98 replies to this topic

[CarlosTheJackal]

In my brief experiences with Muslims I have not yet found a substantial reason why they believe Mohammed is a prophet from God. Can anyone give me solid reasons?

The strongest case I have heard so far is that the Quran is unmatchable in its poetic and literally form surpassing all else. How do Muslims arrive at such a firm decision? What evidence is there to support this?

[BurningLight]

Total Length is same, difference in number of verse does not really matter.

In my brief experiences with Muslims I have not yet found a substantial reason why they believe Mohammed is a prophet from God. Can anyone give me solid reasons?

The strongest case I have heard so far is that the Quran is unmatchable in its poetic and literally form surpassing all else. How do Muslims arrive at such a firm decision? What evidence is there to support this?

Why isn't Muhammad a confirmed prophet in the Bible?

There is no proof. The Quran was written decades after Muhammad's death. Uthman burned all the Qurans he could find. Verses have been added and some removed. At least with the Bible scholars know what had been added and when, because they have not burned the evidence, but scholars of Islam can't so that with the Quran

[Mercyonmankind]

In short...

Well its a gift from God, that's why most of us believe in God and also His messengers..
When God said that Muhammad Peace be upon him His messenger, there is no reason to ask God to prove it..

For example, when your Dad said that He is is your dad, did you ask your dad to prove it?
So it is a gift from God, that's why most of us don't ask God to prove it.. and by His Mercy he will allow whomever he wills to inherit His Paradise and by His Wrath He will put in hell whomever He wills..
The deeper a person goes, the deeper questions becomes, its better to stay at a level where one is stable and proceed to a next level step by step...

Edited by Mercyonmankind, 14 October 2011 - 05:54 AM.

[ParadiseLost]

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetsaaid(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Islam/8.htm"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetsaaid(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Islam/8.htm[/url] this website gives a good answer to your question.

As a revert to Islam, apart from the quran being proof, one of the reasons I felt was major proof that Muhammad pbuh was sent from God was just the way he lived. Apart from gaining in knowledge he didn't gain a lot materially - his life was often in danger like many other prophets before him. Some members of his family rejected him. He had to reveal things that were completely different from the way society lived at that time so he was often criticised. For a man who constantly devoted his life to God praying all the time and actually living the way of the quran, I can't see why he would live a life of a lie.

But that is just my opinion and it's up to every person to make their choice whether they believe in Muhammad pbuh or not. Anyway hope that helps a bit.

[Younes]

In my brief experiences with Muslims I have not yet found a substantial reason why they believe Mohammed is a prophet from God. Can anyone give me solid reasons?

The strongest case I have heard so far is that the Quran is unmatchable in its poetic and literally form surpassing all else. How do Muslims arrive at such a firm decision? What evidence is there to support this?

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?s=&showtopic=734272&view=findpost&p=1229733"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?s=&sh...t&p=1229733[/url]

The Qur'an is not poetry. (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetislamic-awareness(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Quran/Miracle/"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetislamic-awareness(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Quran/Miracle/[/url]

[CarlosTheJackal]

Thanks for your answers

I don’t know it’s not really convincing me. The reasons are genuine but not solid. What credentials does Mohammed have that would be convincing? Immediately I can hear people’s thoughts pointing to the Quran. While it’s subject to debate, but for arguments sake let’s say it was the greatest work ever written, so what? Just because someone has excelled in a particular area is not enough to make them a prophet…

Please don’t interpret my answer has prejudice. I respect all religions.

[aj4u]

Is this supposed to be proof for the Bible not being corrup, that the scholars know what and when things were changed in the Bible? This is analogous to saying that a person is not a criminal because the jury knows what crimes he has committed and when.

This is not a good analogy. If someone knows how, when and where something was corrupted they can remove the change and restore it to the original. You cannot make someone innocent of a crime because of knowing how, when and where he did it

[aj4u]

Good question. I'd like to hear an answer too!

