To OneGodBeliever- the list you gave me

[Mishael]

3 hours ago, OneGodBeliever said:

You have shown me Christian opinion. I don't buy that. Also you don't get to choose who is Christian & or not. It's a known sect in Christianity.

It was already decided many times throughout history that Christians who rejected the Trinity wouldn't be called Christians, in Islam there were never councils or meetings to decide which sect was right and which was wrong, there was never firm decisions on doctrine.

[OneGodBeliever]

2 hours ago, Mishael said:

It was already decided many times throughout history that Christians who rejected the Trinity wouldn't be called Christians, in Islam there were never councils or meetings to decide which sect was right and which was wrong, there was never firm decisions on doctrine.

Lol. Don't you see your double standards for Christianity & Islam. So you get to choose who real Christian is and I don't get to choose who real Muslim is? I'm getting more insights on why you left Islam. A true Muslim will have at least that much common sense.

[Mishael]

2 hours ago, OneGodBeliever said:

Lol. Don't you see your double standards for Christianity & Islam. So you get to choose who real Christian is and I don't get to choose who real Muslim is? I'm getting more insights on why you left Islam. A true Muslim will have at least that much common sense.

Your standards are believing in Shahada as Mohammed said, Shias believe in Shahada, for us its the trinity, non trinitarians aren't Christians, whats so hard to understand? I left Islam because Muslims like you couldn't answer the same questions I provided you with. You still haven't answered my question on the Gharaniq incident.

Edited April 22, 2018 by Mishael

[OneGodBeliever]

30 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Your standards are believing in Shahada as Mohammed said, Shias believe in Shahada, for us its the trinity, non trinitarians aren't Christians, whats so hard to understand? I left Islam because Muslims like you couldn't answer the same questions I provided you with. You still haven't answered my question on the Gharaniq incident.

Shias are Muslims, understand that. Like you can't pray to saints in our religion also we can't pray to saints. There are nullifies of faith which you might not know. Shais curse the companions of prophet and wife of prophet.

As I said earlier Gharaniq is a fake story. Period. Now don't get me started on Greek & Christian similarities or Mithras. If shais are Muslims same way non trinitarians are Christians. 

 

[Mishael]

41 minutes ago, OneGodBeliever said:

Shias are Muslims, understand that. Like you can't pray to saints in our religion also we can't pray to saints. There are nullifies of faith which you might not know. Shais curse the companions of prophet and wife of prophet.

As I said earlier Gharaniq is a fake story. Period. Now don't get me started on Greek & Christian similarities or Mithras. If shais are Muslims same way non trinitarians are Christians. 

 

YOU STILL CAN'T EXPLAIN HOW ITS FAKE, as I said Islam never had determined firm doctrine and since Shias and Sunnis each have their own Hadith to back them up their own respective beliefs, so theres no way of telling which is right. Gharaniq was recorded by four early Islamic scholars, so you know better then them? If you can bring solid evidence Christians copied from Greek pagans and Mithra worshippers then produce your proof. Intercession of Saints isn't forbidden, but anyhow it still doesn't effect the way Christians believe in  the Trinity.

Edited April 22, 2018 by Mishael

[OneGodBeliever]

9 minutes ago, Mishael said:

YOU STILL CAN'T EXPLAIN HOW ITS FAKE, as I said Islam never had determined firm doctrine and since Shias and Sunnis each have their own Hadith to back them up their own respective beliefs, so theres no way of telling which is right. Gharaniq was recorded by four early Islamic scholars, so you know better then them? If you can bring solid evidence Christians copied from Greek pagans and Mithra worshippers then produce your proof. Intercession of Saints isn't forbidden, but anyhow it still doesn't effect the way Christians believe in  the Trinity.

Dont you understand story that has no basis is itself proof that it's fake one. What proof is needed. Can't you have some common sense and I have to explain sense to you every time.

Well it's historians who have said Christian roots are from pagan sources. Too many documentaries are made for that.

At least my Muslim brothers agree with me and only Shias are main deviated ones. You don't seem to have anyone who agrees with you. You must check in the the post which I made for you and no Christian seems to agree with your statements. You are confused my dear friend and belong to no one but yourself.

