Introduction
Public discourse on any subject will always be subject to misunderstandings and intentional distortions, but when it comes to religious affairs, this is even more problematic, because religion can be intertwined with identity and culture, thus, sensitivities and emotions become involved, without the benefit of patience and deep thought.
The Qur'an (39:3) teaches that religion is supposed to be specifically for God. It also teaches that faith should be backed by rational arguments and evidence (22:46, 46:26, 12:1, et al).
It is with those teachings in mind that we present A deep dive into false ideas regarding Islam: with a focus on the Abrahamic ties, to function as a clarification and a reference to those in particular that are associated with the Abrahamic faiths, to address wrong and often ignorant assertions made from such quarters about the religion of Islam, some of those notions having existed for centuries, but with the advent of mass communication, made much easier with the internet and social media, have the capacity to spread further and be taken as credible, simply because of marketing.
Below, we take a look at some of the leading false ideas that are to be found in the public discourse:
Islam is for Arabs (only)
This particular assertion is made by those who can concede that Muhammad (peace be upon him) was indeed a Prophet of God yet find his message (risaalah) relevant only to the Arabs. Such an idea comes from the assertion that Muhammad was the "founder" of Islam, and that because the scripture (Qur'an) is in Arabic, it is therefore Arab-centric with no value to the wider world.
Such a view contradicts the religious teachings as well as historical realities regarding the Muslim community globally. (ft.1)
The Qur'an refers to Muhammad as "The seal of the Prophets" (33:40), a "mercy to all nations" (21:107) as well as a Messenger "sufficient for all people" (34:28). These references should suffice in terms of how the Prophet is portrayed insofar as his potential audience.
Moreover, the Islamic scripture speaks very eloquently on humanity's diversity as evidence of Divine power, wisdom, and as a means for mutual growth (Q 30:22, 49:13), and the Prophet to whom it was given has himself shown clearly that racism and "chosen people" concept have no place in faith. Although there are many statements made by him recorded, his words in his famous final speech (khutbat al widaa') provide a powerful message. He has stated " An Arab carries no virtue over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab over an Arab, nor a white over a black, (the only criterion being) piety."
What about Ishmael and Isaac?
Another notion widespread, in particular among Jews and Christians, is that Islam functions as a religious rebellion, generated by the feud between the sons of Abraham, itself being an extension of the feud between their respective mothers (Sarah and Hagar).
This notion is further given fuel by the fact that while Judaism (and by extension Christianity) asserts that the identity of the sacrificed son is Isaac (the progenitor of the Jews) while Islam teaches that the son here would be none other than Ishmael (the progenitor of the Arabs).
While it is true that there is a difference in the identification of the particular son (ft.2), as well as the fact that the Bible (Gen.16:12) uses disrespectful language regarding Ishmael, it should be noted that the Qur'an never does the same thing to Isaac!
Isaac is viewed with reverence by Muslims, he is given in the Qur'an as one of the carriers of the Divine message (37:112 among other places), and the invocation of peace is recited by Muslims when he is referenced.
This is also strong proof that Islam is not a tribalistic faith, nor is it centered in Arab nationalism.
Qur'an vis-a vis Bible
Seven Quranic texts are often cited by missionaries of various denominations as proof that the Qur'an is relatively useless when it comes to matters spoken of in the Judeo-Christian dispensation. Islam does teach that God has sent forth communication and even scriptures before the advent of the Qur'an to Prophet Muhammad (see the Qur'an 2:1-5, 3:1-3, among other places), however it also teaches that the Qur'an itself functions as a clarification of matters that are present in the Judeo-Christian discourse (Q 27:76). It also sees itself as a "guardian" insofar as preserving essential truths as conveyed in the past (Q 5:48). It portrays itself as the "best narration" (Q 39:23) and the ultimate criteria for judgement (Q 25:1).
A summary of the cited texts is given below, along with a thorough yet succinct explanation.
[1] Q 5:43. This verse requires a simple reading of verses 41-42 which precede it. The context shows the insincerity of the party approaching Prophet Muhammad for a legal ruling. It is here a bit of sarcasm when it reads " And how do they come to you (O Muhammad) for judgement, while they possess the law, therein being God's judgement, then, they turn away after a while, and they are not of those who possess faith."
[2] Q 5:44. The "Law" possessed light and guidance. Remember that the particular aspect of "law" (here being "Taurah") that is referred to is the law of retribution, mentioned in Q 5:45 as something which appears not only in the Qur'an, but in the "law" which came before.
[3] Q 5:46-47: "Injeel" means "Good news", being the Arabic rendering of what is called in English "Gospel". It does NOT reference an actual book, let alone the largely anonymous collections of "Gospels" that came into circulation after the time of Jesus. Jesus did not carry a book with him called "The Gospel", on the contrary, he represented and embodied that "good news". Therefore, his "followers" should conduct themselves in that light. In any case, the very next verse (5:48) tells us that now we have a scripture of Divine Origin, given to the global messenger, that safeguards the core truths that were conveyed before. It is worth mentioning here that Islam teaches that God's guidance was conveyed to peoples all over the world, not limited to a semitic context, and that we have limited information currently on the history (and even identities) of them. (Q 13:7, 40:78).
[4] Q 5:66-68. They did not, in fact, stick to Divine guidance, however, with the Qur'anic revelation to Muhammad, the chance for that guidance emerges once again.
Modern scholarship has confirmed what has been hinted at in the Qur'an (2:79) regarding the editing process of the Bible, not only in theological points, but even in texts which seemingly are innocuous. (ft.3)
Some important examples of differences
One must keep in mind that the Qur'an is for the benefit of all God-aware human beings (Q 2:1), and a thorough reading of its contents and language will show that its general message and application can fit in any time, place and cultural context. We have chosen below some examples to illustrate the Quranic logic vis a vis the rituals and laws that are associated with the Bible or with the faiths tied to it.
[1] Sabbath: The Bible gives two different reasons for its observance: that God "rested" after the creation of the universe (Gen.2:2) and as an act of gratitude to God for liberation (of the Jews) from Egypt (Deut.5:15). (ft.4).
In Islam, there is no concept of God having to "rest", even as a metaphorical expression! The Qur'an says directly "God, none deserves worship except him, the self-subsisting, the eternal, slumber does not overtake him, nor does sleep." (Q 2:255).
Thus, the theological assumptions present in the Biblical language have no equivalent in the Qur'an, thus, that assumption is rejected, and no need for Muslims to observe the Sabbath. Moreover, the other reason given, as an act of gratitude, at best, is for that immediate audience, not for all of humanity.
[2] Divorce: Allowed in the Mosaic dispensation (Deut.24:1), it is said to have been forbidden by Jesus, allowed only in cases of adultery (Matthew 19:9). If the Biblical text can be taken as authoritative, it becomes apparent that divorce was too easy and too lax in Jesus' time and insofar as his audience, so he seeks to stop the abuse of the Mosaic allowance.
Islam, as a faith for all mankind, not only allows divorce, but it also gives us regulations on it. There's an entire chapter called "Divorce" (Soorah at Talaq, 65). This is logical, in that the bulk of mankind would not necessarily face the same issues as faced by the audience of Jesus in his time.
[3] Alcoholic Consumption: While the Bible writers have expressed language ranging from praise of it (Psalm 104:15, Ecclesiastes 9:7) to condemnation of drunken behavior (Proverbs 20:1), nonetheless it has been generally allowed in most strands of Judaism and Christianity.
The Qur'an, given to humanity as a guide to safety and maximum benefit, has decreed that it is totally forbidden. The Qur'an simply states that the harms of alcohol outweigh its benefit (2:219. also see 5:90)
Footnotes
(1) The Arab world only constitutes 20 % of Muslims globally. They are a minority in the Muslim world, the largest nation of Muslims being Indonesia, as well as half of the African continent. Moreover, "Islam" is an Arabic word which means "surrender to God", and according to the Qur'an, submission to God has been taught by the authentic prophets and teachers of the past, in both semitic and non-semitic societies. As for faith as presented in the Bible and Qur'an, refer to the paragraph "Islam: The path of Jesus and Muhammad" in the following article. Click here
(2) There are several issues present that need to be looked at. {I} The older son of Abraham, Ishmael-the progenitor of the Arabs- would be the logical son for the sacrifice. {II} While the Bible (Gen.22) certainly names Isaac (the younger son) as to be the sacrifice, it incorrectly calls him "Your only son", which, at no time, was ever the case! The Biblical wording absolutely suggests the motivations of tribal prestige, which is totally absent from the Qur'an. It is also relevant here to mention that the covenant, often spoken of by missionaries with Biblical citations, has a totally different expression than the Quranic language. In Q 2:124, we read that God tells Abraham that he will make him a leader of global impact ("Imaaman"), Abraham asks if this extends to his descendants, to which he is told "My covenant extends not to the oppressive". Thus, Islam teaches that neither tribe or bloodlines (real or imagined) carry any weight insofar as ties with God are concerned.
(3) It has been convincingly argued, for example, that Mark's Gospel was written in Rome (and not Palestine) by citing Mark 10:12, which allows a woman to seek out divorce. Such an allowance occurred under Roman law, but not in Jewish law, which is exclusively with the man! See Barton, John A HISTORY OF THE BIBLE: THE BOOK & ITS FAITHS, Penguin books, 2019, pg.297. Many authorities, similarly, have been able to detect that the famous story of the adulteress spared by Jesus with the words "let he who is sinless cast the first stone" to be a later interpolation. See Bart D.Ehram, MISQUOTING JESUS: THE STORY BEHIND WHO CHANGED THE BIBLE AND WHY, HarperSanFrancisco, New York, 2005, pp.63-66. Even the famous "Lord's prayer", the most recited supplication in Christendom, has been dismissed as wrongly attributed to Jesus later on. See John Shelby Spong BIBLICAL LITERALISM: A GENTILE HERESY. Harper One, New York, 2016, pp.135-137. This is just the tip of the iceberg.
(4) Genesis 2:2 is rendered as "ceased" in the JPS translation ( TANAKH THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, pg.4, New York, 1988) but has a note that allows for "rested". Robert Alter has also used the same word in his translation (THE FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES, New York, W.W.Norton & Company, 2004, pg.20). While this text has different understandings among Jews and Christians respectively, Islam does not allow for even this sort of language to be used. Thus, the theological importance of the Quranic text 2:255. which is famously called the verse of the throne (Ayatul Kursiyy). A brief examination of that text can be found here
192 comments:
Test.
Test
This is very detailed. Maybe you should break up the topics into indivivdual posts.
Wali,... TESTING
Ok,.. Ive finally had a chance to look through your deep dive article, which hasn't really changed my perspective. Now I can address the matter at hand,..
1: You brought up about a few issues regarding Isaac & Ishmael which I can easily sum up. Yes,.. Isaac IS the progenitor of Israel, as described in the Bible,... & Quran as well. ( which ill address shortly) And as for Gen, 6:12 about God's disrespectful language towards ishmael. ( which isn't the first time He made remarks towards anyone) He made plenty others, (too many to mention thats FAR worse) But who are WE to to criticize what HE says about us? That's Allah/ Ayeheh!! I'm sure he has His good reasons for doing so, so we dont get to tell Him how disrespectful he is,.. as our God is one,.. Q 29:46 - And may i add,... if we share the same "Ilah",.. then all Laws & regulations apply to those of other Abrahamic faiths as well, As far as, i.e.; ( The drinking of wine,. No need for marriage after death, Different levels of salvation after death, etc.) There shouldn't be anything "alternate" or different. for our God is ONE,.. Unless MAN created things to be "alternate"
2: And as for the Quran portraying itself as,. "The best narration & ultimate criteria for judgement",, - Which ill admit is right on point when it spoke about who'll actually be the "Mah-Dee Q 43:61. As well as who the "Advocate / Holy Spirit would be. ( as i've clearly shown before) As for Q 5;44-45, The Torah clearly represents "The Law", ... Not just retribution (w/o cause) - And yes,.. You're right, Jesus DIDNT carry the Gospel scripts around. ( that's something christians believe ) - in fact, Christianity & the Gospels hasn't even been yet established to the public. - Not until shortly after the death of Jesus,( @ around the time of Mark 50AD.)
And one other important thing to note: Jews don't practise or believe as christians do ( which most practice paganism) - also which is why they went astray, ( "having a LAW unto themselves") Romans 2:1-14. - So dont get us twised. Jews always held fast they're covenant Q 2:40,41-63 & Matt 5:17-19 - which christians rebelled, Even till this day. And as for God "resting" on the Sabbath,. The term only meant, "To Cease" from creation, ok? - Not lying down on the couch from exhaustion after He's finished. We've had this very discussion 12yrs ago,. And we're quite aware of Q 2:225, .... But that's how muslims ignorantly see it w/o really studying its reference.
3: But as of my main point about Isaac & ishmael, Issac IS the progenitor of the Jews ( Q 45:16 & 29:47 & Gen, 17: 21 & 21:12) which all scripts clearly excludes Ishmael & his later descendants (including Muhammad) which muslims deny. The Quran even speaks about those whom are in doubt regarding the revelations in the previous books, Q10:94,... which you clearly denied,..- about the Hadith as well. So as we all know, God is not going to choose 2 peoples for His promise & His covenant, He clearly gave his covenant & his promise to ISAAC.,.. Not Ishmael,.. that's why He referred to Isaac as "His only son"because, he's the only son whom he gave his covenant & promise to. ( Not to disown Ishmael ) whom God has given a blessing to as well. The Quran clearly states whom prophethood would go to as well as the Bible, And besides, there's more reference of Muhammad being a MESSANGER of Allah than a prophet, 2:127- 129 - whom the name "Muhammad" itself should be even more disrespectful to God considering it denotes " One To be praised" which should only be Allah himself, (as Muslims already know) This includes having any partnership with Him as well, But muslims always say, La- ilIa-ha -ill- Allah, Muhamadan - rasul -Allah, - which is actually associating him in partnership w Allah, (which he has no partners) But im sure youll see differently anyway with exception & justification
My apologies for the lengthy opening
Anonymous/Wali: I've waded through your remarks and beyond just seeming contentious and wordy, I think there are a few points to address. I don't know you but apparently you are a bible student? well you should realize that the interpretation of Genesis 16:12 reveals bias on the part of the translators against Ishmael, and not any bias from the Most High against him! The word PEREH is derived from PARA: meaning: to be fruitful, so Ishmael is referred to favorably as being fruitful, not "wild" except in the sense of some creations being plenteously abundant in nature rather than in cultivation. The prophecy there concerning Ishmael being fruitful was fulfilled as he gendered 12 sons from whom sprang a great nation.
Your further remarks under point #1 are vague without the context of some apparent prior discussions along these lines: One God means one law on every particular point? no, Allah plainly stated that He gave us differing instructions in order to test us, so no one should expect uniformity in various succeeding scriptures, especially seeing that the prior receivers of Revelation erred against the laws they were given.
Your musings under #2 about the Quran proclaiming Jesus to be Mahdi (!) and the identity of the advocate being (only) the Holy Spirit are presumptuous at best, without due considerations. As for this statement: "Jews always held fast they're covenant" !!! Are you a self-worshipping Jew or a Jew-worshipping Christian? (for only one of the above would make such a claim!) The Bible itself both foretold and recorded the Jews awful history of rebellion against the covenant the Most High made with them! How could you overlook THAT?!!
Brother Waheed mentioned that even a metaphorical interpretation of God "resting" (ceasing from activity) is not allowed in Islam. Allah is the Cherisher and Sustainer of ALL the Worlds, you think He actually ceased or still ceases from cherishing and sustaining on the sabbath days? I would not call Muslims ignorant if I were you while standing on such shaky ground yourself. What you mean by referring to Quran 2:225, I have no idea.
Finally, your contentions under point #3: "as we all know, God is not going to choose 2 peoples for His promise & His covenant" ! Preposterous! You should know that the earth is the LORD'S and the fullness thereof, including all the peoples of earth and He HAS made covenant with all mankind in times past, beginning with Adam and all his descendants, continued through Noah and doubtless repeated through MANY righteous individuals, some of whom we know from scripture and likely most who we do not know of specifically (Phineas, Naaman, and Jonadab son of Rechab are a few of those who had covenants with the Most High mentioned in the Bible). The Almighty had raised up Prophets among every nation in all the earth at various times, even though we do not know the names and histories of all such.
As for your claims against Muhammad, his name can be interpreted as "the praised one" as well as "the one who GIVES praise" which is mentioned in the Apocalypse of Peter quoted from the mouth of Jesus himself and is likely what the Quran refers to where it quotes Jesus' reference to Ahmad.
To accuse a man whose life bore the fruit that Muhammad's bore is quite an unreasonable affront to civility, as if the shahada gives him any sort of partnership with Allah! The Prophet referred to himself as the SLAVE of Allah, which is nowhere even remotely near to "partnership". You seem to be a very jaded and biased individual, anon/Wali, but for your sake, I hope I'm wrong. Your Bible tells you that contention comes ONLY by pride and the Prophet Muhammad foretold that no one with even an atom's weight of pride would enter paradise!
My comments were originally intended for S. Waheed,.... But quickly, Id just like to make a correction regarding Q2:225,.. The verse is actually Q2:55 regarding God not ever being in slumber, ( which IM very aware of ) - But anyways, in response to your last comment; - All of my comments are based on what I've read & studied, Ok?, I never even gave my own interpretation of the scripts I provided, I simply provided them to make a point (as advised in Quran) as well as the bible (" studying to show yourself approved") --And Yes, Allah /Ayeyah DID in fact choose ONE person for his promise & his covenant, (as well as prophethood) & not for TWO people - which its clearly written & stated in scripture, ( in both bible & Quran) of whose side it be would be, - So I don't understand what so "preposterous",- with all the reluctance to see & accept that.
And as for me "accusing" anyone,... there were accusations made, - I only gave the true meaning of the surname "Muhammad', i.e.; ("Praised", / "One to be praised" / or "praised' one ) whom Muslims also refer to Allah as) which left me abit perplexed, - Especially if Muslims already know that NO ONE is worthy of praise but Allah. - He cant be both a SLAVE of Allah and be called "Praised' too. - ( i haven't seen many references referring to saying, "ONE who praises")
And as for Ishmael being called a "wild-ass of a man?",... In most bibles, ' that's how he's described, unfortunately. - So there no bias from translators, - ( I highly advise studying the Hebrew script before accusing anyone of being biased. - Otherwise, theres not a whole lot anyone can do about that. - If thas what God said, then thats what He said. - I know it sounds offensive, but we cant refute that by blaming translators. And NO,... the scripture absolutely wasn't talking about him being "fruitful",... The fruitful part wasn't referenced till afterwards in gen 17: 20. -- Vs 6:12 spoke specifically about his character & of his seedline - (nothing about being fruitful)
As for Islamic perspectives,... I you cant determine everything from an Islamic point of view, because the last day events have been already pre-ordained since before the beginning of creation in the bible. Its been fixed & sealed since before day one., Just because muslims the feel when the Quran was revealed & sent down that God changed the entire future event of the last days, ... No,,, if he did, why does the Quran speaks about the coming judgment of Jesus? Q43:61 & The promise of return of Israel to their land? Q17:104 - And judgment of the world,. 1Cor 6:2 ( which actually means EVERYONE will be judged by the same standard regardless of faith or nation ) SEE Romans 2 - So don't ever say the bible and its revelations don't apply to you, because it did, it would would have never mentioned anything about Jesus & his judgment -- The entire discourse of this segment is supposed to be of "rational thinking" right? - So don't mistaken mine for pride. Ok?
My apologies for any typos on my comments,. - Including the comment about Muhammads surname, Stating; . ( "There WERENT any accusations made'')
@ Wali Djazzique:
Regarding your May 9th comment, itself a reply to this article, there are a few points that need to be addressed, and shall be done so in the numbering format you used in that post.
(1) Your defense of disrespectful language (which Eldon Orr has so articulately addressed in his post) in the Bible only proves one of the premises of this article, in that Islam, as presented in the Qur'an and lived by Prophet Muhammad- upon whom be peace- is for mankind. Indeed, the Qur'an does not speak in any form that could be interpreted as racist or disrespectful towards a group of people because of ethnicity etc. Thus, even though it was given in Arabic language, and the initial followers being Arabs, it does not speak of Isaac (or Moses or any of those prophets) with any tribal or biased terminology. Thanks for proving that point.
(2) Qur'an 43:61 has much commentary on it, but rather than getting into a lengthy discussion on that, none have asserted it as being a reference to Mahdi! Yes, many assert it as referring to Jesus, as support for the second coming, but that is not what the text actually says. You mention a previous discussion on God "resting", (which I do not recall) but again, my point is presented in the article itself, that even as a metaphorical term, The Qur'an does not speak that way! The reason is that there is no confusion on God-concept. Indeed, the Qur'an comes (see Q 27:76) to clarify these kinds of issues that were present among the "children of Israel" (which I believe here is both Jews and Christians). This is just one example. The Quranic throne verse (Q 2:255) clears up the confusion. Moreover, for those who adhere to Islam, there's no need for a Sabbath anyways, regardless of what theological reasons that had existed to sustain it. We don't believe God rested, nor does it really affect us to commemorate the exodus, just as Americans do not celebrate Nowruz.
(3) I am not exactly sure what you are saying in the third paragraph, are you actually acknowledging Muhammad as "God's messenger" but not "Prophet"? In any case, I certainly believe that God has sent forth communication via Prophets, messengers and even books before the coming of the Qur'an. However, the Qur'an is for all mankind, and is devoid of the confusions and interpolations that happened with the scriptures that preceded it. Indeed, this very article gave some details on that, with examples and academic citations.
Your defense of a factually incorrect statement in Genesis regarding Isaac being "The only son"- again- proves another point of the article. The Qur'an does not exclude people like that. Yes, it is revealed in Arabic, but it doesn't speak of Isaac in some tribal or racist fashion. It does not entertain some family feud with existential implications! Directly on this point, see "Isaac and Ishmael: some thoughts", at http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2021/05/issac-and-ishmael-some-thoughts.html.