[Younes]

This is not a good analogy. If someone knows how, when and where something was corrupted they can remove the change and restore it to the original. You cannot make someone innocent of a crime because of knowing how, when and where he did it

I am afraid it doesn't work that way. For example, there are sections in the Gospels that are found in the present day copies but aren't found in the earliest copies. They haven't been removed due to their popularity because we are talking about rather famous sections. So, in practice it doesn't work this way, rather these passages are still in the Bible thus making it corrupt and they are still quoted and relied on. Besides, the Bible has a history of more than 3000 years.

However, all of that still doesn't account for the fact that the Bible lacks a reliable chain of transmission going back to the Prophets (pbut). A chain of transmission being a chain of people who received the information going all the way back to Jesus (pbuh). Modern scholars say that the Gospels are anonymous and that the Torah was written by different people. Christians lack a chain of transmission going back to the Jesus (pbuh) and his disciples, not to mention Moses (pbuh) and the rest of the Prophets (pbut). If, for the sake of arguement, you could restore the original, it still doesn't mean that it was written by Jesus (pbuh), or his disciples or Moses (pbuh). It could have also been written by a person who never met him, so what you would be able to reconstruct is the original work of a person who actually nothing to do with Jesus (pbuh), Moses (pbuh) or the rest of the Prophets (pbut).

[aj4u]

I am afraid it doesn't work that way. For example, there are sections in the Gospels that are found in the present day copies but aren't found in the earliest copies. They haven't been removed due to their popularity because we are talking about rather famous sections. So, in practice it doesn't work this way, rather these passages are still in the Bible thus making it corrupt and they are still quoted and relied on. Besides, the Bible has a history of more than 3000 years.

However, all of that still doesn't account for the fact that the Bible lacks a reliable chain of transmission going back to the Prophets (pbut). A chain of transmission being a chain of people who received the information going all the way back to Jesus (pbuh). Modern scholars say that the Gospels are anonymous and that the Torah was written by different people. Christians lack a chain of transmission going back to the Jesus (pbuh) and his disciples, not to mention Moses (pbuh) and the rest of the Prophets (pbut). If, for the sake of arguement, you could restore the original, it still doesn't mean that it was written by Jesus (pbuh), or his disciples or Moses (pbuh). It could have also been written by a person who never met him, so what you would be able to reconstruct is the original work of a person who actually nothing to do with Jesus (pbuh), Moses (pbuh) or the rest of the Prophets (pbut).

It is fine for a Muslim to question the transmitted reliability of the Bible. But if we are going to compare the reliability of the Bible to the Qur'an, we have to look at the issues of the reliability of the Qur'an, too.

The more I study Islam the more I am convinced that the Bible is God's Holy Word. I admit there are errors but they are insignificant. Theses are the logical reasoning why I trust the Bible overwhat I believe to be the corrupted Quran!

1. We have manuscripts of the New Testament dated c.127 A.D, c.150 A.D., and c.200 A.D., as well as recently released copies with the Dead Sea Scrolls dated before 100 A.D.

2. We have 10,000 other manuscripts of the New Testament to compare. Scribal errors did occur, but with 10,000 manuscripts, we can track these errors. The evidence would be weaker, not stronger, if there had been a "Christian 'Uthman" to burn them.

3. The early church writers (from 97/98 A.D. to 325 A.D.) referred to every single verse in the New Testament except around 17.

4. We have copies of the Greek translation of the Old Testament, Dead Sea Scrolls of almost all of the Old Testament dated at the time of Christ, and Christ's use of Old Testament quotes.

5. We have God's promise that He will watch over and preserve His word, and that He will not let His followers be led astray. -Isa 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25, Mt 24:35

6. Christian scholars are very keen to examine all the evidence and be as precise as possible in what the original wording was.

Christians and all seekers of truth should welcome questioning the reliability of today's Bible. But rather than asking, "what is its reliability", one should also ask "what its reliability is being compared to."

Why do I say the Quran is corrupted?

