? Don't know much about them, other than they are being slaughtered. Ironically, we are murdering them because they won't convert, the very same thing "chrsitians" accuse them of wanting to do to us.


[edit on 8-10-2009 by PSUSA]

[edit on 8-10-2009 by PSUSA]



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by PSUSA
Muslims? Don't know much about them, other than they are being slaughtered. Ironically, we are murdering them because they won't convert, the very same thing "chrsitians" accuse them of wanting to do to us.

[edit on 8-10-2009 by PSUSA]


The sad reality is that most of the Muslims being killed around the world are being done so by other Muslims (Sunni vs. Shi'a conflict). I have to disagree with you that Western military forces are killing them because they won't convert to Christianity. None of Western meddling has been done in the name of religion or Bible prophecy.

The illegal invasion of Iraq was not carried out because the Iraqi population would not convert to Christianity. It appears to have been done for material gain and power. (And some would argue to create an intense Western vs. Islam war.)

The problem with radical Islam is that the motivation for Holy war is almost always based off of religious ideology where the fight to protect and preserve Islam is considered more important than peace and stability.

[edit on 9/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 05:13 AM
link   


The sad reality is that most of the Muslims being killed around the world are being done so by other Muslims (Sunni vs. Shi'a conflict).


I'd like to see some numbers on that. On the face of it, I disagree.

This says the death toll was 655,000 and that was back in 2006. The pentagram won't even
keep track of the numbers. They don't count, I guess.




The illegal invasion of Iraq was not carried out because the Iraqi population would not convert to Christianity. It appears to have been done for material gain and power. (And some would argue to create an intense Western vs. Islam war.)


Agreed.

But they used "christian" terms to sell the Iraq invasion to the drooling idiots, and they couldn't have done it without the "churches" support. Smirk even called it a crusade. I should have been more clear on this. I don't believe for one nanosecond that Chimp is a christian. Vermin like him simply use religion as a tool in their toolbox to be used when needed.

I remember what it was like, trying to reason with "christians" about this as it was happening. I got called every name in the book. And they meant it.



The problem with radical Islam is that the motivation for Holy war is almost always based off of religious ideology where the fight to protect and preserve Islam is considered more important than peace and stability.


Good point. And if you substitute the word "churchianity" for Islam, it would still be accurate.

Religion is a curse. When we were kids, we'd tell other kids "my dad can beat up your dad!". They grew up (!) and now it's "my god can beat up your god!"



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   

reply to post by PSUSA



I'd like to see some numbers on that. On the face of it, I disagree.

This says the death toll was 655,000 and that was back in 2006. The pentagram won't even keep track of the numbers. They don't count, I guess.


Firstly, those figures are very depressing, but they do not separate attacks carried out by Western militants and those carried out by insurgents. The number of civilians harmed/killed due to insurgency attacks is likely much higher than any intended or accidental attack carried out by Western forces.


Agreed.

But they used "christian" terms to sell the Iraq invasion to the drooling idiots, and they couldn't have done it without the "churches" support. Smirk even called it a crusade. I should have been more clear on this. I don't believe for one nanosecond that Chimp is a christian. Vermin like him simply use religion as a tool in their toolbox to be used when needed.

I remember what it was like, trying to reason with "christians" about this as it was happening. I got called every name in the book. And they meant it.


I understand where you are coming from with this point. It is true that a lot of Christians initially supported the wars or led others to believe it was somehow justified. I also keep in mind that there are dangerous extremists in all regions, walks of life, cultures etc.. I just do not believe that Afghanistan and Iraq having "Muslim" majority populations had very much do with the invasions.


Good point. And if you substitute the word "churchianity" for Islam, it would still be accurate.

Religion is a curse. When we were kids, we'd tell other kids "my dad can beat up your dad!". They grew up (!) and now it's "my god can beat up your god!"


It is a shame something that is meant to unite us all does indeed divide us greatly! Like I have already acknowledged that violence is somehow apart of all the three major religions. Holy texts for all three have passages that advocate violence. But, I do not believe that word can be substituted and have the same meaning as you suggest.

