Muslim views on Jesus

firedragon said:

I think, read up on the documentary hypothesis fathered by Wellhausen. No, im not quoting Muslim scholarship or random unrecognised scholarship, this is academic and some of the most highly recognised and established scholarship of the pentateuch. It breaks your theory that the whole of the bible looks as if its written by one person. Sorry, I know that you didnt say this, it was a cut and paste from somewhere. But what you posted is a faith based statement. And is highly rhetoric than analytic.



Again, read on the documentary hypothesis. Read up and analyse. You dont need to believe it.



What you are doing here is agreeing with some Muslims due to your convenience (again I am not addressing you, but the writer of wherever you cut and pasted this from). Some muslims said the Quran was written during Muhammed lifetime, but some others said that it was not, so you go with the latter out of convenience, not scholarship and good reasoning.



While you are taking a document (Buhari) dated to the 14th century to provide you a historical story about another book that was written in the 7th century and you take the 14th century document as authentic enough for you to use it against a book that is closer to Muhammed by 700 years. That cannot be even considered double standard. While using a double standard like that your writer has misread the quote of that story. Actually intentionally misquoted it. This part that says "This indicates the loss of much of the Qur’an" is an interpolation and an assumption of your author. This so called hadith only says that Abu Bakr was afraid, not that Quran was lost. And your writer has not understood the system of haafiz. A Kurra does not memorise part of the Quran. He memorises the whole book. So if there were 1000 people, and 900 died, still there will be 100 who remember the whole Quran. this is a famous apolegetic tactic but a sophomore mistake.



No. Absolutely wrong. The four gospels are author-less. So you dont know who wrote it. There is a study called the Synoptic problem. Read up and understand another issue with it. Thats standard textbook study. Nothing new. And no one knows who wrote John. It is "assumed". there are some books attributed to Peter but not written by him. Same goes to Paul.



Absurd point. Because Zayd (accodding to your own source though you have not definitely read it at all) was the prophets companion. So more authentic. Paul has never met Jesus. No one who wrote the Bible has ever said or indicated that they have ever met Jesus. So this is an absurd point.



Yes. Where you cut and pasted this from has a lenghthier discussion.

Peace.

Click to expand...

And to continue.....



WHO WROTE THE BOOK CALLED QUR’AN AND WHO ORDERED THEM TO WRITE IT?


“Actually the Quran verses being collected by Zayd doesn't mean he is the author, as this was already memorized by many other disciples, all what he did is that he collected the verses in one book with evidence and witnesses for every verse.”




THE BOOK CALLED “Qur’an” was authored and written by Zayd Bin Thabit as testified by the Islamic traditions:


“(The Caliph `Uthman ordered Zaid bin Thabit, Sa`id bin Al-As, `Abdullah bin Az-Zubair and `Abdur- Rahman bin Al-Harith bin Hisham to write the Qur'an in the form of a book (Mushafs) and said to them. "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit (Al-Ansari) regarding any dialectic Arabic utterance of the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, for the Qur'an was revealed in this dialect." So they did it.” Narrated Anas bin Malik:

[Sahih Al-Bhukari, Book 66, Hadith 6.]


Please take note of the following:

(a) According to Islamic traditions, Caliph Uthman ordered these men to write the Book called “Qur’an.” As compared to the Bible, it was God Himself who ordered the inspired prophets and apostles to write the books of the Bible as what the Lord God commanded Prophet Jeremiah:

“Thus speaks the LORD God of Israel, saying: 'Write in a book for yourself all the words that I have spoken to you.” (Jeremiah 30:2 NKJV)

(b) Indeed, Qur’an was written by these men. These words of Uthman testify that these men were the author, not only collectors but writers, of the book called Qur’an, “In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit (Al-Ansari) regarding any dialectic Arabic utterance of the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish.” While, during the writing of the Bible, God guided and guarded the inspired writers and ordered them write only what He ordered them to write:

“Now when the seven thunders uttered their voices, I was about to write; but I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, "Seal up the things which the seven thunders uttered, and do not write them." (Revelation 10:4 NKJV)

(c) Those written by Zayd came from the disciples and followers of the prophet of Islam (“this was already memorized by many other disciples, all what he did is that he collected the verses in one book with evidence and witnesses for every verse”). Unlike the Bible, those written in the books of the Bible were not collected from those who “heard” it from the prophets and apostles, but what the prophets and apostles themselves heard from God because they themselves who wrote it:

“Thus speaks the LORD God of Israel, saying: 'Write in a book for yourself all the words that I have spoken to you.” (Jeremiah 30:2 NKJV)


CONCLUSION

THUS, OUR POINT IS, the Book called Qur’an was not written by Muhammed, did not exist during Muhammed’s lifetime but after his death, those who wrote it are not prophets or apostles, only Abu Bakr and Uthman ordered them to write the book called Qur’an, and their sources were those who heard the utterance of Muhammed. Unlike the books of the Bible, they were written by the inspired writers themselves and God Himself who ordered them to write the books of the Bible saying “Write in a book for yourself all the words that I have spoken to you.”