'Umar "stabilized" the Qur'an in 644 A.D. al-Tabari vol.39 p.22-23

Most Muslims believe the Qur'an is an exact copy of a tablet of the Qur'an [in Heaven] in Sura 85:20-22. But consider the following points.

1. It is strange that even in the temporary verses in the Qur'an that Muslims agree Mohammed said were abrogated, are stored for all time in Heaven. They are still in the Qur'an today.

2. Many Muslims are not aware that the Sahih Muslim Hadiths record an extra Sura that is not in the Qur'an today. Muslim apologists claim this too was abrogated, but it is not in today's Qur'an.

3. 'Ubai's early copies of the Qur'an did not contain two Suras that are in the Qur'an today.

4. 'Abdallah ibn Mas'ud was one of the four people Mohammed said to learn the Qur'an from. Yet Al-Nuri lists verses in Ibn Mas'ud's version that are not in the Qur'an today.

5. Satan always throws something in with a prophet's words according to Sura 22:52, but God has to cancel it out. This might be an explanation for why four different Muslim historical sources report that Sura 53:19-20 originally said the intercession (help) of four idol goddesses was to be hoped for. Google Allah's 3 daughteres

6. 'Uthman also made changes to standardize the Qur'an, but that could be another topic

Uthman threatened anyone with death if they did not turn in their Qur'an to him, so that he could burn them and re-issue new Qur'ans. Fortunately some early copies were not turned in, and we can see some of the changes that were made.

In Bukhari vol.6:525,526 Qatada and Anas relate that in the time of the prophet [i.e. before 'Uthman's rule], four people "collected" the Qur'an: Ubai, Mu'adh, Zaid bin Thabit, and Abu Zaid.

In Bukhari vol.1 chapter 8 p.56: "Anas says that Uthman got the Qur'an compiled and sent a few of its copies to far off places". Bukhari vol.4:709 p.466 says, "'Uthman called Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Sa'id bin Al-'As, and 'Abdur-Rahman bin Al-Harith bin Hisham and then they wrote the manuscripts of the Holy Qur'an in the form of a book in several copies".

The Qur'an used to have many different readings, but 'Uthman got rid of all but one. al-Tabari vol.15 p.156

I copy and paste this for u
from the intgernet

Muslims claim that God's Word, the Qur'an, will never be corrupted. Be that as it may, apparently some years after Mohammed's death, the Qur'an needed standardizing, since Caliph 'Uthman standardized the Qur'an way after Mohammed's death. Apparently in order that nobody could second-guess his editing, he burned almost all copies besides his standard ones. (Bukhari vol.6:510 p.479) For example, Ubai had several Suras in his Qur'an that 'Uthman omitted from the standardized text, and thus Muslims do not read today. The Meccan Abdollah Sarh, who once made suggestions to Mohammed, and later renounced Islam, was killed. Presumably he knew too much about how Mohammed changed the Qur'an. However, a few very interesting variant copies did survive and are now in the Azhyar Library in Cairo.

The 8th sura (al-Anfal) may have originally included the 9th sura (al-Tawbah). al-Tabari vol.11 p.94 footnote 525
A Need for Standardizing ???

Now if the Bukhari Hadiths vol.1:62, vol.4:709, and vol.6:510 are reliable at all, one has to ask why this occurred; Muslims typically do not go around destroying copies of the Qur'an.

? Why did 'Uthman have to burn other copies, unless the other copies were different?

? Why did 'Uthman need to standardize the Qur'an, unless it needed standardizing?

? Why did 'Uthman threaten death to make Muslims use the "Uthmanized" Qur'an?

? Why did some Muslims reject 'Uthman's text in favor of their own text of the Qur'an?

There is a simple answer to these questions. 'Uthman had to edit The Qur'an because there was not just one text.

1. In contrast to this, 'Uthman destroyed all but a few of the early Qur'an manuscripts, so "his tracks are covered."

2. His tracks are not completely covered because of the manuscripts of Ubai and others. (See Bukhari vol.6:527 p.489 for Ubai being the best at reciting the Qur'an, yet they leave some of what he recites.)