Your previous posts seem to indicate you don't have the ability on your phone to copy paste a simple link. If that is the case, and you actually want to give it a read, type in the title above and this blog name on Google or go to the tags on this blog and click on "Isaac", and you should be able to find it.
To avoid a lengthy comment, I will post the remaining shortly.
Wali Djazzique:
You have mentioned being perplexed about the name of Prophet Muhammad. Brother Eldon has already shared some thought on that, but I will add some more.
His name is on the second form pattern in Arabic, passive participle pattern to be precise. "Muhammad" is on the pattern of Mufa'allun. The meaning of his name is-basically- by virtue of his own creation, his own actions, he ends up receiving "Praise". Another translation can be rendered as "high commendations". In Modern English, we can distinguish between the two terms a bit more easily.
It was the Prophet's life that Brother Eldon alluded to in his response. The Prophet was in constant praise and seeking of Allah. Not just five daily prayers, but what we call the "Sunnah" prayers, the actions of dhikr after prayers, the recitation of dhikr, or words of remembrance of God, for every occasion and throughout the day. He saw himself as God's servant. Thus, there is no worship of Muhammad taking place in his teachings.
Allah is known by the name Al-Hameed, the All praiseworthy. It is distinctly different from the Prophet's name.
An appropriate conclusion to this comment is from the Qur'an "Glorified is Your Lord, the Lord of Honor and dignity, free from wrongful attributions to him, peace be upon the messengers, and praise belongs to Allah, the caretaker of the universe" ( 37:180-182)
* It was the Prophet's life, which produced so much positivity for mankind, that makes his name appropriate. It is not an issue of worshiping him. He has said himself, in the hadeeth literature, "do not do to me what Christian did to Jesus, son of Mary. When you reference me, refer to me as "the servant of Allah and his messenger".
to W. Djazzique: briefly: (you said)And Yes, Allah /Ayeyah DID in fact choose ONE person for his promise & his covenant.
the Most High has made MANY covenants in Scripture, not just one, I gave examples from the Bible, but you ignored them, but you expect those who read what you say to that you don't operate from a basis of pride?
He has plenty of blessings available to Him and bestows them freely on whom He wills! for example, while Jacob did "steal" Esau's birthright, Allah still gave some blessings to Esau through Isaac's words -- such are covenants/promises that ought not be ignored, as realizing them removes the offensive "chosen people" status that by nature demeans all other peoples.
(you said) And as for me "accusing" anyone,... I only gave the true meaning of the surname "Muhammad"...
HA! your accusation is here: (your words) muslims always say, La- ilIa-ha -ill- Allah, Muhamadan - rasul -Allah, - which is actually associating him in partnership w Allah
So, you're saying that the shahada associates Muhammad as a partner with Allah, and even though YOU KNOW that the shahada was given to us by the words Muhammad spoke to us, you're not accusing Muhammad of associating himself with Allah??? again, both your accusation and denial are preposterous!
I'll not copy and paste your whole latest paragraph insisting that scripture insults Ishmael by calling him a wild-ass of a man. You gave no consideration to the HEBREW words I responded to your first paragraph insisting that scripture insults Muhammad. Yes the Hebrew word translated as wild originates from a Hebrew root meaning TO BE FRUITFUL!
So the fruitfulness also later foretold of Muhammad is included in the first prophecy regarding him, though he dwelt in the wilderness as an archer, his life was fruitful even as many other "wild things" are fruitful despite their humble beginnings. Compare with "a root out of bare ground" for example. Mainly, Mr. " I highly advise studying the Hebrew script before accusing anyone of being biased" (!!!), the Hebrew you exalt contains the promise of fruitfulness for Ishmael even though translated as "wild", it is from the ROOT word meaning "to be fruitful". That the translators ignored that fact and your subsequent ignoring of that fact reveals YOUR bias, without doubt. Please don't toot your Hebrew horn again while proving yourself ignorant of Hebrew.
Passing over the needless contentions of your last paragraph, I'll respond to this (your words) EVERYONE will be judged by the same standard regardless of faith or nation...
NO! evidently you've forgotten the standard of judgement spoken by Jesus: To whom much is given much shall be required! We, nations and individuals, will be judged according to the revelations from on high that we have received, NOT by the revelations other nations and individuals have received.
Much to your own and other zealots disappointment, Muslims will not be judged by the Bible, but by the revelations they were given through the Quran! Meanwhile, such Christian/Jews such as yourself had best beware and become aware of just exactly what the Quran requires of YOU, for having already seen the historical dissolution of your own religion(s) and humanity's NEED for further revelation, if you refuse to humble yourself and submit your all to our Maker and what He has spoken through the Quran, you will NEVER be led into all Truth by the Spirit of Truth. (pride goeth before a fall)
Here are the quotes from the Apocalypse of Peter, wherein Jesus affirms the coming of Muhammad:
(Peter speaking) And when I looked at him, the one who gives praise was revealed.... (now Jesus speaking) "He whom you saw coming to me is our intellectual Pleroma (completeness), which unites the perfect light with my Holy Spirit."
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/apopet.html
To S. Waheed: - To answer your question about "how positive Muhammad was to mankind" & "How he's not worshiped" -( which I already know its not an issue because I was muslim for 11 yrs,... as you know) - But what Im saying is,.. if most non-muslims knew what the surname "Muhammad" meant,.. that would probably have them really wondering or thinking "is there some sort of idolatry involved?" ( is my point ) - But as i said,. I know better, because I used to be muslim;,.. Although I never knew myself during my 11yrs in Islam,.. So yes, .. people are gonna be a bit perplexed by that,.. although I still know myself there's no worship involved.
Many people are perplexed enough about the "Kaba' & the kissing of the STONE,, which is actually "Taghut" according to Islam ( which muslims are obviously oblivious to,) which also refers to using any objects along with the worship of Allah, ( something I don't think I need to explain to you ) - And besides, there's no mention of the Kaba (or anything as such ) being founded or established by Abraham in the Bible, But ill just leave that part with you because that whole thing will just be moot & counterintuitive.
As for Q43:61 about Jesus returning for judgement, there was no "assertions" made by anyone else but the Quran itself that mentions him by name, regardless of what you think the text is really saying... Im not gonna add a twist or some outside narrative other than what the text is clearly saying... The Islamic definition for Mah-dee or Mah-di means " Soon to Come" Or,... "One who will rule before the end of the world," i.e.: ( which Q 43;61 clearly speaks about a COMING for the hour of judgment ) As i said;.. Adding some other narrative or hypothesis ( that's suitable for you ) other than what the text states is not going to benefit you one bit,. . What it is, is what its going to be, (Judgement on ALL of us) -rather you accept it believe or not.
@ Wali Djazzique:
Your initial post on the name of the Prophet was the following: " whom the name "Muhammad" itself should be even more disrespectful to God considering it denotes " One To be praised" which should only be Allah himself, (as Muslims already know) This includes having any partnership with Him as well, But muslims always say, La- ilIa-ha -ill- Allah, Muhamadan - rasul -Allah, - which is actually associating him in partnership w Allah, (which he has no partners) But im sure youll see differently anyway with exception & justification"
In reply, I shared the meaning of his name, using the grammatical form to explain, but now you are saying you have no problem with his name? Your statements are self-contradictory.
Anyways let's move on...
Regarding the Ka'bah, and the "using any objects along with the worship of Allah", this is a common objection. You have mentioned that it's not in the Bible, nor is showing respect (towards it) Abrahamic. This, admittedly, is a minor issue, not related to the article, however, if you go to this link, you will see a Biblical citation that is right on point regarding this issue.
https://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2011/03/kabah-symbol-of-mans-potential.html
(The Ka'bah: a symbol of man's potential).
I am sharing just in the interest of not recreating the wheel.
As for Q 43:61, I initially avoided discussing this text because (1) I didn't see it as relevant. (2) I didn't think you would understand the reply, as it involves much technical details regarding Arabic language.
I will briefly go into the details shortly, but for now a serious correction. The term "Mahdi" does NOT mean "Soon to come or one who will rule before the end of the world". This term is not even remotely close to your statement. I think you should avoid making judgements on things like this when you don't have access to definitions as they are in those languages.
AS for the technical details of Q 43:61, in short, the meaning of terms such as "HU" and "'ilmun" (or "alamun") that are in the text are not universally agreed upon! Yes, I admit that most assert that the meaning is that Jesus will function as an indicator of the judgement day, but that's not exactly clear in the text. That is why in the translations there are brackets there indicating Jesus. In other words, that's an interpretation, an understanding, not a literal translation!
The view I take on the text, (I'm sharing this way in order to avoid long posts) is that the text is referencing the Qur'an itself, that it conveys or contains knowledge about the hour, so have no doubt and follow the Prophet Muhammad, as this is a straight path.
This view of Q43:61 also has support amongst the early Muslim scholarship.
In any case, you seem to use this text (and other texts of the Bible and to a lesser extent the Qur'an) to propose some "Jewish superiority" of some sort. You have repeatedly spoken of the Jews as being faithful to God's covenant, and having a chosen people position, above others. Brother Eldon has addressed that assertion in great detail, using the Bible as evidence.
As for even that view, the Qur'an ( 62:7 ) says that if you think that way, "seek death". In other words, if that is the case, go to God faster, if you are really with him in that position.
this paragraph from previous post corrected: So the fruitfulness also later foretold of ISHMAEL (not Muhammad!) is included in the first prophecy regarding him, though he dwelt in the wilderness as an archer, his life was fruitful even as many other "wild things" are fruitful despite their humble beginnings. Compare with "a root out of bare ground" for example. Mainly, Mr. " I highly advise studying the Hebrew script before accusing anyone of being biased" (!!!), the Hebrew you exalt contains the promise of fruitfulness for Ishmael even though translated as "wild", it is from the HEBREW ROOT word meaning "to be fruitful". That the translators ignored that fact and your subsequent ignoring of that fact reveals YOUR bias, without doubt. Please don't toot your Hebrew horn again while proving yourself ignorant of Hebrew.
I wont continue any further LENGNTHY remarks after this cont'd post because it'll probably just become futile - Considering my original comment was originally intended S. Waheed anyways.
Although I don't know you as well either, - But to respond to your "contentious "un-asked opinions as well;. I'll give more clarity on my previous comments,. No# 1,. There's no "zealots disappointments" on my part,. because I'm pretty clear of what the text stated in both Bible & Quran Ok? - And yes,. you're correct about God making MANY covenants with ( the peoples of the book) instead of just one.
But the point I was trying to make to you is,.. When it came to His "Covenant & His Promise" (in particular) it was intended only for ISAAC,.. Not Ishmael,. So I'm not really concerned about all the OTHER covenants at this time,.( which I'm very aware of,) I'm trying to focus on ONE example at a time here ok? (which is why I ignored the rest) - So call it "Pride" & "bias" if you will.
But as for MY judgement;. it will be determined by the Law I keep & what I hold fast to according to Romans, 2:12 & Quran, 2:40-41-63- ("As given on MT Sinai")- Not Quranic law itself, (as you believe.) Biblical law is ONLY Law required of me, so I have all the humbleness I need. - And addition to that;.. as I stated before;. If you're having issues with any remarks made by God in the Bible,. its best that you take that up with HIM,. Not ME,. because I'm not the narrator, Ok? - I only presented it,.. Otherwise;. All I can do is wish you the best of luck when you do,..
And besides; -Did you get any whining or complaints from ME when the Quran spoke about turning Jews into pigs & apes? in Surah 7:163-166?/.. NO,.. because I'm not here to play "the blame game".
To be cont'd "with short note"
Remember what Jesus said: The first shall be last and the last shall be first. (Apply that to Christianity vs. Islam and you'll have a LOT to think about and correct!
To Eldon:. Trust me,. when Jesus made that comment about those being the 1st,. he was referring to those whom were exploited & oppressed,.. Not for those who did the exploitation & oppression, (whom be the last,.) This is pretty much evident in the next Kingdom Isaiah 14:2 & Isaiah, 60: 10 -14 & Isaiah 61:4-9. ( Which is the only thing I need to think about now) - And besides;. Why in the world would Jesus ( the one bringing judgement) - allow a different nation of people's, i.e; ( non - believers of his revelations) to be "first" in the next Kingdom of promise? - which the Quran obviously mentiones about as well in Q17:104; .i.e;. (Jannah/Jerusalem) - "His followers shall be first" ( being superior over those who disbelieve in ANY of God's Messengers & ANY of His Holy books, Q3:55 ) - whom BOTH of you admitted to biblical revelations "not applying to you,.... and being "no more than just a dream"
@ Wali:
There's just so many assumptions to unpack in discussions like this. When a person publicly states religious, social or political views, they must be prepared to have those views discussed and even scrutinized. Thus, referencing Br Eldon as being "unsolicited" and the like, is really out of place with reality when it comes to things like this.
* There is a difference between the Quranic assertion about a small group being described and punished and the Biblical assertion calling an individual or an entire ethnic group by disrespectful language.
*Br Eldon has already shared his views on this as it is.
* I don't know Br Eldon's views on the Book of Revelations, which you seemed to refer to above, but my view is based on studying both it and the academic, scholarly discussions around it. My view on it, even if we put aside Islam for a moment, is that the Book of Revelations, while interesting, is not a reliable text, and has always had its importance and even authenticity questioned. Its style is very different, to put it politely, from the other NT writings. Rather than getting stuck on that issue, I had recommended Elaine Pagel's work for you to read.
* Speaking of books, it may be beneficial for you to have a read of Br Eldon's book, called Confirming the Gospel (if memory serves, that's the title). He writes on these very topics. I'm sure purchase can be arranged.
TESTING:
Wali, I will try to make it simple for you: as you look at the nations of the world, which are the first in terms of wealth among the whole populace, military might, world rulership/influence, media monopoly, etc ??? Hint: the Christian nations are FIRST. According to Jesus, they will be last. Nations like individuals are judged in accord with the Revelation they have received and are held accountable for what they SHOULD BE if they had heeded the Revelation they were given. "To whom much is given, much shall be required". I am from the Christian nation of America, all my family is Christian, so it pains me to know that America will be last when it comes to the rewards of Allah's Kingdom. On the other hand, I rejoice to know that downtrodden and persecuted Muslims among the nations will have great rewards, and inshallah I will have a share in their reward. May it prove true for you also.
@ Eldon, Ive been aware of everything you mentioned since for over 20yrs now, youre clearly speaking of Luke 21:24,. And yes,, jews are also being much more credit in the quran than by muslims themselves Q3;113-115 Q2:62 You may want to consider those before generalizing all of us as a whole, which im getting the impression
To be cont'd
@ Eldon:. Sorry for the typos,.. I meant to say;.. "Jews are being GIVEN much more credit in the Quran than muslims give us themselves", - Muslims do pretty much the same thing to Jews as Mainstream Christians does to Muslims, i.e; (Typical religious profiling & stereotyping) -( Another example of what the Bible foretells Revelations,.) "Nation against Nation" & with Wars & too much "intolerance" towards one another.
I'll continue with my initial response,
@ S. Waheed -After reviewing our previous comments, I've noticed there were many things TOTALLY misconstrued of everything stated,. i.e.; ( accusations of Muhammad & his name and how self contradictory I was etc.)- As well as being called a self-worshiping Jew ( which I found tasteless & insulting) - Otherwise, IDK if it was deliberate (just for argument), or.. you just couldn't grasp what I was actually saying / or simply not trying to understand.
But whatever the case,. I deal strictly with only historical definitive FACTS when it comes to both Bible & Quran,..ok? - Not anything based on my own personal opinions,. ("what I feel is right or wrong to me") or through any scholarly influence. However, there's some things Id highly recommend: (As far as getting info about Revelations & the coming of Christ)- You may want read about Juj & Majuj (Gog & Magog) which both the Quran & Hadith speaks of ( based on Revelations 20,)
The Hadith goes into more detailed info of Muhammad speaking about the events regarding the coming of Christ & the Dajjaal ("anti Christ") which Q43;61 clearly confirms about his coming, (which also by the way I've studied that text in Arabic) Although the Arabic text doesn't say "Isa" (Jesus) by name, but it still gave a clear indication of him & his coming, i.e.; ("The hour"& "the coming knowledge" ) which basically shares the same concept with the English,.
So I'm pretty sure the Quran knows what its talking about (regardless of language,).. Right?.. And I don't think translators would put a lie in every Quran, ( in spite of Q15:90-92). - And 2ndly, I don't mean to facetious, but it seems to me there's much reluctance from many Muslims to believe & accept the fact of Jesus being the "Meh-di" in hadith, - Which by the way IS the correct meaning when you made the claim of the term being nowhere near the meaning. That's because you gave an incorrect spelling of "Mahdi" when its actually spelled, "MEH-DI",. which shouldn't really matter anyways, because I'm sure you know generally what my point was, - So why be simple?
IDK what sources you've went to, but I've went to over 10+ Islamic sites where the definition consistently denotes, "The guided one" & A "coming" to rid the world of sin. which I'm pretty sure you ran into at some point yourself as well. - I'm starting to get the impression my intelligence is being insulted.
@ Wali.
Wow...just wow!
(1) I did not call you a self-worshipping Jew, please read above again, but for insults, much of your posts both here and elsewhere has been in bad taste, one glaring example is promoting a video which made the claim (that you yourself acknowledged was false) that the Prophet Muhammad practiced and promoted bestiality (sex with animals). So please, don't kid yourself.
(2) I have actually read the Book of Revelations, as well as the Islamic texts regarding the Dajjal, Gog and Magog etc, and have even made some posts about those issues. I don't know why you seem to assert otherwise.
(3) I made no comment at all about how you spelled Mahdi, I made no issue about it. You sound pretty strange bringing it up as an issue, and as an aside (a) "Mahdi" is the way it is normally transliterated in English and (b) Ultimately, its phonetic rendering of an arabic word, which, since you now claim to "study Arabic" is spelled with a Fat-ha over the meem. Therefore, it makes more sense that it be spelled "Mahdi".
(4) You claimed above " Im not gonna add a twist or some outside narrative other than what the text is clearly saying... The Islamic definition for Mah-dee or Mah-di means " Soon to Come" Or,... "One who will rule before the end of the world," i.e.: ( which Q 43;61 clearly speaks about a COMING for the hour of judgment ".
So, yes, I was 100% correct. "Mahdi" does not mean what you have said above. You have tried to correct that in stating it as one who is guided. That is the correct meaning, not what you stated above.
(5) Traditionally, the Mahdi concept was seen as separate from the issue of Jesus' second coming, meaning, they are seen as two different characters. However, that is a side topic that is largely irrelevant to what has been discussed in this thread, thus, a topic I haven't really been trying to get into in this thread.
(6) Again, you have chosen to post comments on a public blog as replies to the article. Brother Eldon, a reader, posted some replies. It is the nature of things that there will be comments, responses to religious or political assertions. He has not insulted you in any way, neither have I. You, on the other hand, consistently, in particular outside of this platform, have made insults that are rather bizarre. In general, I ignore things like that and engage with everyone, even critics, but it's probably best you take better look at self, at emotions but also a look at what others are saying. A quick read of websites or the Yusuf Ali translation is not going to be all that impressive!
(7) I have summarized how I understand Q 43:61, in as simple a fashion as possible. It requires more time and details, but I don't want to distract the comment section with irrelevant material. In any case, you have referenced that as part of an overall agenda, reflected in your first comment, about Isaac being "chosen", Ishmael being rejected, "therefore Jews- are- better -than- Arabs type of speech". It is that agenda which is mostly being addressed, by both Eldon and myself.
(8) To be honest, your comments throughout the comment section so far shows precisely why rational thinking is needed, because so far you have not displayed that. So far, it's been mostly emotional and defensive. I am hopeful that you can get over that and see that the assumptions you have carried are general misconceptions, and, more importantly, I hope that you can use faith in God as a means for self-rectification and growth.
Wali, you're aware that Christians will be made last when Messiah returns, yet you still identify as a Christian? The critical issue is whether one believes "Jesus" is Messiah come in the flesh. Jews define themselves as those who reject him being Messiah, and Christians claim to believe Jesus is Messiah, yet believe that he is God, meaning he did NOT come in the flesh. Where exactly do you stand in regard to those two erroneous beliefs? I asked whether you were a "self-worshiping Jew, or a Jew-worshiping Christian?" I said that because Jews typically identify themselves as the suffering servant in Isaiah 53, while that is obviously WAY above their means. Christians on the other hand oddly seem to worship Jews in the sense that they hugely support the spurious zionist state of Israel. The question is how do you identify yourself as either Jew or Christian when they are both clearly in error? The scriptures I reference are 1John 4:2 and 1John 5:1 which eliminate both Christians AND Jews from being considered legitimate children (faithful followers) of God! Take a close look at those two verses : one cannot deny Messiah nor hold that he is God according to those verses.
@ Elon,.. first off I never specified identifying as a Christian, I thought I made it clear that I was a Jew, ( non-secular that is) - I'm sure I indicated that through both the Bible & the Quranic texts, (Another example of misconstruing my words & making assumptions) - And as for silly questions of me being a "self worshiping Jew or Christian" (a term I never even heard of) So likely, my answer would be NO!. So I don't exactly stand anywhere in ANYTHING that you find "erroneous"
So I'll ask YOU: Are you a self worshiping Muslim?,.. And Where exactly do YOU stand in YOUR erroneous beliefs?,.( which tries to re-write theology & supersede everything previous,) while inserting an Islamic element in the last day events of Christ's coming that's been already foretold in Revelations over 500yrs earlier. You'll also find this in Hadith & Quran ( which muslims try to downplay & deny ) - And let me remind you: I'm not a secularist Jew or represent any pagan Christianity of any kind,.. ok,..
