Why I didn't believe in Bahaism when I researched it.

[Dawnofhope]

Are you telling us that other prophets may come ?
With eventually others Books adapted to their time ?

That’s correct

 

[firedragon]

Oh dear, some hard questions from me.

1. The apostle of Barabas was not considered holy by the Chrisitans, so, there was no need for Allah to tell them, it is not from God. But Book of revelation was being part of the holy books of Chrisitans and was believed to be an inspiration from God, so, if it was not really from God, He would have asked them not to use it.

2. Some of the verses of Quran are allusions. They are revealed in a brief and condensed form. The verse I was referring is 5:111

"And when I inspired the disciples, (saying): Believe in Me and in My messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) "we are muslims".

It is not like, just Allah said one sentence to them "be muslims". This is just an allusion to a fact the Allah was making communications with them. They were inspired men, not just an ordinary believers. Why would God inspired them, but He does not directly inspire me and you? It is because they had a mission, and that was writing the Bible!
The verses of Quran are meant to ponder upon.


3. I read many Hadithes in arabic, and to me they are consistently classical Arabic.
I don't have knowledge of various hadith types you are referring. To me, it has no benefit. When I find a hadith, I compare with Quran. If it is compatible with Quran, and has its roots in Quran I take as authentic. If it contradicts Quran, I don't consider it authentic. I don't believe to classify hadithes as weak, strong, Hassan,...etc is any proof for authenticity. If a weak hadith is compatible with Quran, I take it as authentic. If a strong hadith contradicts quran, I take it as a false hadith.

U missed

By the way, you forgot to answer some questions after you made the claims i asked questions about. Did you miss it? Let me furnish it again so it will not be missed again brother. Please substantiate your claims.

Your Claims are below in italic and different colour so that its easy to distinguish.

1. I have done a lot of research on hadithes. It is very rare a hadith is false. From my experience more than 99% of hadith are in agreement with Quran.
2. The language of the Hadithes I quoted is classic arabic, same classic arabic used at the time of Muhammad and Imams. I read their Arabic too.

My questions to that claim.

1. If that is the case, how do you explain a Sarih Hadith?
2. Who are the Muthallis and on what basis do you say they are all 99% authentic?
3. What about the hadith that says the earth along with other seven earths is floating on top of a large fish while its swimming in the sea? Is that also correct and in agreement with the Quran?
4. What is the difference between a mathrook and muthawathir ahadith and why are some of them not Sarih?
5. You made this claim: "The language of the Hadithes I quoted is classic arabic, same classic arabic used at the time of Muhammad and Imams. I read their Arabic too."
Can you show me how one would spell the word "Lucy" in the classical arabic of the Quran and the MSA of the Hadith book you are quoting? I would respect your expertise since you have claimed this above.

You are making claims so please respond carefully to each point in order to verify your claims.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Imam just means leader, all Messengers were sent to obeyed by God's permission, hence all leaders.

If the tradition of al-kafi was true, all the time Abraham had a community of believers till old age, he was not the guiding leader, but just their Messenger and Prophet, and their leader would be someone else.

The fact is with Nubuwa comes leadership, with Messengership leadership. But leadership can be not in the open and hence neither with Messengership or Nubuwa.

There are hadiths in Alkafi that show Imammate is a position of all Prophets and something that automatically comes with them as well, like the long one from Imam Reda (as) in there.

Well, the problem was, some think if it is said Mahdi is an Imam, He cannot be a Messenger and Prophet. Whereas, the hadithes says, He comes with a new Book. He will abrogate all that came before Him, and will bring something new that was never before. Other Hadithes indicates, God gives Mahdi all that was given to other Prophets plus more. In fact, knowledge is said to be like 27 letters. All prophets, including Muhammad had revealed only 2 letters. The rest comes with Mahdi.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I don't have time to translate all of the hadiths, but there are a lot that say the Mahdi is one of the Twelve Successors of Mohammad and many hadiths that say there are twelve successors to Mohammad!

