SANCTUS ANACLETUS
JF-Expert Member
- Mar 5, 2016
- 3,338
- 4,676
- Thread starter
- #4,761
Mtume Muhammad: Jamii isipotoshwe; Jua huzama katika Chemchemu ya matope Meusi na Mazito
Mtume Muhammad: Jamii isipotoshwe; Jua huzama katika Chemchemu ya matope Meusi na Mazito
- Thread starter SANCTUS ANACLETUS
- Start date
- Status
Northman
JF-Expert Member
- Dec 22, 2016
- 1,587
- 2,516
Bado, ngoja nirudie kusoma tena.
2013
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 2, 2011
- 11,360
- 6,069
The hadiths quoted above are just some of the wacky statements attributed to Muhammad:
1. Eye Popping Prayers:
“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Apostle saying: People should avoid lifting their eyes towards the sky while supplicating in prayer, otherwise their eyes would be snatched away” (Sahih Muslim 1:863)
2. A ‘Cure’ that Could Kill You:
“Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, If a fly fall in the vessel of any of you, let him dip all of it into the vessel and then throw it away, for in one of its wings there is a disease and in the other wing there is healing.” (Sahih Bukhari 7:673) Camel Urine Anyone? “The Prophet ordered them to go to the herd of camels and to drink their milk and urine.” (Sahih Bukhari 1:234)
3. Anatomical Differences Between Muslims and Non-Muslims:
“Ibn Umar reported Allah’s Messenger as saying that a non-Muslim eats in seven intestines while a Muslim eats in one intestine.” (Sahih Muslim 3:5113) One has to wonder if it hurts when a person converts to Islam and his/her intestines suddenly turns from seven to one?
1. Eye Popping Prayers:
“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Apostle saying: People should avoid lifting their eyes towards the sky while supplicating in prayer, otherwise their eyes would be snatched away” (Sahih Muslim 1:863)
2. A ‘Cure’ that Could Kill You:
“Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, If a fly fall in the vessel of any of you, let him dip all of it into the vessel and then throw it away, for in one of its wings there is a disease and in the other wing there is healing.” (Sahih Bukhari 7:673) Camel Urine Anyone? “The Prophet ordered them to go to the herd of camels and to drink their milk and urine.” (Sahih Bukhari 1:234)
3. Anatomical Differences Between Muslims and Non-Muslims:
“Ibn Umar reported Allah’s Messenger as saying that a non-Muslim eats in seven intestines while a Muslim eats in one intestine.” (Sahih Muslim 3:5113) One has to wonder if it hurts when a person converts to Islam and his/her intestines suddenly turns from seven to one?
MSILOMBO
JF-Expert Member
- Dec 3, 2015
- 511
- 445
Acha dharau kijana
2013
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 2, 2011
- 11,360
- 6,069
Historio-Linguistic Errors.
1. The Bible says the name of Abraham's father was Terah. The Qur'an says Azar (Azir in some translations😉.' Some Muslim commentators and translators put Terah in brackets wherever Azar is mentioned, hoping to make us believe the two words are the same. This is an unsuccessful and unacceptable reconciliation attempt. The two words have no historio-linguistic link.
2. How many children did Abraham have?
The Qur'an says two.
The Bible records eight.' Contrary to the Qur'an, there is no record that Abraham ever lived in Mecca or worshipped in any Ka'aba shrine. He lived in Hebron in Israel, where he died and where his grave remains today. His hometown was Ur of the Chaldeans, not Mecca. This is the history, and we must separate history from religious myths.
3. Noah
How many children did Noah have?
The Qur'an says one son, and he drowned in the flood. So by implication, only Noah (and his wife, though not indicated) survived the flood. In truth, Noah had three sons and none drowned in the flood. All three entered the Ark with their wives.
4. The Qur'an even says Noah's wife and Lot's wife perished "in the fire. Which fire?
Did Noah and Lot's wife live at the same time?
Moreover, if the only son of Noah perished in the flood, and his wife perished in a fire, how then was the earth populated after the Flood?
5. Of Moses and Aaron
Who adopted Moses?
The Qur'an says Pharaoh's wife.
In the Bible, Moses himself wrote it was Pharaoh's daughter.
6. Where was Moses' first encounter with God? The Qur'an says, the Valley of Tuwa.
The Bible says Mount Horeb.
7. The episode of the apostasy of the children of Israel in which they made a golden calf to worship is grossly distorted in the Qur'an.
This story is recorded in not less than three places in the Qur'an, each of which is different from the others.
Either Muhammad got his stories from different sources or he only overheard them on different occasions and recited each as he "received" it. After his death, his devotees possibly did not notice any discrepancies; they just gathered all they could and compiled them as "the Holy Qur'an."We read from the Qur'an:
"(Allah) said: Verily, We have tried thy people in thy absence: The Samaris has led them astray."17 Allah says he tried the people (Israel) when Moses was not around. What was the trial? It was Israel making an idol to worship. This raises a serious moral question that is prevalent in the character of Allah, his tempting people to sin.
Here the Qur'an says Allah tempted Israel to worship a golden calf as God Almighty. In the Bible account, it was God who called Moses to "come up hither" to the mount, very near where the people were, to give him all the laws and commandments: "And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them. And Moses rose up, and his minister Joshua: and Moses went up into the mount of God. And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, until we come again unto you: and, behold, Aaron and Hur are with you: if any man have any matters to do, let him come unto them. And Moses went up into the mount, and a cloud covered the mount....and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights."
If it was Allah who tried Israel in Moses' absence, how would he gain in so doing?
The second point is the statement,
"The Samaris has misled them into error." Other translations say "As Samiri" (the Samaritan) and "Sa- mari."
The first statement says Allah tempted them into the error.' he second statement says "the Samaritan" or "As Samari" tried them. Maybe that is not a serious contradiction. Maybe it means Allah stirred up "the Samaritan" to do the misleading. This is not strange because many verses in the Qur'an say Allah misleads people into sin.
A fundamental issue raised in this verse is the presence of the word "Samaritan." If a Muslim knew history, he would question the heavenly origin of the Qur'an at this point. When the Qur'an was written, Arabs did not know much history since most of them were illiterate, including Muhammad (according to the claim of Muslims). The city of Samaria did not exist at the time Moses was leading the children of Israel. It was built hundreds of years after Israel settled in the Promised Land. Therefore, saying a Samaritan led Israel into error in the wilderness is a serious historical fallacy.
Secondly,
the original writer of the Qur'an did not know the geography of this area. At the time of the episode in question, the children of Israel were in Sinai. An old Arabic Christian apologetic, AI-Hidaya (7he True Guidance) says:
"The mention of the Samaritan indicates substantial ignorance of history and geography. We do not know how or from where this Samaritan came. Did he descend from heaven or rise from below?" as Perhaps the calf made in the wilderness is being confused with the two gold calves Jeroboam made for Israel in Bethel and Dan in his new kingdom, which later had Samaria as its capital. If that is the source of the error, how can we say the Qur'an came from heaven or was inspired by an all-knowing God? This is an honest question we have to answer. Religious sentiment won't help us. We must choose between history and myths.
From real history;
the biblical account, it was not "the thing," the calf, that tempted the children of Israel. Neither was it any Samaritan (who didn't exist then) or "As Samaris." Neither was it God who tried them. It was Aaron who made the calf for them because he feared the threat of the people.