And I stated before about generalizing every Jew & Christian as a whole;.. don't get all of us twisted. I think you need to go back & read Q3:113-115 - And 2dnly, I'm not going give myself brain damage worrying about the modern-day secular Jews & pagan Christians in Israel,. I'm only focused on what MY denomination should be doing. - We have nothing to do with them.- Surah 17: 104 is clearly referring to MY denomination (not Pagans & disbelievers of Jesus & his coming )
And 3rdly,.. I don't need be to given any history lessons about the Bible ( Especially from YOUR standpoint) - or being advised of what I should study. There's nothing new under the sun you could possibly advise or share with me about the Bible that I haven't studied yet. IDK how old you are, but i've been doing all this since the late 90s (& still learning) so I'm not new to this. Unless you studied the Apocrypha the Pseudepigrapha & the Deuterocanonical texts, plus the other 14 lost books, ( which most Christians never even heard of) then you don't really get to share or advise ANTHING to me,... Ok?
In fact,. I think its best that you leave this discourse with me & S. Waheed,..
as originally intended
Wali, You're so full of pride, man! You remind me of the donkey mentioned in the Quran carrying a load of scriptures on its back but having no idea of what the books mean! (Boasting about what you've read such that you have no need to listen to anyone) I reckon you are a self-worshiping Jew after all! I see exactly what you and "your denomination" are up to: taking AWAY from the name of the Most High by discrediting the Truth. You all can and will go to Hellfire unless you repent. I'll leave you with another scripture and hope it doesn't fall on deaf ears as previous ones apparently have: The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them who make peace.
@ Eldon;... Yep,.. Ok, whatever you say. The Lord won't be judging me based anything YOU say or determine. You may want to read up on what the Quran advised about "fault finding" & self righteousness. But as l leave you;.. Its funny youd mention about a donkey,. (Considering that's what the Lord referred to Ishmael as,. (which is clearly fitting & confirming ) -
based on your simple conduct.
@eldon;, ..lm through co-responding with you at this point.
@ S. Waheed
Continuing back to your original response on THIS thread: ( in spite of last one I left on your FB main page) which I really i didn't want to do. (no messenger available)- I just felt like my intelligence was being insulted because I'm sure you knew well of the points I was trying to make but yet, you made it seem to look as though, "I didn't know what I was talking about anyway" ( which I didn't like)
But moving on from that to my initial response (regarding my previous remarks) - I never accused YOU of saying I was a worshipping Jew,.. Ok?- which I'm sure you that saw on Eldon's section, -I was just speaking in general. - And as for your remarks about video I'm supposed to be promoting,.. The video wasn't just about "Beastiality" but many other more important historical facts as well. However; You've made your point about that numerous times,. so why keep bringing up something again that's irrelevant? - I was just wondering if you were aware of it in hadith long before.- So im sorry you saw it as bad taste,. although I know the truth can sometimes have a bitter taste to it anyway.
As for the case of "Jewish superiority",, I could go on forever exposing Quranic comments about Jews & Christians( & destroying them;)- while describing Muslims as, "The BEST of believers". Q3-110 ...What is that?. -And muslims also believing that THEY will be the rulers of in hereafter ( Although Hadith speaks clearly about Jesus & his followers returning & destroying the Dajjaal. (the anti Christ) - which todays Muslims deny anyway (unlike Muhammad did) -So there wont be TWO Meh-di's either (Superseding & replacing everything about the Jews,) while destroying their entire identity, - Basically for some thing NEWER & better. - SEE Psalms 83,, - which still applies till this day.
In conclusion;- As the for the divisive & defensive conduct I've endured form both you & Eldon during this discussion, -I understand most people wont ever see THEYRE own faults, but everyone elses.- As i I stated before, I'm here to have a "rational" discourse,. Not to play "Blame game" every time I feel offended or don't agree with what God stated in the Bible, - And speaking of which; "about "rational thinking"; (which none of you have displayed as well). 'Based on some of the comments & attitudes displayed on this thread by Eldon & yourself,. You should also be another example of why rational thinking is needed,- (Especially when Allah/Aheyeh name is being judged & criticized, while denying His own words, (which is blasphemous itself)
As for the conduct of the muslim community as a whole as well, -I think there needs to be some serious reform - ( considering all the hating, fighting & bickering & killing one another, ( both in the East & the West,) As well as all the Patriarchy treatment in the East towards women. So you may want to consider those before attempting to determine MY eternal fate.
@ S. Waheed:. I forget to one other important thing,;. Muslims also have a goal of having superiority as well,. i.e; ( superseding everything previous ). Refer to Psalms 83 once again
@Wali Djazzique:
With all do respect, sometimes we can be ignorant of topics. Not every person knows every fact. You were making an argument based on a term that not only was not in the text in question, but does not even exist in the Arabic language. You were a bit stubborn about it, refusing to see your mistake ("Mava" is the word you used), and your attempt to edit the comment to hide the error simply didn't work, the damage (to your argumemt) was already done.
Again, the closest word to what you were saying (Al Ma'waa) was not even there in the text. I showed you this, but your insistence on this is what was problematic.
You deny accusing "Me" of calling you a self-worshipping Jew, but you said it in a statement directed at me. In any case, since you identify as a Jewish person, and much of your discourse over time has been this "Jews are superior" type of racialized rhetoric, Brother Eldon's question actually is a reasonable one.
The reason I keep bringing up the bestiality argument (in the video you shared) is because it's like the flat earth theory, it completely destroys any chance of credibility to the remaining argument. The video was mostly recycled arguments which I have heard many times, and you seemingly here co-sign onto the bestiality assertion (i.e. claiming that the Prophet Muhammad, upon whom be peace, had sex with animals and taught people to do that), although in the past you said you knew that was not true!
There are a couple of other statements you make above which I'm unsure of how or where you got them from, but in any case you should be grateful to Muslims. Muslims have helped you out, and you know it. We are not perfect, but we are not monsters either.
Patriarchy and bickering are a part of every human group, including the one which you identify with, so I don't think you can claim some higher moral authority.
@S. Waheed
I believe I've clearly explained to you in full regarding the of term "Mava/Mawa" ok?,.. (in Q53:14-15 & the Qur'anic index itself )- As well as the term of "Meh-de" ( which you only responded back with only part of the definition & not the following part I specifically referenced about) Obviously, There was a reason why
I directed you to the sources., (which both spellings has the same meaning)
But If you continue to believe the terms don't exist neither in the text or the Arabic language, then perhaps you refused to go to the sources I provided, or you just simply refused to accept that the terms may actually exist; (in attempt just to discredit me)- which hasn't worked yet. And for the record, there was no mistake or anything I needed to edit or correct. It just seems you had trouble comprehending to the abbreviated point I was trying to make at first,. So naturally I had to give you the entire original definition; (being more technical) But you can call it whatever you like.
But if you're still in doubt,.. I can make it simple for you by simply going to my FB page in the ("my story" section & the first 2 posts) and you can see for yourself if it exist or not. But regardless of all of that, I think you're still missing the whole point;.. My main premise is only the MEANING of the those words itself (as I said before,) I'm not going to keep laboring on the same thing rather if a word exists or not,. I don't understand why you continue making a huge issue of it. "IT EXISTS" ok? So lets focus more on its meaning.
If you weren't so quick to block & delete my last comment on your main page, then you would've had a chance to see the next sources I was ready to post,. Unless it was something you wanted to avoid anyway. And as for me accusing you of calling me a self worshipping Jew;.. Perhaps you were reading Eldon's comment section instead of reading your own. You may want to try going back and review the comments before making allegations.
And another thing,.. Enough with the bestiality thing, ok?.. Its starting to get a bit tired & the whole monotony of it. & No#2, you never heard me make any reference of such regarding Muhammad having sex with animals, ok?, so I don't know where you're getting that from. So I how can I seem to co-sign onto something that happening one minute;.. then turn around the next minute and also claim that it never happened, (as you stated) -That doesn't make any sense. I either did one or the other. You may want review our previous comments on messenger as well of any accusations I made about Muhammad.
@ Wali:
(1) Regarding this whole "Mava" business, again, it's not in the Qur'an, nor in Arabic language. There is no "V" in Alphabet. This is something very basic.
(2) Besides this, you are referring to a different word, a word which was NOT in the text being discussed in the Sunday Qur'an study session. We were discussing Soorah 37:40-50. Your reference above to 53:15 is actually not a "key-word" either, but in any case, putting all of that aside, you shared what argument you were making anyway, which was addressed during the class. You raised a point about Israelites being granted something by God. That point was addressed in the session.
(3) Unfortunately, when you refer incorrectly to basic things, you end up discrediting your own argument.
(4) Let's talk about Mahdi again. The meaning is "one who is guided". You had said about this in your post " The Islamic definition for Mah-dee or Mah-di means " Soon to Come" Or,... "One who will rule before the end of the world," " ( May 13th). This definition that you have given is NOT correct. This is what I took exception to, This is a basic Arabic word. Now, it is typically given as a description of a ruler at an age near the end times, but in terms of the word itself being defined as you have written, that is simply not the case. In addition, I made no issue with the spelling you employed before. It's not a big deal!
(5) You sent me a video that sought to discredit the teachings of Islam. It was something YOU shared. It mentioned many things that were laughable, as well as items that are basically misconceptions spread by Christian missionaries. It was in that video that one of the speakers spoke on the Prophet Muhammad, peace be on him, teaching and practicing sex with animals. If you share such material, it stands to reason that you endorse the arguments employed by the speakers. That is why I brought it up, it's a nonsensical assertion, much like the flat earth theory.
(6) I didn't block you from the Masjid page, but our moderator, on his own, deleted most of your posts which were argumentative.
(7) Insofar as you attempting to posit arguments based on Arabic words, it's just not working. Please take time to learn basic things rather than making an entire theological argument based on a misprint, following a mistake because of lack of access to Arabic. Similarly, in Eldon's earlier post, he made reference to a term in Hebrew, present in the O.T. text, which counters the bigoted reading (regarding Ishmael). So, it's a benefit to you, since you want to discuss these matters, to study those languages, atleast basic knowledge, for yourself.
As far as I'm concerned, I'm finished with the whole Mava / Mawa thing, ok? I've already made & proved my point about it being in the Quran and listed in its index,. So If you're still having an issue with that, then it's best you take that up with the printers & publishers of the Quran ( regarding the spellings & the alphabets) and not with ME, ok?,. Or better yet, simply see for yourself ( if you ever bothered to ) instead of constantly denying it. I'm not THAT dumb or blind as to what lve seen & read. And FYI, If l want to learn more to better understand Arabic words & translations, I do have access to it.
And again, As for the definition of "Meh-de" itself, there's various wordings of the definition regardless of whatever one you think it's correct or not,. . Every definition still share the same concept of "someone returning during the last days,.. so I'm not going to be petty & nit-picky of what definition is correct or wrong when all are basically describing the same thing. So I don't need anyone to tell to me which one is correct when lve read many, .( Including the one you mentioned) which was abit subtle and not detailed enough.
So if you're having a problem with that as well, l recommend going to the sites l went to & express your concerns. Ok?
As for your Surah 37 class,.. The only thing l shared was the point the Quran itself made, not anything based on my own personal opinion. If the Quran speaks about a "promise" of the hereafter (obviously "Jannah" in Jerusalem after the coming of Christ, ) then that's what it clearly stated. (All followers of Christ bring brought back & gathered in a mingled crowd) just as stated in the bible. And besides, l never watched the entire video, l only caught the last few minutes.
@ S. Waheed,.
As for me attempting to discredit lslam,. I think it's already done that itself,. considering all the mix ups & errors I pointed out in the past. As well as whats Q15:90-92 stated
@ Wali:
(1) I'm sorry, but insofar as "Mava' and your "point", you have only proven that you have been unable or unwilling to read things carefully. It's ridiculous to posit an argument about a text based on words (and even letters) that don't appear in the text or even the language! Even when given a chance (during the class) to simply go to the point, rather than focusing on this imaginary word, the point you attempted to raise was addressed, even after addressing the non existent word. It maybe prudent to look at the video again.
(2) Your repeated posts regarding the word "Mahdi" and it's "various spellings" (In English) is yet another odd argument, based on something that is not even there nor an issue. You (incorrectly) asserted that "Mahdi" and "Mehdee" (in your may 20th post) have two different meanings because they are two different words! This is simply incorrect. The word is very simply, it means one who has been guided. It comes from the verb "He was guided", and "mahdi" (or Mehdi or Mehdee as you want to spell it) is simply one of many derivatives from that root. When foreign names (or words) are transliterated into English, not all people follow the same spelling conventions. This is why I did not even raise the spelling you shared as an issue, rather, it was YOU who made it an issue, followed by an incredibly incorrect and rather odd argument.
(3) The Quranic verse you cited in the facebook livestream comment has not been cited as some evidence of Jesus' second coming. Unless you are here sharing a different notion, your post seemed more focused on this Jewish supremacy notion. Whatever your actual understanding of it was, it was addressed in the video, how "Wa'dul Akhirah" is viewed and so forth.
(4) The May 29th video Quran study session has at minute 43 a list of books that are useful for Quranic study.
hello again, Wali! whether or not you care to hear from me again, I thought of something that I ought to tell you: Remember what Jesus said about ~whatsoever you do to THE LEAST of my brethren, you do unto me" ???
Well the NT very specifically defines just exactly who your brethren are in 1John 5:1 "Whosoever believes that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah) is born of God!"
I think you claim to believe that Jesus is the Christ, so you are "born of God? Muslims ALSO believe that Jesus is the Christ, so WE are also born of God, according to the New Testament!
As such, we also qualify as members of the body of Christ, i.e. the church, having been "born of God" the same as any Christian may claim.
As Paul noted: "and the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee, nor again, the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary... (1Corinthians 12:21-23)
So, again quoting Paul's warning about not "thinking more highly of ourselves than we ought", I will remind you that you will give an account of every idle word you speak and write, so take some caution and consider that you MAY not know everything!
@ Eldon: >>> SIGHS <<<
First off, No one ever claimed to know everything, Ok?,. ( and neither do you) But that still doesn't give you an invitation to attempt to teach anyone as well. And if you're going to quote Paul, Perhaps you missed the part where he also stated; "Do people treat me as an enemy because I speak the truth? (Gal 4:16) Obviously, the Heathens felt the same way about Paul as Muslims feel about ME.
And May I remind YOU as well; The Most HI wont EVER have me give any account to anything based on any personal opinion YOU have about ME;. Simply because I rejected any of your views or opinions?.. Don't deceive yourself, ok? Especially, while you're doing all of this from a different faith which I find very insulting. Its like I'm being told that, I'm too ignorant to have any idea of what I'm studying in my own faith, (as you disrespectfully expressed in your previous comments) about "the donkey," So therefore, I guess I needed to be taught. Frankly, YOU yourself wouldn't have one clue as to what I know or don't know, OK?
So before attempting to TEACH a fellow "Hebrew",. Make sure you're holding a title as an Elder or a Rabbi, Otherwise you wont have much success reaching anyone,. Especially with all your foolish rhetoric as well if you're expecting to have "rational" discourse. Basically the issue here shouldn't really be about anyone "thinking highly of themselves"
The REAL issue here should actually be, "People believing they're more learned" and feeling a need to TEACH others; Who in otherwise feel as though others "have no idea of what anything means;.. Then try to use 1Cor 12;21-23 to condemn them, all because they reject any points or views you try to use against them, (which I guess in your own mind; "it applies to them") However, I think this is pretty hypocritical on your part; Considering the blasphemous remarks made against the very words of God regarding Ishmael. On that final note: The the bed you make for others may be the very one you make for yourself, Especially when you talk about blaspheming the words of God,. all because you feel "offended". I can only hope that you'll be forgiven
I'll also be further addressing S. Wahid on this matter.
@ Eldon;
In Short, I needed to also mention, We normally address "Jesus" by his real name, "Yeshuah-Mashyach-Yahawashi, i.e.; ("Jesus The Savior") We don't use the term "Jesus the Christ" as Christians do. We only use that term when speaking to non-Jews.
Yes, I'm aware of Messiah's name and I'm not claiming any great spiritual authority, besides "you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free", that's good enough for me, if you can't see any light in the things I've written, that's your portion, for now at least. You might do well to remember Yahshua's words "I thank thee (Allah) that you have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them unto babes!" The understanding that Muslims are among "the least of these my brethren" should warrant greater care in how you treat them, but you can only see and do what you are GIVEN to see and do.
@Eldon,.
Once again,.. you're obviously misconstruing Mat 25: 40.
When the txt stated about "my brethren,"...it was speaking of other fellow lsraelites,. (Not Muslims,). ...ok? Because no Ishmaelites or Muslims were living in that region during that period. And genetically, not our brethren, because Arabs don't share the same seedline with Israelites. That's why it's good to do research before using bible texts to condemn someone,. - Especially to someone who actually studies it.
So If you're attempting to "bring light of anything" to anyone,... It should be the correct light.,... Not a light of misunderstanding. Other that,.. I'm very aware of what the "truth" is,... And its definitely not that what you mentioned
Wali, have you ever been called a racist? If not, consider yourself called so now! Messiah's brethren are ALL those who hear the word of God and obey it (that's what he said, if you can remember). It is NOT a matter of being born an Israelite. As Paul wrote Jews are those who are Jews INWARDLY not necessarily outwardly -- who have the FAITH of Abraham, even if they're not physically descended from Abraham! Did you never encounter these statements in all your "research" and bible studies?? You are of course free to repent of your RACIST beliefs and I hope you will do so, at which point I will no longer consider you a racist.
@ Eldon,
Racism has NOTHING to do with it, OK? However; The question that needs to REALLY be asked here is; "Are Muslims anti Jew?" (which many of them are) - As well others being "worthy of death" whoever leaves & renounces Islam ( being labeled as an "apostate") regardless if its for another Abrahamic faith ) And how about Christians and Jews not being able practice their beliefs in anywhere in a Muslim land (let alone build a temple or church) & and lastly reluctance to invite a non- muslim to iftars (saums)
And to be honest, not only there's HATRED & intolerance against non- Muslims, but hatred amongst Muslims themselves (especially in the black community) as well as racism itself by NON -black Muslims ( something I would know first hand ) being a black Muslim for 11yrs. Racism is also indicated in hadith regarding black slaves ) - But as for today, You cant even walk into a Musallah peacefully without another strange Muslim sitting on the side giving you a look of suspicion (as though you're an enemy) - as well as not giving a proper greeting to one another or even "making eye contact" when they do, just to name a few.
There's a pleathera of unusual moments I've experienced during my 11yrs in Islam. There's even been 2 incidences where I've nearly experienced a physical altercation or either witnessed one during iftar, Or in other cases where some stranger simply doesn't like your face. Its either that, or someone having a suspicion or judgment about you w/o really knowing you at all. Its seems a person cant even rest without them finding something wrong with the next person. And of course you're aware of all the fighting & killing amongst Muslims in the East with weapons & in the west with the tounge.
So before questioning if I'm a racist, be sure that the Muslim community gets its own act together first (with needed reformation) by getting rid of those poisons in Islam. And by way; my reasons for converting in 2011 is solely based on my findings of my Hebrew / Jewish roots in Southern America during the mid 1800s, However, some continue to believe it was out of rebellion, as S. Wahid believes, which is fine, Besides, I don't think it would've benefited me much to stay where I was anyway.
@ Wali:
With great interest, I read your reply to Br.Eldon above, and see that there's a serious need to address some issues you have raised, but before that, it's needed to get into the substance of both his statement and your reply.
(1) Why does he refer to you as a racist? It is because of your statements, posted for all to see, in this discussion.
(2) He had never met you before discussion on this article, but he discerned your worldview. And I must tell you, and I believe I have told you this before, it is an observation that many others have made about your views and attitudes. Now, if everyone is saying or feeling similar observations, it would do some good to look at that rather than engaging in diversionary speech.
now, to your "experiences" within the Muslim community...
I cannot comment on other places in which you lived, but I would dispute your characterization of the Toledo, Ohio community, if that was what you were referencing. We did nothing but try to help you throughout the time you were there, despite your rather objectionable statements. This is something you know very well.
You also stated you converted to the Hebrew Israelite theology in 2011. We knew you and had these discussions prior to that date, so I think the dating is off, but if your date of 2011 is correct, it actually shows a bit of dissonance. During 2010, and for years afterwards, you were praying as Muslims pray in our mosque, you were taking assistance from us, even while arguing with us (almost totally black group) about various religious issues, and was attending even as late as last year. You would send messages critical of Islam and the Prophet (upon whom be peace), and on one occasion when I asked you why continue to worship at the mosque, you replied that you were there to "enlighten" people.
You say it would not have benefitted you to stay (at the mosque and perhaps meaning Islam as a faith) yet you were consistent in going there and worshipping.
This is a serious contradiction from what you have said.
If you were referring to a different Muslim community, I have no information about that, but if you were speaking about Toledo, this is where that sort of misrepresentation cannot go unchallenged.
I should tell you, all the people around us that you would share views with, we all thought you were racist, even racist against blacks. This was particularly based on your statements that black people were cursed by God. If you have changed, evolved your views, that's great, but at the time, 2010-2013 range, we all had that observation.
@ S. Waheed
I'll be doing a follow up on your on your initial comments,. But at the moment,
I just feel the need to address your remarks which seriously needs to be corrected. . No 1:. There was no issues with YOUR masjid,.ok? - which l'm sure you already know anyways,. Perhaps l shouldve still specified. - As well offering My assistance as well,.
( helping to restore the masjid & giving zakat.
But anyways,. .l was speaking in general of my experience in lslam during my 11yrs (even before I moved to Toledo). just to make that clear,... That way, you won't continue having excuses to make bad judgements ( as Muslims typically do)
No 2: And l never told you that l consistently continued going to the masjid for worship or making any prayers after my conversion, (which l'm sure l made abundantly clear before) l only visitied from time to time,. So I have to wonder, where are you getting your information? ( That's the 2nd bad judgement you've made so far)
3;. And NO,. . The the dates were NOT off,.. So there was no chance of any "dissonance or contradictions after my conversion. You just simply made Yet, another poor judgement ( making 1 bad assumption after the next) of what the case really was.
