Muhammed Mentioned by Name in Bible

[peaceful soul]

You appear to not be listening to or understanding what I am saying.

There is nothing more I can say to help you here.

Peace be unto you

The problem is your unsound argument. If I found an Arabic term and then used a Hebrew word and imported its meaning to your Qu'ran, you would see how silly the argument gets. That is why we LOL. If you actually inserted Mohammad in place of the word in question, the passage would not make any sense in its original context. That alone should wake you up to realize that it wouldn't fit. Yet, this doesn't seem to deter you from taking liberty with the Bible. I know for sure that you would not see this approach as logical if it were used on your Qu'ran.

Hint: If you are going to use a method, make sure that it equally applies to you. That is one way that you can start to see your follies.

 

[Catherineanne]

Song of Solomon 5:16 (original Hebrew)
"Hikko Mamittakim we kullo Muhammadim Zehdoodeh wa Zehraee Bayna Jerusalem."

They way Christians have translated it - "His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters
of Jerusalem."

The "im" on the end of the Prophets PBUH name is the Hebrew plural of respect. I want to know why Christians have translated a name. A name is the same in any language, you have no right to translate a persons name. Why do they intentionally cover this up?

Clearly you have not read the Song of Songs/ Song of Solomon. It is not exactly what you would expect from an 'Islamic' text. The two people in the poem are Solomon and his beloved; the Queen of Sheba. By allegory (but not in a literal sense) they are also Christ and his church.

The first line tells you the name, to save you trying to make it up for yourself.

I would quote from it here, but I think some of it is too racy for this forum. Take a look, and enjoy.

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/Bible/Song_of_Solomon.html

 

[Catherineanne]

Song of Solomon 5:16 His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.
Machmad - Hebrew Lexicon

Why would a book called the Song of Solomon be about anyone but Solomon? The whole story is a celebration of the love between Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. Sorry, but sticking Mohammed in there is not honouring your prophet in any way, unless you are suggesting some kind of threesome. It is like saying Mohammed was in bed with your mum and dad, the night after they got married; seriously not a good image in any way. Really, don't go there!! If any of your Moslem sites are claiming this nonsense, you need to tell them; they are seriously dishonouring the memory of your prophet in the process.

If you are going to attempt to stick Mohammed anywhere in Scripture, really, this is not the place to do it.

 

[Catherineanne]

Reasons you will not find agreement on the idea this interpretation is "Ludicrous".

It is ludicrous if you happen to know what the Song of Songs actually says. Trust me, you don't want Mohammed there. Really not.

Stick him in the Psalms instead; use cut and paste. Don't worry about half baked derivations from the Hebrew; if that is corrupt anyway, then you can put Mohammed in every single line, and no worries.

It would still not make a jot of difference to the rest of us, but if it makes you happy, then feel free.

If you actually want a coherent argument that does not necessitate the distortion of Scripture, then just go ahead and assume that when the Scriptures were corrupted, the first thing that happened was that Mohammed's name was edited out, very effectively indeed. Therefore, the fact that he does not appear anywhere can be evidence for the corruption, and you can stop looking and accept what Christians and Jews say of their own Scriptures.

That is as good a fallacious argument as any, and far better than this one about the Song of Songs.

 

[peaceful soul]

It is ludicrous if you happen to know what the Song of Songs actually says. Trust me, you don't want Mohammed there. Really not.

Stick him in the Psalms instead; use cut and paste. Don't worry about half baked derivations from the Hebrew; if that is corrupt anyway, then you can put Mohammed in every single line, and no worries.

It would still not make a jot of difference to the rest of us, but if it makes you happy, then go ahead.

If you actually want a coherent argument that does not necessitate the distortion of Scripture, then just go ahead and assume that when the Scriptures were corrupted, the first thing that happened was that Mohammed's name was edited out, very effectively indeed. Therefore, the fact that he does not appear anywhere can be evidence for the corruption, and you can stop looking and accept what Christians and Jews say of their own Scriptures.

