Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Then who was the God that spoke through the prophet mohammed ?
Was it the God of abraham ?
Originally posted by zeeshan
Good Morning,
Yes, it was the God of Abraham(pbuh). Actually, we believe that there is only one God so the God that spoke through the prophet Mohammed(pbuh) was the God of all of the prophets. The following is a relevant verse from the Holy Quran:
'We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers
after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes,
to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms.' (4:163)
Zeeshan.
If you believe the God of abraham is the same God who spoke to muhammad , then why don't you believe the christian bible ?
Originally posted by zeeshan
Good Morning,
I hope all of you are well.
We do believe in the Christian Bible...we believe in all of the books revealed by God:
'Say ye: "We believe in God, and the revelation given to us, and to
Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and
Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference
between one and anothe
r of them: And we bow to God (in Islam)."' (The Holy Quran, 2:136)
However, we also believe that the versions of the bible present today are modifications of the original...i.e. we believe that the Bible has been changed from its original form. So we do not believe the versions of the Bible present today to be the word of God. We do not believe in the present day versions of the Bible not because we don't believe in the (original) Bible but because we do not believe that the present day Bible is the (original) Bible.
I hope that clears things up.
Zeeshan.
Please identify the "original" Bible, and when exactly it was "changed" into some invalid form. The earliest copies of the Gospels that we have are dated from 40-60 A.D.
Your Koran developed over time as well, so how can you say ours is invalid? Just because someone wrote that in the Koran?
I have a question for you. There was only one Bible that was revealed to Jesus(pbuh). However, it is a open fact that there are many versions of the Bible in circulation today. This means that at the most, only one of the versions can be the one that was actually revealed to Jesus(pbuh) and the rest have to be modifications. So do you believe that only one of the versions is the one that was revealed to Jesus(pbuh)? If so, which one? If not, then please explain how all of the versions can be the original words of God and not words inspired by God (or something else)?
The fact is, having a book written in one language and kept unchanged, over all these years proves nothing!
The Quran itself, having been translated into english, has three different versions that I know of, and probably more....Pickethall, Yusufali and Shakir. Still you would agree that the message they bring is the same.....
We do believe in the same God as Abraham. Following are some (but not all) relevent verses from the Holy Quran:
You are wrong about their doctrine. They profess to follow the faith of Abraham.
The fact that we have many, many copies of translations, that all agree with each other, points to the fact that they are valid, in terms of matching the originals. Scholars estimate 99.5% accuracy.
So, what is the point, really?
that I have been wanting to make. You have yourself implicitly stated that there is some inaccuracy involved in the Bible by saying that accuracy in 99.5%. Since, the Bible was compiled by human beings (<-that is what I have understood from this discussion so far...please correct me if I am wrong), it is prone to error. Please note that I am not implying that those who compiled the Bible intentionally wrote something incorrect but that as human beings, we are not perfect and making mistakes intentionally and unintentionally is in our nature.
neither do the angels (<-they do everything exactly as God commands them to do
I mentioned their doctrines: are you going to tell me that the doctrines of Islam are the same as Judaism or Christianity? Certainly not. And again, they can "profess" to follow the faith of Abraham, but their profession and their faith does not lead to a knowledge that Jesus is their savior. It only leads them to believe that Jesus was a prophet and a teacher, not as great as Mohammed. Again, the Jews also made several claims to Jesus that they believed in the God of Abraham. It availed them little.
One thing I noted about your last message. You said 'Scholars estimate 99.5% accuracy'. I am an undergrad student majoring in Statistics and I can tell you that one really can't conclude anything from a statement like that. An estimate is just an estimate and so alongwith it there is always some error. Have you ever asked a scholar about the error in the estimate? To put it simply, have you ever asked a scholar the least amount of accuracy that one can confidently assume?
