Mohammed in the Bible

[gnostic]

So who is this Spririt of Truth he is talking about. Which will guide people to all truth, will not speak of itself but whatever spoken it will say it, will testify of Jesus, will reprove the world of sin and judgment. Who is it then.

From what I have read in the Gospel of John, there seemed to be a clear indication that the Spirit of Truth or Comforter, referred to the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit is mentioned again and again.

From what I understand it, the Holy Spirit is not simply a manifestation of another divine being. What Jesus referred to Father, can mean God or the Holy Spirit. He can be see as one and the same.

However, I don't believe in Jesus to be one and the same as God.

It doesn't mention anywhere the Trinity. The Trinity was idea that began not with Constantine, as most of Muslims would seem to indicate. Trinity can be seen as early as the 2nd century CE; Constantine just grasp only flavour of the Trinity, possibly for his own purpose or possibly because of particular Christian sect that he followed (though he didn't convert until his deathbed).

But as I said, I don't believe in the Holy Spirit or any other spirits, including that of God or angels, demons or djinns. But from the way I see John's gospel, I don't see it as this spirit being Muhammad.

Are you telling me that this spirit of truth, whom you claimed to be Muhammad, had fathered Jesus before Muhammad was born? So Muhammad was really Jesus' father? Do seriously believe that?

That seemed even more far-fetched then the Christian belief of the Holy Spirit being Jesus' father, or the idea of Trinity or the idea of Gabriel visiting Muhammad.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

But Muslims do interpret it so. Unless you are hiding your head in a hole, they have been do so for centuries. Do the Sunni and Shiite not see thing differently in what is written in the Qur'an?

We have free will right. Being told how and what to do is different than doing it.

Did not God promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob the land of Canaan? Do you think the covenant of God should be broken?

Yeah in the bible which is not an evidence of ABSOLUTE truth.

Did not the Book of the People, as you Muslims claim them to be, have no right whatsoever to reclaim the land promised to since these 3 patriarchs? Does your Allah's words, promises and covenants mean nothing to the Jews?

First Allah's is your Allah. For your arab christian brothers call God Allah. And the right they have is to follow the path of all the Messengers is to worship and submit to God only and to not ascribe partners to him. This is what they should have done and they have failed miserabley by denying the Message of Allah and refusing to only worship him alone.

The lands in Africa, Turkey, Spain, Eastern Europes and India also doesn't belonged to Muslims. Can you actually say that God gave them all this territories to Muhammad? Or did Muslims won it through conquests? And shouldn't Muslims lose these lands that didn't belong to them in the first place, if a stronger empire conquer these lands?

Again you keep saying Muslims were given the lands. when I have told you that the property of the people is not taken from them by the muslim government. The muslims just took over as a governing body for the land belongs to the one who created it and that is Allah. And He wants the most just of his creation who will implement His laws in the land. But it must be done in accordance with what Allah said. Again I gave you the example.

You seemed to indicate one rule where can occupy lands that don't belong to them, but you protest that you can't be driven out of these lands you have conquered from conquests. That's simply double standards, and make Muslims no better than any other conquerors.

You keep saying conquest and it is funny the only people opposed to this expansion were the oppressive regimes. For they looked at it as a loss of land. The muslims looked at is as an expansion of relgion. The muslims were going out in the world settling in different areas helping people establish governments so they can function by themselves within the Islamic state. They did their own thing and was given protection at the same time.

Again Instead of stealing the lands from them. Or oppressing the people or implementing the laws of the conquerers and pushing the inhabitants to the lowest of society and many times subjecting them to slavery. That happens many times. The people are raped of their dignity, their wealth and property and all their customs. This is every example except for a righteous muslim leader. For the people are given many times the abiltity to govern themselves and it improved the quality of life for the people I already gave you the example.

That doesn't wash, Mujahid. You religion and your former empires is invaders and was built upon those conquests.