The hadithes says, Mahdi is from the lineage of Muhammad through Fatimah. You think just because someone has lineage of Muhammad, He just becomes His successors and subordinate to Muhammad. Was not Muhammad from lineage of Ishamael? Would that make Muhammad successor of Ishamael?

 

[firedragon]

1. The apostle of Barabas was not considered holy by the Chrisitans, so, there was no need for Allah to tell them, it is not from God. But Book of revelation was being part of the holy books of Chrisitans and was believed to be an inspiration from God, so, if it was not really from God, He would have asked them not to use it.

I didnt say "Apostle Barnabas", i said "Epistle of Barnabas" and it was in the Bible though you say it wasnt "Considered". If it was not considered, why do you think it was in the Bible?

2. Some of the verses of Quran are allusions. They are revealed in a brief and condensed form. The verse I was referring is 5:111

"And when I inspired the disciples, (saying): Believe in Me and in My messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) "we are muslims".

See, you cant cherry pick one verse, and from that two further cherry pick three words and make a doctrinne out of it. This verse doesnt say at all that the disciples were "Inspired to write Gods word". In fact, it doesnt even stop by saying "I inspired" which is why you have cherry picked that bit. Strange.

It says "“And I inspired the disciples: ‘You shall believe in Me and My messenger;’ they said: ‘We believe, and bear witness that we have submitted.’”"

Its making them believe in God and Messenger the Quran is speaking about. Not this Gods word writing inspiration you are trying to imply. Read the rest of the verse too. Its quite simple.

3. I read many Hadithes in arabic, and to me they are consistently classical Arabic.

You keep saying this, but when asked a simple questin about it you completely avoid answering.

 

[Link]

Well, the problem was, some think if it is said Mahdi is an Imam, He cannot be a Messenger and Prophet. Whereas, the hadithes says, He comes with a new Book. He will abrogate all that came before Him, and will bring something new that was never before. Other Hadithes indicates, God gives Mahdi all that was given to other Prophets plus more. In fact, knowledge is said to be like 27 letters. All prophets, including Muhammad had revealed only 2 letters. The rest comes with Mahdi.

It's funny how you guys go metaphorical and hyperbola where you want, and avoid it where you want. The hadith of Imam Mahdi bringing a new book or new religion have been explained by other hadiths, exactly what the Imams meant. And according to the hadiths explaining it (and there are many), it means the religion would be so distorted and Quran would be so misunderstood and distorted meaning, it would be as a new book and new religion. So the Imams explained what they meant to be metaphoric and hyperbola in that regard.

And I honestly see the Bahai "sacred" Writing includes Kitabal Aqdas no where near the level of Quran. Sure anyone can talk about light and Irfan stuff, but the design of Quran is a whole different level of guidance and Bahai writing are not anywhere near the Quran.

Also, now with programming and apps, we can see Imam Mahdi can use the Quran of Ali which had all the dates and times each verse was revealed and hence the order, and we can see how Quran was dynamically built over the period 23 years a long with the commentary of God and Rasool in this regard, along with Imam Ali's commentary.

This itself will be a new book, although same Quran, it has a feature about the Quran that we don't have today, the exact dates when Quranic verses were revealed and tafsir.

 

[Link]

The hadithes says, Mahdi is from the lineage of Muhammad through Fatimah. You think just because someone has lineage of Muhammad, He just becomes His successors and subordinate to Muhammad. Was not Muhammad from lineage of Ishamael? Would that make Muhammad successor of Ishamael?

The hadiths show Imam Mahdi is a successor and the one who successorship ends through. I didn't make any argument like you said.

 

[Link]

If a weak hadith is compatible with Quran

Then you don't act according to the paradigm of Quran or ahadith regarding how to act per hadiths.

If a hadith is not confirmed by Quran nor rejected, you neither accept it nor reject it.
If a hadith is confirmed by Quran, you follow it and let it continue giving you insight in this respect, and use it as evidence you are right in the interpretation you know is correct according to Quran.
If a hadith contradicts Quran and reason, you throw it against the wall.