But tell you what, for what ever consolation
Sufi dance are mesmerizing don't you agree?

ChristineM said:

I mean changes, i am not being picky.

Btw, i edited my previous post

Click to expand...

Okay. You quoted the book of ruth. What change in it have you seen? From the original Hebrew or Jewish to the "OT" as you refer this.

MJFlores said:

And to continue.....

WHO WROTE THE BOOK CALLED QUR’AN AND WHO ORDERED THEM TO WRITE IT?


“Actually the Quran verses being collected by Zayd doesn't mean he is the author, as this was already memorized by many other disciples, all what he did is that he collected the verses in one book with evidence and witnesses for every verse.”




THE BOOK CALLED “Qur’an” was authored and written by Zayd Bin Thabit as testified by the Islamic traditions:


“(The Caliph `Uthman ordered Zaid bin Thabit, Sa`id bin Al-As, `Abdullah bin Az-Zubair and `Abdur- Rahman bin Al-Harith bin Hisham to write the Qur'an in the form of a book (Mushafs) and said to them. "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit (Al-Ansari) regarding any dialectic Arabic utterance of the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, for the Qur'an was revealed in this dialect." So they did it.” Narrated Anas bin Malik:

[Sahih Al-Bhukari, Book 66, Hadith 6.]


Please take note of the following:

(a) According to Islamic traditions, Caliph Uthman ordered these men to write the Book called “Qur’an.” As compared to the Bible, it was God Himself who ordered the inspired prophets and apostles to write the books of the Bible as what the Lord God commanded Prophet Jeremiah:

“Thus speaks the LORD God of Israel, saying: 'Write in a book for yourself all the words that I have spoken to you.” (Jeremiah 30:2 NKJV)

(b) Indeed, Qur’an was written by these men. These words of Uthman testify that these men were the author, not only collectors but writers, of the book called Qur’an, “In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit (Al-Ansari) regarding any dialectic Arabic utterance of the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish.” While, during the writing of the Bible, God guided and guarded the inspired writers and ordered them write only what He ordered them to write:

“Now when the seven thunders uttered their voices, I was about to write; but I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, "Seal up the things which the seven thunders uttered, and do not write them." (Revelation 10:4 NKJV)

(c) Those written by Zayd came from the disciples and followers of the prophet of Islam (“this was already memorized by many other disciples, all what he did is that he collected the verses in one book with evidence and witnesses for every verse”). Unlike the Bible, those written in the books of the Bible were not collected from those who “heard” it from the prophets and apostles, but what the prophets and apostles themselves heard from God because they themselves who wrote it:

“Thus speaks the LORD God of Israel, saying: 'Write in a book for yourself all the words that I have spoken to you.” (Jeremiah 30:2 NKJV)


CONCLUSION

THUS, OUR POINT IS, the Book called Qur’an was not written by Muhammed, did not exist during Muhammed’s lifetime but after his death, those who wrote it are not prophets or apostles, only Abu Bakr and Uthman ordered them to write the book called Qur’an, and their sources were those who heard the utterance of Muhammed. Unlike the books of the Bible, they were written by the inspired writers themselves and God Himself who ordered them to write the books of the Bible saying “Write in a book for yourself all the words that I have spoken to you.”

But tell you what, for what ever consolation
Sufi dance are mesmerizing don't you agree?

Click to expand...

Already read it thanks.

firedragon said:

Okay. You quoted the book of ruth. What change in it have you seen? From the original Hebrew or Jewish to the "OT" as you refer this.

Click to expand...

As you said, position

Position makes great difference to prominence and understanding of the book.

It has been claimed that the Qur’an did not exist during the lifetime of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam). This is incorrect.

Saeed Malik writes:

‘As a young man in his thirties Muhammad would seek a period of retreat and contemplation each year – a tradition not uncommon amongst the Meccan spiritualists. Muhammad’s place of retreat was a cave at the top of Mount Hira, about two miles north of Mecca, and the time of his retreat was usually the month of Ramadan. As a man who could not write or read, Muhammad could not have studied the scriptures during his retreat. He must have instead contemplated the powerful signs of nature around him – a nature of spartan hills, the burning desert sun and the bright stars in the stillness of the night. This would be Muhammad’s gateway to the Truth.