And as for my ( so- called/) "racist remarks". My remarks were based solely on textual references from the bible & the Quran,. ,& not based on my own personal opinions & remarks,. Ok? (Which you have yet to prove) You just seem to have issues of me supporting & agreeing with the whole concept of what was written. So l recommend pondering those
TESTING:
@ S. Waheed
Now, .. Continuing with your original comments (regarding your may 29th comments)
Once again;... to put this whole Mava/Mawa & Meh-de to rest, Ive already explained to you sources to locate the MEANINGS & references of the words, ok? So I wont continue having a meaningless & pointless debate about this issue, Especially when you continue raising irrelevant points about the spellings & alphabets because couldn't care any less about ANY of that frankly. I'm only concerned about the MEANINGS of those words and what they represent, instead of being distracted about spellings alphabets & languages ( which is not the point here ) But you continue to divert attn away from my initial point anyway ( which you were already aware of ) Im not here to play mind games ok?
You did pretty much the same thing during your surah 37 class when I brought up about "The Hereafter & The Coming of Christ" in Q17:104-105 You conveniently left out the word ("paradise") while reading my question,.. As well as mentioning only about the PREVIOUS return to Jerusalem ( during the time of Pharaoh ) but not about the 2nd return AFTERWARDS (During the coming of Christ in the hereafter) were his followers would be brought back in a mingled crowed (dwelling in their land) You conveniently seemed to quickly glaze right past that part to another unrelated point, ( which was very cowardly ) -
Obviously, you weren't ready for the class to know that part. I guess the same thing is being hidden from unknowing Muslims in the Hadith as well, i.e.: ( " About The return of Christ & his followers on The Day of Resurrection ) and their victory over the Dajjaal ( which Mohammad even foretold ) - obviously not mentioning himself being part of the coming. However, it being taught otherwise in the masjid. Another example of deception in all 3 faiths & keeping the masses in the dark.
sorry, Wali, there is no question about you being a racist! it is very entrenched in your psyche that it is of supreme importance to you that you were born into "black Israel" (or whatever you call it. It is pure racism in and of itself.
The words of Jesus, Paul, and Muhammad are all stacked against you: God is able to raise up seed of Abraham even from the stones... it is not of those who are the genetic seed of Abraham, but those who have the faith of Abraham... there is no superiority of white over black, Arab over Jew, black over white, or Jew over Arab EXCEPT if one has greater righteousness, not purity of genetic descent.
As for Muslim racism, Muslims are only people after all and it is likely that there IS some racism amongst us, even beyond the natural sort of "birds of a feather flock together" kind. I have been told that there is even a trend of racism in Saudi Arabia as to the superiority of the Arab Muslims there even over people of other races who are Muslim. The teachings of Islam prove all such racists are wrong and that they need to repent, but we are not talking to them now, we're talking to YOU.
The color of your skin and genetic purity is of no worth to you at all UNLESS you have a righteous life! (Perhaps that is how pride slipped in to dominate your thoughts?) The Almighty can take even the lowliest person who ever lived and make him or her a righteous person -- moreso even than those of us who are striving to be righteous ourselves! We can have NOTHING but what Allah gives us.
As such it is for us to humble ourselves to acknowledge that Allah does not need us at all, but that we all need Him utterly. No offense to you intended brother Wali, that is just the plain truth. May Allah make us pleasing in His sight.
@ Eldon:
And there's no question about you being "anti-Jew" as well! So there,.. And I actually have 4 sufficient reasons to validate & support that w/o question; ( considering its already indicated in Islamic texts anyway ) But shortly, I'll give YOU the opportunity to PROVE I'm exactly what you say I am, OK? And also, I'm not worried about any words of anyone (that you believe) will be "stacked against me" either. You seem to think that you have everything figured out about me when you really don't at all.
And as for me being "entrenched" of being born into "Black Israel", ( or "whatever I wanted to call it" ) - When actually, its NOT whatever I want to call it, "THATS WHAT IT IS". SEE Acts, 13: 1-3 - Job 30:30 - Lamentations, 5:10 & vrs 4:8 - Amos, 3:12 & vrs 9:7 - Songs of Songs 1:6 & Romans 9:3-4 & vrs 11:1 And Be sure its from the KJV or Good news Bible as youre aware its better to have the more "authentic" sources and not the "watered down" copies that suffered doctrinal changes.
And now: for you prove that I'm racist, ( Considering Israel consists of various "ethnic" races ) but before you begin, keep in mind of the blasphemous remarks you made against the Holy Sprit,.(Jn 4:24,), i.e.; ( " GOD-Allah/Aheyeh",) which is an unforgivable sin, Luke, 12:10 - Mark 3:28-30 & Mathew 12:31 The disgruntled remarks made by you & S. Wahid about God being "biggotted (racist) & "making disrespectful remarks against Ishmael" is the biggest level of Haram, ( with NO question ) Just because you feel, "He wouldn't say things like that in the Quran" He still said what HE said rather you like it or not, Unless you're confessing Allah is a different GOD from mine, (in spite of Q29:46) So at this point, I dont think you can really afford to be critical of my character. so on that note;.. You now have the floor to prove of me being racist
here are your words, Wali: "Once again,.. you're obviously misconstruing Mat 25: 40.
When the txt stated about "my brethren,"...it was speaking of other fellow lsraelites,. (Not Muslims,). ...ok? Because no Ishmaelites or Muslims were living in that region during that period. And genetically, not our brethren, because Arabs don't share the same seedline with Israelites"
Your emphasis is on RACE, not grace.
It is only by grace that anyone can be saved from their sins, that fact is well presented in both the NT and Quran and hadith. It's all about fruits, not roots.
Jesus prophesied to the Jews: the Kingdom shall be taken away from you and given to a people that bring forth the FRUITS thereof. Though they had Abraham as their father, he told them that God was able to raise up from the stones seed unto Abraham. Later He did just that, He raised up from blind idolatry the people of the Arabian peninsula and gave them certain FAITH in the Almighty One whom Abraham worshiped! Now that same FAITH is in all the world!
It is all those who believe that Jesus is Messiah that are "born of God" (1John 5:1), NOT those who reckon that their descent from Abraham makes them acceptable to the Most High.
@ Wali:
(1) After 2010, you were consistently coming to the mosque, offering salaat in the fashion Muslims do, for Jumu'ah prayers. Your date above says that was the time you converted to the Hebrew Israelite ideology, and for years, you were coming to jumu'ah. Last year, since leaving Ohio, you have contacted me from time to time, mentioning mosque affairs, and in one of those messages, with your critical remarks about Islam, I asked you why you go to the mosque. You stated you do so in order to "enlighten" the brothers.
You are the source of information about that, and with my own eyes I would see you at the mosque, offering the Jumu'ah prayers in congregation.
(2) In those days, we treated you as a Muslim, albeit seemingly confused on various aspects of Islam, but above you are saying you had already left Islam. Okay, so why come to the mosque? That is my question.
(3) Racial supremacy has been a consistent theme in your discussions, in person as well as online. Everyone (all of whom are black) who you engaged with thought you were a racist, and Brother Eldon has picked up on that. Even if you deny that, it is certainly fair to say that your religious worldview is centered on race. In the video you sent me, in which the Hebrew Israelite speakers were talking about bestiality (among other things), you told me that the video was meant to stop black people from accepting Islam. Why not stop whites? Or others?
(4) You advocate a faith that is saying that blacks are the original Jews, and that (atleast some pockets of it) the second coming of Jesus will bring with it the enslavement of whites.
So yes, racism is a reasonable reading of your posts. Indeed, this article itself shows how Islam is totally against that notion.
Mr Wali, it seems you are not getting the point on the other things that have been discussed, there is a serious stubbornness on your part. If you raise some terms as supporting a particular point, those terms should actually be present somewhere in the texts under discussion. Otherwise, it's just odd. Since I have already addressed the other points, I don't see a need to keep on about it.
@ Wali Djazzique:
You mentioned " The disgruntled remarks made by you & S. Wahid about God being "biggotted (racist) & "making disrespectful remarks against Ishmael" is the biggest level of Haram, ( with NO question ) Just because you feel, "He wouldn't say things like that in the Quran" He still said what HE said rather you like it or not, Unless you're confessing Allah is a different GOD from mine, (in spite of Q29:46"
I must admit, I was taken aback by the above, and your citation of the NT text on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit being unforgivable. I have never seen those two connected.
Your statement actually supplies evidence of what we have been stating, in that rational thinking and discourse is needed, as opposed to blind faith.
You have accused us (but seemingly mainly me) of committing great sins by questioning the Biblical content on Isaac and Ishmael. This is one reason why the Qur'an has come, to encourage rational thinking, and to correct misconceptions that have occurred in the name of the Bible (Q 27:76).
Below is an excerpt from an article I wrote on this very question of Ishmael and Isaac. You will also find the original link, so you can read the article for yourself in full.
Hagar gives birth to Ishmael, who is seen as the progenitor of the Arabs, whereas years later, Sarai gives birth to Isaac, viewed as the progenitor of the Hebrew group.
The problems between their mothers were visited upon the sons, as the story goes. The Bible, while acknowledging that Hagar has not done anything wrong, nonetheless asserts that Hagar was told that her son, who is the progenitor of the Arabs, would be "a wild donkey of a man".(Gen.16:12).
Isaac, although younger, is said to embody the covenant. Ishmael is disinherited from that. It is interesting that throughout the Bible, expressions such as "The Lord God of the house of Israel" and "The Lord God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob" are common.
The Qur'an does not entertain any problems between the two sons. They are both mentioned with respect (Q 6:84, 14:39-41, 2:136 and other places), and it is common practice to say "peace be upon him" when referencing both.
There is never a disrespectful passage in the Qur'an about Issac, even though he is viewed as the progenitor of the Jews. Indeed, Isaac is viewed as a recipient of Divine guidance.
It is important here to note that the Qur'an contrasts from the Biblical style in that it NEVER uses racist or nationalistic language. It refers to God as the "Caretaker of the universe" (Q 1:2), and never as being restricted or exclusively connected to Arabs.
https://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2021/05/issac-and-ishmael-some-thoughts.html
W. Djazzique
@S.Waheed
For the record, ... The comments I citated was NOT just accusations against you,. I was only discribing exactly what you said, Ok? Do l have to re write everything you said about the bible making " biggoted & disrespectful" marks against Ishmael? It's exactly what you said,. so it's not an "accusation"
..You said it!!! which was very blasphemous against the very words of God Himself, which makes me feel really sorry for you.
NONE of us gets to question or critisize ANYTHING Allah says or does., .Period!! So you won't be explaining your way out of this one,. I don't care how more "rational" you believe you are. I stand behind every word the Lord says 💯%.
So you can attempt to make me look as irrational and as foolish as you like., but it won't benefit you one bit. ( I promise you) And lm not concerned about what the Quran DIDN'T say about Ishmael, (which you keep saying.). as though it matters. lm only concerned about what the Bible stated about him. At this point, lm tempted to believe that you still may not see Allah & Aheyeh as the same God, inspite of what's stated in Q29:46.... Seriously!!
And as for Hagar & Sarah, there was indeed an issue with them,. i.e;,. (" Hagar becoming PROUD ) being able to Baer a child for Abraham, as Sarah couldn't,
which was the reason for Sarah having both her and the child dismissed.
You may want to try reading the entire text IN FULL before debating and attempting to discredit
@S, Waheed:.
As said before,. If you're having issues with the bible texts,... That's something you should take up with God himself and not with ME ,,. Ok? I'm just the messanger ( & supporter ) of what He stated.
Stay tuned for a breif conclusion of my comments after my final response to Eldon
@ Eldon,
Now for the point you made about me putting more emphasis on RACE & not GRACE. - If you read Isaiah 14:2 it states:... "The Lord will have compassion on Jacob, and will yet CHOOSE ISRAEL" and set them "apart" IN THEIR OWN LAND,.. And strangers shall be joined with them,.. and cleaving to the House of Jacob,.. - Verse 2 you may find a bit offensive yet again,- ( so take it as you will ) - And besides, it doesn't only speak about RACE, but GRACE as well, because non- Jews will be fortunate to even be included in the House of Jacob in the next kingdom (although as captives, servants & handmaidens) - which is also implicated in Isaiah 60 & 61
The books of Isaiah & Jeremiah basically represent;.. "The Book of Consolation" ( Gods Judgement & The Hereafter ) -However in Revelation 7:9, "NON Jews- ( the rest of the Nations) - still receive their Salvation & GRACE too.( as you stated ) - But it wont be at the same level as Gods first fruits,. Rev 14:1-5,.. i.e.; . (the 144k of Israel)... Not of the 144k of Ishmael,.. OK?
And as I've shown to S. Waheed in the past of the Quran on the video, (regarding Jacob;).. "Whom prophethood would be bestowed upon according to the seed-line of JACOB, Q29:27 ( which obviously speaks about a particular RACE & nation people) excluding Ishmael. - So if God was actually a "BIGGOT" -(as both of you say)- Then Revelations wouldn't be including non-Jews in The New Kingdom as "Saints" ( although not as the first fruits ) which you should still be grateful if even you make it THAT far
On that note: - I'm still waiting for you to give confirmation of me being racist. - I'm waiting once again
there's your proof right there in your own words: " non- Jews will be fortunate to even be included in the House of Jacob in the next kingdom".
how very strange that Jews teach themselves to have such pride in themselves because of their race! Look how the Almighty portrays Israel in Ezekiel 36: 16 Moreover the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
17 Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman.
18 Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it:
19 And I scattered them among the heathen, and they were dispersed through the countries: according to their way and according to their doings I judged them.
20 And when they entered unto the heathen, whither they went, they profaned my holy name, when they said to them, These are the people of the Lord, and are gone forth out of his land.
21 But I had pity for mine holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the heathen, whither they went.
22 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, thus saith the Lord God; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.
23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the Lord, saith the Lord God, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.
24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.
25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all yourfilthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.
28 And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.
29 I will also save you from all your uncleannesses: and I will call for the corn, and will increase it, and lay no famine upon you.
30 And I will multiply the fruit of the tree, and the increase of the field, that ye shall receive no more reproach of famine among the heathen.
31 Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall lothe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations.
32 Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord God, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel...
So, Wali, think about it a little bit: even if you could prove you are a real Jew (which you can't), what do YOU have to be proud of? the Almighty told you that you defiled your land and profaned His Name among the heathen everywhere you went! What you're supposed to do is "remember your evil ways (and those of your ancestors) and loathe yourself for your iniquities and abominations... you're supposed to be ashamed and confounded for your own ways". Instead you're out here bragging about being a Jew, claiming anyone else will be lucky to enter the Kingdom of God!
The RACE you claim gives you nothing but shame, and the Grace you need appears to be beyond your reach!
@ Eldon:
I'm quite aware of the multiple texts you sent,.. ok? - And as for the proof you CLAIM to have of me being racist,... its not a valid one,- because the comment I made was SOLEY based on what the texts stated, - ( right after the blasphemous remarks you made )- of God making biggoted & nationalistic comments against Non-Jews, - That's why I made the personal remark I made about many being fortunate to still be included in the House of Jacob in the next Kingdom, - especially after blaspheming Gods words. - But at this point,.. I'm pretty doubtful of you receiving any entry at all, - let alone GRACE & Salvation, -
Just because you feel the Quran doesn't make any biggoted & nationalist remarks against anyone,.. does that give any of us the right to criticize what He stated in the Bible? - So it really doesn't matter what wasn't said in the Quran.- God said what he said in the Bible!!,. - We'll do FAR less harm to our souls by simply accepting it & staying silent.
And as for me proving to be a A "Real Jew"... its been already proven through DNA evidence ( particularly of those in the S.E. regions of the U.S.,. which i'll send video if you like) - This was already known even during the 1960s. - Do the research. - Most Arabs are secretly aware of our seed line,.. ( which you obviously didn't know ) - I guess your generation was skipped, - That probably explains why you're so reluctant to accept it.
And to add; - You referenced about racist Muslims in Saudi Arabia (the hierarchy) and how they believe they're superior to other Muslims of other races ( as during the battle of Kaybar ) - as well as patriarchal treatment towards women;.. - Although you say its still wrong,. but "they're only human" and just needs to repent,.. but it shouldn't really be about THEM,. but only about ME. (as though Arabs should be absolved,.. like its not that bigga deal) - and focus should only be on ME. - How biased & racist is that? -( which makes no# 5)- I guess that's something to be expected anyway (coming from you) - and likely the majority of other Arabs, which wont surprise me,.. - Mainly because its a "normal" reaction.
The Bible also mentions about,. "Those who curses His people;.. They shall be cursed!" and whoever leadeth in to slavery,. Shall GO into slavery! - (which Isaiah 14:2 likely being the final scenario of that)
You also mentioned about PRIDE,.. We'll consider Isaiah 61:1 thru 11 - After reading, you may question "if our 'ilah's" are the same." - So remember;.. you cant use Bible texts as a base to call me racist,.. I can only "Co-sign & indorse" what it states, (as S. Wahid called it,. LOL ) - So I'll give you another chance to prove I'm racist,.. Otherwise I'll speed up concluding this discourse after making my footnote.
@ Wali:
I am going to try to explain this to you again, in the hopes that it will actually help you.
(1) Your replies to this article have actually reinforced the points of the article, insofar as how (a) Attempts to use the Qur'an to give credibility to claims within the Bible, or (b) That the latter is to have some superior authority in Islam, these are based upon misrepresentations of the Quranic verses that are typically cited. You have shared Q 29:45, which I will address shortly.
(2) It is the Qur'an which advocates rational thinking, reasoned faith, as opposed to blind adherence to a doctrine.
(3) The Qur'an clearly and confidently gives explanations on several topics, among them the topics highlighted within the article, namely God's guidance for all mankind (via Islam) , the sons of Abraham, the Bible itself being championed by advocates of various sects as somehow being upheld by the Qur'an.
(4) Your replies have mostly been emotional, and not actually addressing the article's contents beyond "well, God said it in the Bible, and if you don't like it, tough". To such a sentiment, we simply say read the article again, read the footnotes. Is it more reasonable to believe in God as being the benefactor of all humanity, who sends guidance for all humanity (which is clearly taught by the Qur'an and Sunnah) or is it more reasonable to believe in a presentation of God as being "The Lord God of the House of Israel" which, in your own words, arranges for Non-Jews to function "... as captives, servants & handmaidens" ? to "Jews".?
(5) You have pointed to the Qur'an, 29:46, and implied that we believe in a different deity. Firstly, I don't think that verse works in your favor, after all, you are the one who argues with Muslims, not vice versa! By your own admission, you would go to the mosque for this purpose, which you refer to as giving "enlightenment " to the (black) Muslims there. Plus, you basically argue with us here, and on any available platform. The verse is telling the Muslims to remind the "people of scripture" that we do in fact worship the One and only God, just as claimed by them. I think you already acknowledge that, so that point is moot.
(6) It maybe useful to watch this video, from last sunday's Quran study session. It has much material related to this particular thread of conversation. https://www.facebook.com/TheMasjidIbrahim/videos/soorah-as-saffaat-37110-120-quran-study-session/319362206982833
(7) Brother Eldon's post above is very thought provoking. I hope you will read it thoroughly.
I hate to disappoint you Wali, but the Bible says that the Almighty scattered Israel throughout ALL the nations of the earth (Amox 9:9), not just black nations. Besides, even if you are directly descended from Abraham himself, it still takes a conversion of your heart and mind and GRACE from Allah to make us salvage-able.
Your wording seems to indicate that you believe ONLY the house of Jacob and those grafted into Israel will be saved, but that is not the picture painted by either the OLD or NEW testament at all: ALL flesh will come to worship before the Most High (Isaiah 66:23) and men of ALL nations, kindreds, people, and tongues shall worship before the Throne (Revelation 7:9).
In short, Wali, why don't you seriously consider leaving that racist denomination/demonization you've associated yourself with? You can have a genuine love for humanity and want for all that which you want for yourself, by the Grace of Allah!
as for dealing with Muslim Arabs concerning their racism, I've not even encountered it myself in person. A brother who spent some time working in Saudi Arabia told me about there being some definite prejudice and projected inferiority towards non-Arabs there. So, I'm not addressing their racist mindset, just yours.
Through no plan of my own, I happened to move into a part of this nation where a similar philosophy as yours was prevalent. British Israelism, or as it is more accurately called here, Christian Identity was very popular back in the late 1980's. They believed what you believe except they saw white people as the major remnant of Israel instead of black people.
While it is entertaining speculation to consider your own people as the Chosen, the fact remains that even true Israel has more to be ashamed of than proud of! The Israelites, whoever all they may be, have profaned the name of the Most High throughout the earth by claiming to be His yet committing abominations. That is the bottom line of all these racial considerations as to the identity of Israel today.
We all are indeed "lucky" to have any hope for the Kingdom at all, as the Quran states, If Allah punished the inhabitants of the earth as they deserve, He would leave nothing remaining here at all. So let us by all means take hold of the Mercy of the Most High and pray for our own forgiveness and success in His Will.
@ Waheed ,.
I think you clearly misunderstood my point about surah 29:46 - (believing l gave an implication of Muslims believing in a different deity). -which l gave no such implication at all, -Especially when the whole point of the text is actually supposed to be implicating, (As One God" ) which you obviously didn't pick up on... - This would be another example of the continuous poor judgements you've made thus far thoughout this entire "so called" discourse,. ( which I've lost count,. )
- This is why l feel it's best at this point to just conclude this discourse,. - because its becoming more moot as we go on. --
You cant expect for someone to just see things from YOUR lslamic perspective about the Bible,. Especially when both of you clearly don't follow or believe in it yourselves,.. ( calling it "irroneous" ). - as well as it, "Not applying to you" and "Not being authentic or reliable". -. But yet,.. you're trying to school me of what's in it? - (while blaspheming the Lord words at that) - which is NOT rational thinking at all. - But you claim to be trying to help me? LOL
. I'll return with my final closing comments.