Simply disliking a hadith is never a reason to dismiss, but like a hadith and not seeing confirmed in Quran and following it is not allowed as well. Neutrality is required for hadiths we can't confirm are true nor know they are false.

This is what all the hadiths about this subject show. Also, it is said to carry a hadith is to teach it to followers of Ahlulbayt.

Because everything is in Quran, to carry it, is not simply to see it in Quran, but to prove it by Quran. It's not sufficient to quote a hadith and say the Quran therefore says this, as that would make Quran at the mercy of hadiths.

But as anyone can yap about the Quran and say what they want, you have to provide hadiths.



The Quran itself proves and contextualizes everything it says.

Hadiths from Ahlulbayt and the way to compliment Quran, itself is a miracle of both Quran and Ahlulbayt's guidance and their unity as spoken by the Prophet.

 

[Link]

Referring hadiths to Quran.





Narrated from Prophet (pbu) :when comes a hadith from me refer it to book of Allah if it was agreeing with it so accept it , and it was against it throw it to width of wall

Tusi ,Tabarsi Majma'ul bayan fi tafsir Qur'an v1 p39

2. «اذا أتاکم عنّی حدیث فاعرضوه على کتاب الله و حجّة عقولکم فان وافقهما فاقبلوه و الّا فاضربوا به عرض الجدار»؛

when comes a hadith from me refer it to book of Allah & reasoning of your minds if it was agreeing with it so accept it , and it was against it throw it to width of wall

إِنَّ عَلَى کُلِّ حَقٍّ حَقِیقَةً وَ عَلَى کُلِّ صَوَابٍ نُوراً فَمَا وَافَقَ کِتَابَ اللهِ فَخُذُوهُ وَ مَا خَالَفَ‏ کِتَابَ‏ اللهِ‏ فَدَعُوهُ»؛[3]

for every right is a truth & on every blessing a shinin light , follow what is agrees with book of Allah & leave what disagrees with it

Kafi v 1 p 69

ا مام صادق(ع) :مَا لَمْ یُوَافِقْ مِنَ الْحَدِیثِ الْقُرْآنَ فَهُوَ زُخْرُفٌ

Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) : what doesn't agree with Qur'an is a beautiful-seeming lie.

H 199, Ch. 22, h 3

A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from his father from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Yahya al-Halab from Ayyub ibn al-Hurr who has said the following.

"Abu ‘Abdallah ((عليه السلام).) has said, ‘Everything must be referred to the holy Qur'an and the

Sunnah, the noble traditions of the holy Prophet (s.a.) and any Hadith that does not agree with the holy Qur'an it is a useless statement.’"

Grading Majlisi: Sahih

H 200, Ch. 22, h 4

Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Isa from ibn Faddal from Ali ibn ‘Uqba from Ayyub ibn Rashid from Abu ‘Abdallah ((عليه السلام).) who has said thefollowing.

"Of Hadith whatever does not agree with the holy Qur'an is a useless statement."

Grading: Bahbudi: Sahih

H 201, Ch. 22, h 5

Muhammad ibn ’Isma‘il from al-Fadl ibn Shadhan from ibn Abu ‘Umayr from Hisham ibn al-Hakam and others from Abu ‘Abdallah ((عليه السلام).) who has said the following.

"The holy Prophet once addressed the people in Mina (a place in Makkah) saying, "O people, whatever comes to you in the form of my Hadith you must see if it agrees with the holy book of Allah then know that I have said it but whatever comes to you that does not agree with the book of Allah then know that I have not said it.

Grading: Majlisi: Sahih (majhool)

Chaper 22, Vol 1, Al kafi





Referring hadiths to Quran of course is no easy task. But it’s a task that must be done. In fact, gathering the following, in context of these hadiths, it’s a task the believers are to do as a community.