‘As a young man he was known as Al Amin, in recognition of his honesty, trustworthiness and reliability. The Quran, much later, would recall this same trait, when some of the very same people who now called him Amin would disbelieve and deride him over his claim of a Divine mission (81:21). The Quran would likewise ask rhetorically of the disbelievers’ turning away from the Prophet they called Al Amin, “Do they reject him because they know not their Messenger?”(23:69)"’ (‘A Perspective on the Signs of Al-Quran: Through the Prism of the Heart’).

The Qur’an was revealed to Muhammad (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) over a period of twenty-three years.

Muhammad Abdel Haleem, King Fahd Professor of Islamic Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, reminds us that:

‘The Qur’an was recited first to Arabs whose paramount gift lay in eloquence of speech and who had a rich and elaborate literature, especially poetry. Both followers and opponents of the Prophet recognised its literary supremacy and inimitability. Believers hearing it uttered on the spot by the Prophet, and recognising how different it was from the Prophet’s day-to-day speech, saw in this a further proof of its divine origin.’ (‘Understanding the Qur'an: Themes and Style.’).

According to the IDP Research Division:

‘There is no doubt that the Qur'an was not only transmitted orally by many Muslims who had learned parts or the whole of it, but that it was also written down during the lifetime of the Prophet. The well-known report about 'Umar's conversion shows that large passages of the revelation had already been written down even at a very early time, in Makka, long before the hijra, when the Prophet was still in the house of Arqam.’ (‘Understanding the Qur'an – Its History and Compilation’).

Concerning the Qur’an’s compilation:

There is an expression: ‘jam' al-qur'an’. It’s general meaning is to 'bring together the Qur'an'.

While the Qur’an was written down – in its entirety – during the life of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), it had not been brought together in a single book. Abū Bakr assigned this task to Zaid bin Thabit; a young man in his early twenties, one of the Prophet’s most notable scribes. He was a ḥāfiẓ (a ‘guardian’ or ‘memorizer’ of the Qur’an; someone who knew the Qur’an by heart).

M.M. Al-Azami informs us that:

‘Zaid would accept only those materials which, according to the sworn testimony of two others, had been written in the Prophet's very presence. Ibn Hajar's statement affirms this view, that "Zaid was unwilling to accept any written material for consideration unless two Companions bore witness that the man received his dictation from the Prophet himself.” His contribution, we can summarise, was to collect all first-hand Qur'anic fragments, then scattered about Madinah, and arrange for their transcription into a master volume.

‘Once complete, the compiled Qur'an was placed in the ‘state archives’ under the custodianship of Abū Bakr.

‘In serving the Qur'an Abū Bakr acquitted himself most admirably, heeding its mandate of two witnesses for establishing authenticity, and applying this rule to the Qur’an’s own compilation. The result, though written on rudimentary parchments of varying size, constituted as sincere an effort as possible to preserve the Words of Allāh.

'In the time of 'Uthman the order of sūrahs (and of the verses within each sūrah) had been fixed. However, differences in ‘qira'at’ had become a problem. There were disputes about the correct manner of recitation. Certain tribes boasted that their method of recitation was better than others!

'Uthman’s solution was to borrow the Qur’an of Abū Bakr (in the possession of Hafṣah bint ʿUmar; a wife of the Prophet, and ‘Mother of the Believers’). He then ordered four Companions – among them Zaid bin Thabit – to reproduce the entire script in perfect copies. This they did.

'According to some reports Kufa, Basra and Syria each received a finished copy of the Qur’an; with one being sent to Madinah. Other reports add Mecca, Yemen and Bahrain. It is also said that 'Uthman retained a copy for himself. It must be noted that no copy was sent without a qāri (a ‘reciter’), whose task it was to recite the Qur’an in the manner he had learned through authenticated, multiple channels going back to the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam); ‘insofar as these channels lay in complete agreement with each other and (conformed with) the Qur’an’s consonantal skeleton’ (‘The History of the Qur’anic Text).

According to the IDP Research Division:

‘Two of the copies of the Qur'an which were originally prepared in the time of Caliph 'Uthman, are still available to us today and their text and arrangement can be compared, by anyone who cares to, with any other copy of the Qur'an, be it in print or handwriting, from any place or period of time. They will be found identical.’ (‘Understanding the Qur'an – Its History and Compilation’).

ChristineM said:

Only the OT part

Click to expand...