If the Qur'an were written in heaven, or inspired by the true God, how could these obvious ridiculous historical blunders find their way there?
From the foregoing, it would be wrong to claim that the Bible and the Qur'an are ALMOST the same thing. They are not.
1. The Bible says the name of Abraham's father was Terah. The Qur'an says Azar (Azir in some translations😉.' Some Muslim commentators and translators put Terah in brackets wherever Azar is mentioned, hoping to make us believe the two words are the same. This is an unsuccessful and unacceptable reconciliation attempt. The two words have no historio-linguistic link.
2. How many children did Abraham have?
The Qur'an says two.
The Bible records eight.' Contrary to the Qur'an, there is no record that Abraham ever lived in Mecca or worshipped in any Ka'aba shrine. He lived in Hebron in Israel, where he died and where his grave remains today. His hometown was Ur of the Chaldeans, not Mecca. This is the history, and we must separate history from religious myths.
3. Noah
How many children did Noah have?
The Qur'an says one son, and he drowned in the flood. So by implication, only Noah (and his wife, though not indicated) survived the flood. In truth, Noah had three sons and none drowned in the flood. All three entered the Ark with their wives.
4. The Qur'an even says Noah's wife and Lot's wife perished "in the fire. Which fire?
Did Noah and Lot's wife live at the same time?
Moreover, if the only son of Noah perished in the flood, and his wife perished in a fire, how then was the earth populated after the Flood?
5. Of Moses and Aaron
Who adopted Moses?
The Qur'an says Pharaoh's wife.
In the Bible, Moses himself wrote it was Pharaoh's daughter.
6. Where was Moses' first encounter with God? The Qur'an says, the Valley of Tuwa.
The Bible says Mount Horeb.
7. The episode of the apostasy of the children of Israel in which they made a golden calf to worship is grossly distorted in the Qur'an.
This story is recorded in not less than three places in the Qur'an, each of which is different from the others.
Either Muhammad got his stories from different sources or he only overheard them on different occasions and recited each as he "received" it. After his death, his devotees possibly did not notice any discrepancies; they just gathered all they could and compiled them as "the Holy Qur'an."We read from the Qur'an:
"(Allah) said: Verily, We have tried thy people in thy absence: The Samaris has led them astray."17 Allah says he tried the people (Israel) when Moses was not around. What was the trial? It was Israel making an idol to worship. This raises a serious moral question that is prevalent in the character of Allah, his tempting people to sin.
Here the Qur'an says Allah tempted Israel to worship a golden calf as God Almighty. In the Bible account, it was God who called Moses to "come up hither" to the mount, very near where the people were, to give him all the laws and commandments: "And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them. And Moses rose up, and his minister Joshua: and Moses went up into the mount of God. And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, until we come again unto you: and, behold, Aaron and Hur are with you: if any man have any matters to do, let him come unto them. And Moses went up into the mount, and a cloud covered the mount....and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights."
If it was Allah who tried Israel in Moses' absence, how would he gain in so doing?
The second point is the statement,
"The Samaris has misled them into error." Other translations say "As Samiri" (the Samaritan) and "Sa- mari."
The first statement says Allah tempted them into the error.' he second statement says "the Samaritan" or "As Samari" tried them. Maybe that is not a serious contradiction. Maybe it means Allah stirred up "the Samaritan" to do the misleading. This is not strange because many verses in the Qur'an say Allah misleads people into sin.
A fundamental issue raised in this verse is the presence of the word "Samaritan." If a Muslim knew history, he would question the heavenly origin of the Qur'an at this point. When the Qur'an was written, Arabs did not know much history since most of them were illiterate, including Muhammad (according to the claim of Muslims). The city of Samaria did not exist at the time Moses was leading the children of Israel. It was built hundreds of years after Israel settled in the Promised Land. Therefore, saying a Samaritan led Israel into error in the wilderness is a serious historical fallacy.
Secondly,
the original writer of the Qur'an did not know the geography of this area. At the time of the episode in question, the children of Israel were in Sinai. An old Arabic Christian apologetic, AI-Hidaya (7he True Guidance) says:
"The mention of the Samaritan indicates substantial ignorance of history and geography. We do not know how or from where this Samaritan came. Did he descend from heaven or rise from below?" as Perhaps the calf made in the wilderness is being confused with the two gold calves Jeroboam made for Israel in Bethel and Dan in his new kingdom, which later had Samaria as its capital. If that is the source of the error, how can we say the Qur'an came from heaven or was inspired by an all-knowing God? This is an honest question we have to answer. Religious sentiment won't help us. We must choose between history and myths.
From real history;
the biblical account, it was not "the thing," the calf, that tempted the children of Israel. Neither was it any Samaritan (who didn't exist then) or "As Samaris." Neither was it God who tried them. It was Aaron who made the calf for them because he feared the threat of the people.
If the Qur'an were written in heaven, or inspired by the true God, how could these obvious ridiculous historical blunders find their way there?
From the foregoing, it would be wrong to claim that the Bible and the Qur'an are ALMOST the same thing. They are not.
Gavana
JF-Expert Member
- Jul 19, 2008
- 33,637
- 8,947
Unataka tujadili Maandiko au mgongo wa ngisi
Hayo maneno yako ndiye huyo aliyetamka JOHN 1:1 NA JOHN 1;14 ????
Imani ya Nicene
Bettenson anafafanua kanuni ya imani ya Nicene kama ifuatavyo: [Iliundwa huko Espiphanius, Ancoratus, 118, C.A.D. 374, na iliporwa na wanzuoni, takriban neno kwa neno, kutoka kwa Wahadhiri wa Catechetical wa S. Cyril Jerusalem; iliyosomwa na kuthibitishwa huko Chalcedon, 451, ikiwa ni imani ya (Mapadri 318 waliokutana huko Nicaea na kwa hiyo) wale 150 waliokutana baadaye, (yaani huko Constantinople, 381).
Tangu hapo wameitwa Constantinopolitan au imani ya Nicaeano-Constantinopolitan, na lilifikiriwa na wengi kuwa ni kujikumbusha kwa kanuni ya imani ya Jerusalem alioendeshwa na Cyril.
Tunaamini Mungu mmoja ambaye ni Baba Mwenyezi, muumba wa mbingu na nchi, na vitu vyote vinavyoonekana na visivyoonekana;
Na kwa Bwana mmoja Yesu Kristo, mtoto pekee wa kuzaliwa na Mungu, Amezaliwa na Baba kabla ya zama zote, Nuru ya Nuru, Mungu wa kweli kwa Mungu wa kweli, aliyezaliwa si kuumbwa, kwa asili moja na Baba, na kupitia kwake vitu vyote vimeumbwa; ambaye kwa ajili yetu sisi binadamu na kwa uwokovu wetu amekuja ardhini kutoka mbinguni, na kufanywa mwili wa Roho Mtakatifu na Bikira Maria, na kuwa mtu, na alisulubiwa kwa ajili yetu chini ya Pontius Pilato, aliuawa na kuzikwa, na akafufuka katika siku ya tatu, kwa mujibu wa maandiko matakatifu, na akapaa mbinguni, na kuketi upande wa kuume wa Baba, na atarudi tena akiwa na fahari ya kuhukumu wanaoishi na waliokufa, ambaye mamlaka yake yatakuwa hayana mwisho:
Na kwa roho Mtakatifu, Bwana na Mtoa uhai, aliyeendelea kutokana na Baba, ambaye yupo pamoja na Baba na Mwana anaabudiwa pamoja nao na kutukuzwa pamoja, aliyesema kupitia mitume:
Katika Kanisa moja tukufu la Kikatoliki na la Mitume:
Tunathibitisha ubatizo mmoja wa msamaha wa dhambi. Tunatarajia ufufuo wa wafu, na kuja kwa maisha ya milele.