That is every empire ever. every empire spread by going into foreign lands but muslims do not want the land. They just want you to believe in the One who created you and follow His laws in the land He created for us.

Just because your religion is Islam doesn't justify you in taking lands, forcing them to pay taxes when they don't convert, doesn't make you as liberators.

You keep saying take their land. Why when it is clear that the property of the people is kept by them and protected by the muslims. People pay taxes no matter the reason especially in those times. The Romans taxed their civilians. what about the Persians did they also not tax their civilians. Paying taxes to a government for them was not a new thing. The difference is in the transference of power. Now it was a government who established it rules and principles on a very just system securing the rights of the citizens. It is almost like America you can worship and practice the religion of your choice and you get the rights as a cititzen of that government.

Muslims are invaders and predators (whether they be Arabs, Turks, Persians or Indonesians) as much as those other empires you have claimed to liberate them from.

That is a general statement. And the same can be said about anybody the Christians, Jews etc. are no exception. At least the muslims allow them to keep their lands, their religion and customs, and give them equal status while at the same time protecting them as if they were muslim. They do not go in a slaughter everyone rape the women, steal all the property, and put the people in bondage. Taking the land subjecting the people to slavery.

The last Muslim empire is in Indonesia. Those in government are largely or wholly Muslims. Do you see them treating all islanders as equal? Do you think they give a damn about human rights, when they can take away whatever natural resources they can strip from the lands? Do you think the islands were given to them by Allah? How are they any better than the Portugeses who left the place to them?

The question should be asked not whether they are muslim or not but ARE THEY IMPLEMENTING THE SHARIAH OF ALLAH COMMISSIONED BY THE MESSENGER PBU AND FOLLOWED BY HIS COMPANIONS.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

From what I have read in the Gospel of John, there seemed to be a clear indication that the Spirit of Truth or Comforter, referred to the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit is mentioned again and again.

From what I understand it, the Holy Spirit is not simply a manifestation of another divine being. What Jesus referred to Father, can mean God or the Holy Spirit. He can be see as one and the same.

However, I don't believe in Jesus to be one and the same as God.

It doesn't mention anywhere the Trinity. The Trinity was idea that began not with Constantine, as most of Muslims would seem to indicate. Trinity can be seen as early as the 2nd century CE; Constantine just grasp only flavour of the Trinity, possibly for his own purpose or possibly because of particular Christian sect that he followed (though he didn't convert until his deathbed).

But as I said, I don't believe in the Holy Spirit or any other spirits, including that of God or angels, demons or djinns. But from the way I see John's gospel, I don't see it as this spirit being Muhammad.

Are you telling me that this spirit of truth, whom you claimed to be Muhammad, had fathered Jesus before Muhammad was born? So Muhammad was really Jesus' father? Do seriously believe that?

That seemed even more far-fetched then the Christian belief of the Holy Spirit being Jesus' father, or the idea of Trinity or the idea of Gabriel visiting Muhammad.

the reason I asked the question and i think you missed it, is because you stated "I don't believe in any miracle or spririt because I see no evidence of one." So how do you believe in the holy spirit then, but thanks for the gnostic explanation

 

[Snowbear]

They (Muslims) just want you to believe in the One who created you and follow His laws in the land He created for us.

What happens to the people who choose not to convert to Islam and follow the Islamic version of 'His' laws?

...I have told you that the property of the people is not taken from them by the muslim government. The muslims just took over as a governing body for the land belongs to the one who created it and that is Allah.

What happens to the people who turn down the Muslim's 'offer of assistance?]