I believe the NT is also, just in a different way.

allright said:

The bottom Line

If Islam is true every Christian is going to hell

If Christianity is true every Muslim is going to hell

Click to expand...

I believe those are not truisms. You have to prove your statements.

I believe no true Christian will go to Hell whether Islam is true or not.

I believe Muslims have a fighting chance of avoiding Hell.

Terry Sampson said:

On a cold day in hell ...

Click to expand...

I believe then you don't really believe in true Christianity.

firedragon said:

ut the person who mentioned it doesn't have a clue of Gunters theories. It was just mentioned because Gunter is mentioned on the internet. Thats all. Gunters theories about the poetic composition of the Quran were pretty interesting and I have read it from cover to cover. But his thesis was completely disregarded and thrown out by the German university.

Click to expand...

So far you have demonstrated you lack the wit to understand even basic forum posts. Presenting yourself as the sole legitimate authority on an issue would carry a bit more weight if you had also managed to display basic reading comprehension as well.

firedragon said:

But you haven't read what they alluded or studied them (Thats fine). Do you agree with them?

Click to expand...

Anyone with even average reading comprehension wouldn't have to ask this. That you do speaks volumes...

Muffled said:

I believe the NT is also, just in a different way.

Click to expand...

Very different

Muffled said:

I believe then you don't really believe in true Christianity.

Click to expand...

And I believe that you are so confused about true Christianity that you incorrectly believe that I don't believe in true Christianity.

The Bible is as Islamic as the Qur'an is Christian and Jewish. Go sell that idea to the Jews and the Muslims, and see how much they thank you for that insight.

ChristineM said:

As you said, position

Position makes great difference to prominence and understanding of the book.

Click to expand...

Alright. I agree that the position has been changed from the second slot to close to 1st Samuel.

But whats the great difference to prominence and understanding this causes? Please can you elaborate?

firedragon said:

Alright. I agree that the position has been changed from the second slot to close to 1st Samuel.

But whats the great difference to prominence and understanding this causes? Please can you elaborate?

Click to expand...

What is the Difference between the Old Testament, the Tanakh, and the Hebrew Bible?

ChristineM said:

Differences in canonical order further create distinct interpretations. The Old Testament tucks Ruth between Judges and 1 Samuel; the book fits here chronologically, because Ruth is King David’s great-grandmother, and David is introduced in 1 Samuel. The Tanakh places Ruth in the Ketuvim (Writings), where her scroll (Hebrew, megillah) accompanies the Song of Songs, Lamentations, Qohelet (Ecclesiastes), and Esther. These scrolls are read, in full, on certain Jewish holidays; thus they have a more prominent place in the canon of Judaism than they do in the Christian canons.​

What is the Difference between the Old Testament, the Tanakh, and the Hebrew Bible?

Click to expand...

A devotional issue sis and there is no indication of the reasons for change of positions in antiquity. This is a new theory. If you go to the oldest complete bible in existence, the codex sinaiticus, you will not see this kind of reasoning that comes from documents found from that time. No patristic narrations of this sort.

Nevertheless, this is a faith matter so its all yours. Have a great day.

firedragon said:

A devotional issue sis and there is no indication of the reasons for change of positions in antiquity. This is a new theory. If you go to the oldest complete bible in existence, the codex sinaiticus, you will not see this kind of reasoning that comes from documents found from that time. No patristic narrations of this sort.

Nevertheless, this is a faith matter so its all yours. Have a great day.

Click to expand...

Actually its a printing matter and there are changes between the torah and O,T. So trying to dump it in to me is rather pathetic,

ChristineM said:

Actually its a printing matter and there are changes between the torah and O,T. So trying to dump it in to me is rather pathetic,

Click to expand...

Super.

firedragon said:

Super.

Click to expand...

And of course, no one actually uses the codex sinaiticus anymore.

Also note the vulgate is older and still in use

ChristineM said:

Actually its a printing matter and there are changes between the torah and O,T. So trying to dump it in to me is rather pathetic,

Click to expand...

Haha. Now I understand why you said this which I thought doesn't make any sense to me.

All yours is an English phrase we use to say "you win".

).

firedragon said:

Haha. Now I understand why you said this which I thought doesn't make any sense to me.

All yours is an English phrase we use to say "you win".

).

Click to expand...

You dont understand at all. Atheist here, no religious faith involved, just hard facts, evidence and data.

ChristineM said:

And of course, no one actually uses the codex sinaiticus anymore.

Also note the vulgate is older and still in use

Click to expand...

Can you show me a vulgate that is older than Sinaiticus? Do you have a manuscript that is older than sinaiticus?