The greatest danger with Islam as a religious ideology is how it defines when violence and killing is acceptable. This is one of the greatest deceptions about Islam as a peaceful religion. Islamic scholars can just say "in self-defence this is acceptable..." and silence the critics. The problem is that the meaning of "self-defence" is NOT the same as our Western notion. Self defence in this context can mean any threat to followers of Islam whereever Muslims happen to be.

[edit on 18/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 08:17 AM
link   


Firstly, those figures are very depressing, but they do not separate attacks carried out by Western militants and those carried out by insurgents. The number of civilians harmed/killed due to insurgency attacks is likely much higher than any intended or accidental attack carried out by Western forces.


I would love to know what the real numbers are. But they either dont bother counting them, or they won't release those numbers.

Nevertheless, I still hold the US responsible, no matter who pulls the trigger or activates the detonator. If we hadn't invaded, those people would still be alive. It was a war of choice. None of the justifications held water. Every time a excuse was debunked, they'd give another excuse. Rinse and repeat.

The US acted worse than Saddam.

So, is it surprising that radical islam has found fertile ground? We're turning them into "radicals" in the same way our government is turning many of us into radicals. You can only kick a man in the balls so many times before he starts to fight back.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 10:12 AM
link   
I am completely confused by the OP.

Are you saying that this is what Islam believes, and what they believe is a myth? Or are you saying that it is a myth that this is what Islam believes?

For example, are you saying it is a myth that Islam reveres Jesus Christ (and they actually don't believe in Jesus)? Or are you saying that Jesus Christ is a myth (and anyone who believes in Jesus is misguided?)

Having read the entire English version of the Quran in 2002 (a very daunting task!) I can tell you that the book deals quite a bit with Jesus, and that is a central component of the writings. Also, the Quran discusses Abraham, Moses and Noah, as well as other Biblical figures. The Quran elaborate on these figures, but doesn't substantially change their character.

Additionally, I can tell you that the Quran heavily promotes tolerance, compromise on many issues, patience, mercy, and understanding of different belief systems. There are a few exceptions (which are often highlighted) but the majority of the Quran deals with respecting others, forgiveness, compassion.

Additionally, It is obvious that Allah is exactly the same as Jehovah. It is the same deity, with similar characteristics and objectives for humanity. The word "Allah" is derived from the Arabic word for "The All" (according to footnotes in my copy of the Quran.)

Additionally, although the Quran does not put women on the same level as men, the treatment of women is about on the same level as the Old Testament, which is about the same level as USA society during the mid-20th century.

I think the point of the OP is that Islamists misrepresent their religion to non-Muslims, that the Islamic religion actually doesn’t worship the same God as Christians and Jews, and doesn't consider Jesus Christ to be a holy and Godlike figure, and does not advocate peace, and advocates mistreatment of women. All these are incorrect statements, according to my personal direct readings.

I haven't studied Islam beyond reading the Quran, so this is my particular opinion taken only from what is said in the Quran and nothing else.

Frankly, I think a lot of Islam consists of a belief in mythology, but that is true with all religions, which is something I accept and am willing to dignify.

If the point of the OP is that Islam is heavily based on mythology, I will agree to that. However, if the point of the OP is that Islam contradicts Judaism and Christianity, I would disagree based upon what I have personally read, because it has become clear to me that Islam is just an extension (not a contradiction) to Christianity, much the same way Christianity extends Judaism.

[edit on 18-10-2009 by Axial Leader]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by PSUSA



Firstly, those figures are very depressing, but they do not separate attacks carried out by Western militants and those carried out by insurgents. The number of civilians harmed/killed due to insurgency attacks is likely much higher than any intended or accidental attack carried out by Western forces.


I would love to know what the real numbers are. But they either dont bother counting them, or they won't release those numbers.

Nevertheless, I still hold the US responsible, no matter who pulls the trigger or activates the detonator. If we hadn't invaded, those people would still be alive. It was a war of choice. None of the justifications held water. Every time a excuse was debunked, they'd give another excuse. Rinse and repeat.

The US acted worse than Saddam.

So, is it surprising that radical islam has found fertile ground? We're turning them into "radicals" in the same way our government is turning many of us into radicals. You can only kick a man in the balls so many times before he starts to fight back.