SOMA:
Victor Paul Wierwille: Jesus Christ Is Not God", American Christian Press, New Knoxville, Ohio, pp.26-27.
Ingawa baraza la maaskofu lilikubali imani ya Nicaea lakini hakukutajwa Utatu.
Mabishano juu ya maumbile (nature) ya Yesu yameendelea kwa miongo mingi. Mwaka 381 C.E. baraza la busara la pili lilikutana huko Costantinople.18F1 Baraza hili lilitoa azimio la imani la Nicene linaloeleza kuwa Yesu na Mungu walikuwa ni sawa sawa, wa milele na uungu wa Roho Mtakatifu. Imani ya Utatu ikadhihiri na kuanzishwa rasmi kama jiwe la msingi la imani ya Kikristo kwa karne kumi na tano zilizofuatia.
Zingatia: Mfano "Sala ya Bwana" (Mathayo 6:9-13), Waromani katoliki wote wanatakiwa waikariri "imani ya Nicene" ambayo inajumuishwa katika sala zao.
Mfalme Theodosius ameamani Ukristo kuwa ni jambo la amri za kibeberu/kifalme:
"Ni matakwa yetu kuwa watu wote tunaowatawala watatekeleza dini hii iliyoletwa na mtakatifu Petro Mwanafunzi wa Yesu kwa Warumi. Tutaamini Mungu mmoja katika Baba, Mwana, na Roho Mtakatifu, chini ya ufahamu wa usawa wa utukufu na Utatu mtakatifu.
Tunaamrisha kuwa wale wanaofuata sheria hii wataingia jina la Wakristo Wakatoliki. Waliobakia, hata hivyo, wale Tunaowahukumu ni vichaa na machizi, watapata hali mbaya ya kuzusha imani bila ya kuhoji, maeneo ya vikao vyao hayatapokea jina la makanisa na wataangamizwa kwanza na kisasi kitakatifu na pili kwa adhabu kali ya nguvu zetu. Tutahakikisha kwa mujibu wa hukumu takatifu."
Kisha, imani ya kumtukuza Maria kuwa ni "mama wa Mungu" na "mzaa Mungu" pia iliundwa katika Baraza la Pili la Constantinople (553 C.E.) na jina la "Bikira wa Milele" liliongezwa.
"Katika sala na nyimbo za kidini za Kanisa la Kiothodox hilo jina la Mama wa Mungu liliombwa mara nyingi kama jina la Kristo na Utatu Mtakatifu"... "Kwa imani ya Waroman Katoliki, Maria, mama wa Mungu, alifafanuliwa kwa umbo la Busara takatifu. Hapa matendo ya kumwabudu mama wa Mungu yalipiga hatua moja mbele, na ndani yake Maria anatendewa kama vile ni asili (hypostasis) takatifu. Umbo la Busara ya Mbinguni.
SOMA:
1 B.K. Kuiper, The Church in History (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., p. 128 (See –
Ibid, p. 25).
2 (Bamber Gascoigne: "The Christians", Granda Publishing Limited, 1976, Frogmore, St Albans, Herts
A12 2NF and 3 Upper James Street, London Wir 4BP, p.9).
Gavana
JF-Expert Member
- Jul 19, 2008
- 33,637
- 8,947
HAYO MANENO YAKO NDIYE ALIYETAMKA YOHANA 1:1 NA YOHANA 1:14 ????????
Katika Injili ya (Yohana 8:40), Yesu (As) anasema:
"Lakini sasa mnatafuta kuniua mimi, mtu
ambaye nimewaambia iliyo kweli,
niliyoisikia kwa Mungu..."
Allah (Mwenyezi Mungu) anasema katika Quran (3:59):
Hakika mfano wa Isa kwa Mwenyezi Mungu ni kama
mfano wa Adam; alimuumba kwa udongo
kisha akamwambia: Kuwa! Basi akawa.
Ukweli wa upweke wa Mwenyezi Mungu, maumbile na nafasi ya Yesu (As), kwa mujibu wa Maandiko:
[
Gavana
JF-Expert Member
- Jul 19, 2008
- 33,637
- 8,947
Yesu (AS) anasema katika (Mathayo 4:10):
"...kwa maana imeandikwa, Msujudie Bwana Mungu wako, umwabudu yeye peke yake."
Katika (Yohana 17:3) anasema: "Na uzima wa milele ndio huu, Wakujue wewe, Mungu wa pekee wa kweli, na Yesu Kristo uliyemtuma."
Vilevile anasema katika Yohana 20:17: "...ninapaa kwenda kwa Baba yangu naye ni Baba yenu, kwa Mungu wangu naye ni Mungu wenu."
Je, maelezo haya hayapo wazi?
Wapi alipokubaliwa Yesu kuwa ni Mungu?
Gavana
JF-Expert Member
- Jul 19, 2008
- 33,637
- 8,947
Gavana
JF-Expert Member
- Jul 19, 2008
- 33,637
- 8,947
SABABU ZILIZOSHAWISHI IMANI YA UTATU
Sababu zilizoshawishi kuundwa kwa Imani ya Utatu zimefupishwa na Wathtower pamoja na jumuia ya kijitabu cha dini na Biblia ya Pennsylvania, 1989, katika kile kinachoweza kuzingatiwa kuwa ni bishara (utangulizi) wa imani ya Utatu:
Kupitia ulimwengu wa kale, hadi kufikia umbali wa zama za mababyloni, kuabudu miungu ya kipagani iliyo katika makundi ya utatu ilikuwa kawaida. Tendo hilo vilevile lilienea kabla, ya wakati wa Yesu na baada yake huko Misri, Ugiriki na Roma. Baada ya kufa kwa wanafunzi wa Yesu, imani hizo za kipagani zilianza kuushambulia Ukristo.
Mwanahistoria Will Durant ameona: "Ukristo haujaangamiza upagani, ila Ukristo ulianzia katika upagani... Kutoka Misri yalikuja mawazo ya utatu mtakatifu. "Na katika kitabu cha Dini za Kimisri, Siegfried Morenz ananukuu: Utatu ulikuwa unawashughulisha sana wanateolojia wa Kimisri... Miungu mitatu inajumuishwa na kutendewa kama kitu kimoja, kinaelekezwa kwa nafsi ya umoja. Kwa njia hii nguvu ya kiroho ya dini ya Kimisri inaonesha mafungamano ya moja kwa moja na teolojia ya Ukristo."
Kwa hiyo, huko Alexandria, wazee wa kanisa wa Misri wa mwishoni mwa karne ya tatu na mwanzoni mwa karne ya nne, kama vile Athanasius, aliakisi atahri hii kama zilivyounda wazo la lililopelekea Utatu. Athari zao wenyewe zilienea, kiasi kikubwa sana hadi bwana Morenz anazingatia kuwa "Teolojia ya Waalexandria ni kiunganishi kati ya dini za urithi wa Kimsri na Ukristo."
