Jesus was a "Muslim"

Originally posted by babloyi

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The God of the bible is a Trinity God. God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. There is NO WAY that Muslims believe that Jesus is God incarnate. Therefore, the God of the bible is NOT the god of the Qu'ran.

Hahaha....if that were true, there seem to be a huuuuge number of christians who are doing it wrong. I suppose only you are correct?

The vast majority of Christians believe in the Holy Trinity. Catholics, Episcopalians, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Lutherans, Methodists, and even the Baptists (according to the Southern Baptist Convention). I am unsure about the Church of Christ (I have read it as that the do believe and that they do not .. I don't know).

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Well, go on.
Are you going to comment on Surah 53:53?

And He destroyed the Overthrown Cities (of Sodom and Gomorrah).

What? Now Im really confused. I thought it was the God of the old testament who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. But since we read that in the Koran as well, it settles that Allah is the God of the Old Testament.

Theres a whole lot of other things in the Koran which matches what God did in the Old Testament.

Surah 28:59 And never would your Lord have destroyed the cities until He had sent to their mother a messenger reciting to them Our verses. And We would not destroy the cities except while their people were wrongdoers.

Do you have the surah of Abraham's mother receiving the message about destroying Sodom and Gomorrah? Do you have the surah of Abraham reciting the Quran to Sodom and Gomorrah?

Can you show me from the Torah where Abraham preached the message of Allah to Sodom and Gomorrah? This is the only interaction of Abraham with the king of Sodom

(Complete Jewish Bible) Genesis 14:21 The king of S’dom said to Avram, “Give me the people, and keep the goods for yourself.” 22 But Avram answered the king of S’dom, “I have raised my hand in an oath to Adonai, El ‘Elyon, maker of heaven and earth, 23 that I will not take so much as a thread or a sandal thong of anything that is yours; so that you won’t be able to say, ‘I made Avram rich.’ 24 I will take only what my troops have eaten and the share of the spoil belonging to the men who came with me — ‘Aner, Eshkol and Mamre; let them have their share.”

Now in Hebrew..which the Torah is written in

21 וַיֹּ֥אמֶר מֶֽלֶךְ־סְדֹ֖ם אֶל־אַבְרָ֑ם תֶּן־לִ֣י הַנֶּ֔פֶשׁ וְהָרְכֻ֖שׁ קַֽח־לָֽךְ׃ 22 וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אַבְרָ֖ם אֶל־מֶ֣לֶךְ סְדֹ֑ם הֲרִימֹ֨תִי יָדִ֤י אֶל־יְהוָה֙ אֵ֣ל עֶלְיֹ֔ון קֹנֵ֖ה שָׁמַ֥יִם וָאָֽרֶץ׃ 23 אִם־מִחוּט֙ וְעַ֣ד שְׂרֹֽוךְ־נַ֔עַל וְאִם־אֶקַּ֖ח מִכָּל־אֲשֶׁר־לָ֑ךְ וְלֹ֣א תֹאמַ֔ר אֲנִ֖י הֶעֱשַׁ֥רְתִּי אֶת־אַבְרָֽם׃ 24 בִּלְעָדַ֗י רַ֚ק אֲשֶׁ֣ר אָֽכְל֣וּ הַנְּעָרִ֔ים וְחֵ֙לֶק֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר הָלְכ֖וּ אִתִּ֑י עָנֵר֙ אֶשְׁכֹּ֣ל וּמַמְרֵ֔א הֵ֖ם יִקְח֥וּ חֶלְקָֽם׃

Now the Arabic (not the Quran)