I agree about the numbers. Pro-USA groups will underestimate the total figure, anti-American groups will inflate the true number. This is done for propaganda purposes by both sides. The first group wants the world to think the invasion was a necessary and justified thing. The second group wants to make the USA out as a monster bully that enjoys destroying other countries. There is propaganda on both sides, friend.

I agree that the War on Terror has created many more terrorists than there were before it was started. However, it is important to note that Muslims have been killing other Muslims before 9/11 even happened. Sunni and Shia factions have been killing those of opposing sects for decades. Islamic extremism has been a danger since at least 1948 (creation of Israel).



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Axial Leader
I am completely confused by the OP.

Are you saying that this is what Islam believes, and what they believe is a myth? Or are you saying that it is a myth that this is what Islam believes


The original article is titled "Ten Myths About Islam". I felt this title was misleading because it implies that Islam is a false religion. I do not agree with that assertion because as a whole Islam does have many truths and many of the ideas contained in the Qua'ran are clear and logical.


For example, are you saying it is a myth that Islam reveres Jesus Christ (and they actually don't believe in Jesus)? Or are you saying that Jesus Christ is a myth (and anyone who believes in Jesus is misguided?)


Islam does revere Jesus to an extent. They recognise him as a prophet/messenger of God, but not as the Messiah or Redeemer of Mankind. This is a big difference between Christianity and Islam. Apologists often say "yes we believe Jesus is the Al-Mahdi (Messiah in Islamic mythology)" but this is not true. Islam teaches that Muhammad is the final prophet and the one most revered by God. In addition, Islam does not acknowledge the crucifixion of Jesus, and does not believe that he died for the sins of man.


Having read the entire English version of the Quran in 2002 (a very daunting task!) I can tell you that the book deals quite a bit with Jesus, and that is a central component of the writings. Also, the Quran discusses Abraham, Moses and Noah, as well as other Biblical figures. The Quran elaborate on these figures, but doesn't substantially change their character.


Please read my above paragraph.


Additionally, I can tell you that the Quran heavily promotes tolerance, compromise on many issues, patience, mercy, and understanding of different belief systems. There are a few exceptions (which are often highlighted) but the majority of the Quran deals with respecting others, forgiveness, compassion.


I agree that Islam does promote those things you mentioned. The majority of verses are not violent and do not incite violence either. Unfortunately, the verses that are violent often mention the "disbeliever" and "heretic" (actual translation is difficult as you know, but this is close to the meaning.) The problem is that while apologists highlight "in self defence" but they do not mention that it is in self-defence of Islam as a religious ideology. Not the defence of adherents of Islam (Muslims).


Additionally, It is obvious that Allah is exactly the same as Jehovah. It is the same deity, with similar characteristics and objectives for humanity. The word "Allah" is derived from the Arabic word for "The All" (according to footnotes in my copy of the Quran.)


This is another misconception and you will see it covered in the website I quoted. The teachings of Jesus and Muhammad (as documented in history) are rather different. Muhammad is very much more militarily offensive, less merciful and much more sexually active. (Not assuming these are all bad considering the contexts, but they do illustrate information about the individual and their ideals).


Additionally, although the Quran does not put women on the same level as men, the treatment of women is about on the same level as the Old Testament, which is about the same level as USA society during the mid-20th century.


Again, the problems women face are both due to holy texts of their respective religions. However, the difference is that Christianity has adapted to modern life and does not rule their nations (where they are a majority) with the same archaic rules and laws that many modern Islamic nations do. For example, while Christianity strongly condemns blasphemy, Christian nations do not cut off body parts of their citizens for doing so. Christianity denounces alcohol but does not lash its adherents for drinking.


I think the point of the OP is that Islamists misrepresent their religion to non-Muslims, that the Islamic religion actually doesn’t worship the same God as Christians and Jews, and doesn't consider Jesus Christ to be a holy and Godlike figure, and does not advocate peace, and advocates mistreatment of women. All these are incorrect statements, according to my personal direct readings.


It was not my intention to demonise Muslims or the religion that they follow. I am merely trying to illustrate that Islam as a religious ideology is a very big danger to those who do not support or agree with the teachings of Islam. The danger, once again, comes from a small faction of Muslims and not Islam as a whole.


I haven't studied Islam beyond reading the Quran, so this is my particular opinion taken only from what is said in the Quran and nothing else.