 

[shema]

The Biblical prophecies on the advent of the Prophet Muhammad are evidence of the truth of Islam for people who believe in the Bible.
In Deuteronomy 18, Moses stated that God told him: “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account.” (Deuteronomy 18:18-19).
From these verses we conclude that the prophet in this prophecy must have the following three characteristics:
1) That he will be like Moses.
2) That he will come from the brothers of the Israelites, i.e. the Ishmaelites.
3) That God will put His words in to the mouth of this prophet and that he will declare what God commands him.
Let us examine these three characteristics in more depth:
1) A prophet like Moses:
There were hardly any two prophets who were so much alike as Moses and Muhammad. Both were given a comprehensive law and code of life. Both encountered their enemies and were victorious in miraculous ways. Both were accepted as prophets and statesmen. Both migrated following conspiracies to assassinate them. Analogies between Moses and Jesus overlook not only the above similarities but other crucial ones as well. These include the natural birth, the family life, and death of Moses and Muhammad but not of Jesus. Moreover Jesus was regarded by his followers as the Son of God and not exclusively as a prophet of God, as Moses and Muhammad were and as Muslims believe Jesus was. So, this prophecy refers to the Prophet Muhammad and not to Jesus, because Muhammad is more like Moses than Jesus.
Also, one notices from the Gospel of John that the Jews were waiting for the fulfillment of three distinct prophecies. The first was the coming of Christ. The second was the coming of Elijah. The third was the coming of the Prophet. This is obvious from the three questions that were posed to John the Baptist: “Now this was John’s testimony, when the Jews of Jerusalem sent priests and Levites to ask him who he was. He did not fail to confess, but confessed freely, “I am not the Christ.” They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No.” (John 1:19-21). If we look in a Bible with cross-references, we will find in the marginal notes where the words “the Prophet” occur in John 1:21, that these words refer to the prophecy of Deuteronomy 18:15 and 18:18. We conclude from this that Jesus Christ is not the prophet mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:18.
2) From the brothers of the Israelites:
Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac (Genesis 21). Ishmael became the grandfather of the Arab nation, and Isaac became the grandfather of the Jewish nation. The prophet spoken of was not to come from among the Jews themselves, but from among their brothers, i.e. the Ishmaelites. Muhammad, a descendant of Ishmael, is indeed this prophet.
Also, Isaiah 42:1-13 speaks of the servant of God, His “chosen one” and “messenger” who will bring down a law. “He will not falter or be discouraged till he establishes justice on earth. In his law the islands will put their hope.” (Isaiah 42:4). Verse 11, connects that awaited one with the descendants of Kedar. Who is Kedar? According to Genesis 25:13, Kedar was the second son of Ishmael, the ancestor of the Prophet Muhammad.
3) God will put His words in the mouth of this prophet:
The words of God (the Holy Quran) were truly put into Muhammad’s mouth. God sent the Angel Gabriel to teach Muhammad the exact words of God (the Holy Quran) and asked him to dictate them to the people as he heard them. The words are therefore not his own. They did not come from his own thoughts, but were put into his mouth by the Angel Gabriel. During the life time of Muhammad, and under his supervision, these words were then memorized and written by his companions.
Also, this prophecy in Deuteronomy mentioned that this prophet will speak the words of God in the name of God. If we looked to the Holy Quran, we will find that all its chapters, except Chapter 9, are preceded or begin with the phrase, “In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.”
Another indication (other than the prophecy in Deuteronomy) is that Isaiah ties the messenger connected with Kedar with a new song (a scripture in a new language) to be sung to the Lord (Isaiah 42:10-11). This is mentioned more clearly in the prophecy of Isaiah: “and another tongue, will he speak to this people” (Isaiah 28:11 KJV). Another related point, is that the Quran was revealed in sections over a span of twenty-three years. It is interesting to compare this with Isaiah 28 which speaks of the same thing, “For it is: Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; a little here, a little there.” (Isaiah 28:10).
[FONT=Arial (Arabic)]
[/FONT]

Isn't it true that Muslims believe that the Bible has been tampered with and currupted?

 

[Snowbear]

Isn't it true that Muslims believe that the Bible has been tampered with and currupted?

Yes they do. But that never stopped anyone from taking what they wanted from it and twisting it to say whatever they want it to :sarcastic


(Yes, I know - there are non-Muslims, including some Christians, who do the same thing)