وَأعطَى أبْرامُ مَلْكِيصادَقَ عُشْراً مِنْ كُلِّ ما غَنِمَهُ مِنَ الحَرْبِ. 21 ثُمَّ قالَ مَلِكُ سَدُومَ لِأبْرامَ: «رُدَّ لِي أسْرايَ، وَاحتَفِظْ لِنَفْسِكَ بِمُقْتَنَياتِنا الَّتِي غَنِمْتَها.» 22 فَقالَ أبْرامُ لِمَلِكِ سَدُومَ: «رَفَعْتُ يَدِي إلَى اللهِ العَلِيِّ الَّذِي صَنَعَ السَّماءَ وَالأرْضَ، وَعاهَدْتُهُ 23 أنْ لا آخُذَ مِنْكَ وَلَوْ خَيطاً أوْ رِباطَ حِذاءٍ. حَتَّى لا تَقُولَ: ‹أغْنَيتُ أبْرامَ.› 24 سَأعْتَبِرُ أنَّ نَصيبي هُوَ ما أكَلَهُ هَؤُلاءِ الفِتْيانُ. أمّا الرِّجالُ الَّذِينَ جاءُوا مَعِي: عانِرُ وَأشْكُولُ وَمَمْرا، فَلْيَأْخُذُوا نَصِيبَهُمْ.»

OK, now you have it three languages. Show me there where Abraham preached the message to Sodom, show me where his mother received the message, show me where Abraham preached the Quran.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Um .. no. It's not the 'fundamentalist Christians who keep rambling on about it'. It's just historical truth.

Actually, the very idea that Allah was a moon-god was originally proposed by a Christian fundamentalist named Robert Morey in his 1994 book Moon-god Allah in the Archeology of the Middle East. This has become an oft repeated lie among fundamentalists.

BTW, this kook also has a message for Catholics...
An Open Letter to Roman Catholics

Originally posted by babloyi
Since your information seems to be wikipedia,

No. Ibn Warriq and Julius Wellhausen
From "Why I am not a muslim" -by Ibn Warriq Page 39

The Black stone itself is evidently a meteorite and undoubtedly owes it's reputation to the fact it fell from the 'heavens'. It is doubly ironic that Muslims venerate this piece of rock as that given to Ishmael by the angel Gabriel to build the Kaaba, as it is, to quote Margoliouth, 'of doubtful genuineness, since the Black Stone ws removed by the ... Qarmatians in the fourth (Muslim) centur, and restored by them after many years: it may be doubted whether the stone which they returned was the same stone which they removed."

Hubal was worshiped at Mecca, and his idol in red cornelian was erected inside the Kaaba above the dry well into which one threw votive offerings. It is very probable that Hubal had a human form. Hubal's position next to the Black Stone suggests there is some connection between the two. Ellhousen thinks that Hubal originally was the Black Stone that, as we have already remarked, is more ancient than the idol. Wellhausen also points out that God is called Lord of the Kaaba, and Lord of the territory of Mecca in the Koran. The Prophet railed against the homage rendered at the kaaba to the goddesses al-Lat, Manat, and al-Uzza, whom the pagan Arabs called the daughters of God, but Muhammad stopped short of attacking the cult of Hubal. From this Wellhousen concludes that Hubal is no other than Allah, the "god" of the Meccans. When the Meccans defeated the Prophet near Medina, their leader is said to have shouted, 'Hurrah for Hubal."

... cut to page 40 ....

The goddess al-Lat is also sometimes identified with the solar divinity. The god Dharrih was probably the rising sun. The Muslim rites of running between Arafat and Muzdalifah, and Muzdalifah and Mina had to be accomplished after sunset and before sunrise. This was a deliberate change introduced by Muhammed to supress this association with the pagan solar rite, whose significance we shall examine later. The worship of the moon is also attested to by proper names of people such as Hilal, a crescent, Qamar, a moon, and so on.

Allah, Hilal and Hubal all kind of blend together at Mecca

And having something as your symbol, doesn't make you the god of it.

I didn't say he was the god of snakes. I put the symbol information as just that .. information.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

Julius Wellhausen (who the information came from ) was mid to late 1800s.
And I'm NOT a fan of fundamentalist christian anything ... (don't get me started on that! )

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by babloyi

Originally posted by FlyersFan

The vast majority of Christians believe in the Holy Trinity. Catholics, Episcopalians, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Lutherans, Methodists, and even the Baptists (according to the Southern Baptist Convention). I am unsure about the Church of Christ (I have read it as that the do believe and that they do not .. I don't know).

@FlyersFan
It appears to me that Muslims only accept the Quran when it suits them. The problem is this, Muslims are taught the history only of Islam and nothing more. They are not aware of any history that came before it, that is why they seem to be so resistant or blind. Fundamental Christians are not the one who made the endless number of steles and inscriptions found all over the Eastern world.