3. His tracks are not completely covered because of the words of 'Aisha and some Shi'ite Muslims.

4. Many Sunni Muslims have never thought to ask, "is the Qur'an they have the same as the original Qur'an?"



Some Shi'ite Muslims give an additional reason though. They say 'Uthman left out 25% of the original verses for political reasons. See McClintock and Strong Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature 5:152. This is interesting, because most Sunnis still accept Shi'ites as Muslims.

According to Mohammed's wife 'Aisha, one Sura had 200 verses. By 'Uthman's time, it only had 73. One can read this in the book Islam p.191ff by the skeptic Guillaume.

Finally, the Qur'an Sunni Muslims use today is based on the Ibn Masud Codex, which is NOT identical with 'Uthman's work. According to Geisler and Saleeb: Answering Islam p.192 there are 150 differences in Sura 2 alone, including complete sentences!

Even today, there are differences in Arabic versions of the Qur'an. For example, in Answering Islam p.193 point out some Arabic discrepancies: Sura 28:48 [sahirani/sihrani], Sura 32:6 [ummahatuhum/ummahatuhum wa hyua abun lahum] Sura 34:18 [rabbana ba'id/rabuna ba'ada], Sura 38:22 [tis'un/tis'atun]. Sura 19:35 [tantaruna/yamtaruna]. See W. St. Clair-Tisdell A Manual of the Leading Muhammedan Objections to Christianity (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1904 p.60.). There are also significant differences between the 'Uthman's Qur'an and the Qur'an used today. Why the changes, and when will they change it back?

The Changes in the Qur'an

Have you ever though to ask, "Is the Qur'an today the same as the original Qur'an?"

Any Corruption of God's Word Prior to the Qur'an?

Abrogated Verses in Mohammed's Lifetime

Changes After Mohammed

'Uthman, Editor of God

The Qur'an Today

The Reliability of the Old Testament

The Reliability of the New Testament

God's Word Prior to the Qur'an?

Allah claimed to be the same God as Christians and Jews (do not dispute except in the best way) - Sura 29:46

Jews and Christians were to make God's word known to all mankind -Sura 3:187

Do not selectively believe in only some of God's messengers -Sura 4:150-151

Mohammed alleged the Qur'an confirmed what they already had. -Sura 4:47

God promised His word would not depart from the mouths of the Jews in Isaiah 59:21

Sura 29:46 "Dispute ye not with the people of the book, except in the best way, unless it be with those of them who do wrong but say, 'We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; our God is your God is One; and it is to Him we submit (in Islam)."

"And remember Allah took a Covenant from the people of the book, to make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it; but they threw it away behind their backs, and purchased with it some miserable gain! And vile was the bargain they made!" in Sura 3:187. While this Sura criticizes some who were called people of the book, it does not in any way criticize the book God gave to mankind.

This verse doesn't prove wholesale corruption as I mentioned

[Younes]

It is fine for a Muslim to question the transmitted reliability of the Bible. But if we are going to compare the reliability of the Bible to the Qur'an, we have to look at the issues of the reliability of the Qur'an, too.

The more I study Islam the more I am convinced that the Bible is God's Holy Word. I admit there are errors but they are insignificant. Theses are the logical reasoning why I trust the Bible overwhat I believe to be the corrupted Quran!

Yes, I agree that if we are going to compare the reliability of the Bible against the Qur'an or vice versa, we are going to have to look at both books.

If you are interested in impartial research instead of just copy and paste jobs, I recommend the following book to you:

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_individual.utoronto.ca/fantastic/"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_individual.utoronto.ca/fantastic/[/url]

Click on the "The History of the Qur'anic Text from Revelation to Compilation"- section and download the pdf-file.

[Younes]

The Meccan Abdollah Sarh, who once made suggestions to Mohammed, and later renounced Islam, was killed. Presumably he knew too much about how Mohammed changed the Qur'an.