“Meet each other because it enlivens your hearts and causes the remembrance of our affair, and our traditions will promote love amongst you. That if you take them you are successful and achieve salvation and if you leave them you shall be misguided and fall into perdition. Act on these traditions and I guarantee your salvation.”


The line “whatever Quran doesn’t validate is false” may seem like we can reject all hadiths that we don’t find in the Quran but that is false. The Quran has an explanation to all things, and hence while it’s only what it verifies that is true, it’s not necessarily if we don’t find something in the Quran that it is not the Quran.

This is a task that is the noble purpose of the Quran. Quran was not meant for everyone to just state an opinion upon it, but for it truly guide and unite humans upon the path of God.


One of the hadiths even says, what your reason doesn’t accord with. This is because nature and reason take precedence over everything, and revelation is to be testified through reasoning.

This poses some question towards the paradox. If we can judge hadiths by Quran, why do we need hadiths in the first place? And if we don’t need hadiths, why do we need Quran, if we can use our minds to figure out it’s insights?

And here is a trial. There is a delicate balance between and in the middle of the two extremes, one blindly following and another only following what we ourselves can come up with in our own minds.

The balance is while we don’t know something is not taught in the Quran, we don’t deny. In fact, there are hadiths that show sometimes if believers intend to follow Ahlulbayt (as) but act on a false tradition to them, it’s accepted their actions.

This is not to say we can follow what we have no knowledge of, rather, Islam is meant to very dynamic. We were embryos who relied on our mother to live. We come to this world, and then slowly while relying on our parents for insights, come to be more acquainted with the world around us. We aren’t going to understand the Quran in one go. We aren’t going to see every false hadith refuted in Quran in one shot. We aren’t going to see every single true hadith in Quran in one shot.

In fact, if we go alone approach, we may reflect are whole lives and still remain blind to a lot of hadiths. As true hadiths are insights to Quran and Quran verifies them, there is a way to come to see them.

The nature of learning is not that we must come to know the whole Shariah by trusting a clergy figure or anything like that. We may need at a certain point of time, delegate a lot of things to be practiced but not known by us to be true, but we must try to strive for knowledge.

Ultimately, Quran has been emphasized to be a book that is superior in knowledge and guidance, and in that we must strive. Its primary insight givers are Ahlulbayt (as) but we aren’t to approach hadiths and Quran alone. Rather, as the hadith previous has mentioned, we are to meet and communicate, and study hadiths together.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I didnt say "Apostle Barnabas", i said "Epistle of Barnabas" and it was in the Bible though you say it wasnt "Considered". If it was not considered, why do you think it was in the Bible?

.

I quote wikipedia:

Eusebius (260/265 – 339/340), excluded it from "the accepted books", classifying it as among the "rejected" or "spurious" (νόθοι) writings, while also applying to it, as to many others, the term "the disputed books"


Epistle of Barnabas - Wikipedia

.

See, you cant cherry pick one verse, and from that two further cherry pick three words and make a doctrinne out of it. This verse doesnt say at all that the disciples were "Inspired to write Gods word". In fact, it doesnt even stop by saying "I inspired" which is why you have cherry picked that bit. Strange.

.

It is a logical deduction. Cherry picking is if I ignore other verses of Quran, which says, God asked people of the Book to read and stand by their Scriptures which was available at the time of Muhammad. If those Books were not really from God, why Quran asks them to follow them?

قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَسْتُمْ عَلَىٰ شَيْءٍ حَتَّىٰ تُقِيمُوا التَّوْرَاةَ وَالْإِنجِيلَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ وَلَيَزِيدَنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنْهُم مَّا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ

"Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord." It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith." 5:68



So, who wrote the Injil that this verse 5:68 is talking about?

It says "“And I inspired the disciples: ‘You shall believe in Me and My messenger;’ they said: ‘We believe, and bear witness that we have submitted.’”"

Its making them believe in God and Messenger the Quran is speaking about. Not this Gods word writing inspiration you are trying to imply. Read the rest of the verse too. Its quite simple.