Frankly, I think a lot of Islam consists of a belief in mythology, but that is true with all religions, which is something I accept and am willing to dignify.

If the point of the OP is that Islam is heavily based on mythology, I will agree to that. However, if the point of the OP is that Islam contradicts Judaism and Christianity, I would disagree based upon what I have personally read, because it has become clear to me that Islam is just an extension (not a contradiction) to Christianity, much the same way Christianity extends Judaism.


I agree that religious mythology is prevalent in most religions. In many ways it seems like an extension, but there are some major differences between core beliefs and values.

[edit on 19/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 




There is propaganda on both sides, friend.


This is true. My immediate reaction is to totally disbelieve anything our leaders say and judge them by their fruits. In this instance I believe the muslims hold the moral high ground when compared to the US and especially our string-puller "israel".



Sunni and Shia factions have been killing those of opposing sects for decades. Islamic extremism has been a danger since at least 1948 (creation of Israel).


Again, true. This is why I consider religion to be a curse. No matter what the faith is, they just can't leave other people alone, they try and beat them into submitting.

I don't know much about Islam, but "christians" are told to preach the gospel to everyone. That is all well and good, if they knew what the gospel is. They generally don't. If they did know, there would be no problem.

And before "israel" was created, arabs were allies.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


I really appreciate the detailed response, because I was actually looking for info (and not wanting to pick a fight at all.) I spent a lot of time reading your response.

This is a great answer that clarifies your position, explains several points to me. You have actually turned me around on several points.

Excellent thread. Thanks for the perspective!

Edit: In particular, you persuade me that Islam is not as much an "extension" to Christianity as a major shift away from Christian beliefs. That is really a major change in my perspective. You provide a good set of arguments on that, thanks.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by Axial Leader]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by PSUSA

This is true. My immediate reaction is to totally disbelieve anything our leaders say and judge them by their fruits. In this instance I believe the muslims hold the moral high ground when compared to the US and especially our string-puller "israel".
[...]
Again, true. This is why I consider religion to be a curse. No matter what the faith is, they just can't leave other people alone, they try and beat them into submitting.
[..]
I don't know much about Islam, but "christians" are told to preach the gospel to everyone. That is all well and good, if they knew what the gospel is. They generally don't. If they did know, there would be no problem.

And before "israel" was created, arabs were allies.


Again you elicit some interesting points. At the end of the day my friend, I would have to agree that Religious Extremists of any faith found anywhere are a danger to the values of peace and tolerance. Yes Christians are encouraged to preach the gospel and many of them are more concerned with the act itself and not the intended effect it is meant to bring forth. Yet, violence is prohibited when taking part in this preaching.

I know it might seem that I am "picking" on Islam in a sense, but I am really trying to put forth the other side. You do not have to go far through any medium to see anti-Christian sentiment, and you don't need to go very far down the street to hear anti-Jewish sentiment. It just seems that for Christianity it is a free-for-all for critics - you can make the most insulting, denigrating, blasphemous accusations about Christians and not suffer repercussions. You can say - using the most abstract of logic - that Christianity has the most blood on its hands and thus does not have a moral ground to stand on in modern times.

When it comes to Islam, calling an orange an orange makes you seem racist and xenophobic. Something is wrong with a religious ideology when the publishing of blasphemous text in a foreign, non-Muslim nation results in the death of Muslims and non-Muslims not even living in that region. Something is wrong with a religious ideology when a Muslim publishes information critical of the Islamic religion and then has a death threat (religious declaration) made against him by leaders of an Islamic theocracy. Something is wrong with a religious ideology when Buddhist temples are desecrated and blown up because the inhabitants were considered offensive to certain Muslims.

Just like Christianity and Judaism, it is a small faction of religious fanatics in Islam that create the trouble and tarnish the reputation of the majority. It is becoming more taboo by the day to criticise elements of Islam, but is becoming far more acceptable to denounce Christianity.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 

Hey All!


Originally posted by Dark Ghost
Islam does revere Jesus to an extent. They recognise him as a prophet/messenger of God, but not as the Messiah or Redeemer of Mankind. This is a big difference between Christianity and Islam. Apologists often say "yes we believe Jesus is the Al-Mahdi (Messiah in Islamic mythology)" but this is not true. Islam teaches that Muhammad is the final prophet and the one most revered by God. In addition, Islam does not acknowledge the crucifixion of Jesus, and does not believe that he died for the sins of man.