That is as good a fallacious argument as any, and far better than this one about the Song of Songs.

That really hits the nail on the head! Muslims, take note--only if you care to preserve context.

 

[JJWhite]

Fellow Muslims,

Allah commands us this:

----------

"O you who believe! Be reverent to Allah and say the 'right' word" 33:70

These Ayahs (verses) from Surat Al-Ahzab are broken down as follows.
"Ya Ayuha Aladheena Amanoo" (O You Who Believe)

The Ayah begins with, “Ya Ayuha Aladheena amanoo”, or “O those [of you] who believe”. From this, it is understood that the Ayah is directed at those who are believers. Allah gets their attention by exclaiming it in the first person. This is not some ordinary request; it is a warning.
"Ittaqoo Allaha" (Be Reverent to Allah)

The next words are, “Ittaqoo Allaha”. This is frequently translated as "Fear Allah (God)". Again, this is stated as a command. The type of fear that the word Taqwa denotes is not the type of fear that one gets when someone creeps up on them from behind, claustrophobia or any phobias. The word for that would be “Khaaf Allah” (Be afraid of Allah).


This Taqwa is the kind of “fear” that one has of disappointing someone out of a sense of overwhelming love and duty. It may be best described by the word "reverence". Why would the believers be commanded to Taqwa? When Taqwa dissipates, so do inhibitions. A person with no sense of inhibition is a dangerous person indeed and on a quick road away from Imaan (belief).
"Wa Qooloo Qawlan Sadeedan" and Speak the Rightful Speech

The Ayah is wrapped up by probably the most misunderstood section, “wa qooloo qawlan sadeedan”. “And say words that are “Sadeedan”. The misunderstanding or “understatement” occurs with the word “sadeedan”.

When doing a comparison of the different translations of the word “Sadeeda” into English, one will find each translation is different, from MH Shakir to Yusuf Ali to M. Pickthal. To be fair, they all stay within the general theme. What is being missed is that the true essence of the meaning is not being conveyed.


The word “Sadeedan” relates back to the root of “Dam” – as in a barrier that keeps water from flowing through. Words that are Sadeedan cannot be penetrated. So when one is cautioned to say only words that are Sadeedan they are asked to be sure of what they say; to not say something that can be proven wrong; to only speak words he knows are foolproof; to not speak conjecture. The believer should be sure that no loopholes can be found in his or her speech.


This “Sad” or Dam keeps all falsehood and lies from flowing out of one’s mouth. Words always have a way of coming back to the one who said them. If one is speaking about Islam, for instance, he should not speak about that which he does not know. If he is asked a question that he does not know, he or she should refer the questioner to a better source.




From article by Lamyaa Hashim

Honesty in the Quran: Islam's Holy Book Exhorts Believers to be Truthful in their Speech
​

​

​

 

[Catherineanne]

Fellow Muslims,

Allah commands us this:

----------

"O you who believe! Be reverent to Allah and say the 'right' word" 33:70

These Ayahs (verses) from Surat Al-Ahzab are broken down as follows.
"Ya Ayuha Aladheena Amanoo" (O You Who Believe)​

Honesty in the Quran: Islam's Holy Book Exhorts Believers to be Truthful in their Speech​

I would agree with that. Truth is always a good place to start.​

Well said, JJ. ​

​

 

[JJWhite]

I think Joshua got it right when he hinted that this might be a reaction to some other threads on here that are doing the same with Qur'anic verses in ways just as ridiculous.

One thing I've observed in life. When one sees injustice, the natural reaction is to combat it with the EXACT SAME kind of injustice. It's weird and wrong, but it's usually what happens.

When someone gets angry, one usually gets angry at the person for getting angry.

When someone hates on you, you almost can't help but hate them for being haters.

Or, my favorite, which I feel I fall victim to sometimes, 'I can tolerate anything except intolerance.'

It takes a lot of self-control not to let these natural reactions take over us, and to exert effort into not reciprocating any injustices we see.