"And when I inspired the disciples, (saying): Believe in Me and in My messenger, they said: We believe. Bear witness that we have surrendered (unto Thee) "we are muslims".

What does Muslim mean? The disciples of Jesus according to Quran, said we are Muslims!

Question: to be a Muslim, is it enough to only say, we believe in God and His Messenger, or they were also required to obey the teachings and laws of God? Please answer this first!

"Muslim" means one who submits to God! How could they submit to God? They could submit, only if they knew what God wants them to do, and what is the Right way of living that God expects from them. How could they know the right way God wants from them? Only if they know the Religion of God and His teachings! Those teachings are the Revelation of Injil! Yes, God had inspired them with correct teachings of Injil! So, they must have known Injil very well, so, they could believe in God and His messenger, and obey God!

If God did not inspire them with teachings of Inljil, what did He inspire them with?
Just think....

Here is another verse about disciples:

When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: "Who will be My helpers to (the work of) Allah?" Said the disciples: "We are Allah's helpers: We believe in Allah, and do thou bear witness that we are Muslims.


Question: How did Disciples help Allah!? If Jesus went up, and His Revelations were not ever written properly by anyone appointed by God, then how did disciples help Allah?
If you have better answers for these questions, please do not hesitate to teach me something.

You keep saying this, but when asked a simple questin about it you completely avoid answering.

It is irrelevant. What matters is the teachings from Hadith. For a Hadith to be authentic, it does not need to be exactly the words that came out of the mouth of prophet and Imams! The concepts needs to agree with Quran. Just think. If you translate Quran to english, it is no longer the original words, but does it mean, it becomes corrupted? Same, with hadith, even if hadithes were written in a different Arabic dialect, what matters is the concept.

 

[Dawnofhope]

And I honestly see the Bahai "sacred" Writing includes Kitabal Aqdas no where near the level of Quran. Sure anyone can talk about light and Irfan stuff, but the design of Quran is a whole different level of guidance and Bahai writing are not anywhere near the Quran.

I am a Baha’i who has grown up in the Christian West and was formerly a Christian before becoming a Baha’i 30 years ago. At that time in my country only a tiny number of my countrymen were Muslims. I certainly had no significant contact and friendship with Muslims as they were so few in number. What I did know of Muslims was through the negative news headlines growing up. For example, the kidnapping and killing of Israeli participants in the Olympic Games in the 1970s. Then the capture of the American Embassy in Iran and the prolonged period were hundreds were held hostage.

So Islam had no appeal whatsoever. The religions beyond Christianity that were attractive were peaceful and contemplative such as Hinduism and Buddhism. The Baha’i Faith made sense in regards its progressive social principles of social justice, how it elaborated on Christianity and acknowledged the light within the Dharmic religions. It also opened the door to appreciating and studying Islam. So now I have a couple of copies of the Quran in my home. I am happy to develop friendships with Muslims.

In regards a comparison between the Baha’i writings and the Quran for one who speaks English, there is no comparison. The Baha’i Writings are relevant for today whereas so much of the Quran appears no longer suited to modern times. Little wonder I see Mosques that seperate men and women and promote inequality.

But I am interested to learn more about Islam through threads such as these. I think your attraction to Islam over the Baha’i Faith is likely based on how you have been conditioned growing up.

Salaam

 

[firedragon]

I quote wikipedia:

Eusebius (260/265 – 339/340), excluded it from "the accepted books", classifying it as among the "rejected" or "spurious" (νόθοι) writings, while also applying to it, as to many others, the term "the disputed books"


Epistle of Barnabas - Wikipedia

Brother. Please understand this sentence.

"Epistle of Barnabas was in the Bible".

Do you deny that?

You are quoting Eusebius, thats patristic quotations. But even after Eusebius, the bible had the epistle of barnabas.

Also, it seems like your criteria of "Gods word" is "Christians followed it". Thats a strange standard. A strange foundation.