@ Waheed
And one other important thing I needed to correct you on so youll understand more clearly, (regarding your July 12the comments,) - As i mentioned before, - I NEVER continued to practice Islam after 2010? ok? - I officially converted to Judaism on Jan, 1st 2011, - (well after I left Ohio,) - But although I was attending the masjid in 2010,.. I was only becoming more conscious of Judaism during that time (while researching & discovering new info ) - That's when I began bringing to your attn critical views & questions about Islam, although still practicing in it ( but in its more original "Median" form ) -i.e.; ("before turning to Mekkah for prayer but Jerusalem )- which was an earlier practice in Islam of Muhammad. - Yes!!,. Muslims once prayed towards Jerusalem,.. look it up
Anyways,.. as to my next point:- you stated about racial supremacy being a constant theme in my discussions,.. ( although you can call it whatever you like ) - But whenever I discuss the matter, - I do it based solely on the fortellings of Bible, and not by my own personal ideologies. - And to add to that,.. which doesn't only include, "enslaving whites" in particular,- as you put it. - ( which is stretching it a bit far don't you think? ) - That statement right there demonstrates your ignorance once again.
The Bible speaks about "Whoever nations" that engaged in slavery & the exploitation & oppression of Israel - ( which were various nations whom Israelites would be scattered to) would be taken as captives themselves, whos captives they were,.. Isaiah 14:2 - So it never mentioned about only "whites" in particular or any other nation exclusively. - It speaks only in terms of, "Whomever" nation that engaged in it" which it wasn't only whites.
This would also include Hamitic (black) nations of Africa -( including Ancient Black Egyptians )- that engaged in the slave industry as well - So obviously you haven't been studying as much as you should,.. but instead, you find it more convenient to demonize me as being "racist' and continuously making other silly assumptions & poor judgments out of frustration,. - But id often have to wonder; -"how in the world can victims of racism be racist? - But as i said,.. call it what you like,.
And besides;.. you'll find clear evidence of racial superiority in the hadith regarding the battles of Kaybar & Bani Al-Mustaliq ( Which you stubbornly deny & separate your teachings from ) - Another attempt to omit evidence of racism in Islam. - So clearly,. Muslims that claim to represent Islam, didn't always seem to be against that notion,. ( as you stated Islam does.) - So far,.. the only reason of me being called "racist" is because of the "Karmas" I've shared in the Bible and not based on my own personal comments. - However,.. Psalms 28:4 states;.. "Repay them for their deeds and for their evil work;- Repay them for what their hands have done and bring back on them what they deserve."
( Also see Prov 26:27 - Isa 14:2 - psalms 7:16
@S. Waheed
I forget to mention about the Ishmaelites joining into "The crafty Council Plot".- i.e; (oppression & exploitation) - against Gods people as well . . Psalms 83
( As clearly confirmed in Hadith)
@ Eldon:
I think you should be the last person to inform me of ANYTHING of what's written in the Bible, - as though I wouldn't have a clue of what's been written. - ( as you disrespectfully implicated before ) - So NO,.. I'm not disappointed about anything ) - If I happen to share whatever text to you in the Quran,.. it wouldn't be because I think you wouldn't have clue about it,.. Its particularly to make a point about something,.. -not because I think you wouldn't have a clue of what's in it.
And as for you being told about Arab Muslim racism towards non Arab Muslims, ( which you casually said you weren't willing too address their racist mindset,.. but mines only. ) - Which I think it DOES need addressing,.. instead of acting as though 'its no big deal" when its done by them,.. Only when its done by ME. - ALL racism should be addressed.- ( including Arab Muslim racism too ) - not just about ME,.. ( which you technically haven't proved yet thus far ) - All I got was complaints about Bible texts I shared that you didn't agree with.
Sense you weren't able to produce proof about MY racist DEMONS after 4 chances,.. I'll just address YOURS;..- (1st) being biased & casual about the racism of your own people, while demonizing other races about theirs,.. lets start there,. -(2) labeling the faith of others as "erroneous" -(3)- as well as labeling them as "self worshiping" - ( which are all bigotry remarks ) - Along with making comparisons to "donkeys"- ( being ignorant & "Not knowing what anything means") - But im pretty sure that type of mindset comes from whatever upbringing you're accustomed to while growing up,.. So its pretty much "normal" behavior when dealing with other races,.. That explains why its not that bigga deal to you. because its most likely something you were taught.
And as for my RACE brining shame to me - ( which is also a MAJOR racist epithet) - But at least I'm not ashamed to admit that we have our flaws - ( as YOU are about your people) - That's why its stated in Deut 28:28,.. "The LORD would smite my people with madness, blindness & confusion at heart,.. So were WELL aware of our problem too, OK?. - But also know this;... "All the SHAME shall be diminished, and our portion shall be doubled,.. As well as our portion being DOUBLED -(in OUR Land)- with everlasting joy. Isa 61:7 - -
So I'm willing to accept whatever shame comes to us NOW.
@Eldon,.
Correction;... Our SHAME shall not only be diminished,. But Totally NON EXISTANT. Period!!
@ Eldon / S. Waheed
And now to finally conclude with this rather lengthy & tedious topic;..
I came to finally realize - (even more) - that racism exists and is EVER present in ALL races,.. ( although some may try to hide theirs because of the shame ) - But as for the Hebrew race,. I'll ask once again;. How can victims of racism be racist? - And if we are,.. Our reason would probably be more legitimate, due to the long history of exploitation & oppressions of other nations,. as clearly mentioned in Psalms & as well as the battle of Kaybar which supports my point.
And to respond to Eldon's response of,. ("being entertained by speculations of my people claiming to be the chosen") - That right there is the type of silly rhetoric & racist epithet that proves my point,. then you wonder why my attitude is the way it is towards you,. its because of that sort of speech. - When you begin to rudely show true colors,. be prepared for me to bring constructive criticism to its fullest.
However,. if you want talk about "being entertained by speculations of others",.. lets consider the far-fetched notion of Muslims believing that there will now be an "Islamic figure" as the Meh-di to return during the last days;. - regardless of what was already foretold in the Quran, Hadith & the Bible,. "being Jesus himself" - And also emphatically convincing themselves that THEY will be the rulers of the hereafter,. which is a rather wishful & BOLD statement,.. as well as hilarious philosophy.
But as for the (ethnic) Jewish nations,.. When the Bible spoke of their sins & short comings,.. it didn't apply to the entire race,. (as some claim) - Many still followed the right path. - Every race is guilty of sin,. especially in TODAY'S world. - So NO one can point out anyone's else's past or present flaws,. while denying or minimizing their own faults.
@ Eldon:
if I told you,. "You should seriously consider leaving Islam because of its racist & current slavery practices and all the fighting & killings & unequal treatment of women",. (which I seriously doubt that you would,) - So why should I leave mines?,.. Especially if Islam is NOT my original faith. - And as for white European Jews, many of them adopted the faith during the 8th cent BC. just to clarify.
Although im concluding this discourse, still fell free reply,.. but I cant guarantee ill reply,
@ Eldon/Waheed
Sorry for typos again,. - But feel free to Send a reply if you want,. but l can't guarantee youll get one back. - We're at 74 comments now and the thread is starting to become abit cluttered.
yes, Wali, racism is naturally present at all times in all people, we have a built in preference for our own people by familiarity. In True Religion, that is overcome.
I'd be glad to address Arab racism IF there were any Arabs here, otherwise its just gossip and backbiting to talk of others' faults when they are not present.
Surely racism practiced against others leads to racism practiced by those who were discriminated against -- for example, large scale black racism against whites as the backlash from slavery.
If any charge of racism in Islam could be pointed out to me as being endorsed by Quran and/or sunnah, I would surely have cause to seriously consider leaving Islam.
My experience in conversation with you though, indicates that your denomination's actual polices/beliefs are racist. If you're content with that, as far as you can see it exists or not, that is for you to decide.
@ Wali:
(1) I think you have really missed the points in your citation of Q 29:45 that I addressed. Yes, I addressed your assertion about worshipping a different deity (which you now deny was ever a point you were making, even though you implied it wherein you state " At this point, lm tempted to believe that you still may not see Allah & Aheyeh as the same God, inspite of what's stated in Q29:46.... Seriously!!"
(2) In any case, the other point I made, which you didn't reply to, is that it is YOU who argue with us, not vice versa. The Quranic verse says to Muslims to not to argue with the people of scripture, but you are the one who has for years been sending texts, social media messages, coming to the mosque to talk like this, even leaving a note on my car, so my point is that your citation of the Quranic text here is ironic, and really stands against your points.
(3) I have no idea why you mention praying in the direction of Jerusalem. It's not a secret that that was the practice early within the Prophet's time, as that was the Qiblah of the past prophets (this also demonstrates that the Prophet was not some Arab racist, teaching a racist ideology, in that he is praying in the same focal point direction as Jews). It seems you are attempting to justify worshipping (or just pretending to) with Muslims in the mosque?
(4) Racism is indeed a problem (and yes, Blacks can be racist), however the beginning of this article shows that it is not a teaching of the Islamic religion! If Muslims, be they Saudis or anyone else, have racism within them, that is their own fault, and not the fault of Islam. I have been to Saudi Arabia many times and was just there (and in other places in Middle East) five months ago, and while I am tempted to go into detail on it (as I had meetings with many influential figures there), It's important to stick to the issue of racism insofar as religious dogma is concerned.
(5) Br. Eldon picked up on this theme in your posts almost immediately. Moreover, the things you have said to me in person, in other platforms, and what you have said to others (who of course told me), leads everyone to say you have racist tendencies. If that isn't bad enough, one of key factors is that you are expressing here following a denomination (to use Br Eldon's generous language) that has made race hate an aspect of their doctrine. You yourself have told Br Eldon that he would be lucky to make it into God's kingdom, and that Non-Jews would function as slaves to Jews, according to your Biblical citations.
Continued below.
(6) The article itself had, as a main function, to show that there has been incorrect application of Quranic verses, assertions by missionaries of various groups, that the Qur'an takes a back seat insofar as the Bible is concerned. I thank you for sharing Q 29:46, because that is another verse on that list. The article looked at all those verses, in context, and shared why the view of the missionaries/opponents of Islam are incorrect.
(7) You have cited here, and in the past, reports about Khaybar and other cites, wherein Jewish groups had military encounters with the Prophet. I have addressed those in other comments, to summarize, those reports (depending on which ones, as I'm not going into the details again) are either untrue or exaggerations. There is so much evidence from the Qur'an, Sunnah, actions of early Muslim rulers and Muslim history, that shows that the Islamic religion and the Prophet Muhammad himself (peace be upon him) was not engaging in some genocide against Jews. Indeed, you cited a text in Psalms (which I did read since you shared it) to prove some conspiracy theory, to be honest I found it laughable and historically unsound. Your posts suggest that you believe that the Prophet and Islam was trying to wipe out Jews, in order to prevent them from knowing the truth about themselves. The video you shared in the past had a similar conclusion, but it's just ludicrous.
(8) You seem to accuse Br Eldon of racism in his statements. Reading them again, in my opinion, this is simply a distraction, an attempt to side-step his points and comments (which are filled with Biblical references) , as well as projecting. If he points out a wrong conclusion to you based on a translation issue, or if I do the same, how is that racist? It's simply showing a wrong conclusion based on a misreading of texts.
(9) At the end of the day, you can follow whatever faith you want. The Qur'an itself says to say to the rejectors of faith "To you your deen, and to me my deen" (Q 109:6). However, generally your comments, both here and in other places, have been filled with incorrect conclusions, especially as they relate to the Qur'an and hadeeth. This is what we have really wanted to address.
I think I have addressed the points you raised in your various comments, if I missed any, I'm sure it will be mentioned.
@ Eldon
I was curious as to whether you had any dialogue/discussion with those who advocate British Israelism? I have had limited discussion (in person) with a Neo-Nazi, which made me to understand that (in the context of this conversation) that these ideas are all related.
Indeed, if we think about it, almost all of the religious minorities that were forced out of Europe to come to North America had, as part of their theological aspirations, to create a New Israel or a new Jerusalem (it is debatable if it was racially centered), and certainly, later movements had the same thinking, and had some matter of racism to it (Christian identity movements, KKK, Neo-Nazis etc).
Please let me know your thoughts.
To S. Waheed
I just happened to check through my messenger ( on FB) and I noticed a rather lengthy message you left that finally had a chance to read,. It was regarding to your response to the topic of Kaybar,
But not only that, You also made a rather awkward remark of me leaving commentary notes on your car @ 12 (Midnight) which I thought was rather unusual,. Especially being brought back up again after 12yrs, i.e.; (2010) - Are you sure you didn't mean NOON?,, because that's the time of Dhur, - Otherwise, I'd don't engage such acts (during hour you mentioned)
Speaking of which: - The note only contained my response to your rude behavior when I spoke with you over the phone. This was during the time I informed you of the materials I would be bringing to the masjid., because at the time, I was giving my time in helping out to remodel the musallah with you & your friend "Demenya" ( if I'm correct )
Although the initial reason for me contacting you was about me arriving
with the supplies be bringing to the masjid, I just thought id quickly inform you (with an overview) of other critical info I discovered about Islam that Id be discussing later when I saw you. It wasn't to engage in any lengthy theological discussion as you stated.
I guess it was the whole point of me becoming more conscious & critical which obviously caused you to feel more & more dismissive anyways to my discoveries. So I didn't totally buy, "it was because you were busy & working" as you claimed,. - You were just simply reluctant to hear what the topic would be later anyway.
And another point;- You should always keep in mind that we live in different time zones, so I cant always keep up with your time frame whenever your having Djuma service or whatever else you're doing. - And whoever else kept interrupting with you text messages during service and "all other hours" as you stated,. I'm sure it wasn't just ME,.. Ok? (As I'm sure you know anyways) - Whatever message I send to you, its just ONE for that day.
So I just thought id address that.
That ninja is crazy no one should pay him any attention.
Whoever "Ninja" is
from Shamsuddin Waheed @ Eldon
I was curious as to whether you had any dialogue/discussion with those who advocate British Israelism? I have had limited discussion (in person) with a Neo-Nazi, which made me to understand that (in the context of this conversation) that these ideas are all related.
Indeed, if we think about it, almost all of the religious minorities that were forced out of Europe to come to North America had, as part of their theological aspirations, to create a New Israel or a new Jerusalem (it is debatable if it was racially centered), and certainly, later movements had the same thinking, and had some matter of racism to it (Christian identity movements, KKK, Neo-Nazis etc).
Please let me know your thoughts.
Sorry I missed this somehow, brother Waheed, I am supposed to get notifications of new posts here, but only just now noticed this among new emails in a "Social" category that Gmail separates from regular emails.
No, I haven't had any interactions with "British Israel" adherents, per se. I was amongst Christian Identity people, who derived much of their theology from British Israel, but I think Identity people were more radicalized and racially oriented than BI folks were.
I was trying to explain to Wali that a sense of racism comes naturally to all people, as we are born into families of our own race and have almost all of our early childhood interactions with extended family or neighbors who are generally of the same race as we. Thus we develop a preference for our own culture and kin, which can be exploited by propagandists into political fervor as nationalism amongst a majority of a populace.
Religion is folded right into the mix and that sort of racism is made a chief plank of the religion in many cases throughout history. Certainly, more spiritual religious organizations will avoid the racist connotations of it being the FAMILY/race of Abraham that was most favored to receive revelation from the Most High.
Jesus himself pointed out to the Jews of his day that it was often NON-Israelites who received blessings from the Almighty and that His Favor was not just for Jews: they attempted to kill him for the first time right after he told them that! (Luke 4:25-30)
So, yes, racist sentiments are a pretty strong element of religious movements and the coarser elements of society are cajoled into compliance with the religion being preached by appeals to "stand up for YOUR PEOPLE", "WE are the Chosen ones" etc. It may well be that some of those religious minorities in Europe who fled to America had more racist overtones to their preaching than we think. I know that racism was part of the message of the Mormons, for example, though they originated in America.
But True religion overcomes racial prejudice, Islam being foremost in doing so since the Prophet included in the message of his final sermon the fact that no one of any race has superiority over another person, except by reason of piety.
@ Elon & S. Wahid
As for British Imperialism, - I think many of us in the African American community is quite aware of Imperialism/White Supremacy and whole slave trade thing - ( Considering slavery was a major contributing factor anyway) regardless of faith - So there's really no need for any further discussion with them, -As well as with certain Arab groups as well because both groups basically have been sharing the same idealology since day 1, i.e.; ( Racisim, dividing, Conquering, destroying, exploiting, & maintaining power over other nations)
Arabs also introduced the slave industry to Europeans as well,..( as you may or may not know,.) Another example of Psalms 83... - Even Ethiopian Jews arent as accepted in Israel today, and thier forefathers fleed from there in 70AD from the siege of Rome into into Ethiopia till this day., Thats where they got the name "Falashia" Jews,. i.e; ( because they were actually the "migrants, strangers, & immigrants") of Ethiopia,.. Not actual natives. (The 2000+ yr exile in Ethiopia )
As for racisim itself,- As i stated before,.- Blacks have a more legitimate reason to be racist, ( considering the long history of exploitation we've faced) - but I agree that its natural in many races anyway,.. mainly because people often find others outside of thier orgins as "strange & different".
So thats MY take.
@ Wali
* Yes, I am positive as to the time, around midnight time, a note was left on my vehicle outside of my home. The memory is vivid, and confirmed with witnesses present at the time. At that time, I was working a third shift job, and had only drove a couple of hours before leaving for that work. Thus, in that gap, a note was left by you on my vehicle, and retrieved when I left for work.
* You refer to a different discussion in which I discontinued the call. I am a patient listener, even when the other person is obviously discussing something without a deep knowledge of the issue at hand, but I was also working, and frankly didn't have time to listen to a rant.
*Even if you left a note on the car at a different time, why do that in the first place? Why go to the trouble? It seems strange to leave cars with insults and religious debate content.
* My point in bringing this up is simply to remind you - by way of clear example- that it is YOU who consistently pursue arguments on the same basic points, issues which I have already addressed in the past and to a certain extent even within this comment thread. You continue to pursue debate with us. None of us are leaving notes on your car.
* I am unsure of the reason behind the time zone difference reference, it has been a while so perhaps I have forgotten the context, in any case, if referring to the friday prayer or sunday sessions (which are consistently livestreamed), anyone is welcome to view those.
@ Eldon:
Thanks for your reply. Life gets cluttered with so many obligations, so it is certainly understandable that you haven't had the time to pay attention to a discussion in a comment thread on this blog.
I am going to address the broad subject of racism in a separate comment, but in a sense, the racism of "Christian identity" movements, as well as its theological stepchildren (in Hebrew Israelite theology, among others) find their textual support in Biblical language. It makes sense, when groups see themselves as "God's Chosen people". It breeds arrogance and contemptable behavior.
Certainly, Moses didn't teach racism, neither did Jesus nor Muhammad, God's messengers, about whom we ask God to bestow peace and blessings. Racism is a back-projection, perpetuated often in their name.
The Qur'an is so precise in addressing those attitudes when it says "Say: O those who claim to be Jewish, if you assert to be the allies of God, to the exclusion of other people, then seek (your own) death, if you are speaking the truth." (Q 62:6).
God, according to the Qur'an, has created all races and groups, why should He- Subhaanahu wa ta'alaa- have some inherent hatred of one particular group among his creation?
@ Wali:
Regarding one of your posts above, posted as a reply to Brother Eldon, a few points to consider.
* Slavery, as an institution, certainly has existed in almost every society. It doesn't seem prudent to say Arabs "introduced slave industry to Europeans". Certainly, that assertion is made with the view in mind to portray Islam in a negative fashion. There is much scholarship on the issue of slavery in the African context, it occurred in the realm of a variety of factors, including internal conflicts in the Western and central African subcontinent.
*I actually agree with you (believe it or not) to a certain extent, in your latter comment. After all, even if we just refer to slavery alone (and exclude the subsequent events that occurred for hundreds of years in both Africa and the Americas respectively), it makes sense that African Americans would not be warm and fuzzy towards the power structures that benefitted from such oppression.
* However, we have to be careful to be truthful and accurate in both our readings and our emotional responses. In addition, we have to be careful to protect ourselves from internalizing negativity. Thus, the Qur'an says (Q 5:8) not to allow the hatred of a people to influence us to be unjust.
To S. Wahid
like you said, slavery has existed as an institution in many societies,.. However the first known society famous for slavery was the ancient Egyptians, whom were a Hamitic BLACK race of peoples. Although the Arabs weren't the first, they were indeed the first to introduce the slave trade to the Europeans (which they in fact did) according to my 20+ yrs of research from various sources, so there's no assertions or misinformation being made. So until YOU prove otherwise,.. I'll just stick to my 20+yrs of study.
As for Arabs,. You keep making reference of what the Quran stated about hatred, racism, slavery, and,, ( what Muslims shouldn't do ) but it continues to happen till this very day anyway, which you continue to deny and be in denial about ( with justifications & rationalizations ) in spite of my evidence. But it always end up being only assertions, misconceptions, misinformation, and the like. - Consider Q6:65 6:66 as another example of the chaos as well the Muslim world today.
And one other thing you need to to stop doing is,, imposing & expecting for others,, (outside of your cultural background) to share or accept the same personal views you have about history, theology, religious politics, & culture,.. "because were not,.. ok? ( which l'll say emphatically ) - Especially when you don't have any facts to fully support it,. -However, WE already have plenty of facts & evidence to validate our assertions as both "truthful AND accurate" rather you accept it or not. So I don't see any of my responses as a "negative" internalization,.. but a REALISTIC internalization. - So I'm very careful of how I deliver my information.
@ Wali:
There's just so much in your comment above.