Katika insaiklopidia ya Dini na Maadili, James Hasting ameandika: "Katika dini za Kihindi, kwa mfano, tunakutana na makundi ya wanautatu ya Brahma, Siva, na Visnu; Katika dini za Kimisri, makundi ya wanautatu ya Osiris, Isis, na Horus... Wala si kuwa ipo katika dini za kihistoria tu ambazo tunakuta ndani yake Mungu akitazamwa kuwa ni wa Utatu. Mtu anaweza kukumbuka kwa sifa ya kipekee ya mtazamo wa new-Platonic Mkuu au Hakika ya Kikomo." Ambao ni "kuwakilisha seti ya utatu."
Insaiklopidia mpya ya Schaff-Herzog ya Elimu ya Dini inaonesha ushawishi wa falsafa za Kigiriki: "Imani za Logos na Utatu zimepokea maumbo yao kutoka kwa Mapadri wa Kigiriki waliokuwa wakivutiwa sana, moja kwa moja au si moja kwa moja, na falsafa ya Platonic...
Makosa hayo na ufisadi huo uliotambaa Kanisani kutoka katika vyanzo hivi hayawezi kupingika."
Kanisa la Karne tatu za mwanzo linasema: "Imani ya Utatu ilikua polepole na kwa kuilinganisha ni ya kuundwa katika zama za mwishoni;... imani hiyo ina asili katika vyanzo vya kigeni kabisa si vya Maandiko ya Kiyahudi wala Kikristo;.. imekuzwa na kupandikizwa katika Ukristo, kupitia mikono ya Mapadri wa Platonizing."[1]
Sanamu za miungu zikiwa na nyuso tatu zilipatikana katika maeneo kadhaa ulimwenguni (kwa mfano,
Kampuchea, [Mungu wa Utatu wa Kibudha, c. Karne ya 12 C.E.];
Italia, [Utatu, c. Karne ya 15 C.E.];.
Norway, [Utatu (Baba, Mwana na Roho Mtakatifu), c. Karne ya 13 C.E.];
Ufaransa, [Utatu, c. Karne ya 14 C.E.] Ujerumani, [Utatu, c. Karne ya 19 C.E.];
India, [Mungu wa Kihindu wa Utatu, c. Karne ya 7 C.EI.]
S.Falmyra, (Utatu wa mungu mwezi, Bwana wa mbinguni, mungu jua, c Karne ya 1 C.E.];
Babylon, [Utatu wa Ishtar, Sin, Shamash, Karne ya 2 B.C.E.]
na Misri [Utatu wa Horus, Osiris, Isis, Karne ya 2 B.C.E.]).[2]
[1] Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania: Should You Believe in Trinity? (1989), Int`l. Bible Students Association Brooklyn, New York, U.S.A. p. 11.
[2] Ibid, p. 1.
Kisoda2
JF-Expert Member
- May 30, 2008
- 2,475
- 745
2013
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 2, 2011
- 11,360
- 6,069
In the Gospel of John, the Lord Jesus Christ declares,
“Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32).
In the same Gospel, Jesus would reply to His questioner,
“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). .
Thus, in the final analysis,
“truth” is embodied in the person of Christ Himself, as encapsulated in John 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2013
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 2, 2011
- 11,360
- 6,069
In understanding God's nature and the World, the Holy bible and Qur'an are diametrically opposite to each other.
When you describe characters of allah in the Qur'an, are what represent image of Devil in the Holy bible. It is enough to say, allah is the satan in the Holy Bible.
The doctrine of Qur'an is seen as a pure Luciferian doctrine in the Holy Bible eye.
There's no way, You can reconcile this.
This goes on,when comparing Mohammad and Jesus actions. mohammad was the undisputed most evil man ever lived on the planet.
This poses serious threats when assessing him with the Holy bible' benchmark. No doubt mohammad is the False prophet prophecied in the Bible.
The spirits inside Muhammad is the spirit of Anti-Christ.
The destiny of the two leaders:
Jesus is in heaven with his Father and Mohammad is in hell suffering for eternal damnation.
2013
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 2, 2011
- 11,360
- 6,069
Reasons Why Christians Do Not Believe in the Qur’an .
1.MOHAMMAD WAS AN ILLITERATE ARAB FROM THE TRIBE OF QURAISH WHO WAS ANTI-JEWISH, BUT ACCORDING TO HOLY BIBLE, GOD CHOSE TO REVEAL HIS HOLY BOOKS ONLY THROUGH THE AGENCY OF JEWS. (A’raf 7:157-158)
Romans 3:1-2 –
(1) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
(2) Much every way: chiefly, because unto them were committed the oracles of God. Romans 9:4 – Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises.
2. MOHAMMAD'S MESSAGE WAS FUNDAMENTALLY IN DISAGREEMENT WITH THE MESSAGE OF JESUS AND OTHER PROPHETS OF THE BIBLE. (Nisâ 4:157)
Isaiah 8:20
– To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Galatians 1:8 – But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
1 Corinthians 14:32-33 –
(32) And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. (33) For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace.
3. MOHAMMAD'S SELF PROCLAIMATION AS A PROPHET IS NOT A VALID CRITERION FOR PROPHETHOOD, and there are no other valid proofs for his being a prophet.
John 5:31 – If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
John 5:36 – for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.
4. Muhammad did not do any obvious miracles like Jesus and the other prophets did. (En’âm 6:37)
John 14:11 – Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
John 20:30-31 – (30) And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: (31) but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.
5. MOHAMMAD DID NOT HAVE A SPIRIT OF PROPHECY LIKE JESUS AND THE OTHER PROPHETS HAD. (En’âm 6:50)
1 Samuel 9:9 – (Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to enquire of God, thus he spake, Come, and let us go to the seer: for he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer.)
Revelation 19:10 – Worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
6. MOHAMMAD CLAIMED TO BE THE LAST OF THE PROPHETS, BUT GOD HAD ALREADY CLOSED THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE AT THE END OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION. (Ahzab 33:40)
Revelation 22:18 – For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.
7. MOHAMMAD TAUGHT DOCTRINES WHICH ARE DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED TO THE TEACHINGS OF THE BIBLE AND WHICH PROPAGATE THE SPIRIT OF ANTICHRIST.
(Tevbe 9:30-31)
1 John 2:22 – Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 John 4:1-3 – (1) Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. (2) Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: (3) And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2013
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 2, 2011
- 11,360
- 6,069
The original Greek manuscripts, the translations of the New Testament into other languages, the writings of the early church fathers, and the decisions which were made at the early church councils about the canonical books, all confirm the deity of Christ and the other fundamental doctrines of the faith which all Christians believe today.
The original Greek New Testament agrees 100 percent with the message of the writings of the early church fathers and with the message found in the other New Testament translations.