Fundamental Christians are not the ones who built the Kaaba and neither are Fundamental Christians responsible for the Black Rock, the minarets or Mecca and Medina. We are not responsible for the Quraysh tribe that worshiped allah the moon god, neither are we responsible for the Quran being inaccurate.

Fundamental Christians did not travel back in time to implant all the archeology so whoever wrote the Quran would be mixed up. We did not travel back in time to create allah or his three daughters. What Muslims fail to realize is that in our Bible, we have the Torah and the Talmud. It has never been taken from us, when we read the Old Testament, it is exactly as the Torah says...because it is the Torah. We have never done away with the Torah. The Quran does not even have the Torah correct. The stories in the Quran are not found as they appear in the Torah. Fundamental Christians did not change the Torah.

Moses beat the rock because it stole his clothes while he was swimming. I wish they could show that from the Torah. Oh they can't, because it never happened.

Gabriel is mentioned only twice in the Tanahk (Books of the Old Testament that are not the first five books of Moses) and that is in Daniel.

Originally posted by babloyi
PS: And you're actually giving Ibn Warraq as suggested reading?!

That guy's stuff's been disproven more times than the Protocols of Zion

I didn't quote Ibn Warraq to you .... and you failed to acknowledge the accuracy of the information that I did give you. As for Ibn Warraq .. I can understand why a muslim wouldn't like him ... he exposes all sorts of nasty things in Islam. But he does the same for Christianity, so don't feel bad.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Julius Wellhausen (who the information came from )

Though I haven't read up on it, I'll take your word for it.
Either way, it still came from one person... and he was still another biblical theologian (no surprise) who made the same false assumptions.

Its not the first time Europeans have failed at understanding semitic religions... it definitely wont be the last.

You say your source is Ibn Warraq, then to show, you quote a passage from Ibn Warraq that doesn't mention Wadd at all? Interesting.


Besides, unsurprisingly, your source is wrong. Hubal wasn't a moongod. There was some theories in the 19th century that he might have been, mostly propagated by Ditlef Nielsen and then parroted by others, but that was simply his attempt to homogenise everything so that his OTHER theory (that of sun/moon/star trinity in the Middle east) could be backed up. Both are pretty much discredited today.

And to say Muhammad "stopped short" of attacking Hubal is silly. The reason Allat, Manat and ul-uzza were attacked was because the pagan arabs had added them as "daughters of Allah". Hubal was unrelated to Allah (although there are some theories that he was considered to be one of the two sons of Al-lat, the other being Wadd, the ACTUAL moongod), but that didn't stop him from being "attacked" both verbally (as is recorded in the scripture), AND physically, as his idol was smashed with all the others.

And claiming that proper names is proof of worship is again pretty silly. Another (much more common) proper name among muslims is "Asad", meaning "Lion". Do they worship lions? Yet another is is "Bakr" meaning "young camel" or "calf". Are those worshipped? A common name in Christianity is Peter. I suppose Christians worship rocks? People have names from physical things that they see around them. Doesn't denote worship.

reply to post by babloyi

nd to say Muhammad "stopped short" of attacking Hubal is silly.

After defeat by Muhammad's forces at the Battle of Badr, Abu Sufyan ibn Harb, leader of the Quraysh army, is said to have called on Hubal for support to gain victory in their next battle, saying "Show your superiority, Hubal". When Muhammad conquered Mecca in 630, he removed and had destroyed the statue of Hubal, along with the other 360 images at the Kaaba, and re-dedicated the structure to Allah.

Mohammad fulfilled the prophecy of shaming the idolaters in Isaiah 42.
But Christians don't want to accept that.

reply to post by nenothtu


interesting observations, i havnt read the whole OT or NT but what i read, i found a lot of similarity and the same basic principles. Especially for the right spirituality and human conduct.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Theres a whole lot of other things in the Koran which matches what God did in the Old Testament.

That's because Muhammed, when he invented his new religion, PLAGIARIZED from the Jews and Christians. Muhammed took what he knew from the other religions (Jews, Christianity and Zoroastrianism) and tried to transpose it to the new one he was inventing. But he didn't do a good job of it.