In that case please answer for other books that was in the Bible, Christians followed it, then later in the 5th century Christians removed it. So according to your standard It was Gods word, then suddenly because Christians didnt include them later they seized to be Gods word.

1. Epistle of Barnabas
2. Epistle of Clement
3. 2nd Epistle of Clement
4. Shepard of Hermas.

I asked about all four of these but it was not responded to.

It is a logical deduction. Cherry picking is if I ignore other verses of Quran, which says, God asked people of the Book to read and stand by their Scriptures which was available at the time of Muhammad. If those Books were not really from God, why Quran asks them to follow them?

قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَسْتُمْ عَلَىٰ شَيْءٍ حَتَّىٰ تُقِيمُوا التَّوْرَاةَ وَالْإِنجِيلَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ وَلَيَزِيدَنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنْهُم مَّا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ

"Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord." It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith." 5:68



So, who wrote the Injil that this verse 5:68 is talking about?

You asked me "Who wrote the Injil" based on that verse. Where in verse does it say the Injil was a reading, writing, or recital?

If you think the Bible or the New Testament is "The Gospel", you have to prove it, not just say "I believe so" or say "Christians believed so".

Question: to be a Muslim, is it enough to only say, we believe in God and His Messenger, or they were also required to obey the teachings and laws of God? Please answer this first!

Who told you that based on this verse Muslims are only those who believe in God and his messenger? Does the verse say so? NOPE.

Also, who told you Muslims are not "Those who believe in God and his messenger"?

"Muslim" means one who submits to God! How could they submit to God? They could submit, only if they knew what God wants them to do, and what is the Right way of living that God expects from them. How could they know the right way God wants from them? Only if they know the Religion of God and His teachings! Those teachings are the Revelation of Injil! Yes, God had inspired them with correct teachings of Injil! So, they must have known Injil very well, so, they could believe in God and His messenger, and obey God!

They know what to do because the messenger instructs them.

But what you are trying your best to do is with all of this irrelevant arguments argue that Jesus's disciples were inspired by Allah to write Gods word and the New Testament is Gods word. YOU ARE WRONG.

Not a single person who ever met Jesus ever wrote anything in any of the books of the Bible. There is no evidence to it. No one who write anything in the Bible ever claim to be a disciple of Jesus.

It is irrelevant.

Brother. When you make claims like "All ahadith and Quranic languages are the same" you have made the gravest error one could make. So i keep asking you simple questions that makes a difference in languages between both but you are always avoiding the question like a plague then you would move on to another argument.

Can you tell me how to write this in arabic? And can you tell me how the writer of Bihar (Majlis) you keep quoting all over the place, differs from the Quranic arabic. Its a simple question. I ask you because you claim something.

"LUCY"

So tell me please.

Peace.

 

[Dawnofhope]

What is simple and straightforward is that God protected the Gospel as He did the Quran. In doing so He conveyed all He wished through Christ and Muhammad. I believe it to be a serious error to reject either the Gospel or Quran. Yet most Christians reject the Quran and most Muslims reject the Gospel because of their leaders and scholars. Both are a necessary foundation and the English versions of the Quran are clear it is insufficient to follow Muhammad alone but the Prophets that have come before.

Say: "We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets, from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)."
3:84

What has become clear is that most Muslims do make a distinction between Muhammad and the Prophets that have gone before.

Peace

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So tell me please.

It would not matter what was said, in the end 6:39 offers a judgement between main stream Islamic thought and what the Bab and Baha'u'llah offered.

"But those who deny Our verses are deaf and dumb within darknesses. Whomever Allah wills - He leaves astray; and whomever He wills - He puts him on a straight path."

As such, Allah Will is unfolding in precisely that way and it is up to us to choose what is applicable to our own self, from that verse.

Peace be with you and all.

Regards Tony

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Brother. Please understand this sentence.

"Epistle of Barnabas was in the Bible".

Do you deny that?

You are quoting Eusebius, thats patristic quotations. But even after Eusebius, the bible had the epistle of barnabas.