* Ancient Egypt was not the "first known society famous for slavery". From a Middle Eastern context, it would have to be Babylon, where slavery was addressed in the famous code of Hammurabi. It has, as previously stated, existed in every society, for a number of reasons, including punishment of crimes, debt, and as what we would call today "prisoners of war".
*You try to impose a reading on it that is simply not the case. Pure and simple.
* We cannot trust your "20 years of research", because you don't want to grasp simple things, such as an insistence on a concept based on a created word you created, incorrectly attributing it to the Qur'an, the laughable assertion about a different definition of "Mahdi" and "Mah-dee", your stubborn replies regarding Hebrew definitions in your discussion with Brother Eldon, and even your insistence on, after all these years, spelling not only his name wrong, but mine as well, despite it being right in front of you.
* People can be racist, be they black, white, Arab or other. That was never denied. It is the assertion that it is somehow allowed by Islamic teachings which is being refuted within the body of the article.
* Who is imposing what? Firstly, you obviously don't know anything about my backround, and secondly, what does that have to do with facts? Do you have only Black doctors? Do you shop only with black grocery stores, and do business with black-only banks? Need I go on?
* In terms of imposing, do we go to your videos, webpage, text and facebook messenger, spamming ? Your assertion here sounds like projection.
* Returning to racism for a moment, Brother Eldon caught on almost right away, without any previous experiences with you, a racist twist from your comments. Most of your theological assumptions are based on what amounts to a racist reading of scripture, doing exactly what the Christian identity movements have done, i.e. using the language and rhetoric of religion to justify an inflated sense of self. This is, in my opinion, a spiritual illness.
* It seems you are of the view that there is no evidence to whatever I share on these platforms. In addition, you seem to blame Islam for every problem you can cite. Here's an interesting quote from the historical work "Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race" by the Christian missionary Edward Blyden. First published in 1888, he was an African American Christian intellectual, who traveled Africa with the view of winning converts to Christianity. He has much to say that is relevant to this discussion, but space limitations prevent much citations. Nonetheless, he says:
" Mohammedanism, in Africa, has left the native master of himself and his home..." (pg.354).
Need I go on?
If slavery is going to be the main subject, it seems prudent to go to the article in which that is addressed, and address slavery in the comment section there.
The link is below.
https://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2018/05/does-islam-sanction-slavery.html
Copy/paste above to a new tab. Otherwise, simply look up the title "Does Islam sanction slavery" in the search engine of this blog, or simply type the above, along with my name, in Google search engine.
Oh Lord ,... Here we go again with all the "Mahde" thing again,.. And all the other repetitive topics l thought we've covered
My previous comment was intended for S.Wahheed
@ S. Wahid
No,.. I don't think you need to go on. - And you don't have to trust my 20yrs of research,... "I trust it" - which doesn't mean I should trust yours,.. Considering how you tend to deliberately OMMIT & be in denial about certain events,. So why I should I trust yours? - If Egypt was one of the first to institute slavery, then they were,. ( regardless of who was first ) - And as for me blaming Islam for everything; the problem is not Islam,.. its the characters who claim to be so pious, (but infallible.)
But continuing with slavery,.. I'm quite aware of Israelites being in slavery during exile in Babylon,.. which is right in the Bible, - Considering Mesopotamia/Persia ( and that region ) was the first civilization of society anyway, - But my point was,. Egypt was most famously known for instituting slavery,.. So I wont allow that to become another senseless argument - (including the petty argument about weather if word exists or not. ) Especially if you already saw it in your own Quranic index.
And as far as all the spamming nonsense; - I don't have a clue what you're talking about,.. as well as all the other nonsense of me putting notes on your car @ midnight (12hrs after I actually left it,) - which was 12 noon just before djuma. - Thats the 2nd time you accused me of doing some weird "BS". - So whoever your so called witness was "who supposedly saw me" (while I was at home sleep)- then perhaps you need to investigate THEM instead.
I have to assume you were living upstairs of the masjid during that time because you stated the incident happened outside of your home as you went to your car @ 12am for work. - I guess thats when you finally noticed the note on your car, ( which is likely what happened ) - Otherwise if you were told anything different (by your so-called "witness") then you just got played like video game bro. - So IDK what kinda "vivid" memory you had,.. but it was obviously an illusion of some sort.
@ S. Wahid,..
One other quick note: Could you please stop repeating my comments back to me? I'm well aware of the comments l made (which I'm sure everyone else is as well.) I don't need to have it constantly relayed back to me. My memory is sharp & well ok? Its starting to become really annoying.
@ Wali:
Let's go through this step by step.
* I did not live upstairs, but in a nearby home, but that is not the point. There was no note until late in the evening, but even if your recollection is correct, putting a note on a vehicle, on a subject that amounts to a religious divergence, is really strange.
* I brought it up, along with other examples, to demonstrate a pattern on your part, which is, for lack of a better word, spamming, ( I'm sure even stronger words could be used). In essence, you send anti-Islamic messages for years, the same basic messages, asking for replies (and rejecting the responses), attending mosque functions with the intention of arguing/attempts to spread anti-Islamic views. In light of all that, including your insults towards my own family (yes, I know about that too!), I have been very patient.
* You are neither obligated to listen nor accept my explanations, yet, you continue to attempt to dispense your views to me. Know that when you do that, it can't be one-sided.
* And as for the word you attempted to cite in the livestream, for the umpteenth time, it has no presence in the Qur'an. It has a letter that doesn't exist in Arabic. If you own a work that has a misprint, we can't be held responsible for that. Besides that, the word you attempted to cite to prove a point was neither in the particular text you shared during the livestream nor in the texts under discussion that day.
Now that that has been addressed, I'll go into some of your assertions in the next comment.
* While I think it's best to discuss slavery in the comment section of the slavery article, I will share a brief comment below.
* You have attempted to create (seemingly in keeping with Hebrew Israelite ideology) a religious interpretation of slavery. While I do understand this, the bigger picture is simply that the institution was not abolished either in the Bible or the Qur'an, it existed globally for a variety of reasons, including as by-products of war, crime, debt and the like. It has been argued that even in an American context it continues via prison (as a result of criminal convictions), debt service, and even the nine-to- five work schedule.
* Therefore, taking whatever Ancient Egypt, Babylon or other societies did in connection to "Jews" as some sort of actions based on jealousy of the Jews' true status (and subsequently you seem to imply the early Muslims did the same with the Jews, and continue to do) is simply ridiculous.
* Racism is a problem, one which you have often brought up. If it exists among Muslims, it is not in keeping with Islamic teachings. It contradicts Islamic values, as shown in the article itself.
*However, racism is a core belief of the Hebrew Israelites (HI), demonstrated by their own videos. The HI movement does not seek to hide their beliefs in these regards. Neither do you. The discussions over time, as well as in this thread, demonstrate this.
*Thus, if racism is an open tenant of the HI, and you decide to embrace that and share those views with us, in your own words, then you should own it, and avoid projecting your beliefs as our beliefs and practices.
@ S. Waheed
The only thing that's rather strange is you bringing up something that took place over a decade ago. - I didn't realize you were that wounded by such a small incident,. (which happens all the time with others in MANY cases) - And besides,. I believe I made it pretty clear why I left the note on your car in the first place,.. it was because of your rude conduct as I said ( at least for the MOST part anyways) - It wasn't so much a subject of any "religious divergence" at all,. "It was your rude conduct,." which was something OTHER that I needed to critically correct & address you on. - Thats about the 4th thing you mis-recolected thus far.
It should be obvious if you haven't been outside to your car 12hrs after djuma service,.. then naturally the note would probably still be stuck on your car when you finally arrive to it,.. I mean you'd think. - Why assume I just decided come back 12hrs later ( @ 12am ) & left it there just before you came? LOL!! - The whole thing just sounds comical & hilarious.
And as for me "sending anti-Islamic messages for years;".. Everything I presented was based on documented evidence from Islamic sources I've read & studied ( which you ignored ) or just simply justified & rationalized or either still denied anyway. - I just simply gave my views & opinions of what I've read & studied,.. Not so much anything "anti -Islamic"- as youre so in a rush to put it.. And besides, if you believe the hadith "is not scripture" and "is not been authenticated" or "a reliable source",. then why teach & make videos of it to your class?.. It doesn't make sense.
And as for the institution of "slavery" itself, Im quite aware of it not being abolished and how long it existed,. That's why the Bible also speaks of the karma of those who practice it- (as I've shown in scripture) - And for the whole 'jealousy" thing about the Jews,. Perhaps many other nations were. ( as implicated in psalms 83) - Just as you read;.. the whole agenda was to destroy the entire Jewish identity & heritage, in attempt to replace them with THIER OWN identity,. And it named EVERY nation with that same agenda.
And yes,... many Muslims are NOT keeping up with Islamic teachings, (till this very dday).. Boka Haram is just a modern continuation of Kaybar... - Another example of Islam being just as obstructed & corrupted as Christianity & Judaism. - The Shaiton has attacked & entered into ALL houses of worship as well, -- as well as its scriptures,... So NO ONES immune,.. And no one should claim to be,.. as we're living in the last days
@ Wali:
* I bring up the note incident as indicative of a strange pattern, a consistent mode of behavior. If you view me as rude and the like, why continue coming to the mosque, sending anti-Islamic articles, videos, and messages, essentially repeating the same rhetoric over and over again? Why not simply go to where you feel more comfortable religiously? Why seek to impose these rather odd assertions on people who already see it differently? With regards to rudeness, it is you who have been extremely rude to us over time, not just to me, and generally I just ignore it but not forgetting it. And since there were witnesses present, there's no need to rely upon singular memory. As an addendum to the note issue, I did in fact use the vehicle before the note was discovered, if memory serves, it was not a Friday, so no note was present. In any case, leaving a note on a religious or personal matter on a car is a bit obsessive.
* You ask about my teaching hadeeth. This is actually a reasonable question. The simple answer is that I am not a hadeeth rejector, hadeeth is a source of information, however, it is not always 100% correct. This is not a new reading; this has been recognized from the beginning of the Islamic intellectual history. This is why there are standards that are used to judge the authenticity of reports. In every field, there are reports or opinions that slip in that are later rejected as false for one reason or another. However, the field itself is not rejected.
* As I have shared with you my understanding of Khaybar and other reports you have cited, I don't think there's any need to recreate the wheel.
* Above, you stated " . That's why the Bible also speaks of the karma of those who practice it- (as I've shown in scripture) - And for the whole 'jealousy" thing about the Jews,. Perhaps many other nations were. ( as implicated in psalms 83) - Just as you read;.. the whole agenda was to destroy the entire Jewish identity & heritage, in attempt to replace them with THIER OWN identity,. And it named EVERY nation with that same agenda." . This articulates very well the difference between Islam and the religious views you are espousing. Islam sees itself as for all humanity, asserting that people are essentially equal. If Muslims are racist, it is not a part of Islamic theology, however, the theological views you are currently advocating is clearly racist, in other words, if HI followers are racist, it is because they are being faithful to the core of their religious teachings. Also of note is that Islam has never advocated people abandon their culture in the name of another culture.
* I have seen HI preachers in New York and the West coast, yelling at Non-Black pedestrians. These folks actually create YouTube videos recording their nonsense. They assert (although I think you have denied this as your own religious view in the past) that Jesus' return will usher in slavery upon nonblacks. They view themselves as God's chosen people and are certainly rude to strangers. They have no problems using shock language and hyperbole in order to convey their beliefs, such as the video you shared asserting that the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah's peace and blessings be on him) practiced bestiality. Even you distanced yourself from that statement, but still shared it.
* I will continue to answer assertions about the Islamic faith and other related issues. That is what I do on this blog, and other platforms. Generally, I don't mind discussion, if it is genuine and polite. As a reader/viewer, you are free to accept or reject what is stated. However, don't expect to somehow win others over to your views on the Islamic religion or the Prophet Muhammad, especially when those views have been researched and addressed time and time again. You are obviously free to worship or not worship as you see fit, as the Qur'an itself says "To you is your deen, to me is my deen." (Q 109:6)
Hello Wali, I have been loosely following this dialogue and thought I should relay a story on to you, whether it has any application to your own life or not.
This happened in a Sunni Islam masjid down in Mobile Alabama, quite awhile ago. A personal friend of mine named Brian who adopted the Islamic name of Omar was drawn into the teachings of a traveling "scholar" who provoked him towards zeal for Islam and jihad. Over the course of a few years time after I last saw him, Omar was eventually persuaded to leave his wife here in America and go to Somalia. Once there he joined forces with an Islamic group of soldiers who were fighting to create an Islamic state there. Though he drew great publicity to the group as an American, his own zeal eventually ostracized him from some of the leadership of that group of soldiers... and they ended up killing him!
He was known as Al-Amriki while he lived and his story remains a sad memory for his own family and friends and for Islam in general: what began as disrespect for his own father led him into desperate action and companionship with a band of murderers! This just goes to show how far someone can drift away from peace and home and cut their own life short.
Look well to your goings Wali, I truly hope the best for you, that your life will be most pleasing to Allah.
@ Eldon.
OK,... Although its unfortunate to hear,.. I don't see how that story applies to ME in any way. _ I'm assuming its supposed to serve as an example or message of some sort for ME ) - which doesn't happen in the Hebrew Israelite community,.. and never did,. - But I'm not surprised your friend would end up being killed by the very ones he was supposed to be supporting,. _ If that was allowed to happen here in the US,.. the same thing probably would've happened to ME too (as a Muslim),,.. Even if I was still loyal to Islam. - Because during my 11yrs of practicing it,. I haven't experienced much love at all anyway from many fellow Muslims,. long before I even became more conscious of the the faith I'm practicing now ( which ill explain later) - So I can see why your friend was killed. - So if he was killed by his very own Muslim brothers,.. what do you think they would've done to ME as I am now? - ( for being a so-called "Apostate")
@ Eldon
As salaamu 'alaikum. The story you shared is sad indeed, for so many reasons. The word "zeal" that you used in your comment can be extended to encompass the term "zealous" or even that the person in question was a "zealot". In Afghanistan during the 1980s, foreign mujahideen would occasionally be killed because the foreigners (all there to fight the Soviet invasion) vocalized-with zeal- their opposition to local practices deemed by the foreigners to be un-Islamic.
For those who accept Islam from a western backround, often they are exposed to only one understanding of the faith, being gleamed from translations (and having no access to primary sources), thus, when finding diversity in practices and understanding that they were unfamiliar with, raise their voices in anger and frustration, leading to alienation which leads to terrible consequences.
With regards to what Mr Wali has mentioned above, it all has a connection, in the sense that emotions cloud judgements, even clouding religious teachings. As humans, we take our emotional baggage, the good and the bad, with us, so it becomes difficult to have clarity and rational thinking in the religious realm, and certainly colors our perceptions of events.
Racism and isolationist tendencies are all emotional tendencies that are largely illogical. Similarly, with Mr Omar, jumping into a situation as complex as Somalia seems to have been done without rational thinking.
Also at Wali, if you are rejecting fundamental Islamic teachings, you would be seen as a non-Muslim, an "apostate". If a person who had been a Christian rejected fundamental doctrines, and began to self-identity as another faith, the Christians would say "apostate" as well. Indeed, they do say that, that word is used within their discourse. Thus, I don't see the problem if someone used that word (although I doubt anyone in our Muslim community circle used that term in connection to you).
When judging doctrines, it is important to distinguish between the doctrine and the people, because the latter can be more problematic.
Thus, if "Muslims" are racist, well, that is against Islam. Clearly. It's something that is not ambiguous.
Yet, if a faith has in its core- teachings that are racist or hateful, and its adherents are actually openly and clearly expressing those teachings, we will have to say that that is the result of the doctrine!
I hope this clarifies the distinction.
@ Wahid
That was my whole point;.. i.e.; - (being referred to as an "apostate")- which I'm sure your masjid wouldn't be the first to or the last to label me as such. - According to the "Muslim" version of Islam;. all apostates are worthy of death.- (Al Bukhari, Book 37, Hadith 96 Vol. 5 & Hadith 4066) -
This also includes not even having any sort of friendship with Jews or Christians,. Q Al-Madiah 5:51.11, which is clearly a promotion of "hate",. Especially considering we worship the same Abrahamic God. ( something I'm sure Allah would NEVER promote.) - So once again,. it all makes you wonder,. "whos actually promoting Islam?" - Especially when you read surah 15: 90: 91-92. - So believe me when I say,. "I can easily distinguish between doctrine & people"
So if it doesn't sound like any thing of GOD,. Thats how we know there's clearly evidence of "tainting" of Islamic scripts as well the Torat & Gospel
@ Wali:
Since I have already mentioned the absence of usage of the term "apostate" from those in our circle, while acknowledging the validity of the term, there is no need to repeat it again.
* In terms of a legal punishment: death as a penalty is understood in context of treason against the state. For more on this, see https://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2010/11/questions-on-islamic-law-apostasy-in.html
* No one claims that Islam forbids friendship with non-Muslims, except Islamophobes, who promote this misrepresentation. The Qur'an allows both marriage and consumption of food from Jews and Christians (Q 5:5) and tells us to keep good relations with Non Muslim family, even though we don't follow them in religious affairs ( Q 31:15-16).
* The Quranic verse you have cited (5:51) does not forbid friendships with Non Muslims. It forbids ties with those who are detrimental, particularly to the state. This issue is dealt with in questions 2-4 in the following article. https://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2013/04/in-belly-of-beast-questions-on-islamic.html
Shamsuddin: "Racism and isolationist tendencies are all emotional tendencies that are largely illogical. Similarly, with Mr Omar, jumping into a situation as complex as Somalia seems to have been done without rational thinking."
YES, SIR!
Those two sentences capture the whole essence of my friend's demise! He felt isolated (by a false zeal) from a simple normal Muslim way of life, helping with ordering his household, taking care of his family, praying as prescribed with other believers, etc.
He HEARD from someone that the situation in Somalia was a perfect opportunity for Jihad: believers striving to establish an Islamic state being opposed by unbelievers. He hastily seized that opportunity, & abandoned his family and community life to join in an awfully conflicted Jihad, which he had esteemed as simple and pure.
I consider him to be a shaheed, of sorts, though not in the way he had hoped for. May Allah reward him for the best of his intentions, and let us learn from his mistakes.
@ Waheed
As for ME rejecting Islamic teachings,. I can legitimately say,.. "it no longer applies to me,. because the Quran already gave clear instructions of what "teachings" WE are to hold fast to as Hebrews. - Considering that's my original faith and all,. So I should be allowed to do so w/o any criticism Muslims. .So its not about being "Islamophobic"- although many would probably say the same thing about Muslims,. considering the Quranic scripts I shared of Q5:51 and too many others to mention.
And besides,. the explanation you gave about that verse doesn't give specific circumstances of why it stated what it did,. - it pretty much spoke in general,. As well as stating; "killing them when & wherever you see them" (Jews & Christians.) which didnt give any specific cause,.. we can only speculate. But as you said,. many Muslims DONT keep good relations the Jews & Christians, - because they simply choose not to - ( for the most part anyways )- And if so,. its conditional
And to respond to your initial remarks regarding my "strange behavioral patterns" ( or whatever) The whole incident was a "one time" thing as far as I can remember. - I don't exactly recall much a "strange & consistent indicative pattern" of anything,.. But if you're actually referring to me simply bringing up and addressing those new facts I've discovered back then,. then I'm sorry you found that whole thing strange ( instead of being curious yourself) - but instead,. being offended & annoyed.
And besides,. I didn't think you were having that much of a hard time with that,. ( I guess after that last phone call with your rude behavior,) - However;. I was only curious of your views opinions of the sources I discovered ( the so-called "anti-Islamic" rhetoric) which you never actually gave a sufficient response to at the time,.. that's why I consistently brought it up,.
So it wasn't intended to be any sort of "imposition" as you put it,.. "just curiosity and to inform you." thats it. And as for me being RUDE (or whatever) I think the real word you're actually looking for is "ANNOYING". But in any case;. after us helping each other out; ( Me helping remolding the masjid & you helping me with moving ) - there wasnt much of a chance for me to continue coming back to the masjid anyway,.. as we were moving back to NY
Stay tuned for my short conclusion
@ S.Waheed
Excuse the typos in some areas,. Too bad you can't edit after posting
@ Wali:
The references you are alluding to are easily addressed (such as 2:191) in a war context, I think you would know this already, it seems that you are at this stage picking up Islamophobe talking points.
As we have gone back and forth on this incident and that incident, I'm not going to return to that, however, on the point you made above (asserting that the Qur'an is instructing to go back to Hebrew faith), this has actually been addressed in the very beginning of the article.
In these regards, what is being forgotten is that faith in God is not supposed to be an ethnic issue. Be a Jew, or a Christian, or a Muslim, etc because it makes sense and you feel like it is the correct expression of Divine truths from God, not because it is some (supposed) ancestral faith.
The Qur'an repeatedly states the folly of adherence to ancestral norms when those norms are devoid of guidance and intelligence.
@ Waheed
Yes,.. You must've read my mind because I would like to conclude this topic as well (as I've stated already)
But just to respond to your question;.. 1:.. No one ever said faith was supposed to be an "ethnic issue"... YOU did,. OK? - & No# 2,.. in case you forgot,.. I gave an example of what it stated in Romans 2:8-11 when it stated "ALL will be judged according to the same standards",. including hypocrite Jews (without any favoritism) -even if OTHERS don't have biblical law (as Christians & Muslims) - They will still be judged by the SAME standard as Jews anyway,. although having a law unto themselves. - So it wont matter if you feel the Bible applies to you or not,.. which would be a major breach against "the 6 articles of faith of Islam" anyway, which you've pretty much "breached" MOST of it according to your recent comments.
