Posted on 10/05/2009 8:09:08 PM PDT by mrisiah
Christians and Muslims; different God
With these surahs from the Qur’an we can verify exclusively that Christians and Muslims DO NOT worship the same God.
(Excerpt) Read more at chroniclewatch.com ...
I smell ZOT!
No.
By their fruit you will know them.
The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.
Thats how you know God’s people.
Don’t get me started.
Just so. The “Jesus” of Islam is simply incompatible with the Jesus of the Bible.
I would add that there are numerous incompatibilities with the Old Testament as well. The story of Abraham and Isaac becomes the story of Abraham and Ishmael. The chosen line of descent from Abraham differs completely from that in the Hebrew Bible.
These are not only theological differences, but differences in accounts of history and of vital facts.
The Hebrew Bible has been changed from what it was centuries ago. The KJV is consistent with the vast majority of available manuscripts. Of course, the modern versions of the Bible are a mess, a la Westcott and Hort.
The Qur’an is another story with it’s historical mistakes. Ex., Jesus was crucified, then saying Jesus was NOT crucified.
>> Is the Qur’an Accurate?
I don’t know... never gave it any thought.
I can say that pages torn from a Koran are good for mopping up oily spills, training puppies, and starting fires in the fireplace.
And I’d never be without one at deer camp... we keep it out by the latrine.
Well, The historical errors in the Qran disagree with any version of the Hebrew Bible that I’ve ever heard of.
The Hebrew Bible agrees that G-d is the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And the Twelve Tribes of Israel are the children of Jacob, whom G-d renamed Israel.
The Qran pretends that the succession as chosen by Allah was entirely different. The chosen son of Abraham was Ishmael, and so forth. This is simply incompatible with any version of the Bible accepted by Jews, Catholics, or Protestants. And of course it also differs from the genealogy of Jesus as given in the New Testament.
The god of Islam is solitary. The God of Christianity is Trinitarian. The two views are not compatible at all.
Well, Mohamad was a thief. He tried to convince the Jews of Medina that he was the moshiach. When they disagreed he had them slaughtered. Then he said about composing (with the assistance of one who could read) his foul book.
Piss be on the so-called...prophet.
Zot or not...My God tells us his name. It is:
Exodus 3:14 (King James Version)
14And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Was posting a thread on the date of sign up your first clue? ;~) Seems to be a fair indicator in my book.
As to the question, if a book of lies can be considered accurate....
Islam is a cult of death...nothing more..nothing less...
In addition to the use of religious violence: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/JESUS.Vs.Muhammad.html
Coming hundreds of years after Christ and the completion of the Bible, Muhammad claimed to be after the order of Biblical prophets, yet he founded a religion that is radically different from that of the Bible, and Islam depends upon deception and the sword* in order to spread and defend it.
Muhammad could not read and likely got the Biblical stories from people who were Biblically illiterate, and thus garbled them. But he thought he was faithful and said to check him out with the people of the Book (Jews and Christians: Sura 5:48-52). When Islam realized the contradictions between the Bible – which as the prior source is the authority – and the Quran then they came up with the theory that the Bible was changed wherever it contradicts the Quran ( which is more often than it agrees with it).. However, that is a lie that can only be defended in a vacuum, as not only would that require not simply changes but virtually a complete rewriting of the Bible. But we have thousands of extant Biblical manuscripts (partial or entire), many of which substantially predate the Quran, but not even one supports the Islamic allegations! While there are better and poorer manuscripts, and a very small amount of actual variance between them, every one of them that has the pertinent passages declares (among many other things Islam denies) that Christ was the son of God, who died for our sins and rose again!