The text of the New Testament and more than 36,000 verses quoted in the writings of the Patristics show clearly that these early church fathers were in 100 percent agreement about the following cardinal doctrines of Christ which are found in the Bible:
The Virgin Birth of Christ – Matthew 1:18-21 The Sinlessness of Christ – Hebrews 4:14-15 The Deity of Christ – John 20:28-29 The Incarnation of Christ – Philippians 2:5-11 The Eternality of Christ – Hebrews 13:8 The Atoning Death of Christ – Isaiah 53:5-12 The Omniscience of Christ – John 4:25-26 The Omnipotence of Christ – John 20:30-31 The Creative Power of Christ – Colossians 1:15-22 Christ is the Word of God – John 1:1-14
Christ is the Son of God – Mark 14:61-62
Christ is the Messiah – Matthew 16:16-20 Christ is the Savior of the World – 1 John 4:14-15
Christ is the Mediator between God and Man..1 Timothy 2:5
Christ Alone Can Forgive Sin – Mark 2:5-11
THE Qur’an AFFIRMS THE FOLLOWING BIBLICAL DOCTRINES CONCERNING CHRIST:
Jesus Christ is the Son of Mary – Bakara 2:87
Jesus Christ is the Messiah – Ali-İmran 3:45
Jesus Christ is the Servant of Allah – Nisâ 4:172
Jesus Christ is a prophet – Meryem 19:30 Jesus Christ is an apostle of Allah – Mâ’ide 5:75
Jesus Christ is the Word of Allah – Al-i-İmran 3:3
Jesus Christ is the Word of Truth – Meryem 19:34
Jesus Christ is the Spirit of Allah – Tahrîm 66:12
Jesus Christ is a sign for mankind – Meryem 19:21
Jesus Christ is a witness – Nisâ 4:159
Jesus Christ is a mercy from Allah – Meryem 19:21
Jesus Christ is great (eminent) – Al-i-İmran 3:45
Jesus Christ is righteous – Al-i-İmran 3:46 Jesus Christ is blessed – Meryem 19:31
Jesus Christ did miracles – Bakara 2:87
Jesus Christ was led by the Holy Spirit – Bakara 2:253
Jesus Christ was born of a virgin – Al-i-İmran 3:47
Jesus Christ guides to the truth – Al-i-İmran 3:49
Jesus Christ healed people – Al-i-İmran 3:49 Jesus Christ raised the dead – Al-i-İmran 3:49 Jesus Christ would die for unbelievers – Al-i-İmran 3:55
Jesus Christ was resurrected from the dead – Al-i-İmran 3:55
Jesus Christ ascended to heaven – Al-i-İmran 3:55
Jesus Christ is a life giver – Mâ’ide 5:110
Jesus Christ is holy – Meryem 19:19
Jesus Christ is coming again – Zuhruf 43:61 Jesus Christ knows the future – Zuhruf 43:61, 63
Jesus Christ is to be obeyed and followed – Zuhruf 43:63 1
Timothy 4:15-16 – (15) Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all. (16) Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.
masoud mshahara
JF-Expert Member
- Mar 31, 2018
- 4,712
- 2,010
Huyu anabwabwaja tu, ndio maana nikakupa uhuru wewe ukishaelewa clip zako njoo uulize maswali nami kama mwanachuoni mbobezi NITAKUJIBU, lakini ukileta clip sasa ntawezaje kumuuliza mtu kwenye clip? rahaaaaaaaa ya majadiliano ni maswali na majibu , kama hapa ujaelewa wewe upelekwe milembe sasa ahahhahhaahhaahhaaha Ahahahahaahahaahaha Ahahahahaahahaahaha
masoud mshahara
JF-Expert Member
- Mar 31, 2018
- 4,712
- 2,010
Asante kwa kuthibitisha kuwa Ametumwa , hivyo basi huyu aliemtuma ndio big boss na ndio mwenye maamuzi magumu kama.haya
KUTOKA 12:29
"Hata ikawa , usiku wa manane Bwana AKAWAPIGA wazaliwa wa kwanza wote katika nchi ya misri, tangu mzaliwa wa kwanza wa FARAO aliyeketi katika kiti chake cha enzi; hata mzaliwa wa kwanza wa mtu ALIYEFUNGWA katika Nyumba ya wafungwa; na wazaliwa wa kwanza wote wa WANYAMA ";
Ahahahahaahahaahaha kazi kwako Ahahahahaahahaahaha kafyekelea mbali hadi wanyama hata sijui wamemkosea nini? Ahahahhaah hahahahahaha
2013
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 2, 2011
- 11,360
- 6,069
Muḥammad’s Jibrīl
.
Jibrīl in the Islāmic narratives is the angelic messenger who carried (transported) the revelations to Muḥammad. Despite Jibrīl’s vital role in establishing Islām as a religion, Muḥammad was silent about him for years. Jibrīl is not mentioned at all by Muḥammad in the Meccan portion of the Qur’ān.
This spiritual messenger is not identified by Muḥammad until thirteen years later, after about eighty-six sūras of revelation had already been given.
Jibrīl’s name appears for the first time in sūra al-Baqara, where Muḥammad accused the Jews of being enemiesJibrīl (Gabriel) (Q 2.97-98).
Afterwards, Muḥammad mentions Jibrīl’s name only once in Q 66.4 to warn his insubordinate wives that Allah and Jibrīl are on his side against them.
There are, however, verses where hints of Jibrīl possibly appear, including “One mighty in power” (Q 53.5) and “the Faithful Spirit” (Q 26.193).
Muḥammad declared his revelations for many years before explicitly mentioning the name Jibrīl.
The Trance .
The sirat literature (biography books) record that Muḥammad suffered from strange trancelike episodes. These unusual experiences were described by an eyewitness:
“I looked at him, he had a snore...as the snore of a young camel.”[40] These trances actually led Muḥammad to question whether he had a touch of madness.[41] These symptoms stayed with him even after he declared himself a prophet. He continued to suffer from episodes of fainting, profuse sweating, and sounds of voices in his head.
These symptoms then became explained as manifestations connected with the descending of inspiration, instead of possible symptoms of sickness.
Muḥammad described his condition during the process of his receiving a revelation:
[42] Sometimes it comes like the ringing of a bell—which is the hardest on me—then it splits away from me. I then am aware of what he said. Other times the angel appears to me like a man and talks to me. Then I become aware of what he was saying.
‘Ā’isha[N] [Bint Abī Bakr, Muḥammad’s third wife]...said about it,
“I saw him while the revelation was coming upon him on a bitterly cold day, then when it was split away from him, his [Muḥammad’s] head would drip with sweat.”
When we read history, we find that these symptoms are similar to the condition of the Arab diviners before Islām:
The priest during his divination enters a trancelike state, during which he would be in contact with a difficult arduous world no man can withstand. For the spirit to connect to it and be connected with the body of the diviner is a seriously dire matter during which the sweat is profuse, which especially happens when the speaker is the diviner himself. Note that Muḥammad had openly declared that he used to hear a sound like the ringing of a bell. He also claimed,
“The bell is the pipes of Satan.”
Nonetheless, the question that seemingly has not been asked is if “the bell is the pipes of Satan,” why does Muḥammad hear its ringing? No matter the answer, Muḥammad treated these symptoms with al-ruqya (“spell-removing prayers or chants”) and he would further advise Muslims to use al-ruqya for spells and chants.