God didn't write the Qu'ran. Muslims made it up. So some of the same stories will be in it. They are twisted from the original sources and added to in order to fit into the political asperations of Muhammed and his followers. The 'god' of the Qu'ran isn't the same God of the Old Testament. The Qu'ran god is a twisted version of the original.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
The fundamentalists will never acknowledge all that, instead they'd just say "Oh but Mohammad just copied it all from the bible"... which is a pretty weak argument.... and go on and on about the moon god..

- I'm not a christian fundamentalist .. so lets not go there.
- Muhammed DID copy it from the bible. (and did a poor job of it) That's a fact.
- The truth isn't a 'weak argument'. It's just the truth.
- There IS a pre-Islamic moon good named Allah. It was still worshipped during the time Muhammad was a kid. That's a fact as well. So when people go 'on and on' about the moon god, they are just stating truth.

writing something in BOLD or repeating it a lot doesnt make something true.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by logical7
The problem here is that if its acknowledged that the God of Bible and Quran is same, then Islam stops appearing alien and scary and possibility of it being authentic increase, thats DANGEROUS!!

The problem here is that the god of the Qu'ran is NOT the same God of the bible or of the Jewish writings.

The two are completely different, even though Muhammed plagiarized some of what is in the Qu'ran from the Christians and Jews. The god of the Qu'ran comes up with things that are contradictory to what the God of the bible says. All those verses about killing non-Muslims for example ... :shk: OBVIOUSLY the two books are not from the same source.

The God of the bible is a Trinity God. God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. There is NO WAY that Muslims believe that Jesus is God incarnate. Therefore, the God of the bible is NOT the god of the Qu'ran.

Oh .. and there is no way that the god of the Qu'ran is 'authentic' (to use your word).

Suggested reading - Why I am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warriq. Very educational on the errors and contradictions in the Qu'ran and problems with Islam in general. And here ya go .. should keep you busy on a rainy afternoon ... 1000 errors and mistakes in the Qu'ran The god of the Qu'ran is a confused mess and rather petty. Not the kind of god I'd want to have to deal with for eternity.

ya right! Reading a book "why i am not a christian" by authors like "pissed ex-christian" or "christian hater" would really give me an objective view of the religion!

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

the surah at the start is addressed to companions of prophet and talking about Muhammad(pbuh)
maybe nw it will make sense.
And the "mighty one" is angel Jibrael(Gabriel) and ya angels are visible. Now the surah makes more sense right?
Now re-read it ane see how stupid your conclusions sound.
And i'l post the remaining surah in next post, which you conviniently skipped. Maybe you should read it and give it some thought

Yeah, uh huh.
Which came first? The Torah or the Quran? If the Torah came first, then don't you think it is possible maybe the writers of the Quran was simply implanting things they already knew about? How does that confirm the books that came before? It does not, it merely recycles information. And much of the information is not even correct.

Surah 28:2These are the verses of the clear Book.

If it's clear, it should be correct, right?

Surah 28:6 And establish them in the land and show Pharaoh and [his minister] Haman and their soldiers through them that which they had feared.

Even though this is supposed to be about the birth of Moses and his life, what the writer here clearly did, and it is very clear, clearly WRONG. Haman and the Pharaoh of Moses' time did not live at the same time, and neither did Haman work for Pharaoh.

Clearly the Quran is WRONG.

Surah 28:38 And Pharaoh said, "O eminent ones, I have not known you to have a god other than me. Then ignite for me, O Haman, [a fire] upon the clay and make for me a tower that I may look at the God of Moses. And indeed, I do think he is among the liars."

HAMAN THE AGAGITE. Son of Hammedatha; chief minister of King Ahasuerus (Esth.iii.1-2). As his name indicates, Haman was a descendant of Agag, the king of the Amalekites. On account of his attempt to exterminate the Jews in the kingdom of Ahasuerus, he is frequently called "the persecutor of the Jews" ( ; Esth. iii. 10; viii. 1; ix. 10, 24). His machinations against the Jews and his downfall are remembered during the Feast of Purim.