Another thing is 99.5% accuracy is not 100% accuracy. It might mean that 995 passages out of a 1000 are accurate(again its an estimate so we could have a little less or more than 995 (or even a lot less depending on the error involved)). This means that there are probably some passages that are not accurate. Now, if these passages that are not accurate are the most important ones, then there is the possibility of coming to atleast some incorrect conclusion if one assumes the entire Bible to be the truth. And who's to say these inaccurate passages are not the most important ones?...After all, we no longer have the original to compare it with.
Holy Quran, on the other hand is the word of the God and it was revealed directly to the Prophet Mohammad(pbuh) from the God through the angel Gabriel (AS). It is the same revelation that is in existence today...the millions (maybe billions) of copies of the Holy Quran are copies of the exact same revelation that came directly from the God. The God does not make errors, neither do the angels (<-they do everything exactly as God commands them to do). Hence, the Quran is 100% accurate with 0% error. Since this is not an estimate, the error is 0%. You can ask any Muslim how accurate the original Arabic text of the Quran is and you can ask any Islamic scholar and the answer you will get is the same...100% with 0% error. Based on this then, if there is ever a contradiction between the present day versions of the Bible and the Quran, I would choose the word of the God in the Holy Quran as final and correct and the truth over the word inspired by God in present day versions of the Bible...any Muslim would do the same. Thankyou for taking the time to read this.
...the millions (maybe billions) of copies of the Holy Quran are copies of the exact same revelation that came directly from the God. The God does not make errors, neither do the angels (<-they do everything exactly as God commands them to do). Hence, the Quran is 100% accurate with 0% error.
The account of this collection of the Koran has reached us in several substantially identical forms, and goes back to Zaid himself. According to it, he collected the revelations from copies written on flat stones, pieces of leather, ribs of palm-leaves (not palm-leaves themselves), and such-like material, ,but chiefly from the breasts of men, i.e. from their memory. From these he wrote a fair copy, which he gave to Abu Bekr, from whom it came to his successor Omar, who again bequeathed it to his daughter IJaf~a, one of the widows of the Prophet. This redaction, commonly called al-~oizof ( the leaves ), had from the first no canonical authority; and its internal arrangement can only be conjectured.
The Moslems were as far as ever from possessing a uniform text of the Koran. The bravest of their warriors sometimes knew deplorably little about it; distinction on that field they cheerfully accorded to pious men like Ibn Masud. It was inevitable, however, that discrepancies should emerge between the texts of professed scholars, and as these men in their several localities were authorities on the reading of the Koran, quarrels began to break out between the levies from different districts about the true form of the sacred book. During a campaign in A.H. 30 (A.D. 65o651), Ijodhaifa, the victor in the great and decisive battle of Nehäveand (see CALIPHATE; and PERSIA: History) perceived that such disputes might become dangerous, and therefore urged on the caliph Othmgn the necessity for a universally binding text. The matter was entrusted to Zaid, who had made the former collection, with three leading Koreishi*t*es. These brought together as many copies as they could lay their hands on, and prepared an edition which was to be canonical for all Moslems. To prevent any further disputes, they burned all the other codices except that of ljaf~a, which, however, was soon afterwards destroyed by Merwgn the governor of Medina. The destruction of the earlier codices was an irreparable loss to criticism; but, for the essentially political object of putting an end to controversies by admitting only one form of the common book of religion and of law, this measure was necessary.
The result of these labours is in our hands; as to how they were conducted we have no trustworthy information, tradition being here too much under the influence of dogmatic presuppositions. The critical methods of a modern scientific commission will not be expected of an age when the highest literary education for an Arab consisted in ability to read and write. It now appears highly probable that this second redaction took this simple form:
Zaid read off from the codex which he had previously written, and his associates, simultaneously or successively, wrote one ~opy each to his dictation. These three manuscripts will therefore be those which the caliph, according to trustworthy tradition, sent in the first instance as standard copies to Damascus, Basra and Kufa to the warriors of the provinces of which these were the capitals, while he retained one at Medina. Be that as it may, it is impossible now to distinguish in the present form of the book what belongs to the first redaction from what is due to the second.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?