Muḥammad and the Pre-Islāmic (Jāhilīya) Divination:
When the above-mentioned symptoms started to appear in Muḥammad, a great anxiety overtook and controlled him. When he compared what he was going through with the condition of the Arab diviners, he thought he too had become a diviner. He said to his first wife, Khadīja[N],
“I am worried that I might be a diviner.”
In the Arabian Peninsula, divination was a common religious practice as well as a variety of other magical practices in use at the time, such as al-ruqya and astrology. The religious men would often belong to the priestly group, known as the ruqya performer (al-rāqi) or the astrologer.
Such a diviner could make contact with hidden, spiritual forces. People with spiritually related questions would bring them to him at his home:
[Those] who sought him [the diviner] saw in him a super power and an ability to receive the revelation from that power which was seen in the form of an invisible person that would give the revelation to the diviner. Then the diviner would speak accordingly with what was appropriate to the situation and would answer their questions addressed to him. Muḥammad admitted that he too experienced this process of divination:
“Other times the angel appears to me like a man and talks to me. Then I become aware of what he is saying.
” Acts of similar divination by Muḥammad are presented in the Qur’ān, where he responds to questions with the expression, “They ask thee,”
as in these verses:
“They will ask thee of the spirit…” (Q 17.85); “They will ask thee about the mountains…” (Q 20.105);
and
“They shall ask thee about the Hour…” (Q 79.42).
Furthermore, the “priests had a particular style in their talk while prophesying and divining known as al-saj‘ [rhymed prose]; that is why it was known as al-saj‘ of the diviners. Their saj‘ was characterized by the use of ambiguous words and general expressions that could be interpreted in a variety of opposing ways.”
The saj‘ and short expressions are characteristic of the Qur’ānic verses that belong to the first call (to Islām) period.
An example of this can be seen in the Arabic rhymed prose of Q 102.1-8:
The contention about numbers deludes you till ye visit the tombs!
Not so!
In the end ye shall know!
And again not so!
In the end ye shall know! Not so!
Did ye but know with certain knowledge!
Ye shall surely see hell!
And again ye shall surely see it with an eye of certainty. Then ye shall surely be asked about pleasure!
For this reason,
Muḥammad’s contemporaries described him as one who had joined the diviners, an accusation that he vehemently denied. He announced to the Quraysh, that he was
“neither a soothsayer nor mad!” (Q 52.29).
This reaction is significant, as the diviner was seen as one who would be inspired with the revelation by the “satan of the diviner.”
The Arabs believed that this satan would eavesdrop “on heaven and bring what he heard and recite it. Then the diviner would recite to the people what his satan had recited to him.”
Based on this imagery, Muḥammad believed that every man had his companion satan. He declared,
“‘Each one of you, without exception, has been assigned a companion of the jinn.’
The Muslims asked him, ‘Even you?’
He said, ‘Even I, except that Allah aided me against him. So, he became a Muslim and would command me with nothing but good.’”
He also said to ‘Ā’isha,
“‘Yes! But my Lord aided me against him until he became a Muslim.’”
Khadīja’s Verdict:
In the midst of these hallucinations and voices, when some suspected that madness could have befallen Muḥammad or that he might have become a diviner, Khadīja stepped forward to deliver Muḥammad out of his condition and suffering:
Khadīja...said to the messenger of Allah...“Cousin[husband], can you tell me about your companion that appears to you when he comes?”
He said, “Yes!”
She said, “Then when he comes to you, tell me about it.” Jibrīl...came to him as he used to do.
The messenger of Allah...said to Khadīja, “Khadīja! Jibrīl has come to me.”
She said, “Get up, cousin [husband], and sit on my left thigh….”
The messenger of Allah...got up and sat on her.
She said, “Do you see him?”
He said, “Yes!” She said, “Move and sit on my right thigh.”
She reported that the messenger of Allah...moved and sat on her right thigh.
She asked, “Do you see him?”
He said, “Yes!”
She said, “Move and sit in my lap.”
She reported that the messenger of Allah...moved and sat in her lap.
She said, “Do you see him?”
He said, “Yes!”
She reported that she felt distressed and cast her veil while the messenger of Allah...was in her lap.
Then she said to him, “Do you see him?”
he said, “No!”
She said, “O cousin [husband], be steadfast and of good cheer, for by Allah he is indeed an angel and not a satan.” [Another slightly different story adds that Khadīja] tucked the messenger of Allah...between her and her undergarment [dir‘ihā]. At that point Jibrīl left.
She then said to the messenger of Allah...“This is an angel, not a satan.”
We notice the following troubling issues in this story:
1. Khadīja said to Muḥammad, “This is an angel, not a satan,” which indicates that Muḥammad believed that a satan was the one who was appearing to him (and not Jibrīl) as the text of the story mentions. For if Muḥammad had thought that Jibrīl was the one that was appearing to him, his wife would probably have said, “You are right! He is Jibrīl.” Instead, she rejected the description of the being as a satan without mentioning Jibrīl, which means the name Jibrīl may have been inserted later into the original story.
2. Even though Khadīja was not able to see this being, she still decided its nature—despite the fact that Muḥammad, who could see the being, was not able to identify it. (Muḥammad only identified this being as Jibrīl in later revelations.)
3. This story presents another perplexing question: Why would the angel overlook the fact that Muḥammad was sitting on the thigh of Khadīja (a suggestive, provocative position) yet leave later when she unveiled her face (a less erotic action)?
4. Khadīja conducted her experiment to an explicit extreme. She made Muḥammad sit one time on her left thigh, then again on her right thigh, and then in her lap. Finally, according to the second story, she tucked Muḥammad under her undergarments, “tucked the messenger of Allah...between her and her garments [dir‘ihā],” to judge if the being would remain to watch these explicit scenes. If this being continued to watch, then this being would be a satan.
What is clear is that Khadīja was lavishing compassion and kindness on Muḥammad to calm his fears, so she would find it easy to convince him that what he saw was an angel and not a satan.
Conclusion
For many long years Muḥammad suffered different trancelike symptoms. On occasion he suspected that he had become mad, as he said to Khadīja, “I hear a voice and see a light. I fear that I have madness in me.”
At other times, Muḥammad believed that he had become a diviner like those soothsayers who “see their companion, who could appear to them in a human form.”
But Khadīja delivered him from this condition because she had a sharp insight into Muḥammad’s psyche. Then she experimented to find out the identity of what appeared to her husband and to testify afterwards that it was an angel and not a satan. Her pronouncement means Muḥammad discovered the nature of what he saw through a woman, “who lacks in reason and religion,” according to the view of women in Islām.
Based on her witness, Muḥammad established his evidence that what came to him was an angel. Muslims, then, rely in turn on the single testimony of a woman.
The testimony of Khadīja did not cure Muḥammad of this phenomenon, which plagued him throughout his adult life. He continued hearing the voices and seeing the shadows.
These symptoms resemble those of a condition known as auditory aura. They are auditory hallucinations that may be accompanied with other sensory hallucinations, and they can take place during an epileptic seizure.
If Muḥammad did not suffer from auditory aura, it seems certain that he had a lesser problem known as akoasm, which is an auditory hallucination where symptoms include hearing ringing sounds, knocking sounds, shuffling sounds, and the like. Because of these sounds, Muḥammad continued to believe that he had a companion satan, as he told ‘Ā’isha.