Edited April 22, 2018 by OneGodBeliever

[Mishael]

25 minutes ago, OneGodBeliever said:

Dont you understand story that has no basis is itself proof that it's fake one. What proof is needed. Can't you have some common sense and I have to explain sense to you every time.

Well it's historians who have said Christian roots are from pagan sources. Too many documentaries are made for that.

At least my Muslim brothers agree with me and only Shias are main deviated ones. You don't seem to have anyone who agrees with you. You must check in the the post which I made for you and no Christian seems to agree with your statements. You are confused my dear friend and belong to no one but yourself.

I believe I asked you to provide proof not tell me historians think Christianity has links with Paganism, my question was clear. Documentaries are made for everything doesn't make them all true, Christians not commenting doesn't mean they don't agree with me, they are however refuting you and giving me likes so...   Muslims have no basis to declare the Gharaniq incident as fabricated. This event is documented by the four early biographical writers of Muhammad's life: Ibn Ishaq, Waqidi, Ibn Sa'd, and Tabari. The Hadith and Qur’an also contain direct references. Additionally several other Islamic scholars on Hadith (traditions) support the event's occurrence.

When Muhammad first began preaching in  Mecca his desire was that the people of Mecca, the Quraysh, would accept him as a prophet and the religion he was teaching. They were not receptive to him and made life difficult for him and his followers, and many of his followers fled to Christian Abyssinia for protection. This was until Muhammad recited Surah 53 (Suraht-an-Najm) with the following verses:

Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third ... these are the exalted Gharaniq (a high flying bird) whose intercession is approved. (Ibn Ishaq, pp. 165-166) 

Al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat were some of the local idols worshiped in  Mecca. Previously Muhammad had spoken against them in his monotheist preaching but now he recited that their "intercession is approved".

When Quraysh heard that, they were delighted and greatly pleased at the way in which he spoke of their gods and they listened to him ... Then the people dispersed and Quraysh went out, delighted at what had been said about their gods, saying, " Muhammad has spoken of our gods in splendid fashion". (Ibn Ishaq, p. 166)

The Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, repeated them (the verses), and he went on reciting the whole of Surah (53) and then fell in prostration, and the people (the Quraysh) fell in prostration with him. (Ibn Sa'd, vol. 1, p. 237) 

Bukhari too confirms that after Muhammad recited Surah 53 the Quraysh accepted Muhammad and prayed with him:

Muhammad recited Suraht-an-Najm (53) and prostrated while reciting it and all the people prostrated and a man amongst the people took a handful of stones or earth and raised it to his face and said, "This is sufficient for me." Later on I saw him killed as a non-believer. Bukhari 2.019. Number 176; see also Nr 173)

Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet ... prostrated while reciting An-Najm (Surah 53) and with him prostrated the Muslims, the pagans (Quraysh), the jinns, and all human beings. (Bukhari, 2.019, Number 177). 

Muhammad's desire had been realised; the Quraysh accepted him. The Muslims who had fled to Abyssinia heard about this and many of them began to return to  Mecca. The Quraysh accepted Muhammad because he had, "spoken of (their) gods in splendid fashion" (Ibn Ishaq, p. 166). The Islamic explanation as to why Muhammad accepted the idols is that he desired a way to attract the Quraysh and Satan used this opportunity to put these words on Muhammad's lips:

Now the apostle was anxious for the welfare of his people, wishing to attract them as far as he could. It has been mentioned that he longed for a way to attract them ... (and) Satan, when he (Muhammad) was meditating upon it, and desiring to bring it (sc.reconciliation) to his people, put upon his tongue "these are the exalted Gharaniq[6] whose intercession is approved". (Ibn Ishaq, pp. 165-166)

This is what is meant by the phrase, the Satanic Verses; they were words that Muhammad spoke from Satan and his own desire.  The Islamic accounts then say that the angel Gabriel rebuked Muhammad for what he had said:

Then Gabriel came to the apostle and said , "What have you done, Muhammad? You have read to these people something I did not bring you from God and you have said what He did not say to you." (Ibn Ishaq, p. 166)