And God knows best.

 

[Catherineanne]

I think Joshua got it right when he hinted that this might be a reaction to some other threads on here that are doing the same with Qur'anic verses in ways just as ridiculous.

So because some other person is being a prat, your brothers and sisters risk defaming Mohammed? Nice going.

Alternatively, stay calm and address the issues as an adult, rather than resorting to 'me too' behaviour. Which is what I have tried to do with the nonsense about the Koran as well, when I encounter it.

One thing I've observed in life. When one sees injustice, the natural reaction is to combat it with the EXACT SAME kind of injustice. It's weird and wrong, but it's usually what happens.

This is true. This is why we KNOW that our Lord's teaching on this matter is pure and holy; because it is so much NOT what we naturally do.

Our Lord commands us to love our enemies and do good to those who would hurt us. We don't often manage it, but that is the standard to which we aim.

When someone gets angry, one usually gets angry at the person for getting angry.

Our Lord said, if you get angry with your brother and call him names, that is just as bad as committing murder in your heart.

When someone hates on you, you almost can't help but hate them for being haters.

When Our Lord was killed, he prayed for those who executed him, from the cross, and said, 'Father, forgive them, they don't know what they are doing.'

Or, my favorite, which I feel I fall victim to sometimes, 'I can tolerate anything except intolerance.'

Quite right. Line up those intolerant souls and ... erm ... perhaps not.

It takes a lot of self-control not to let these natural reactions take over us, and to exert effort into not reciprocating any injustices we see.

And God knows best.

Self control is one of the fruit of the Holy Spirit. And probably the most underused.

 

[hikersong]

One thing I've observed in life. When one sees injustice, the natural reaction is to combat it with the EXACT SAME kind of injustice. It's weird and wrong, but it's usually what happens...
...It takes a lot of self-control not to let these natural reactions take over us, and to exert effort into not reciprocating any injustices we see.

True observations and wise word imo.

I think Joshua got it right when he hinted that this might be a reaction to some other threads on here that are doing the same with Qur'anic verses in ways just as ridiculous.

So because some other person is being a prat, your brothers and sisters risk defaming Mohammed? Nice going.

JJ was clearly not saying it was the right thing to do Catherine. Only why it might be happening.

edit: And on second glance it may be that you weren't suggesting she was either, in which case ignore me.

 

[JJWhite]

So because some other person is being a prat, your brothers and sisters risk defaming Mohammed?

I do not believe it was the conscious intention of my brother, as he said so himself.

 

[Catherineanne]

JJ was clearly not saying it was the right thing to do Catherine. Only why it might be happening.

edit: And on second glance it may be that you weren't suggesting she was either, in which case ignore me.

No, I was not saying JJ was wrong in anything she said. I was trying to say, if others are idiots, Moslems do not need to be idiots as well.

Sorry if that was not clear to anyone.

 

[JJWhite]

No, I was not saying JJ was wrong in anything she said. I was trying to say, if others are idiots, Moslems do not need to be idiots as well.

Sorry if that was not clear to anyone.

May God protect us all from idiocy.

 

[Catherineanne]

I do not believe it was the conscious intention of my brother, as he said so himself.

Clearly no sensible Moslem would risk defaming Mohammed. However, it is still the case that this thread has come rather too close for comfort, and I am very relieved that it has backed off now.

I know Moslems want to find evidence of the authenticity of their prophet in the Christian Bible, and the Jewish Scriptures, but anyone reading, please be careful how you do this, and if Christians or Jews tell you that you are getting any particular context or interpretation wrong, and here is why, then listen to them. Chances are, there is good reason for what we say.

 

[Catherineanne]

May God protect us all from idiocy.

Indeed so.

 

[peaceful soul]

Clearly no sensible Moslem would risk defaming Mohammed. However, it is still the case that this thread has come rather too close for comfort, and I am very relieved that it has backed off now.