AHASUERUS. Persian king, identical with Xerxes (486-465 B.C.). The Book of Esther deals only with one period of his reign. It tells us that he ruled over one hundred and twenty-seven provinces—"from India, even unto Ethiopia" (Esth. i. 1)

Is this inaccuracy clear yet that the Quran is clearly inaccurate?

All you have done is show a surah written several thousand years later than the Torah and said "see, the Bible says it too"...the Bible said it first, your Quran said it wrong. The Quran is supposed to confirm, but yet this is one verse out of many that is inaccurate, therefore wrong.

BTW, the tower that Haman was supposed to build for Pharaoh was the Tower of Babel, which was made by Nimrod, who lived a long time before Moses.

Will you care to say this surah confirms the Bible? It does not even confirm history.

In 1799, much to the delight of historians and other learned people, the mystery of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics was solved by the discovery of a tablet called the "Rosetta Stone." This amazing find dated back to 196 B.C. The importance of this inscription was that it was written in three different forms of writing: hieroglyphics, demotic (a simplified form of ancient Egyptian hieratic writing) and Greek. With the help of the Greek script, the ancient Egyptian writings were decoded. The translation of the inscription was completed by a Frenchman named Jean-Françoise Champollion. Hence, a forgotten language and the events related in it were brought to light. In this way, a great deal of knowledge about the civilization, religion and social life of ancient Egypt became available to mankind and this opened the way to greater knowledge about this important era in human history. Through the decoding of hieroglyph, an important piece of knowledge was revealed: The name "Haman" was indeed mentioned in Egyptian inscriptions. This name was referred to in a monument in the Hof Museum in Vienna. This same inscription also indicated the close relationship between Haman and the Pharaoh.In the dictionary of People in the New Kingdom, that was prepared based on the entire collection of inscriptions, Haman is said to be "the head of stone quarry workers." The result revealed a very important truth: Unlike the false assertion of the opponents of the Qur'an, Haman was a person who lived in Egypt at the time of the Prophet Musa (as). He had been close to the Pharaoh and had been involved in construction work, just as imparted in the Qur'an.
Pharaoh said, "Council, I do not know of any other god for you apart from Me. Haman, kindle a fire for me over the clay and build me a lofty tower so that perhaps I may be able to climb up to Musa's god! I consider him a blatant liar." (Qur'an, 28:38)

Originally posted by logical7
writing something in BOLD or repeating it a lot doesnt make something true.

And yet, when I say Muhammed PLAGIARIZED .. it most definately is true .. bold or not.
The reason it is repeated is because that fact doesn't seem to be sinking in.

reply to post by logical7

You still fail to acknowledge that the god of the Qu'ran and the God of the bible are not the same.
You still fail to acknowledge the historical and scientific errors in the Qu'ran.
You still fail to acknowledge the contradictions in the Qu'ran.

Christians worship a Holy Trinity God. Jews and Muslims do not.
The Christian God is a different God than the Jews and Muslims.
That's the truth. Deal with it.

The Qu'ran is bits and pieces taken from the Jews, Christians and Zoroastrianism.
Poorly translated. That's where it came from. Not from a god or from an 'allah'.
Then a whole bunch of other political and misogynistic stuff was sprinkled in.
The source of the Qu'ran is not the same source as the Christian bible. It simply is not.

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Well, go on.
Are you going to comment on Surah 53:53?

And He destroyed the Overthrown Cities (of Sodom and Gomorrah).

What? Now Im really confused. I thought it was the God of the old testament who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. But since we read that in the Koran as well, it settles that Allah is the God of the Old Testament.

Theres a whole lot of other things in the Koran which matches what God did in the Old Testament.

Surah 28:59 And never would your Lord have destroyed the cities until He had sent to their mother a messenger reciting to them Our verses. And We would not destroy the cities except while their people were wrongdoers.

Do you have the surah of Abraham's mother receiving the message about destroying Sodom and Gomorrah? Do you have the surah of Abraham reciting the Quran to Sodom and Gomorrah?