The text you quoted has a lot of fabricated things in it. I will use this one as a test case. Abdullah ibn Sad ibn Abi Sarh (ra) wasn't killed.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetislamic-awareness(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Quran/Sources/Sarh/"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetislamic-awareness(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Quran/Sources/Sarh/[/url]

There's a lot more baseless stuff in that but I am not going to bother to reply to everything.

[AHMAD_73]

real peace to the truth seekers, i hope you and me among them,

While I was going to give you a good offer in this subject, but you walked in other direction, and that's good too,
You have a v.good and valuable information that worth to be discussed, my friend.

If you like discussions, we can discuss all of this in a friendly, fair, equal way. Where you have your truth and I have my truth. While we have to take it little by little, since I'm not an English original speaker, or do you like to make it in Arabic
For now,

It is fine for a Muslim to question the transmitted reliability of the Bible.

The problem is more sophisticated than one translation. The bible has been translated from Aramaic, the mother tongue of the Messiah (p) to the Hebrew, and then to the (old/new) Hellenic, and then to the Latin and then to the old English and then to the modern English. And so the errors have a propagating manner, while for bad luck most of these languages are dead languages, now. And we don't have a single peace of the scripture in the first two languages.

The Quran has been revealed in Arabic which been used only in Arabia (3 million sq km). While the Quran spread out the Arabic language (14.5 million square km and almost 450 million speakers), and the Arabic language spread the Quran to at least have of the earth. The Arabic still a live, speakble, understandable as it was all the time.

The more I study Islam the more I am convinced that the Bible is God's Holy Word. I admit there are errors but they are insignificant.

I believe the bible scholars are doing a lot of work to make it as nearest to the 3-4 centauries as possible.
While would you as a devoted Christian may accept a bible without any trinity indications, or that tell the son of god could be originally the servant of god, or would you accept to remove the whole adulterer woman story (LK 8:1-11), or removing the final part of Mark (MK 16:9-20) which indicates the miracles of the believers, along with hundreds of small and large passages in the bible.

Thirty-two scholars have served as members of the Committee charged with making the revision, and they have secured the review and counsel of an Advisory Board of fifty representatives of the co-operating denominations.
They reached the final goal, the most authentic bible ever known, the Revised Standard Version (RSV), published in 1952.
What was the Christian reaction to the most authentic bible, they refused it, didn't buy it, didn't re-publish it. Until they reached a deal with the scholars, to return back all the removed passages, and add what they want to say in the footnotes. For example, this passage (MK 16:9-20) was not found in the most ancient manuscripts while it begin to appear in the manuscripts since the 5th centaury. And that what exactly happened in the 1971 publication.

1. We have manuscripts of the New Testament dated c.127 A.D.

I know this one, it have the size of a play card, it's a piece of John bible found in Sinai, Within the Sinatic Codex. while the almost complete bibles that could be depend on, there is no one before the Nicaea council 325 ???.
Do you think these so old manuscripts have the extra 7 books the catholic have or not. I mean, do the Catholic added extra 7 man made books to the god's word or the other denominations (Protestants and Orthodox) lost 7 chapters of the god's word?

as well as recently released copies with the Dead Sea Scrolls dated before 100 A.D.

Questionably, These scrolls had been put under the control of the Franciscan devoted Catholic father" Roland de Vaux " and 8 Catholic members of his team??. ..under top secret measurements??.... Under the direct supervision of the pop??. Since 1956 to 1993. the work went sooooo slow????....

plz, raise one by one point, to be able to go along with you. if you think i was offensive, forgive me it wasn't my purpose at all,
have a nice day

[John Paul]

There's a lot more baseless stuff in that but I am not going to bother to reply to everything.

I would be very interested to read replies to aj4u; many important points were made and it seems to be a very strong case against Islam.

God bless,

[aj4u]

real peace to the truth seekers, i hope you and me among them,

Yes, of course

While I was going to give you a good offer in this subject, but you walked in other direction, and that's good too,
You have a v.good and valuable information that worth to be discussed, my friend.