After Khadīja convinced Muḥammad that what appears to him is the deliverer of revelation, Muḥammad refers to this being as the “Holy Spirit” (Q 16.102), and calls him “a noble apostle” (Q 81.19).
He did not mention Jibrīl’s name as the one delivering the revelation until he moved to Medina. This eventual declaration concerning Jibrīl must have resulted from Muḥammad’s contact with the Jews.
The name (Jibrīl/Gabriel) is a Hebrew name mentioned in an Old Testament book (Dan. 8.16, 9.21).
Did Muḥammad learn the name Jibrīl from the Jews, or did he learn it just before this contact?
We do not have any available written text that would help specify the time period when Muḥammad directly introduced the name Jibrīl. If Muḥammad acquired that name from the Jews, it explains why the name did not appear except in Medina. However, if we are to accept the probability offered by Arthur Jeffery, noted scholar and historian of Semitic languages, its source originated from the Syriac form of the name √
It is possible that Muḥammad could have heard the name in Mecca, but in Medina he saw the necessity of updating all the Qur’ānic texts to show that Jibrīl delivered all the revelations Muḥammad had received.
Therefore, Jibrīl, in his true nature, was those voices and images that would come to Muḥammad. These manifestations were transformed by the suggestive power of Khadīja into an angel who later could have become Gabriel through the influence of Jewish or Christian acquaintances.
Note:
Because of an apparent misinterpretation of the Annunciation story in the New Testament (Luke 1.19-31), Muḥammad created a mix-up between the spirit and Jibrīl and merged the two into one being. He said about Mary, “...we sent unto her our spirit” (Q 19.17) as well as “a messenger of” the Lord (Q 19.19).
Therefore, Muḥammad made the spirit of Allah and the messenger of Allah one and the same. This issue of Jibrīl as both spirit and messenger appear to run counter to other verses of the Qur’ān that mention “angels and the Spirit” (Q 70.4; Q 97.4), distinguishing between the angels and the spirit without paying attention that Jibrīl is an angel. Who is the spirit in these verses? In response, the exegetes say that Jibrīl is the spirit.[59] But if Jibrīl is one of the angels, then why make this distinction?
(See comment on Q 2.97, Qur’ān Dilemma 1: 195.)
Sources : Quran Dilemma.
Jibrīl in the Islāmic narratives is the angelic messenger who carried (transported) the revelations to Muḥammad. Despite Jibrīl’s vital role in establishing Islām as a religion, Muḥammad was silent about him for years. Jibrīl is not mentioned at all by Muḥammad in the Meccan portion of the Qur’ān.
This spiritual messenger is not identified by Muḥammad until thirteen years later, after about eighty-six sūras of revelation had already been given.
Jibrīl’s name appears for the first time in sūra al-Baqara, where Muḥammad accused the Jews of being enemiesJibrīl (Gabriel) (Q 2.97-98).
Afterwards, Muḥammad mentions Jibrīl’s name only once in Q 66.4 to warn his insubordinate wives that Allah and Jibrīl are on his side against them.
There are, however, verses where hints of Jibrīl possibly appear, including “One mighty in power” (Q 53.5) and “the Faithful Spirit” (Q 26.193).
Muḥammad declared his revelations for many years before explicitly mentioning the name Jibrīl.
The Trance .
The sirat literature (biography books) record that Muḥammad suffered from strange trancelike episodes. These unusual experiences were described by an eyewitness:
“I looked at him, he had a snore...as the snore of a young camel.”[40] These trances actually led Muḥammad to question whether he had a touch of madness.[41] These symptoms stayed with him even after he declared himself a prophet. He continued to suffer from episodes of fainting, profuse sweating, and sounds of voices in his head.
These symptoms then became explained as manifestations connected with the descending of inspiration, instead of possible symptoms of sickness.
Muḥammad described his condition during the process of his receiving a revelation:
[42] Sometimes it comes like the ringing of a bell—which is the hardest on me—then it splits away from me. I then am aware of what he said. Other times the angel appears to me like a man and talks to me. Then I become aware of what he was saying.
‘Ā’isha[N] [Bint Abī Bakr, Muḥammad’s third wife]...said about it,
“I saw him while the revelation was coming upon him on a bitterly cold day, then when it was split away from him, his [Muḥammad’s] head would drip with sweat.”
When we read history, we find that these symptoms are similar to the condition of the Arab diviners before Islām:
The priest during his divination enters a trancelike state, during which he would be in contact with a difficult arduous world no man can withstand. For the spirit to connect to it and be connected with the body of the diviner is a seriously dire matter during which the sweat is profuse, which especially happens when the speaker is the diviner himself. Note that Muḥammad had openly declared that he used to hear a sound like the ringing of a bell. He also claimed,
“The bell is the pipes of Satan.”
Nonetheless, the question that seemingly has not been asked is if “the bell is the pipes of Satan,” why does Muḥammad hear its ringing? No matter the answer, Muḥammad treated these symptoms with al-ruqya (“spell-removing prayers or chants”) and he would further advise Muslims to use al-ruqya for spells and chants.
Muḥammad and the Pre-Islāmic (Jāhilīya) Divination:
When the above-mentioned symptoms started to appear in Muḥammad, a great anxiety overtook and controlled him. When he compared what he was going through with the condition of the Arab diviners, he thought he too had become a diviner. He said to his first wife, Khadīja[N],
“I am worried that I might be a diviner.”
In the Arabian Peninsula, divination was a common religious practice as well as a variety of other magical practices in use at the time, such as al-ruqya and astrology. The religious men would often belong to the priestly group, known as the ruqya performer (al-rāqi) or the astrologer.
Such a diviner could make contact with hidden, spiritual forces. People with spiritually related questions would bring them to him at his home:
[Those] who sought him [the diviner] saw in him a super power and an ability to receive the revelation from that power which was seen in the form of an invisible person that would give the revelation to the diviner. Then the diviner would speak accordingly with what was appropriate to the situation and would answer their questions addressed to him. Muḥammad admitted that he too experienced this process of divination:
“Other times the angel appears to me like a man and talks to me. Then I become aware of what he is saying.
” Acts of similar divination by Muḥammad are presented in the Qur’ān, where he responds to questions with the expression, “They ask thee,”
as in these verses:
“They will ask thee of the spirit…” (Q 17.85); “They will ask thee about the mountains…” (Q 20.105);
and
“They shall ask thee about the Hour…” (Q 79.42).
Furthermore, the “priests had a particular style in their talk while prophesying and divining known as al-saj‘ [rhymed prose]; that is why it was known as al-saj‘ of the diviners. Their saj‘ was characterized by the use of ambiguous words and general expressions that could be interpreted in a variety of opposing ways.”
The saj‘ and short expressions are characteristic of the Qur’ānic verses that belong to the first call (to Islām) period.
An example of this can be seen in the Arabic rhymed prose of Q 102.1-8:
The contention about numbers deludes you till ye visit the tombs!
Not so!
In the end ye shall know!
And again not so!
In the end ye shall know! Not so!
Did ye but know with certain knowledge!
Ye shall surely see hell!
And again ye shall surely see it with an eye of certainty. Then ye shall surely be asked about pleasure!
For this reason,
Muḥammad’s contemporaries described him as one who had joined the diviners, an accusation that he vehemently denied. He announced to the Quraysh, that he was
“neither a soothsayer nor mad!” (Q 52.29).