Can you show me from the Torah where Abraham preached the message of Allah to Sodom and Gomorrah? This is the only interaction of Abraham with the king of Sodom

(Complete Jewish Bible) Genesis 14:21 The king of S’dom said to Avram, “Give me the people, and keep the goods for yourself.” 22 But Avram answered the king of S’dom, “I have raised my hand in an oath to Adonai, El ‘Elyon, maker of heaven and earth, 23 that I will not take so much as a thread or a sandal thong of anything that is yours; so that you won’t be able to say, ‘I made Avram rich.’ 24 I will take only what my troops have eaten and the share of the spoil belonging to the men who came with me — ‘Aner, Eshkol and Mamre; let them have their share.”

Now in Hebrew..which the Torah is written in

21 וַיֹּ֥אמֶר מֶֽלֶךְ־סְדֹ֖ם אֶל־אַבְרָ֑ם תֶּן־לִ֣י הַנֶּ֔פֶשׁ וְהָרְכֻ֖שׁ קַֽח־לָֽךְ׃ 22 וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אַבְרָ֖ם אֶל־מֶ֣לֶךְ סְדֹ֑ם הֲרִימֹ֨תִי יָדִ֤י אֶל־יְהוָה֙ אֵ֣ל עֶלְיֹ֔ון קֹנֵ֖ה שָׁמַ֥יִם וָאָֽרֶץ׃ 23 אִם־מִחוּט֙ וְעַ֣ד שְׂרֹֽוךְ־נַ֔עַל וְאִם־אֶקַּ֖ח מִכָּל־אֲשֶׁר־לָ֑ךְ וְלֹ֣א תֹאמַ֔ר אֲנִ֖י הֶעֱשַׁ֥רְתִּי אֶת־אַבְרָֽם׃ 24 בִּלְעָדַ֗י רַ֚ק אֲשֶׁ֣ר אָֽכְל֣וּ הַנְּעָרִ֔ים וְחֵ֙לֶק֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר הָלְכ֖וּ אִתִּ֑י עָנֵר֙ אֶשְׁכֹּ֣ל וּמַמְרֵ֔א הֵ֖ם יִקְח֥וּ חֶלְקָֽם׃

Now the Arabic (not the Quran)

وَأعطَى أبْرامُ مَلْكِيصادَقَ عُشْراً مِنْ كُلِّ ما غَنِمَهُ مِنَ الحَرْبِ. 21 ثُمَّ قالَ مَلِكُ سَدُومَ لِأبْرامَ: «رُدَّ لِي أسْرايَ، وَاحتَفِظْ لِنَفْسِكَ بِمُقْتَنَياتِنا الَّتِي غَنِمْتَها.» 22 فَقالَ أبْرامُ لِمَلِكِ سَدُومَ: «رَفَعْتُ يَدِي إلَى اللهِ العَلِيِّ الَّذِي صَنَعَ السَّماءَ وَالأرْضَ، وَعاهَدْتُهُ 23 أنْ لا آخُذَ مِنْكَ وَلَوْ خَيطاً أوْ رِباطَ حِذاءٍ. حَتَّى لا تَقُولَ: ‹أغْنَيتُ أبْرامَ.› 24 سَأعْتَبِرُ أنَّ نَصيبي هُوَ ما أكَلَهُ هَؤُلاءِ الفِتْيانُ. أمّا الرِّجالُ الَّذِينَ جاءُوا مَعِي: عانِرُ وَأشْكُولُ وَمَمْرا، فَلْيَأْخُذُوا نَصِيبَهُمْ.»

OK, now you have it three languages. Show me there where Abraham preached the message to Sodom, show me where his mother received the message, show me where Abraham preached the Quran.