Muhammad likely got the Biblical stories from people who were Biblically illiterate and garbled them. But he evidently thought he was faithful and said to check him out with the people of the Book (Jews and Christians: Sura 5:48-52). Muhammed himself is seen to uphold the Scriptures[7] that existed then as divinely inspired, both the Torah, (Sura 2:87) and the Psalms, (4:163) and the Gospels, (Suras 3:3; 5:46) such as in stating,
If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt. 10:94 (Y. Ali)
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, (Sura 5:68; Y. Ali) and
And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam). (Sura 29:46; Y. Ali)
When Islam realized the contradictions between the Bible (which as the prior source is the authority – and the Quran) then they came up with the theory that the Bible was changed wherever it contradicts the Quran ( which is more often than it agrees with it).. However, that is a lie that can only be defended in a vacuum, as that would require not simply changes but virtually a complete rewriting of the New Testament and substantial changes to the Old! Yet we have thousands of extant Biblical manuscripts (partial or entire), including those that substantially predate the Quran, and absolutely NONE of them support the Islamic contradictions and allegations, while every single manuscript of the pertinent passages declares (among many other things Islam denies) that Christ was the son of God, who died for our sins and rose again!
Moreover, though claiming to be a prophet, unlike prophets in the Bible Muhammad did not prophecy as in making predictions that came true. He did not even prepare well for his demise, thus the major divisions in Islam today. Even in a literary sense his writings are vastly inferior to the Bible, as they are largely disjointed revelations of only one writer, with nary an historical narratives or systematic teachings.
And though reverenced as a holy man, Muhammad was a decidedly unholy soul, who murdered unbelievers once he was established in power, and raised caravans to get loot, as his “revelations” corresponded to his desires, and so he had sex with a 9 year old wife.
At less than 80,000 words, (figures vary: 77,701 in Arabic by one source,[3] 77,439 by ‘Ata bin Yasar[4]) the Qur’an is much smaller than the Bible, (602,585 words in the Old Testament; 180,552 in the New = 783,037,[5] with the KJV being counted at 788,258 words total.[6]) The Qur’an is also far more restrictive in in its scope of communication, lacking the manner of extensive historical narratives of the Bible, and the context it provides for its commands, as well as genealogical records which helps provide historical chronology. In addition, absent from the Qur’an are extended doctrinal discourses on salvation, such as are especially seen in the New Testament. This results in difficultly formulating extensive systematic theology out of the Qur’an by itself, and in its allusions to Biblical characters and events evidences that it requires knowledge of the Bible, which as the prior revelation, it must agree with.
Sura 6:34 states that “there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah.” However, the Qur’an critically contradicts the Bible,[8] especially as concerns the person and work of Jesus Christ, as it flatly denies His death and resurrection, as well as His Divine nature, both of which which are held by Christians to be abundantly testified to.[9][10]
Islamic apologists recognize these contradictions, and therefore charge that the Bible was tampered with, though the amount of alterations required to explain the Quranic deviations from Biblical text would require a radical amount of rewriting, especially of the latter.
Christian apologists respond to these charges by evidencing that an abundance of manuscripts which predate the Quran yet exist,[11] such as the Codex Sinaiticus (c. 350 CE), with Aland numbering a total of 230 extant New Testament manuscript portions which pre-date 600 AD (192 Greek New Testament manuscripts, 5 Greek lectionaries containing scripture, and 33 translations of the Greek New Testament).[12][13] The doctrinal conflation of these with later manuscripts manifest that the alleged rewriting did not take place.[14][15]
While Muslims also typically claim that the text of the Qur’an is identical to that received by Muhammad. Christian researchers contend that there is overwhelming evidence that it is not. [20]
As no extant Biblical manuscript, from before the time of Muhammed or after him, agrees with the Quranic contradictions, many Muslim apologists look to the Gospel of Barnabas for support. However, this radically different account is judged by both Christian and secular academics, (and some Muslims such as Abbas el-Akkad), as a late work and pseudepigraphical. With its obvious anachronisms and historical errors (like sailing to Nazareth) and utter lack of early manuscript evidence and irreconcilable differences between it and any ancient manuscripts, it is seen as a fourteenth century attempt to read later Islamic doctrine into the Bible, which clearly refutes it.[21] [22] [23] [24]
http://www.conservapedia.com/Quran#The_Bible_versus_the_Qur.27an
As a paper weight or kindling it does just fine. ZOT?
