Thank you everyone for your replies. I'll take them one at a time
First, I am not offended with your username.
Well, in the very beginning, we have stated that we do not believe the Bible to be the word of God, and we do believe its corrupted by men. If you want proof, please ask us specifically. Therefore how can we be concerned if such a book claims Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) to be a false Prophet?
Yes we have considered the both perspectives. Guess what? Islam is the only non-Christian faith which has an article of faith to believe in Jesus Christ (peace and blessings be upon him). We believe he is the Messiah! We believe he was born with no intervention of a male, which many modern day Christians do not believe. We believe when he placed his hand on the blind, they were cured with the permission of Allah. etc etc.
I strongly doubt that you have watched the video I posted on the other thread. I hope you watch it, and comment on it.
Here I am posting another video which I strongly urge you to watch and comment on.
[video=youtube;sREemKFBJX8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sREemKFBJX8[/video]
Moreover, I would like to ask you a simple question. Do you believe Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) to be the begotten son of God?
I only watched the first 20 minutes of the other video you posted. I would like to watch the whole thing, but I don't have the time right now. I'll let you know when I do. I did watch this one thouhg, my thoughts follow.
Yes, I believe Jesus is the begotten son of God. I heard and undersood the teacher's reasoning for his disbelief of this truth. But I disagree, and so do the majority of translations, the Revised Standard Version one of only a few modern translations which removes "begotten"...but it does say "only" son, something not mentioned in the video. The original Greek does use a word which describes this son as unique, which is why the RSV says "only son". So I completely disagree with his arguement, and I think if you look critically at the arguement, it falls flat on its face.
The concept that the Bible has been corrupted by man, has been largely debunked over the past couple centurys. And there is a vast reasource of very old manuscripts with which we can verify the accuracy of very early writings. I'd also like to point out that I believe that only the original Greek and Hebrew texts were actually the "inspired word of God", the modern translations are only that: translations of the inspired word of God. Just like how you would likely say that English translations of the Koran are not the word of Allah, only the original Arabic version of the Koran is Allah's word.
Actually, Islam also warns that there will be false teachers and false prophets. The biggest one to come is someone mentioned in the Bible too. You know him as the Anti-Christ. We call him Dajjal. He's basically going to be the biggest trial for the entire world ever since the beginning and end of this Earthly life.
The Bible and the Torah also actually have mentions of a Prophet to come, and a request to believe in him when he does. That Prophet was Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Here's a link that details how our Prophet is mentioned in the Bible and the Torah:
http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/muhammad_bible.htm
Thanks for the link, I've already addresses some of these points in the previous thread. Basically, I don't see these references as explicit indicators of Muhammad, and they could very easily be attributed to the other prophets or even Jesus.
Logic :
It is not (possible) for any human being to whom Allâh has given the Book and Al-Hukm (the knowledge and understanding of the laws of religion) and Prophethood to say to the people: "Be my worshippers rather than Allâh's." On the contrary (he would say): "Be you Rabbaniyyun (learned men of religion who practise what they know and also preach others), because you are teaching the Book, and you are studying it." (79) Nor would he order you to take angels and Prophets for lords (gods)[]. Would he order you to disbelieve after you have submitted to Allâh's Will? (Tafsir At-Tabarî). (80
Translation of the meanings of Quran , 3
I think my responses to the video (below) will address your comments as well
All your questions can be answered in this video:
http://youtu.be/YW99U4JWNEc
Tell me what do you think about it after watching it fully
Great video, thanks for posting. I did watch the whole thing and there are some very interesting arguements given. I'll address them in the order given:
10) God can not be born.
Well, I understand why this is confusing. It would seem to our human minds that it might not be possible for God in His supreme nature to be born in human form (however, consider that humans were created in God's own image). But Islam gives no alternative explaination as to why Jesus had no father. Why do you believe God gave Jesus so much more power & wisdom than the other prophets? Something about Jesus was very unique, and Islam does not explain what that something is.
9) There is no explicit Biblical reference claiming Jesus is God.
The claim in the video is that only by taking verses out of context can you show the Bible claims Jesus is God. I beg to differ, please read all of John chapter 13, there are several specific references to Jesus' divinity. When read in context, I find them quite convincing, and this is only one of many examples. Here is a list of many references:
http://carm.org/jesus-god Please read them in context...
8) No one has ever seen God
I struggle with this one as a Christian as well. Even before Jesus came on the seen, the Bible states that Moses saw God as one sees his brother. I don't understand how the Bible could make both claims, and there seems to be an inconsistancy to me. However, they are applying the truth to Jesus, and I believe the reference is only with God the Father, not Jesus. So it does not apply.
7) The doctrine of the trinity is not taught by Jesus or his followers.
There are many references, but I think this one is most compelling:
Matthew 28
16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. 17 And when they saw him they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”
Please check here for more:
http://carm.org/what-trinity
I'd also like to point out that I think Joshua is being pretty deceptive with his argument here. He says that the verse 1 John 5:7 has been thrown out of most modern translations....but I looked around and could not find a shred of evidance to support this claim, so I'm left a bit stumped on where he got that from, any more insight would be appreciated.
6) Jesus ate slept & prayed.
If you believe Jesus is God in human form, this is not difficult to accept, so I don't really see it as a seperate argument, but simply an add on to #1.
5) Jesus claimed God's knowledge was greater than his own.
This seems to me to be the most powerful arguement, and I don't have any good answer. But I will definitely be looking into this more, thanks!
4) Jesus says He is not God
Joshua highlighted several verses to refute his claim on this, but I would argue that they are taken out of context. Read John 17:1-5...Joshua only picks out verse 3 (which really doesn't support his claim even out of context in my opinion), but when put in context, especially with verse 5, its a pretty solid arguement for Jesus' divinity.
3) The phrase "son of God" is not exculsively used for Jesus.
No, that is correct, but the phrase "only son of God", or "begotten son of God" is exclusive to Jesus.
2) God cannot change.
I agree, God cannot change His nature, but that does not mean He cannot manifest Himself to us in various ways. I believe God is all powerful, and He can do this, just as it was promised in the old testament that He would.
1) God is the object of worship.
Again, I have to call bluff on Joshua. He picks Matthew 15:9 as his reasoning about this point. However, it is taken out of context, please read from verse 1 to verse 20 and see if you still agree with him. This one he claims is his strongest arguement, but to me it is the weakest one, built on straw.
Have you read any translation of Quran ? If yes, what you think about its content ?
I am revert and i embraced islam with great joy.
I read it at
http://www.quranexplorer.com/quran/
I find it very tedious to read, and difficult to understand the context. Earlier this year I picked up a commentary on the Koran, and the author said it very well, so I'll echo his sentiment:
"The Koran is less a collection of historical narratives, as is much of the Bible, as it is a collection of sermons in which historical material is not told for its own sake, but is used to illustrate various points. It makes no attempt at linear history, either as a whole or, generally, within the individual chapters. While the Bible contains historical books that are more or less in chronological order, and in broad outline follows a coherent historical trajectory, the focus of the Koran's suras often moves from subject to subject, with various historical incidents recounted only in fragments........
...To be sure, much of the Koran is perfectly clear, but there are numerous passages that refer to incidents in Muhammad's life of an event in early Islamic history without providing key elements of the story - as if taking for granted that everyone who hears the Koranic account will know the omitted details. That makes reading some passages of the Koran rather like listening in on a converstaion between two people you don't know, who are discussing events in which you were not involved - and they are not bothering to stop and explain to you the details of what they are discussing." - pages 16-18, "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran", by Robert Spencer