Thank you, but where do I go in a different direction?

plz, raise one by one point, to be able to go along with you. if you think i was offensive, forgive me it wasn't my purpose at all,
have a nice day

No offense taken, but what Scriptural proof do you have that Muahammad is a confirmed prophet? Remember, it has to be something outside of the author's own recitations or dictations!

[Younes]

I would be very interested to read replies to aj4u; many important points were made and it seems to be a very strong case against Islam.

God bless,

Most of the points are addressed in the pdf-file I linked to.

Honestly the person who wrote that doesn't really understand much about the compilation of the Qur'an. He honestly doesn't know much about what he is talking.

However, like I said, what he brought up contains lies, too. Take, for example, this: "Many Muslims are not aware that the Sahih Muslim Hadiths record an extra Sura that is not in the Qur'an today. Muslim apologists claim this too was abrogated, but it is not in today's Qur'an." The author should show what is this extra Surah and where is the hadith.

Another point, Uthman (ra) didn't threaten anybody with death. The author should back that up.

[aj4u]

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetsaaid(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Islam/8.htm this website gives a good answer to your question.
As a revert to Islam, apart from the quran being proof, one of the reasons I felt was major proof that Muhammad pbuh was sent from God was just the way he lived... I can't see why he would live a life of a lie. u can't see with that big eye on your icon?
But that is just my opinion and it's up to every person to make their choice whether they believe in Muhammad pbuh or not. Anyway hope that helps a bit.

Believe me, when I say I take it as your opinon. There are many religions in the world where its adherents are very devoted and live sacrafical lives. They are all sincere people, but that doesn't mean they are not sincerely wrong. Look are Mormons, for instance, Their prophet Joseph Smith received revelation much like Muhammad did and wrote the "The Book of Mormon" Many sincerely follow that religion. Little do they know that according to the Bible they claim to believe they are hell-bound doomed for destruction because that's what the Bible says about those who reject God's gift of salvation only through Jesus Christ! Jesus said I am the Way, Truth and the Life. He didn't say I show the way like all prophets before or after Him. Think carefully friend!

[aj4u]

Yes, I agree that if we are going to compare the reliability of the Bible against the Qur'an or vice versa, we are going to have to look at both books.

If you are interested in impartial research instead of just copy and paste jobs, I recommend the following book to you:

you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_individual.utoronto.ca/fantastic/

Click on the "The History of the Qur'anic Text from Revelation to Compilation"- section and download the pdf-file.

Thanks I uploaded it and have the Quran as well

[AHMAD_73]

Yes, of course
Thank you, but where do I go in a different direction?
No offense taken, but what Scriptural proof do you have that Muahammad is a confirmed prophet? Remember, it has to be something outside of the author's own recitations or dictations!

First, you have to try to be as fair as you can, then you will act just like professionals in a specific field (scientist, historian, military leader, socialist, ……)
we can discuss one by time, I'll offer you (12) different titles to proof that:

1. The Scientific Miracles in the Holy Quran, and the Sunnah.
2.

For example if we reached the result that Mohammad provided 10s of scientific facts, That wasn't available at his time and many of it wasn't available tell the 20th centaury. Is that can proof that he had received these info from a higher divine source?
Is that seems fair?

[ParadiseLost]

Believe me, when I say I take it as your opinon. There are many religions in the world where its adherents are very devoted and live sacrafical lives. They are all sincere people, but that doesn't mean they are not sincerely wrong. Look are Mormons, for instance, Their prophet Joseph Smith received revelation much like Muhammad did and wrote the "The Book of Mormon" Many sincerely follow that religion. Little do they know that according to the Bible they claim to believe they are hell-bound doomed for destruction because that's what the Bible says about those who reject God's gift of salvation only through Jesus Christ! Jesus said I am the Way, Truth and the Life. He didn't say I show the way like all prophets before or after Him. Think carefully friend!

I believe Muhammad pbuh was sent from God with the greatest miracle - the quran - you don't need to tell me to think carefully because I already have.