Just wanted to chip in on this one point...First off, I've NEVER heard anyone refer to Jesus as the Mahdi, and Mahdi definitely doesn't correlate to the "Islamic Messiah".
Secondly, a cursory reading of anything Jesus related in the Quran (there's quite a bit of it, as Axial Leader pointed out), will reveal that he is acknowledged in Islam as the prophecised Messiah, and that title is very clearly given to him (referred to as "Al-Massih" in the Quran). It is however, true, as you say, that muslims do not believe he died for the sins of mankind (or that he died at all).



Originally posted by Dark Ghost
This is another misconception and you will see it covered in the website I quoted. The teachings of Jesus and Muhammad (as documented in history) are rather different. Muhammad is very much more militarily offensive, less merciful and much more sexually active. (Not assuming these are all bad considering the contexts, but they do illustrate information about the individual and their ideals).

I'd again respectfully disagree here. While it is true that Muhammad and Jesus's actions were different, I wouldn't necessarily say the teachings were.

Jesus was born into a relatively "civilised" era, with the Romans keeping peace and structure and all, so Jesus only needed to be a "spiritual" leader to his people. Muhammad, on the other hand, was born into a turbulent time, the people just recently settled down from nomadic life, their society rife with dangers and lawlessness. If you want to compare "Muhammad the Statesman", a better comparison might be Moses.

But as far as Spiritual teachings go, I wouldn't think Muhammad and Jesus were so far off. They both advocated worship of a monotheistic God, they both advocated "doing good". Muhammad acknowledged that forgiveness and "turn the other cheek" were the better way, but also said that there was nothing blameworthy with seeking justice.

Now I agree that the concept of "dying for all the sins of mankind" is not agreed with in Islam, but then again, Jesus didn't really preach or teach that doctrine (it is just assumed that he DID it, and that too, not by all Christian denominations). Jesus's explanation of the fundamental core of his teachings is about the same as that of Muhammad's.

[edit on 19-10-2009 by babloyi]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Hi babloyi, thank you for your input. It seems there is debate within Islam on this topic of a Messianic figure. After much reading, I am of the opinion that there is confusion on Jesus, Muhammad and a redeemer figure within Islamic eschatology.

This is the transcript of the talk given on "Islam in Focus" TV program on December 6, 1997. Sayyid Rizvi elaborates on the concept of a Messiah figure in Islam. Please read through this transcript and tell me if you find anything he says alarming in regard to the concept of Messiah in Islam. I do realise he does not speak for all Muslims, but he does seem to share views that tie in with that of many Muslims around the world.

***The Following Quotes are taken from the following website:***

The Concept of Messiah in Islam


Muslims believe that Muhammad was the last prophet and messenger of God. Muslims also believe that God will grant total and comprehensive victory to Islam over other religions. The holy Qur’ãn talks about this promise in three different verses. It says:

He (Allãh) is the one who sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with the guidance and the religion of truth so that He may grant victory to it over every religion.
(The Qur’ãn 9:33; 48:28; 61:9)


In other words, God sent Muhammad to Earth so that through the teachings of Islam He can claim victory over every other religion? One would assume that "victory over" other religions does not refer to the acceptance of differing ideologies.


"According to the unanimously accepted saying of the Prophet Muhammad, God will bring about a saviour before the end of time to establish the global domination of Islam over all religions. In other words, the saviour will establish the Kingdom of God on this earth. In Islamic traditions, that saviour is known by the name of "al-Mahdi".

The establishment of God’s Kingdom on earth at the hand of the righteous people has been clearly mentioned in the holy Qur’ãn. God says:

We would like to bestow a favour upon those who have been oppressed in the earth and make them leaders and make them inheritors (of the world)." (The Qur’ãn 28:5)


This does not seem to refer to Jesus in the Second Coming. Also take note that the global domination of Islam over other religions is a key factor in this "saviour's" efforts to establish the Kingdom of God on this planet.