This reaction is significant, as the diviner was seen as one who would be inspired with the revelation by the “satan of the diviner.”
The Arabs believed that this satan would eavesdrop “on heaven and bring what he heard and recite it. Then the diviner would recite to the people what his satan had recited to him.”
Based on this imagery, Muḥammad believed that every man had his companion satan. He declared,
“‘Each one of you, without exception, has been assigned a companion of the jinn.’
The Muslims asked him, ‘Even you?’
He said, ‘Even I, except that Allah aided me against him. So, he became a Muslim and would command me with nothing but good.’”
He also said to ‘Ā’isha,
“‘Yes! But my Lord aided me against him until he became a Muslim.’”
Khadīja’s Verdict:
In the midst of these hallucinations and voices, when some suspected that madness could have befallen Muḥammad or that he might have become a diviner, Khadīja stepped forward to deliver Muḥammad out of his condition and suffering:
Khadīja...said to the messenger of Allah...“Cousin[husband], can you tell me about your companion that appears to you when he comes?”
He said, “Yes!”
She said, “Then when he comes to you, tell me about it.” Jibrīl...came to him as he used to do.
The messenger of Allah...said to Khadīja, “Khadīja! Jibrīl has come to me.”
She said, “Get up, cousin [husband], and sit on my left thigh….”
The messenger of Allah...got up and sat on her.
She said, “Do you see him?”
He said, “Yes!” She said, “Move and sit on my right thigh.”
She reported that the messenger of Allah...moved and sat on her right thigh.
She asked, “Do you see him?”
He said, “Yes!”
She said, “Move and sit in my lap.”
She reported that the messenger of Allah...moved and sat in her lap.
She said, “Do you see him?”
He said, “Yes!”
She reported that she felt distressed and cast her veil while the messenger of Allah...was in her lap.
Then she said to him, “Do you see him?”
he said, “No!”
She said, “O cousin [husband], be steadfast and of good cheer, for by Allah he is indeed an angel and not a satan.” [Another slightly different story adds that Khadīja] tucked the messenger of Allah...between her and her undergarment [dir‘ihā]. At that point Jibrīl left.
She then said to the messenger of Allah...“This is an angel, not a satan.”
We notice the following troubling issues in this story:
1. Khadīja said to Muḥammad, “This is an angel, not a satan,” which indicates that Muḥammad believed that a satan was the one who was appearing to him (and not Jibrīl) as the text of the story mentions. For if Muḥammad had thought that Jibrīl was the one that was appearing to him, his wife would probably have said, “You are right! He is Jibrīl.” Instead, she rejected the description of the being as a satan without mentioning Jibrīl, which means the name Jibrīl may have been inserted later into the original story.
2. Even though Khadīja was not able to see this being, she still decided its nature—despite the fact that Muḥammad, who could see the being, was not able to identify it. (Muḥammad only identified this being as Jibrīl in later revelations.)
3. This story presents another perplexing question: Why would the angel overlook the fact that Muḥammad was sitting on the thigh of Khadīja (a suggestive, provocative position) yet leave later when she unveiled her face (a less erotic action)?
4. Khadīja conducted her experiment to an explicit extreme. She made Muḥammad sit one time on her left thigh, then again on her right thigh, and then in her lap. Finally, according to the second story, she tucked Muḥammad under her undergarments, “tucked the messenger of Allah...between her and her garments [dir‘ihā],” to judge if the being would remain to watch these explicit scenes. If this being continued to watch, then this being would be a satan.
What is clear is that Khadīja was lavishing compassion and kindness on Muḥammad to calm his fears, so she would find it easy to convince him that what he saw was an angel and not a satan.
Conclusion
For many long years Muḥammad suffered different trancelike symptoms. On occasion he suspected that he had become mad, as he said to Khadīja, “I hear a voice and see a light. I fear that I have madness in me.”
At other times, Muḥammad believed that he had become a diviner like those soothsayers who “see their companion, who could appear to them in a human form.”
But Khadīja delivered him from this condition because she had a sharp insight into Muḥammad’s psyche. Then she experimented to find out the identity of what appeared to her husband and to testify afterwards that it was an angel and not a satan. Her pronouncement means Muḥammad discovered the nature of what he saw through a woman, “who lacks in reason and religion,” according to the view of women in Islām.
Based on her witness, Muḥammad established his evidence that what came to him was an angel. Muslims, then, rely in turn on the single testimony of a woman.
The testimony of Khadīja did not cure Muḥammad of this phenomenon, which plagued him throughout his adult life. He continued hearing the voices and seeing the shadows.
These symptoms resemble those of a condition known as auditory aura. They are auditory hallucinations that may be accompanied with other sensory hallucinations, and they can take place during an epileptic seizure.
If Muḥammad did not suffer from auditory aura, it seems certain that he had a lesser problem known as akoasm, which is an auditory hallucination where symptoms include hearing ringing sounds, knocking sounds, shuffling sounds, and the like. Because of these sounds, Muḥammad continued to believe that he had a companion satan, as he told ‘Ā’isha.
After Khadīja convinced Muḥammad that what appears to him is the deliverer of revelation, Muḥammad refers to this being as the “Holy Spirit” (Q 16.102), and calls him “a noble apostle” (Q 81.19).
He did not mention Jibrīl’s name as the one delivering the revelation until he moved to Medina. This eventual declaration concerning Jibrīl must have resulted from Muḥammad’s contact with the Jews.
The name (Jibrīl/Gabriel) is a Hebrew name mentioned in an Old Testament book (Dan. 8.16, 9.21).
Did Muḥammad learn the name Jibrīl from the Jews, or did he learn it just before this contact?
We do not have any available written text that would help specify the time period when Muḥammad directly introduced the name Jibrīl. If Muḥammad acquired that name from the Jews, it explains why the name did not appear except in Medina. However, if we are to accept the probability offered by Arthur Jeffery, noted scholar and historian of Semitic languages, its source originated from the Syriac form of the name √
It is possible that Muḥammad could have heard the name in Mecca, but in Medina he saw the necessity of updating all the Qur’ānic texts to show that Jibrīl delivered all the revelations Muḥammad had received.
Therefore, Jibrīl, in his true nature, was those voices and images that would come to Muḥammad. These manifestations were transformed by the suggestive power of Khadīja into an angel who later could have become Gabriel through the influence of Jewish or Christian acquaintances.
Note:
Because of an apparent misinterpretation of the Annunciation story in the New Testament (Luke 1.19-31), Muḥammad created a mix-up between the spirit and Jibrīl and merged the two into one being. He said about Mary, “...we sent unto her our spirit” (Q 19.17) as well as “a messenger of” the Lord (Q 19.19).
Therefore, Muḥammad made the spirit of Allah and the messenger of Allah one and the same. This issue of Jibrīl as both spirit and messenger appear to run counter to other verses of the Qur’ān that mention “angels and the Spirit” (Q 70.4; Q 97.4), distinguishing between the angels and the spirit without paying attention that Jibrīl is an angel. Who is the spirit in these verses? In response, the exegetes say that Jibrīl is the spirit.[59] But if Jibrīl is one of the angels, then why make this distinction?
(See comment on Q 2.97, Qur’ān Dilemma 1: 195.)
Sources : Quran Dilemma.
- Status