Then Muhammad confessed:  I ascribed to Allah, what He had not said. (Ibn Sa'd, vol. 1, p. 237)

I have fabricated things against God and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken. (Al-Tabari, vol. 6, p. 111)

Muhammad then announced that Gabriel had now told him to speak against the idols and so  what he recited changed. Previously it had been:

Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third ... these are the exalted Gharaniq whose intercession is approved. (Ibn Ishaq, pp. 165-166)

Now the verse became:

Have you considered El-Lat and El-'Uzza and Manat the third, the other? What, have you males, and He females? That were indeed an unjust division. They are naught but names yourselves have named, and your fathers; God has sent down no authority touching them. (Qur'an 53:19-23, Arberry). Please read as well (Tafsir al-Jalalayn)

The last sentences ( What, have you males…) were abrogated after a while, because they were in contradiction with the unity of God, and were

This final form of the verse is what is now in the modern Qur'an. The Quraysh saw that Muhammad had now changed his message: When the annulment of what Satan had put upon the prophet's tongue came from God, Quraysh said: "Muhammad has repented of what he said about the position of your gods with Allah, altered it and brought something else." (Ibn Ishaq, p. 166-167)

This explanation, that Satan had placed these words on Muhammad tongue and God had now cancelled it, now had to be justified to both his followers and to the Quraysh. The answer came by referring to another part of the Qur'an: “Never have We sent a single prophet or apostle before you with whose wishes Satan did not tamper. But God abrogates the interjections of Satan and confirms His own revelations”. (Qur'an 22:52, Dawood). Muhammad's justification was that other prophets had had their wishes tampered with by Satan just as he had done, but God had corrected the whole situation.

al-Bukhari, Islam’s most trusted authority, confirms certain details of the story that only make sense if Muhammad really did deliver the Satanic Verses. According to Bukhari,

The Prophet performed a prostration when he finished reciting Suraht an-Najm [Surah 53], and all the Muslims and Al-Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in His Messenger Muhammad) and jinn and human beings prostrated along with him. (4862)

Though Bukhari understandably omits the embarrassing reason for the prostration of the pagans,  he inadvertently confirms the account given by Ibn Ishaq and the others, who faithfully reported that the pagans bowed down because Muhammad spoke favourably of their gods. Muslims must account for Surah 22:52, which, again, declares that all God’s prophets received revelations from Satan—a verse so preposterous that it could only have been offered to the Muslim community as an absurd explanation for something like the Satanic Verses. Why should we believe that Muhammad was spiritually reliable, when Muhammad was the victim of black magic and, at one point, was convinced that he was demon-possessed? (For more on Muhammad’s spiritual difficulties, see "A Bewitched Prophet?")

The only conceivable reason the pagans would bow down in honour of Surah 53 is that the Surah originally supported paganism, and this is exactly what our earliest historical records claim. Thus, Muhammad, in a moment of weakness, gave into temptation and actively promoted polytheism by delivering a revelation from Satan

[Mishael]

Now I challenge you to prove Gharaniq to be fake, and if do manage to prove it to be fake wouldn't that mean the Quran lied since that would mean people were able to fabricate a Quranic verse? I'll leave you to sort out this dilemma. I find it quite sad people who claim to follow the truth can't refute a confused person like me, but instead switch topic to topic.

Edited April 22, 2018 by Mishael

[OneGodBeliever]

13 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Christians not commenting doesn't mean they don't agree with me, they are however refuting you and giving me likes so

I did not say no Christian is commenting. I said no Christian seems to agree with your statements.

dont you understand the difference?

go through the post and you will understand what I'm saying. And can you please take English lessons. It's a waste of time if you can't understand it

[GeorgeTwo]

10 hours ago, OneGodBeliever said:

You have shown me Christian opinion. I don't buy that. Also you don't get to choose who is Christian & or not. It's a known sect in Christianity.

I have shown you verses in context that destroy your claim of "Muhammad in the Bible."  Jews agree that Muhammad is nowhere foretold in the Hebrew Bible in all the verses cited by Muslims.  I have discussed their Scriptures with them and many know Hebrew; in fact, one of the teaches Hebrew.