The belief in al-Mahdi —as the embodiment of the messiah or the saviour who will appear at the end of time— is a belief in the fulfilment of God’s promise. It is a belief common to all Muslims based on the unanimously accepted sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.).

Ibn Khaldun, the 14th century historian famous for his pioneering work in philosophy of history, writes in his Muqaddima:

"It has been (accepted) by all the Muslims in every epoch, that at the end of time a man from the family (of the Prophet) will, without fail, make his appearance, one who will strengthen Islam and make justice triumph. Muslims will follow him, and he will gain domination over the Muslim realm. He will be called the Mahdi."

"In trying to identify the person who will be the Mahdi and the Saviour, the only source we have is the Prophet of Islam. According to his sayings, the basic characteristics of Mahdi are as follows:

1. He will be an Arab, from the tribe of Banû Hãshim.
2. He will be from the descendants of the Prophet Muhammad
through his daughter Fatima.
3. He will be the descendant of Husayn, son of Fatima and ‘Ali.
4. He will appear in Mecca.
5. Finally, one of the most interesting things that we find in the sayings of the Prophet is that Imam al-Mahdi will be helped by Prophet Jesus.

We are told that Jesus will descend to the earth soon after the appearance of the Mahdi; he will join the Mahdi in establishing the Kingdom of God on earth; and he will pray behind Imam al-Mahdi. The true Christians will follow Jesus in accepting Imam al-Mahdi as the leader at the time and become Muslims."


So, true Christians will be instructed by Jesus that they must follow this new figure "Al-Mahdi" and eventually become Muslims? Do you see something wrong with these statements? To me it seems that a figure CLAIMING to be Jesus will instruct mankind to follow the teachings of this Al-Mahdi and encourage people to convert to Islam.


"In the Qur’ãn, God has selected Abraham and his descendants and preferred them over the others. Abraham’s children were from his two sons: Ishmael and Isaac. From the line of Isaac, we have all the great prophets of the Israelites (Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon and, finally, Jesus). From the line of Ishmael, we the Prophet of Islam and the Imams from his family, the last being Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi.

God has, by His decree, preserved the last representatives from both lines of Abraham for the establishment of His Kingdom. At the end of time, He will bring Imam al-Mahdi and Prophet Jesus together for the fulfilment of His plan.

This is the optimistic outlook that we have towards human history; and incidentally it also shows how closely the destiny of the Muslims and the Christians is linked together."


This shows once again how certain Muslims will lie and distort the truth to try and make Islam seem like a better extension of Christianity. By lumping Jesus with this Al-Mahdi figure, perhaps this is part of the plan to get people to accept Muhammad's teachings and convert to Islam?

[edit on 19/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Dark Ghost
 


Originally posted by Dark Ghost
Hi babloyi, thank you for your input. It seems there is debate within Islam on this topic of a Messianic figure. After much reading, I am of the opinion that there is confusion on Jesus, Muhammad and a redeemer figure within Islamic eschatology.

This is the transcript of the talk given on "Islam in Focus" TV program on December 6, 1997. Sayyid Rizvi elaborates on the concept of a Messiah figure in Islam. Please read through this transcript and tell me if you find anything he says alarming in regard to the concept of Messiah in Islam. I do realise he does not speak for all Muslims, but he does seem to share views that tie in with that of many Muslims around the world.

There is certainly belief in an end-times figure known as "Al-Mahdi", but I've never heard of Jesus being called the Mahdi. About the transcript, I certainly find it disturbing that they'd be using the term "Messiah" for anyone other than Jesus. This is definitely NOT supported by Islamic scripture. While I would have no problem in accepting the idea of this "Mahdi" figure, it is hardly a universally accepted (within Muslims) concept.



Muslims believe that Muhammad was the last prophet and messenger of God. Muslims also believe that God will grant total and comprehensive victory to Islam over other religions. The holy Qur’ãn talks about this promise in three different verses. It says:

He (Allãh) is the one who sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with the guidance and the religion of truth so that He may grant victory to it over every religion.
(The Qur’ãn 9:33; 48:28; 61:9)

This again I disagree with, as it seems a distortion of the the verses quoted. Yusuf Ali translates it as "to proclaim it over". The actual word used here لِيُظْهِرَهُ "liyuthhirahu" can be translated as "to manifest" or to "make it apparent/visible". So it is definitely not talking about it in a military sense. In fact, if you ask me, the Quran supports the idea that there will never be only 1 worldwide group or 1 religion, etc.