You mean the Jesus of Islam that is basically a girl friday or whatever the correct political term is?
Better than my post.
Maybe it was the BWV. Bizarro World Version.
Geeze! You were just waiting to repost that one. LOL
How can a work of fiction be accurate?
Does this- the words of Allah, the one and only Islamic Moon god, whose word cannot be questioned- sound accurate?:
Qur'an 18:83 "They ask you about Dhu'l-Qarnain [Alexander the Great]. Say, 'I will cite something of his story. We gave him authority in the land and means of accomplishing his goals. So he followed a path until he reached the setting place of the sun. He saw that it set in black, muddy, hot water. Near it he found people."
Or Allah's profound wisdom shown here:
Qur'an 67:3 "We created seven heavens, one above the other. Muhammad, can you see any fault in Ar-Rahman's [what Mohammad named his god before he slaughtered the Meccans and stole the "allah" name, which is what the pagan rock worshipers called their black rock god] creation? Look again: Can you see any rifts or fissures? Then look again and yet again. Your gaze turns back dazed and tired. We have adorned the lowest skies with lamps, and We have made them missiles to drive away the devils and against the stone Satans, and for them We have prepared the doom of Hell and the penalty of torment in the most intense Blazing Fire."
Now the works of IBN Ishaq, which describes what Islam really is and who Mohammad really was, that's accurate.
It has to be. It was the only accounting of Mohammad ever written within 100 years of his death. If Ishaq wrong, Islam can't exist. Nobody else can have it right. All other Muslim scholars, like Bukhari,(written 800 years after Mohammads death) Islam, Hisham etc. take from those original works, leaving out the most brutal and embarrassing stuff of course.
Yup. One of my Yahoo answers.
I like both your posts.
These are not only theological differences, but differences in accounts of history and of vital facts.
There isn't a single bible story, or bible verse in the Koran period.
The stories in the Koran of Abraham and Ismeal are pure crap, invented by Mohammad or whoever passed on early Koranic stories; other stories are twisted versions of old Jewish fables that were told to children.
Thank God, but its very late and i was a bit redundant.
More useful links:
http://www.answeringinfidels.com/answering-infidels/answering-muslims/
http://bibleprobe.com/mohammed.htm
http://www.answering-islam.org
http://www.muslimhope.com/
http://debate.org.uk/topics/apolog/contrads.htm
http://www.muhammadanism.org/Muhammad/Muhammad_Terrorism.htm
Good night from NE.
The bible doesn't "agree" with the Koran anywhere.
Some of Mohammad's stories were tricks played on him by the Medina Jews.
Mohammad was trying to convince them that he was a prophet. He had sent a spy to mingle with the Jews and gather bible scripture. The Jews knew of this spy, and fed him fables. Mohammad would then repeat these back to the Jews at one of his gatherings, and the Jews would laugh at him.
Mohammad found out, which is why 3/4 of the Koran is a rant against Jews.
Afterwards he slaughtered them all.
Thank you.
Although Modern Scholars say 9, and some hadith and sura's were altered, (poorly) careful reading shows that Aisha was in fact only 6 years old when he raped her, destroying her at the same time, which is why she was never able to have kids.
1. Aisha's parents never moved to Medina after Mohammad was expelled from Mecca. But the rape took place in her parents home in Mecca.
2. Aisha claims a "nurse" took her off a swing, wiping her face. SHe was taken by her hand and was "breathless" from being walked from the swing to the "house"(most likely a tent or mud walled tent) and placed on the pedophile's lap.
3. In those times, a "nurse" was a wet nurse, a slave or lower order person who breast fed the young children so that the wife could resume her husbandly duties sooner, go on trade caravans etc.