Also, it seems like your criteria of "Gods word" is "Christians followed it". Thats a strange standard. A strange foundation.

In that case please answer for other books that was in the Bible, Christians followed it, then later in the 5th century Christians removed it. So according to your standard It was Gods word, then suddenly because Christians didnt include them later they seized to be Gods word.

1. Epistle of Barnabas
2. Epistle of Clement
3. 2nd Epistle of Clement
4. Shepard of Hermas.

I asked about all four of these but it was not responded to.



You asked me "Who wrote the Injil" based on that verse. Where in verse does it say the Injil was a reading, writing, or recital?

If you think the Bible or the New Testament is "The Gospel", you have to prove it, not just say "I believe so" or say "Christians believed so".



Who told you that based on this verse Muslims are only those who believe in God and his messenger? Does the verse say so? NOPE.

Also, who told you Muslims are not "Those who believe in God and his messenger"?



They know what to do because the messenger instructs them.

But what you are trying your best to do is with all of this irrelevant arguments argue that Jesus's disciples were inspired by Allah to write Gods word and the New Testament is Gods word. YOU ARE WRONG.

Not a single person who ever met Jesus ever wrote anything in any of the books of the Bible. There is no evidence to it. No one who write anything in the Bible ever claim to be a disciple of Jesus.



Brother. When you make claims like "All ahadith and Quranic languages are the same" you have made the gravest error one could make. So i keep asking you simple questions that makes a difference in languages between both but you are always avoiding the question like a plague then you would move on to another argument.

Can you tell me how to write this in arabic? And can you tell me how the writer of Bihar (Majlis) you keep quoting all over the place, differs from the Quranic arabic. Its a simple question. I ask you because you claim something.

"LUCY"

So tell me please.

Peace.

You skipped many of my questions! I quoted the verse, that Allah says, desciples were helpers of Allah. You have no answer how they helped Allah in practical terms.

If you read the verses of Quran, you will see in many cases, Allah asks those Christians who lived at the time of Muhammad must stand by the Injil. In other cases, Quran even says, Muhammad is mentioned in the Scriptures that is in the hands of people who live at the time of Muhammad. Which Injil, Quran is asking Chrisitans to stand by? If you say, it is not the Injil that was among Chrisistians, then which one is it that God is talking about? How could Christian's know what Injil says so that can stand by it if the Book that was in their hands was not the true Injil? Moreover, why there is no verse in Quran to say, their Book is corrupted?


I notice many Muslims think there are 4 Injils. This is just how people named the book of John, Luke, Mike, and Thomas.

But, what Quran intends by Injil, is the Revelation of Jesus, meaning, All teachings of Christ, and all prophecies about future events such as next prophet and Judgement Day. Thus, if we consider, Injil is really all these informations regarding commandments, laws and prophecies, we would see, all of it is contained in new testament. For, when you read the whole testament, you get a clear view about divine laws and ordinances as well as future prophecies. Thus, when Quran asks Chrisitans to stand by Injil, It certainly means, the teachings and prophecies in new testament. What else could Quran be referring to? Even if, some of the other books, such as Clement was among books of new testament, it cannot be said, it is no longer Injil, for even those other books, essentially elaboration on the teachings of Christ. Either way, the Chrisitans always gave more importance to the writings of apostles.

Moreover, the problem with the idea that the Injil was never written properly according to the will of God, is, a blasphemy to God. Do you know why? Because, it is claiming that God was incapable of providing the guidance He intended and left Chrisitans with a false holy Book for 600 years. Between Jesus and Muhammad, there are 600 years! So, you say, God revealed Injil to Jesus, so it may be a guidance to people of that time, but, God failed to even give a Book of guidance to them after taking Jesus up. Was God powerless?

I think, this is just a wishful idea for some Muslims. They like to think only their own Holy Book is perfect, and all other people have false holy books. I can see why you like to believe this. I think, it gives a sense of proud to Muslims.