I say this because you clearly denied The Revelations of one of its revealed books, i.e.; (Biblical Revelations) - As well as the "divine revelations" of is "Biblical" Prophets and its events as mentioned in hadith & Quran, i.e.; (The Meh-di & the Dajjal ) which will only be ONE according to Hadith. - As I've noted in one of my past videos,.. I always stressed how none of us should boldly leave this world thinking,.. ALL of our current knowledge is sufficient,. because its not. As for yourself;.. You seriously don't want to leave here with the current blasphemous mindset you have about Moses being a "homicidal maniac"(which God instructed him to do against the wicked pagans),.. as well as Sampson with the Philistines.
And not to mention, your disgruntled & blasphemous remarks against Allah about Ishmael. - So you basically referred to Allah as not only a bigamist,. but a "homicidal maniac" as well. - So I guess HE was pretty much the same thing when HE nearly ordered Ibrahim to sacrifice his own son Isaac as an act of faith in Him alone. - You need to to be more mindful of your bold statements.
I feel REAL sorry for you ach,... Seriously.
@ Wali:
Thank you for providing evidence for the entire premise of this article.
(1) Above you deny making faith as an ethnic issue, however your comments just about everywhere show the contrary. Indeed, it is you who sent a livestream event recording (the one in which the speakers accused the Prophet Muhammad of bestiality), telling me directly that the video's contents are not meant for me but rather for blacks, in order to stop people of color from accepting Islam. Even putting that aside, the HI (Hebrew Israelite) theology is all about ethnicity. They don't hide it; it is placed within their videos.
(2) I think that either you have not ever been able to study Islam properly, or you are simply positing an argument for the sake of argument. I have tried to avoid the issues of Mahdi and Dajjal in the past (as that is a largely irrelevant side topic) but traditionally Jesus and the Mahdi ( I think you meant to say Jesus rather than Dajjal in above comment) are seen as two different people, not the same person.
(3) On Moses, I have said repeatedly that THE BIBLE portrays him as a homicidal maniac, if I was to depend on the Bible as a source of faith about him, I would have to reject him based on that. However, I have the Qur'an, which portrays Moses as a messenger of God who was faithful to the morals and values that come with being a God-fearing man. Thus, I reject the assertions in the OT which has him ordering the death of men, women and children, even animals, sparing none except virgin girls.
(4) This aspect was brought up because you have asserted that the Prophet Muhammad was out killing and massacring Jewish tribes. While we see this as untrue, you want to affirm the historicity of it (and thus, condemn the Prophet Muhammad) yet you see nothing wrong with the Biblical portrayal of Moses and assert further that I have a "blasphemous mindset" regarding the Biblical portrayal.
@ Wali
(4) Allah as a "bigamist"? What word are you trying to say? Br Eldon has- earlier in the thread- given us a different way at looking at the Genesis wording on Ishmael, based upon the Hebrew words (explanations which you seemed to have disagreed with), but in any case, you have used that to basically build a platform of racism, which is very different from what Islam teaches. Indeed, it can be said that the article itself illustrates these stark differences.
(5) I believe you were being critical on what I have said elsewhere on the Book of Revelations (the last book of the NT). I would like to remind you, before addressing that, that the Bible itself, despite its historical, cultural and theological importance, has been the subject of changes, interpolations, mistranslations and more. The article's footnote #3 gives some examples. Thus, we are on solid ground to not take the Bible as authoritative. Modern research confirms what is hinted at in the Qur'an (Q 2:79).
(6) While Islam does teach that prophets and messengers preceded Muhammad, some of whom with scripture, we don't have access to all of their teachings and authentic representations. Thus, Islam also teaches that to follow Muhammad is to also follow the same line as the Prophets before him. Following Muhammad is also to follow Jesus and so forth. Their overall legacy and teachings are preserved in essence within the Quranic scripture.
(7) Finally, on the Book of Revelations (perhaps Br Eldon or other readers would like to say something on this), it is Christian tradition that associates that text with a dream. You can see that assertion in some of the introductions in Bible printings preceding the actual text. Moreover, disputes as to its authorship and authenticity have always been there, ever since its emergence. Martin Luther himself wanted it thrown out of the canon, until he realized its usefulness in refuting the Catholic Church leadership (the latter ended up using themes from BOR against him as well). So, again, my view is that it is not to be relied on as a scriptural source, while I can acknowledge its cultural significance (as with the Bible in general).
@ S. Wahid
I'm sure you knew I meant "bigoted" instead of "bigamist"... So why even ask and play dumb about it? - You already know what you said anyway. _And as for Eldon's interpretation of whatever "different way" of looking at the Genesis wording of Ishmael;.. it has nothing to do with me USING anything to "build a platform of Racism of any sort,.. That's your own warped psyche,.. - It has to do mostly with you being disgruntled about the whole thing with your emotional & blasphemous remarks toward God,.. which is MY main issue.
And as for those videos I sent you in the past, (that you keep bringing up,) - Perhaps I can set up an arrangement where you can express your ALL thoughts with the Elders on YouTube, instead of complaining continuously with ME on the same topics. _If you feel you're more knowledgeable and learned than any of us on these discussions about the Bible, then I recommend having a discourse with them as well, then you can get each others perspectives.
I advise studying the Bible from its original Hebrew & Aramaic languages. - You cant keep using all these newer modern & revised / reinterpreted Bibles as YOUR own platform to say, "its been tampered with.." - Go to the ORIGINAL sources before debating,..OK?. _Were WELL aware of what's happened to the Bible over the centuries,.. & before, As well as what happened to the Quran. ( which you seem to continuously deny) with all the explanations And I'm still wondering exactly what "evidence" i supposedly provided?
a couple comments: on Genesis 16:12 referring to Ishmael as "a wild man". I simply looked up the Hebrew word translated there as WILD: in Strong's Hebrew Lexicon, it is word 6501 PEREH, derived from the primary Hebrew root word PARA #6500, which means "to bear fruit" (to be fruitful). None of that is "my interpretation", but is simply what I learned from looking into the "original Hebrew language". Unless you bear some determined prejudice against Ishmael , there is no reason for anyone to reject the evidence that the Hebrew used in that verse in Genesis associates Ishmael with being fruitful (a good thing) and thus the verse is not just a negative portrayal of Ishmael as so many accuse.
As for the book of Revelation, my grandfather, a Christian, inserted a hand written note into the page of his Bible where Revelation began. The note said "Do not read this book, it will make you crazy" ! While I don't agree with that sentiment entirely, it is highly illustrative of some of the historical interpretations of the Book of Revelation throughout the Christian centuries. Charles Manson, for example, adapted the words of Revelation to frame his racist scenario of endtime slaughter! SO, YES it is a very controversial and provocative book of the NT, which includes some very precious teachings and also contains very many verses clouded in meaning and open to strange interpretations, depending on the mental state of the reader.
@ Eldon,
I don't know which Strong's Lexicon you've read, but according to the one IVE read;. The source gave a CLEAR reference for the Hebrew word for "Pere," - which was, ("wild -ass") H6501, - As well as from the Blue letter Bible. - It was described CLEARLY, so IDK where or HOW you're getting you're information, because you're clearly in error, The 2 words you used PERE & PARA are 2 different words,. PERE meaning "wild-ass & PARA" meaning "Cow" #6544 - But although the words sound similar, they still have 2 different meanings.
Ill continue with may comment,
@ Wali
The following is a rather long article a non Muslim wrote regarding the Genesis text in question.
https://mystic444.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/was-ishmael-a-wild-ass-man/
I'll return to this thread later (am finishing another article for the blog as we speak), but this apsect of the discussion proves yet another premise of the deep dive article, i.e. that the Quranic message is one for all mankind, it does not use derogatory or racist language, it does not speak of Isaac in any disrespectful fashion, it cannot be used in that way, whereas the Bible is clearly being used to show disrespect in the name of chosen people syndrome.
read closely, Wali: Strong's "#6501 pere, pereh FROM 6500 in the secondary sense of running wild..."
6500 para; a primary root; to bear fruit: --be fruitful
that phrase FROM 6500 means that #6501 is derived FROM #6500
two different words but the one 6501 is derived from the other 6500, thus they inherently share somewhat in meaning.
Thus the prophecy includes a blessing of Ishmael, describing him as a wild man: one who would be raised in the wilderness partaking of the vitality of that environment, "running wild" as describing a plant without the benefit of attentive cultivation but nevertheless fruitful and productive.
https://mystic444.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/was-ishmael-a-wild-ass-man/
that is an excellent article, brother. Thanks for sharing it.
@ Eldon
Regarding the above Genesis discussion, the Arabic language structure seems to be the same as Hebrew, in the sense that words derive from a three-letter root word, the root being the primary foundation from which the other words are built.
Take the words "Kitaab" (book), Maktaba (bookstore), Maktoob (written or "destined"), Maktab (office), and a host of other words, all are from the root Kataba, which literally means "He wrote" or "ordered" (depending on the context).
Your explanation of the Hebrew Root word is precisely the same. Thanks for sharing it.
Even if we ignored what you have said above, and focused on the reading of Ishmael (and by extension Arabs in general) as a "wild-ass", from the Islamic perspective, the religion does not speak of Isaac in that way, the religion cannot be used in that way, and, most importantly, the Qur'an itself comes to address these very issues that are contentious amongst both Jews and Christians ( Q 27:76)
Coming from an educated Muslim backround, there was always access and interaction with other faiths, but it wasn't until I was in my twenties that I decided to study the Bible itself.
I could see from that study precisely why Allah Almighty addresses some issues very strongly within the Qur'an, how precisely the Qur'an gives clarity on points that are the sources of controversy in the Bible.
Putting aside academic approaches to the Bible, one thing which really struck me is the Book of Revelations. It's content and style are very different from the remainder of the New Testament. It reads more like a science fiction creation.
This impression remained and became more apparent through study of its text and commentary/approaches that have traditionally been found.
Thus, even from a neutral perspective, it does not give confidence (atleast to me) of being a reliable source of scripture.
Islam acknowledges that God sent forth communication and prophets before the time of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, however, it asserts that the records of times past have been subjected to doctrinal and even textual distortions.
Thus, from a Muslim perspective, there is no obligation to accept the Book of Revelations as a Divinely-inspired scripture.
Moreover, as we get into history, we see that many Christian figures had similar views.
Yes, brother, even as the article you linked here suggested, all the other passages concerning Ishmael in Genesis pronounce blessings upon him, whereas, the way the words are translated, this verse seems to be more of a curse. Yet those same Hebrew words can be translated as a blessing as well, more in line with other Genesis verses concerning Ishmael.
I have noticed before some ambiguity of Hebrew words, such that the translator can somewhat twist them depending on his opinion. I have seen an article also saying that Greek can and has been twisted in Bible translations, particularly in Paul's writings to make him seem more so against the Law than he was in real life.
https://mystic444.wordpress.com/2010/06/30/was-ishmael-a-wild-ass-man/
@ S. Wahid & Eldon
To quickly respond to comments regarding the meanings of the words, :Pere & "Para." . As I stated before;.. The Strong's lexicon was pretty clear of the meanings of both of those words,. so there shouldn't be any ambiguity for any of us because it shouldn't much of struggle to figure figure out,.. At least not for ME anyway.
And to respond to S. Wahid's remarks about what the Quran states & what the Bible states;.. For one,.. It doesn't really matter what the Quran DOSENT say about Ishmael,. (as far as using derogatory & racist language) - You cant change or criticize a comment Allah made about Ishmael,... or ANYONE. - He simply said what He said,. and none us gets to question or be critical of any comment he makes,. For HE is the our "Ilah,,." no matter how disgruntled you are about the matter. - And besides,. this isn't about what the Quran says, its about what the BIBLE says.
And for your reluctance to accept the Biblical Revelations;. You really shouldn't expect for others to relate to any opinions, personal feelings or what you believe about Revelations. .Much of your comments seems to be solely based on your personal opinion rather that hard facts. .Just because you find it provocative, controversial or strange or whatever,. those are YOUR OWN thoughts,. which doesn't matter.
If you feel it has textual distortions or obscurities,. then perhaps you can pin point any examples to validate any your assertions. .Have you even studied the Book of Revelations in its original language to come to a definitive conclusion? .Both the Quran & Hadith clearly speaks of the events of The Book of Revelations, which you still stubbornly deny.- If you continue to deny what was clearly written in ALL of the revealed books, then that's your prerogative,. but let me remind you,. its a clear breach of the 6 articles of faith of Islam, which as actually has a clear "messianic" element to it.
But will say this in closing,. If the Quran spoke about Abraham and his connection to the
Ayyats of the Bible, and you continue to disbelieve, ( with all the doubtful eloquent & articulate explanations,) it'll only be a HUGE disservice to you at the very end. .It seems you're looking for any explanation & excuse to find any reason to make anything "Biblical" null & void & obsolete another example of psalms 83: "Of ridding any remembrance or existence of Israel.
That's likely the reason why you're not too particular of observing "Ashura",. Because it relates to the Bible ( which Muhammad even observed ) -But you seem to stubbornly refuse to have ANYTHING to with the Bible.
@ S.Walid @ Eldon
Pardon much of the typos,. Unfortunately this forum doesn't allow editing.
@ S. wahid
What I meant to say was,.. You seem quite determined to have absolutely NOTHING to do with the Bible,. which you and many other muslims stubbornly refuse to do,. It's like you'll come with EVERY explanation & justification yo can find to totally dismiss everything about the Bible ( making it null and void, ).. regardless of the importance of it mentioned in Quran & Hadith. . But you continue to have YOUR OWN veiws and narratives, anyway.
The same as l stated about that being an example in psalms 83 ; . "Of destroying & dismissing the entire existance of Israel so it will be totally forgotten, i.e. ( it's books, teachings, religion, culture, Prophets, God original name,) etc,.. And that's exactly what your doing.
from Wali: regarding the meanings of the words, :Pere & "Para." . As I stated before;.. The Strong's lexicon was pretty clear of the meanings of both of those words,. so there shouldn't be any ambiguity for any of us because it shouldn't much of struggle to figure figure out,.. At least not for ME anyway.
I am sorry to read that the concept of Hebrew root words apparently is over your head. I will not try to explain it further for you.
@ Eldon
Why would you need to explain it any further for me anyway?,.. The reference itself gave a clear meaning of the Hebrew word "PERE,." Which was;.. "wild ass" - So I'm sorry if you're having a hard time with that.
And for S. Wahid,. The notion you have about the Israelites making things about "ethnicity" is not the issue,.. The main point of the matter is about them addressing about,. "Our True Identity,." (for the most part.) - That's why the main-stream community has deemed them as "Identity Extremist's." -
There's seems to be more emphasis put on THEM more than the white supremacists. - Although SOME in The Black Hebrew community are racist,.( but not destroyers or exploiters'
) You never saw THEM joining in with all the destruction on Jan 6th at the capital ( with confederate flags & guns,)... Or attending rallies with assult rifles & with other weapons,..'As well as running people over in cars, (killing them.) -
I'm sure everyone knows, ( including yourself ) how the outcome would've been had it been "The Black Hebrews Israelites, The nation of Islam, or The Black Panthers,. ( with their raised fists ) and with the Green, Black & Red flags. - We know the entire outcome would have been totally different,. as I'm sure YOU already know as well.
@ Wali:
You wrote above" For one,.. It doesn't really matter what the Quran DOSENT say about Ishmael,. (as far as using derogatory & racist language) - You cant change or criticize a comment Allah made about Ishmael,... or ANYONE. - He simply said what He said,. and none us gets to question or be critical of any comment he makes,. For HE is the our "Ilah,,." no matter how disgruntled you are about the matter. - And besides,. this isn't about what the Quran says, its about what the BIBLE says."
It does matter what these texts actually say, for a variety of reasons. Among those reasons, it helps us in understanding the actual sources or reasons behind what these texts assert. You have essentially given an emotional non reply to the premise of the article as well as in the comment section (by talking about not having the right to question the Biblical texts on Ishmael).
You have also stated: " And for your reluctance to accept the Biblical Revelations;. You really shouldn't expect for others to relate to any opinions, personal feelings or what you believe about Revelations. .Much of your comments seems to be solely based on your personal opinion rather that hard facts. .Just because you find it provocative, controversial or strange or whatever,. those are YOUR OWN thoughts,. which doesn't matter"
We can say the same, but my "feelings" are more than simply intuition, it is also based on solid academic research (insofar as the Book of Revelations are concerned).
You have also stated " if you feel it has textual distortions or obscurities,. then perhaps you can pin point any examples to validate any your assertions. .Have you even studied the Book of Revelations in its original language to come to a definitive conclusion? .Both the Quran & Hadith clearly speaks of the events of The Book of Revelations, which you still stubbornly deny.- If you continue to deny what was clearly written in ALL of the revealed books, then that's your prerogative,. but let me remind you,. its a clear breach of the 6 articles of faith of Islam, which as actually has a clear "messianic" element to it"
I have answered the question on the BOR, it is easy to simply open my Bible and see my notes on it, but I think what really needs to be remembered is that from an Islamic perspective, the Bible, despite its obvious cultural value, is not necessary for a Muslim's guidance. The Qur'an itself has summarized what Biblical scholarship has later determined, that the Bible as we have it today has suffered much in terms of textual and doctrinal infiltration, that it cannot be relied upon in terms of Divine direction.
You are suggesting that my views on the BOR (and the Bible in general) violate Islamic teachings, to that claim, I say simply read the article again. The article gives contextually based explanations of the Quranic verses often cited by those Non-Muslim voices who attempt to demonstrate a theological superiority of Bible over the Qur'an, or a Quranic endorsement of the Bible.
@ Wali:
You have also stated above " But will say this in closing,. If the Quran spoke about Abraham and his connection to the
Ayyats of the Bible, and you continue to disbelieve, ( with all the doubtful eloquent & articulate explanations,) it'll only be a HUGE disservice to you at the very end. .It seems you're looking for any explanation & excuse to find any reason to make anything "Biblical" null & void & obsolete another example of psalms 83: "Of ridding any remembrance or existence of Israel.
That's likely the reason why you're not too particular of observing "Ashura",. Because it relates to the Bible ( which Muhammad even observed ) -But you seem to stubbornly refuse to have ANYTHING to with the Bible."
From an Islamic religious perspective, it is not about Israel, Arabs or other nationalities. God created all of them. It is about God.
You are demonstrating here precisely why Islam is a message relevant for all humanity. It is not about giving some hierarchy based on someone's ethnicity or color. My contention throughout this discussion is that the contrast is demonstrated between Islamic teachings and your assertions (based on Hebrew Israelite assertions). The Qur'an speaks with respect for Isaac, despite that he was not an Arab, yet you insist (based on HI racially based theology) to have a rude disposition towards Ishmael BECAUSE of his being "non-Jewish".
Now, Br Eldon has come and shared that the terminology in the Genesis text need not be read as disrespectful but meaning something entirely different. Hopefully I will reply to that later on, but even if your reading is to be insisted upon, it still illustrates the point and premise of this article.
@ Wali:
"
And for S. Wahid,. The notion you have about the Israelites making things about "ethnicity" is not the issue,.. The main point of the matter is about them addressing about,. "Our True Identity,." (for the most part.) - That's why the main-stream community has deemed them as "Identity Extremist's." -
There's seems to be more emphasis put on THEM more than the white supremacists. - Although SOME in The Black Hebrew community are racist,.( but not destroyers or exploiters'
) You never saw THEM joining in with all the destruction on Jan 6th at the capital ( with confederate flags & guns,)... Or attending rallies with assult rifles & with other weapons,..'As well as running people over in cars, (killing them.) -"
Generally, I have been silent on the notion of African Americans being originally Jewish, because I don't find that relevant insofar as Divine guidance is concerned. However, from the Hebrew Israelite arguments, which you yourself have stated both here and elsewhere, it is apparent that it is a theology based in racial identity, not very different from the various (white) religious impulses, those same impulses which have been oppressive to people of color for generations.
When Br.Eldon asked early in the thread if you are racist, he wasn't asking from a vacuum. He was asking based on what you have written in this thread. He didn't know you before this, he is a reader of this blog.
Racism, in whatever form, is condemnable. It is wrong. It is illogical. It is also clearly Un-Islamic. So I have no problem in condemning racism, in whatever form. Even if it comes in religious language.
@ Wali:
You mention 'Ashoora in one of your above comments, I don't recall if we ever discussed it. While I (on the basis of what I have learned from my teachers) question the narration on it, I have no problem with someone fasting during that time, and in times past I have done it as well.
You also mention above as well as earlier in the thread about studying and pointing out what I have personally found problematic in the BOR, as well as (much earlier in the comment section) expressing criticism of "... all these newer modern & revised / reinterpreted Bibles .."
Well, typically the assertion is that these "newer modern and revised Bibles" are superior in translation, explanation and the like. I actually own almost all of the Bible translations and commentaries in English (and a couple in Arabic), as well as a host of academic works by Bible scholars as well as individual commentaries and reflections by Jewish and Christian thinkers, as well as dictionaries dedicated to Biblical content. My writings consistently cite sources in these regards. I am unsure of what the nature of your criticism is. Is there a particular Bible version that you are saying is better than the others? Have you seen a Bible translation cited in this article (or in my other presentations) that you have a problem with?
Returning to the BOR, I have studied it.