Even in those times, 9 year olds weren't breast fed. Aisha's description puts the nurse on the swing, and her on her lap breast feeding, which is why her face needed wiping.
4. A nine year old wouldn't be out of breath trying to keep up with a wet nurse in that short distance from the swing to the house. she would probably be able to outrun her in fact.
5. A nine year old wouldn't need to be "put" in Mohammad's lap. He was probably sitting on the ground as well. They didn't make furniture in Mecca at the time. There was no wood there. They couldn't even make a roof over the Ka'aba (rock god temple)
6. Mohammad was kicked out of Mecca shortly after he "married" Aisha, so she had to still be six, or even younger.
7. The order of events confirms that Aisha was only six. Her parents were dead when Mohammad returned to Mecca and slaughter the tribe (his own tribe) which expelled him. That is also when he quit calling his god "Ar-Rahman" and took the name "Allah" which is what the Meccan rock god worshipers called the black stone.
Nothing in Abraham’s religion affords a basis for claiming that Islam stems from the beliefs and faith of Abraham. Abraham may be the biological progenitor of the Arab people, through Ishmael, but that does not even suggest a spiritual or “philosophy of religion” linkage to Islam, the deity of which is one of the moon gods worshipped by nomadic Arabs.
Exactly correct. Abram/Abraham never worshipped al-Ilah, the moon god of Islam. He worshipped El Elyon, God Most High.
Well, for those to whom Names Mean Something, that really is an argument for the thesis that the God of Judeism and Christianity is not the Allah of Islam: Ar-Rahman = Ahriman = Satan.
Course, in my opinion, God is God, and the merely human and historical names applied to Him by men do not define Him.
Jesus is a “historical figure” and “teacher.” Remember who said that?
Positively koranic.
Interesting, but what is your source(s)?
Korn says that Abraham was asked by G-d to sacrifice Ishmael, not Isaac. Mo came up with this revelation about 2600 years after the incident and no one in that period of time had said it was wrong. Very strange. And you ask if the Korn is accurate?
So, Muhamed’s original name for God was Ar-rahman? That is very interesting, for the Persian name for the devil, the opponent of Ahura-Mazda, was Ahriman,
I am new here and I thought I would post this article from a site I frequent as well as many others that I find interesting from different sites.
ZOT? No, I am a guy who does not like what is happening to this nation, MY NATION, and I will do all I can to expose the threat Islam pushes on the West as well as expose Obama as he continues to destroy this nation.
If I posted this in the wrong section what section should have posted it in?
Sorry for the late response as again I am new here.
Thanks...
And just what is a ZOT? Sorry for my FR ignorance, but thanks for the article.
I don’t know why they piled on you. This is an anti-islamic article and a factual one. Some people on this site are way, WAY to newbie-phobic and like to dance around in a ban chant. Lousy tribalism and they don’t even bother to read the articles usually.
ZOT is short-form for “You’ve gotten banned because you’re probably a democrat in disguise, and you’re misbehaving on a conservative forum” — quite unnecessary for mrisiah’s case because those who said it didn’t read the article, but just saw the headline.
Thanks. I want to say that I do respect many Muslims i have met, who basically are uneducated i think in the Qur’an, or take it metaphorically in places where Muhammad exampled it literally. I have good neighbors, who live quiet lives, with happy (and modestly dressed ) kids, and sincerely seem to want to make it in America. Islam benefits from its Biblically base, however, it then corrupts it. And paradoxically, while ostensibly being against paganism, it actually perpetuated a form of it.
If so, I stand corrected.
well, partially — you are right that he took bits and pieces of religions. Christianity (mostly Nestorian), Judaism and Gnosticism was there in the Arabian peninsula along with pre-IslamicArab paganism. There would have been some Zoroastrians, but they would have been far away in Bahrain and the Persian Gulf region. So Mo just took the mangled bits of various religions and added it to his Bedouin nationalism to form a fake religion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.