I know Moslems want to find evidence of the authenticity of their prophet in the Christian Bible, and the Jewish Scriptures, but anyone reading, please be careful how you do this, and if Christians or Jews tell you that you are getting any particular context or interpretation wrong, and here is why, then listen to them. Chances are, there is good reason for what we say.

Exactly!

I only hope that they take this seriously and try to understand what they have read or have been told. Hopefully, your post will help some of them to start studying for the purpose of understanding original context, even if it does not agree with their own views. The point would be that even if the text leads to different outcome than their Islamic teachings, they will at least understand what was said instead of trying to overwrite what is considered historical perspectives from the perspective of Christian and Jews.

 

[Catherineanne]

Exactly!

I only hope that they take this seriously and try to understand what they have read or have been told. Hopefully, your post will help some of them to start studying for the purpose of understanding original context, even if it does not agree with their own views. The point would be that even if the text leads to different outcome than their Islamic teachings, they will at least understand what was said instead of trying to overwrite what is considered historical perspectives from the perspective of Christian and Jews.

I agree.

One thing I would also say is that Christians do not always agree with Jews on the interpretation of their Scriptures, particularly in relation to the Messiah, but we certainly do NOT say that they are corrupted in any way. There is no evidence for such a point of view whatsoever.

There are variations between different copies, but this is because the OT Scriptures existed in oral form for a significant length of time before being written down, resulting in minor variations. As indeed did the Koran; it was not written down for about 100 years after its composition, and there were originally several different versions, then reduced to seven, then reduced to two and then one. The process is pretty well the same. Mohammed never wrote anything down, because he could neither read nor write. He was a poet, composing poetry in an oral tradition, for recitation.

The earliest Gospel, on the other hand, was written down around 60AD, some thirty years after the death of the Lord, from collections of sayings of the Lord. The epistles of Paul are far earlier.

The accusation that the Jewish and Christian Scriptures are corrupted beyond the original versions inspired by God is completely without foundation. Not to mention rather disrespectful of God's power.

 

[humblemuslim]

The problem is your unsound argument. If I found an Arabic term and then used a Hebrew word and imported its meaning to your Qu'ran, you would see how silly the argument gets. That is why we LOL. If you actually inserted Mohammad in place of the word in question, the passage would not make any sense in its original context. That alone should wake you up to realize that it wouldn't fit. Yet, this doesn't seem to deter you from taking liberty with the Bible. I know for sure that you would not see this approach as logical if it were used on your Qu'ran.

Hint: If you are going to use a method, make sure that it equally applies to you. That is one way that you can start to see your follies.

And yet another person who does not appear to understand or did not read what I wrote...

If you did comprehend please summarize...

Peace be unto you

 

[humblemuslim]

Why would a book called the Song of Solomon be about anyone but Solomon? The whole story is a celebration of the love between Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. Sorry, but sticking Mohammed in there is not honouring your prophet in any way, unless you are suggesting some kind of threesome. It is like saying Mohammed was in bed with your mum and dad, the night after they got married; seriously not a good image in any way. Really, don't go there!! If any of your Moslem sites are claiming this nonsense, you need to tell them; they are seriously dishonouring the memory of your prophet in the process.

If you are going to attempt to stick Mohammed anywhere in Scripture, really, this is not the place to do it.

Did you read my post sister?

More importantly did you comprehend it correctly?

If you answer yes to both, please summarize my point of view to demonstrate this...

Peace be unto you

 

[humblemuslim]

Clearly no sensible Moslem would risk defaming Mohammed. However, it is still the case that this thread has come rather too close for comfort, and I am very relieved that it has backed off now.

I know Moslems want to find evidence of the authenticity of their prophet in the Christian Bible, and the Jewish Scriptures, but anyone reading, please be careful how you do this, and if Christians or Jews tell you that you are getting any particular context or interpretation wrong, and here is why, then listen to them. Chances are, there is good reason for what we say.

Pay heed to your own advice...I have seen sparse explanations here and more jesting and laughter (In general).

Not to mention the blatant disregard for what I did actually write.