(28:59) Your Lord would not destroy a town until He had sent to its centre a Messenger who would recite to them Our verses. Nor would We destroy any town unless its inhabitants were iniquitous.
(28:59) Your Lord never destroys cities without first sending a messenger in
their midst, reciting to them Our
revelations. And We never destroy the
cities, unless their people are
wrongdoers.
(28:59) Nor was thy Lord the one to destroy a population until He had sent to its Center an apostle rehearsing to them Our Signs: nor are We going to destroy a population except when its members practice iniquity.(yusuf ali)
.
Now here are some translations, i dont know where you found that 'mother'
and Abraham(pbuh) dint preach to sodom, but he was living nearby. It was Lot(pbuh) or you forgot that? And that 3 people(angels) visited Abraham before they went to Lot to warn and save him from the destruction.
.
(29:31) When Our emissaries brought the good news to Abraham, and said (to him): “We are surely going to destroy the inhabitants of this city; its inhabitants are immersed in wrong-doing.”
(29:32) Abraham said: “But Lot is there.” They replied: “We are well aware of those who are there. We shall save him and all his household except his wife.” His wife is among those who will stay behind.
(29:33) When Our emissaries came to Lot he was distressed and embarrassed on their account. They said: “Do not fear nor be distressed. We shall save you and all your household except your wife who is among those that will stay behind.
(29:34) We shall bring down upon the people of this city a scourge from the heaven because of their evildoing.”
(29:35) And We have left a vestige of it in that city as a Clear Sign for a people who use their reason.

reply to post by babloyi

Admit you were wrong when you said this -

Originally posted by babloyi
Hahaha....if that were true, there seem to be a huuuuge number of christians who are doing it wrong. I suppose only you are correct?

Admit that the vast majority of Christians worship a TRINITY God and that muslims do not.

Now as to Julius Wellhausen .... this is the conclusion of a person who has studied that time period. I'm not surprised that Muslims don't like it. It kinda blows their Muhammad worship apart. If you wish to ignore it (without ever having read it ) and continue to buy into the Muslim rhetoric about that time period ... of course that's your choice.

ON TOPIC ...

Bottom line .. Jesus was not a Muslim. There were no Muslims around 2,000 years ago. The Christian Trinity God and the Muslim Allah god are two different gods. NO MATTER WHO MUSLIMS SAY ALLAH IS, it's not the same as the Christian Trinity God. If Muslims start worshipping Christ as God incarnate, then we can revisit to see if the Muslims and Christians have the same god. Until then .. two different gods.

Jesus was not a Muslim.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by logical7
writing something in BOLD or repeating it a lot doesnt make something true.

And yet, when I say Muhammed PLAGIARIZED .. it most definately is true .. bold or not.
The reason it is repeated is because that fact doesn't seem to be sinking in.

OT is an ancient historical account. Now when egyptian tablets and writings were found that dated older than OT but had the same history, would OT be blamed as been plagiarized? And if they differ, which would you take as true account? And why?
Not all that is mentioned in OT has been proved true by archeology or other sciences. But you still take everything as fact. While you ignore the established facts mentioned in Quran and question things which are in Quran but not OT. In short you mean "if its not in OT, it dint happen"
let me tell you a prophecy in Quran that Allah would make pharoh a sign for people till judgement day. Now Muhammad(pbuh) had no clue what that meant, it could simply mean making the story a lesson.
But then the mummy of a pharoh, possibly of the time of Moses was discovered.
Now if that finding validitates OT, doesnt it validitate Quran more?

Originally posted by logical7

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by logical7
writing something in BOLD or repeating it a lot doesnt make something true.

And yet, when I say Muhammed PLAGIARIZED .. it most definately is true .. bold or not.
The reason it is repeated is because that fact doesn't seem to be sinking in.

OT is an ancient historical account. Now when egyptian tablets and writings were found that dated older than OT but had the same history, would OT be blamed as been plagiarized? And if they differ, which would you take as true account? And why?
Not all that is mentioned in OT has been proved true by archeology or other sciences. But you still take everything as fact. While you ignore the established facts mentioned in Quran and question things which are in Quran but not OT. In short you mean "if its not in OT, it dint happen"
let me tell you a prophecy in Quran that Allah would make pharoh a sign for people till judgement day. Now Muhammad(pbuh) had no clue what that meant, it could simply mean making the story a lesson.
But then the mummy of a pharoh, possibly of the time of Moses was discovered.
Now if that finding validitates OT, doesnt it validitate Quran more?

The Old Testament is concurrent with those world events.
You know what? You probably should not be using bogus Islamic websites like you told me not to. Now show us, according to the Torah, which has never, never, never, ever, changed in words...show me where it says Haman, According to the Torah and the Torah alone. That should be simple to do if the writers of the Quran did it. The Quran is basing their stories from the Torah, so show us the Torah verse.