We would like to bestow a favour upon those who have been oppressed in the earth and make them leaders and make them inheritors (of the world)." (The Qur’ãn 28:5)

This again being a misuse of the quote. If you read the actual quote in the Quran, it is talking about the Phaoroh's oppression of Moses's people. If you'll excuse me for posting the whole quote:

Surah 28 Verse 03 (Yusuf Ali Translation)
We rehearse to thee some of the story of Moses and Pharaoh in Truth, for people who believe.
Truly Pharaoh elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections, depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew, but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief.
And We wished to be Gracious to those who were being depressed in the land, to make them leaders (in Faith) and make them heirs,
To establish a firm place for them in the land, and to show Pharaoh, Haman, and their hosts, at their hands, the very things against which they were taking precautions.


Now obviously, as most muslims believe, if Jesus returns, it is assumed (by muslims) that he will preach the "truth" (a return to the basics of Islam). That I do not disagree with.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
There is certainly belief in an end-times figure known as "Al-Mahdi", but I've never heard of Jesus being called the Mahdi. About the transcript, I certainly find it disturbing that they'd be using the term "Messiah" for anyone other than Jesus. This is definitely NOT supported by Islamic scripture. While I would have no problem in accepting the idea of this "Mahdi" figure, it is hardly a universally accepted (within Muslims) concept.


Can you explain the role of this Mahdi figure? I have found that the figure is featured prominently in Islamic texts about the End Times. I am just curious how you can say that Islam considers Jesus to be the Messiah, yet Islamic texts assert that "Al-Mahdi" will aid Jesus when he returns, and help bridge the gap between Muslims and non-Muslims. I just find this idea troublesome because it suggests that Jesus (not the final prophet in Islam) is not able to spread the message of Allah without aid from this Mahdi figure.



This again I disagree with, as it seems a distortion of the the verses quoted. Yusuf Ali translates it as "to proclaim it over". The actual word used here لِيُظْهِرَهُ "liyuthhirahu" can be translated as "to manifest" or to "make it apparent/visible". So it is definitely not talking about it in a military sense. In fact, if you ask me, the Quran supports the idea that there will never be only 1 worldwide group or 1 religion, etc.


I have to respectfully disagree with your opinion on this. It seems to be a consistent theme throughout the writings of Islamic scholars that Islam is indeed the true religion and final one according to God's will. The world will be at peace and at ease when the whole world population follows Islam. Like I said earlier, the major dilemma with Islam as a religious ideology is how extremists twist the verses to make the term "self-defence" mean quite the opposite. If you read through the site I mentioned in the OP, you will see what I am referring to.


This again being a misuse of the quote. If you read the actual quote in the Quran, it is talking about the Phaoroh's oppression of Moses's people.

If you'll excuse me for posting the whole quote:
Surah 28 Verse 03 (Yusuf Ali Translation)
We rehearse to thee some of the story of Moses and Pharaoh in Truth, for people who believe.
Truly Pharaoh elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections, depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew, but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief.
And We wished to be Gracious to those who were being depressed in the land, to make them leaders (in Faith) and make them heirs,
To establish a firm place for them in the land, and to show Pharaoh, Haman, and their hosts, at their hands, the very things against which they were taking precautions.

Now obviously, as most muslims believe, if Jesus returns, it is assumed (by muslims) that he will preach the "truth" (a return to the basics of Islam). That I do not disagree with.


Thank you for clearing that up as it does appear to be a misquote. I am still a little confused at the part of "to show Pharaoh, Haman, and their hosts, at their hands, the very things against which they were taking precautions". Can you please try to translate what that section of the verse is meaning to say in English a little better if possible? Especially the "at their hands" part.

Can you please explain why Allah would decide for an inferior prophet (Jesus) to be involved in the Second Coming? Wouldn't Muhammad be the best choice, considering he is considered the final prophet of Allah? This is another thing that makes me confused. What was the point and motivation for Allah deciding that Muhammad should be considered Islam's final and most righteous prophet?

[edit on 20/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join