 

[firedragon]

You skipped many of my questions! I quoted the verse, that Allah says, desciples were helpers of Allah. You have no answer how they helped Allah in practical terms.

If you read the verses of Quran, you will see in many cases, Allah asks those Christians who lived at the time of Muhammad must stand by the Injil. In other cases, Quran even says, Muhammad is mentioned in the Scriptures that is in the hands of people who live at the time of Muhammad. Which Injil, Quran is asking Chrisitans to stand by? If you say, it is not the Injil that was among Chrisistians, then which one is it that God is talking about? How could Christian's know what Injil says so that can stand by it if the Book that was in their hands was not the true Injil? Moreover, why there is no verse in Quran to say, their Book is corrupted?


I notice many Muslims think there are 4 Injils. This is just how people named the book of John, Luke, Mike, and Thomas.

But, what Quran intends by Injil, is the Revelation of Jesus, meaning, All teachings of Christ, and all prophecies about future events such as next prophet and Judgement Day. Thus, if we consider, Injil is really all these informations regarding commandments, laws and prophecies, we would see, all of it is contained in new testament. For, when you read the whole testament, you get a clear view about divine laws and ordinances as well as future prophecies. Thus, when Quran asks Chrisitans to stand by Injil, It certainly means, the teachings and prophecies in new testament. What else could Quran be referring to? Even if, some of the other books, such as Clement was among books of new testament, it cannot be said, it is no longer Injil, for even those other books, essentially elaboration on the teachings of Christ. Either way, the Chrisitans always gave more importance to the writings of apostles.

Moreover, the problem with the idea that the Injil was never written properly according to the will of God, is, a blasphemy to God. Do you know why? Because, it is claiming that God was incapable of providing the guidance He intended and left Chrisitans with a false holy Book for 600 years. Between Jesus and Muhammad, there are 600 years! So, you say, God revealed Injil to Jesus, so it may be a guidance to people of that time, but, God failed to even give a Book of guidance to them after taking Jesus up. Was God powerless?

I think, this is just a wishful idea for some Muslims. They like to think only their own Holy Book is perfect, and all other people have false holy books. I can see why you like to believe this. I think, it gives a sense of proud to Muslims.

You have not understood the Quran. It doesn’t say anywhere that any of the books were written down.

Quran means a recitation, a reading. No other revelation named in the Quran means such. So you should think about it.

 

[firedragon]

It would not matter what was said, in the end 6:39 offers a judgement between main stream Islamic thought and what the Bab and Baha'u'llah offered.

"But those who deny Our verses are deaf and dumb within darknesses. Whomever Allah wills - He leaves astray; and whomever He wills - He puts him on a straight path."

As such, Allah Will is unfolding in precisely that way and it is up to us to choose what is applicable to our own self, from that verse.

Peace be with you and all.

Regards Tony

Doesn’t say anything related.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Doesn’t say anything related.

It gives an alternate response to the OP post, a possible reason why a person can not see the Mahdi in the Bab and the 'Glory of God' in Baha'u'llah, thus this is that Quran verse repeated to consider in that light.

6:39 "But those who deny Our verses are deaf and dumb within darknesses. Whomever Allah wills - He leaves astray; and whomever He wills - He puts him on a straight path."

Peace be with you and all, what a great day we live in.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

It gives an alternate response to the OP post, a possible reason why a person can not see the Mahdi in the Bab and the 'Glory of God' in Baha'u'llah, thus this is that Quran verse repeated to consider in that light.

6:39 "But those who deny Our verses are deaf and dumb within darknesses. Whomever Allah wills - He leaves astray; and whomever He wills - He puts him on a straight path."

Peace be with you and all, what a great day we live in.

Regards Tony

still doesn’t say anything related.

 

[firedragon]

You skipped many of my questions! I quoted the verse, that Allah says, desciples were helpers of Allah. You have no answer how they helped Allah in practical terms.

1. Where does it say "Disciples were helpers"?
2. How is that said in Arabic?