@ S. Wahid
To respond to your previous comment regarding the B.O.R. and your doubts of the Bible in general;.. As I stated before,. it doesn't really matter what the Quran's says about racism or derogatory language being used against anyone, - Allah simply said what he said,.. Period. ( Unless you see the God of the Bible different from Allah )
This isn't about what the Quran says,.. its about what the Bible interprets,. As it was the first words of God himself, regardless if we like it or not... We dont get to CHANGE or criticize ANYTHING about,. if so, we will suffer the consequences,. 2Peter 1:20-21 & Rev, 22:18 & Surah 15:90-92. - And youre right,. it IS about GOD and not about Ishmael or Arabs,. etc. - which is why my reference was made specifically about HIM & His words ( which you clearly took issue with )
As for the B.O.R. itself,. It doesn't really matter how pervocative, controversial & strange you believe it is,. those are YOUR OWN personal views & opinions,. Considering the very events are mentioned in the Quran,. and the Hadith as well (in particular) which you're reluctant to accept as well,. - seeing it as "unreliable & unauthentic." _ The Quran clearly gives suggestion about those who are IN DOUBT regarding the Revelations of the previous books,. Surah 10:94 ( which you stubbornly are )
If you feel the B.O.R. has textual distortions,.. I want you to find examples to confirm it definitively. _ I need all historical FACTS to support your assertions. - You seem to be determined not to believe ANYTHING about the Bible,.. Only the 2 parts you believe reference about Muhammad, in John 14 & Deut 18:18 ( which you TOTALLY misunderstood )
And as far as me "not practicing Islam properly";.. There's NO "emotions" from me ( as far as REJECTING the fundamental teachings of Islam,). I'm mostly interested about learning the HISTORY of it (in general) as well,.. And besides,. its not only about practicing Islam properly,. but more importantly,. about STUDYING it properly first.
And as for your comments about Black Hebrew Israelites;.. "being only about ethnicity;.." - Its not just about "ethnicity." _The entire premise is solely about "Our True Identity" & Our History as a people,. - as I'm sure the Prophet Muhammad and other races would also like to be recognized for themselves,.. But whenever WE do it,. were labeled as,. "Identity Extremists"
And as for your obvious doubts of African Americans ever being Jewish at all, ( more properly "Hebrews").. Of course you're not going to find that relevant,. because it doesn't relate to YOU anyway. - Perhaps I'll put it into more contrast in the near future (with biblical evidence) if you're not too stubborn & close minded to even indulge in it.
But in any case,. if you studied or have all of these different Bibles you've read ( as you mentioned ) you'd come out a bit better using the following references closest to the original sources:,.. The Jerusalem Bible, The KJV Bible, The Good News Bible, & The Aramaic Bible. just stick with those 4 instead of giving yourself brain damage & all the monotony of studying all those different Bibles and basting your judgment from those
I'll be concluding with commentary on,. "The Muslim perspective" of how "religion" should be for mankind.
Stay tuned
A few thoughts on the book of Revelation, race, and Bible translations. Of all the books of the whole Bible, the b.o.r. is the only one which promises a blessing on those who "keep the words of this book". One important point revealed by this book is that there will be people "of all nations, kindreds, peoples, and tongues" (7:9) that worship the Most High before His Throne in Heaven. That should discourage any racist types among people of faith who think that only those who share their own skin color, nationality, or culture can be saved! Sadly, in truth many protagonists of racial supremacy still hold to their prejudice! As the Prophet Muhammad taught, there is no superiority of one race or individual over another, except in case of one being more righteous than the other. So those who "keep the words of Revelation", should trust the words of Muhammad as in accord with Rev. 7:9. As for Bible translations evaluation, Revelation 22:14 is one of the most important verses for discerning the sacred from the profane translation. "Blessed are those that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life and may enter in through the gates to the City." KJV. Other translations ERR by saying "blessed are those that wash their robes...". The fact that this verse when properly translated, strongly agrees with Matthew 5:17-19 is overwhelming against every wrong translation. These are precious truths that most modern "translations" muddy up the minds of their readers with, to the discredit of a LARGE portion of New Testament believers. Finally, it is the fact that translations were chosen OVER the original languages Scripture was revealed in have heavily damaged the faith of Christians and Jews. The Hebrew language was historically lost, infiltrated, and only somewhat accurately reconstructed in the long centuries of the wandering of the Israelites as Talmudists and Masorites took a significant role against the proper translation of the Hebrew language. For illustration of this point, read ANY English translation of the book of Isaiah, and you'll see that much clear meaning has been hidden by foggy translations and distortions. The same sad distortion is echoed in Aramaic "translations", which are mostly reconstructions from Greek to Aramaic. I thank the Almighty for leading me to the Quran which clears one from dependence upon man-made translations of earlier scriptural languages.
@ Anonymous
Unfortunately,. many don't believe in the words of B.O.R. let alone KEEPING any of the words of the Bible in general,. So many won't be too blessed at all anyway. _ As for Muhammad stating;. "How one race shouldn't be superior over another";. - Was he thinking about that during his expeditions when slaughtering 700+ men while kidnaping women & children in Kaybar? ( Which is a very hypocritical statement on his part don't you think?) _ Sounds like another classic case of "divide & conquer,." i.e.; (superiority)
As for the example you gave about us "promoting racism"..- There's no discouragement I need, because that's not something I advocate or promote. _ And I also gave reference of Revelations 22:14 & 5:17-19 - Those are main scripts I've been promoting for years,.. (Including Luke 24:44) - This is why I advise people to go the Bibles that relates closest to the original sources and not all theses other modernized, revised & watered-down Bibles, which I avoid.
As for anyone claiming; "one race of peoples will inherit the next kingdom" ( as some Muslims believe THEY will as well ) after the "Islamic" Mah-die returns,. - There wont be ONE race of people in Heaven at all,... there will be MANY,. If that was the case,. then Isaiah (chapters 14:2 & 60: 4,5,6,-11,. i.e.;. involving "The Strangers" wont be able to play out )- However, there will be different levels & ranks in the next kingdom. ( as many don't even know )- Everyone wont receive the same level of salvation, depending on their level of previous worldly deeds.
And Rev 7:9 is another verse I'm VERY familiar with;. - However, Revelations does give reference of who the First Fruits will be,. which doesn't really include any other group of people. - However, the followers & believers of Jesus & his Laws will share in rulership in the next kingdom (being SUPERIOR over all disbelievers Q3:55 ) regardless of race but the majority will be among the 144K, ( Revelation 7:4 )
As stated in Romans 2:5,. ALL nations shall be judged by the same standard (regardless of race) with NO favoritism. So before concerning yourself about all the racial supremacy, of another group of another race ("regarding skin color") just let that scripture be an encouragement for you. - Because you'll often have extremists in EVERY religion misrepresenting our faith for their own benefit & convenience. - Always be able to distinguish those types from the "Pious" and not label as a whole.
@Anoymous:
My Correction,.. The verses of Isaiah l meant to include was verses, 60:10-14 & 61: 4-11 ( Regarding "The strangers") in the next Kingdom
about Khaybar: it was a WAR scenario, just as the Israelite war incidents against Canaan where they were commanded to kill all the men and all women who were not virgins. Doesn't seem very loving nor equality-promoting of them, does it? War is an awful thing, but is a part of Divine Providence for the time being. Someday all the wars will be over and those who have peace with the Most High will be forever secure.
@ Eldon
So basically you're saying,. Allah also COMMANDED Muhammad to kill off all the men & women who were not virgins in Kaybar as well? - Sense it seems you're using that to validate your point about the WAR scenario.
Otherwise,. It was just be a self fulfilling prophecy on Muhammad's part.
To: Eldon.
The previous comment was from ME
I don't remember reading any specific comment from Muhammad saying that Allah commanded him to kill in that instance, but I think it falls under the same rule of warfare whereby traitors are executed even today. For instance, Julian Assange had been basically under house arrest for several years and now is actually held in prison in the UK at the behest of the USA, as he is accused of treasonous activity (I believe he is innocent) and the US wants to try him to be imprisoned for 175 years, a death sentence for sure!
The Jews of Khaybar had a treaty of agreement with Muslims and then treacherously betrayed their trust as I recall. My point is that since we know according to Torah that Moses & Joshua WERE commanded to kill by Allah, it is no surprise if He also commanded early Muslim forces to kill as well. Again, War is Hell!
WE also know that when Messiah returns, he will say "As for my enemies who would not that I should rule over them, bring them hither and SLAY them before me! Luke 19:27
Wali Djazzique.
@Eldon
... And just to clarify,.. it was Allah (God) Himself that commanded war (from the Bibles
standpoint) against other wicked pagans nations, (by using Moses) in the Book of Numbers, As well using Sampson in the Book of Judges.
There was no confirmation of God ordering or commanding Muhammad to wage war against the Israelites or Bani- Mustaliq in the Quran or Hadith. It was a personal agenda for Muhammad.
@Eldon
To answer your question, I don't think Luke 19:27 would be a good example to validate or justify Muhammad's raid against the Israelites,. Reason being,. he wasn't appointed or commanded by God to do so. - But he did so by his own free will. _And most importantly, Why would Allah/ Aheyeh even allow him to commit such a barbaric act against his chosen people?,.. Especially if He already implemented their own covenate to hold fast to. ( Q 2:40,41,63 )-
So their punishment couldn't be because of rejecting Islam or because of any sort of treasonous acts,. because according to Islam, its forbidden to have any close personal relations with non-Muslims anyway;.. - I guess with only with conditions of marrying women (with the intent to convert them to Islam) that's pretty much it;. Otherwise,. any other close relations with non Muslims is clearly forbidden,. "being muamlats" Q58:22 Q5;51 Q60:1 which we discussed before. - But as far as on a business level,. its on a VERY limited bases; - not usually to the point of engaging in any treaties. - But either way, that would be no excuse for war. - So your example of Luke 19: 27 has no bases
@ Wali:
The issue of Banu Quraydhah, as I mentioned to you before, has to do with treaty breaking, not some kind of anti-Jewish conspiracy. Similarly, it has nothing to do with trying to force them to accept Islam, and the punishment they received was initiated by a Jewish convert to Islam ['Abdullah b.Salaam), itself based on Jewish traditions (Deut.20:13-14).
In terms of wiping out, exterminating people, the Bible asserts that Moses did this. This is something which I don't believe because the Qur'an says that prophets don't disobey God in that fashion.
There are other issues to address in the previous comments, Islam does not forbid friendship with Non Muslims, but it does forbid building alliances with those forces which have already proven to be untrustworthy. This is addressed at this link. https://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2013/04/in-belly-of-beast-questions-on-islamic.html
@ Wali:
You write " To respond to your previous comment regarding the B.O.R. and your doubts of the Bible in general;.. As I stated before,. it doesn't really matter what the Quran's says about racism or derogatory language being used against anyone, - Allah simply said what he said,.. Period. ( Unless you see the God of the Bible different from Allah )
This isn't about what the Quran says,.. its about what the Bible interprets,. As it was the first words of God himself, regardless if we like it or not... We dont get to CHANGE or criticize ANYTHING about,. if so, we will suffer the consequences,. 2Peter 1:20-21 & Rev, 22:18 & Surah 15:90-92. - And youre right,. it IS about GOD and not about Ishmael or Arabs,. etc. - which is why my reference was made specifically about HIM & His words ( which you clearly took issue with )""
It's actually the opposite. The article focuses on certain claims that are made that somehow Islam is teaching that the Bible surpassed the Qur'an, that the latter teaches the Bible is Islamically valid, etc.
From both historical and an Islamic perspective, the Bible we have today does not reflect in totality what the prophets came with. It does not reflect in totality what God has conveyed. Moreover, the Qur'an is given to benefit all mankind, and does not use language that would automatically divide people into opposing groups.
The B.O.R. has always been controversial, and from an Islamic (and historical) perspective, we have every right not to take it as authoritative.
@ Wali:
" And as for your comments about Black Hebrew Israelites;.. "being only about ethnicity;.." - Its not just about "ethnicity." _The entire premise is solely about "Our True Identity" & Our History as a people,. - as I'm sure the Prophet Muhammad and other races would also like to be recognized for themselves,.. But whenever WE do it,. were labeled as,. "Identity Extremists"
And as for your obvious doubts of African Americans ever being Jewish at all, ( more properly "Hebrews").. Of course you're not going to find that relevant,. because it doesn't relate to YOU anyway. - Perhaps I'll put it into more contrast in the near future (with biblical evidence) if you're not too stubborn & close minded to even indulge in it."
It's very easy to address this, but it's a strawman issue, irrelevant to my overall point. For the sake of discussion, I will refer you to something attributed to Jesus (peace be upon him) in the Bible. He is being argued with by detractors, who see themselves as Abraham's children. His detractors were using the same sort of argument that the Hebrew Israelites advance, that they have covenant with God based upon family tree. The Bible has Jesus say "If you were Abraham's children, you would act like him. Rather, you are the children of Satan" (John 8:39-41)
So it is a matter of personal choice and action that determines one's spiritual fate, not ethnicity.
Regarding Bible translations, the ones Wali mentioned, I own two of them and have access to the others via websites. While I appreciate the answer to my question (regarding Bible translations), I don't think it changes anything insofar as conclusions are concerned.
With interest I have read what Eldon shared here on Bible translations and the like, and from a theological perspective it only reinforces what the Qur'an says on itself. It is a clarification on Bible related issues (Q 27:76).
It leaves us with clarity wherein there had been doubts before.
Hey Wali, tell me something: how is it that you think you know what Allah did or did not tell Muhammad to do? His life can be summed up like this: he was known by his fellow citizens as a man of integrity and truth all his life. At around 40 years old he began to receive revelation via the angel Gabriel and the result of that revelation was that he converted the whole country he lived in from gross darkness and polytheism to Islam AND that the religion he exemplified then spread to all the earth!
Now, I don't know you much at all, but how does your spiritual resume compare to Muhammad's?
You are more than welcome to list all of your accomplishments that would lead me to discredit Muhammad's testimony to accept yours.
As for Allah's actions (through Muhammad) against "His chosen people", I think that you have read the long record of the curses He promised to Israel that would result if/when they disobeyed Him.
Just reference Deuteronomy 28:15-68 or the song of Moses in Deuteronomy 32 and SEE if Muhammad's treatment of the Jews of Khaybar is in line with those curses or not!
@ Eldon
This isn't about, "what I think I know",.. its only about what I've observed according to what I've read & studied,.. As well as your own words;.. "You don't remember reading anything specific of Muhammed mentioning anything about God commanding him to kill in that instance".. - then turn right around & flip flopped stating,.. "It wouldn't be a surprise if Allah commanded Muhammed to do the same" (as he commanded Moses & joseph,. I guess) -
But the whole point is,.. Did He actually commanded him to do so?.. - Or did you just assume? - There has to be an OFFICIAL documentation of Him allowing Muhammed to do so,. (as He allowed previous prophets) - You cant assume Allah just gave him the "green light" to attack his people,.. - Especially if (you believe) its for the cause of being a " traitor or treasonous (due to a treaty) which obviously sounds like special association established with non-Muslims anyway, i.e.; (an "Alliance")
Usually if there's anything involving a "treaty" (as you mentioned) there would have to be an Alliance of some sort established",.. which we already know is clearly forbidden in Islam as S. Wahid just explained (in full) on his previous comments. - So actually that would be yet another breach against Islam on Muhammad's part,. -So how you explain that?
And as for the "The Curses" as you mentioned of, Yes,. those curses IS the result of disobedience to Allah's Covenant,. which the the book of Psalms 83 also spoke of how other nations would conspire against Israel (which S. Wahid denies any conspiracy) However, other nations new very well of Allah's curses against His people while studying the Bible. - This would now be an opportunity for them to take full advantage of the situation by fulfilling Gods curse anyway,.. W/O actually waiting to be commanded by God Himself (according to the Quran) - But I guess it doesn't really matter anyway, because in any case,. _As stated in Psalms 83,. Ishmael would also be part of the conspiracy against Israel.
But just you know, theres also curses on Muslims as well ( clearly till this very day as we see ) See Surah 6:65 6:66 - As well as an obvious curse against Muhammed himself ( being poisoned to death by a Jewish woman after his invasion ) as mentioned in hadith. This would also likely be for making treaties with non muslims (establishing an alliance) and most importantly,.. "forcing jews into Islam after He already gave them their covenant to hold fast to.
I don't remember a whole lot of details about Khaybar, but I DO know that the Most High commanded other Prophets and Leaders of His People to kill at times, and that "Jesus" will kill more than all of them put together ever killed.
As for curses, we do not know what we may have to live through and some things that happen to us may seem like MAJOR curses, but we have the hope in Allah that He will make good come to us even out of our calamities. Surely we have almost all of us done things worthy of curses, so let us be thankful so that we don't always seem to bear curses -- it works together for the cleansing of sin !
@ Eldon
Sorry for any typos,.. Anyways, as for my spiritual resume,.. l don't claim to be a Prophet,.. that's not my mission,. My mission is about spreading Gods message & to enlighten the masses with knowledge and wisdom,.. As well as holding fast To my covenant.
Stay tuned for my conclusion of this topic.
@ Eldon & S.Wahid,.
Today marks the beginning of Haunnakah,. Although Muslims is past the sacred month, ( 10th month of Muharram,. ) Which is actually Sunnah.
It was highly advised by Allah's apostle that it should be observed, according Hadith,. (Which many Muslims stubbornly refuse to do ). Which is also written in Hadith;. Sunan al- Tirmidhi. # 755.
Many Muslims are reluctant, simply because it relates to biblical reference,. Which makes them kufr,. Any rejection of what the Muhammad observed makes one an unbeliever.
Staffa-allah for typos once again,
Sunan al- Tirmidhi. # 755 Ibn Abbas narrated: The Messenger of Allah ordered fasting the tenth day for the Day of Ashura.
(not Hanukah)
@ Eldon
I never said The 10 month of Muharram had anything to do with Haunnakah,.. However they usually fall during the same seasonal period - regardless when fasting begins.
But my main point was,.. why are many muslims so reluctant to follow & practice it as Muhammad ordered? - which most don't at all,.
Likely,.. it simply because of their PRIDE & emnity against Jews, why they stubbornly refuse to engage in anything in associated with the BIBLE
BUT, you referenced Sunan al-Tirmidhi. # 755 as proof of your claim that Muhammad endorsed Hannakah, which it does NOT.
If you have any reference at all that Muhammad endorsed the keeping of Hannakah, then prove that by some quote of his in specific reference to Hannakah, not Ashura.
@ Eldon
Once again,... I never stated anything in particular about Muhammad endorsing the keeping of Hannukah to Muslims,.. Only about the tenth month of Murharram, I only mentioned how both holydays fell during the same seasonal period, thats it, ( not about Muslims having to observe Hannukah) -
I don't see how in the heck I left out the main word, i.e.; ("Ashura") - That was the whole purpose of me mentioning about the 10th month of Muharram, (The sacred month for fasting) But I guess you didn't catch on to what I was actually trying to say or meant. Especially after reading the narration I gave and all. ...I mean Geez!! So does that gives more clarity for you?
So continuing with my initial question;... Why are Muslims reluctant to observe The 10th Month of Muharram? (Ashura)
There's a certain level of contradiction in Wali's posts here.
(1) On one hand, he has said repeatedly that the recipients of his various assertions are to be people of more color that us, yet repeatedly posts on this thread, which, currently, is not really occupied by his intended audience.
(2) In the past it seems as though you rejected the Prophetic claims of the Prophet Muhammad, upon whom be peace, and yet, here you are, Mr Wali, quoting a (questionable) narration attributed to him and accusing us of being disbelievers if we don't fast on 'Aashoora (which you apparently connected to Hannukah). I don't want to derail the thread too much by going into the hadeeth on Aashoora too much, I'm just saying that these are inherently different positions to maintain.
(3) Briefly, on the "aashoora fast, there is discussion on this in the literature. Generally it is seen as one of many voluntary fasts, and even if it was an obligatory practice, it has been superseded by the emergence of the month of Ramadan as a fast anyways. Actually, if you do wish to connect this to Hannukah and the like, this would be an example, from the Islamic perspective, of why we have our practices in the way we have them. Hannukah is a celebration regarding the capture of Jerusalem from its enemies, if memory recalls. Islam is not centered around various cultural and historical reports, rather, the focus is on God, which is why its teachings and practices, as lived through Muhammad the Prophet (peace be on him) has a relevance and impact on any groups that accept the Islamic claims as correct.
@ Wali:
You write " But the whole point is,.. Did He actually commanded him to do so?.. - Or did you just assume? - There has to be an OFFICIAL documentation of Him allowing Muhammed to do so,. (as He allowed previous prophets) - You cant assume Allah just gave him the "green light" to attack his people,.. - Especially if (you believe) its for the cause of being a " traitor or treasonous (due to a treaty) which obviously sounds like special association established with non-Muslims anyway, i.e.; (an "Alliance")"
I have already shared on this. The Prophet Muhammad is not a killer or something like that. He never gave some sort of genocidal orders. I have shared elsewhere on Khaibar and the other reports you like to keep bringing up.
You write " Usually if there's anything involving a "treaty" (as you mentioned) there would have to be an Alliance of some sort established",.. which we already know is clearly forbidden in Islam as S. Wahid just explained (in full) on his previous comments. - So actually that would be yet another breach against Islam on Muhammad's part,. -So how you explain that?"
Nice try, but no cigar! I have not claimed that Islam forbids agreements with Non Muslims. I have said on the basis of client-state, patron sort of foundation.
To summarize what happened, there were treaties in place, these Jewish groups broke their treaties with the Muslims. The details are available, but that is it in a nutshell. The fact that Jews continued to live in Arabia and in the larger Muslim world itself is evidence that there was no anti-Jewish agenda in mind, either by the Prophet (peace be upon him) or the early Muslim leadership. Indeed, about a year ago I read a paper by a Jewish academic crediting the Prophet Muhammad for saving Judaism from becoming extinct!
@ S. Waheed
After this final comment, ill be concluding with final brief questions as well because I wont continue to labor on this topic.
But for now, I have to wonder;.. Did you actually "comprehend" my previous comments, or did you just READ & skimmed through it - while cherry picking whatever comments you could find to discredit me? -
I thought I clearly gave clarity of the relations between Muharram & Hannukah, which was basically NONE, i.e.; ( Only falling during the same seasonal time period ) w/o any particular links,.. That's it. -But I guess that part just went right past you and continued to accuse me of linking the two together anyway. - I guess some people don't comprehend as quickly as others.
And as for me rejecting any prophetic claims of Muhammed;.. About the only prophecy he made that I was actually interested in, was the one about Biblical Revelations, i.e.; ( The Coming of Jesus & destroying the Dajjal and the last days ) - Otherwise, any other unrelated prophecy he made doesn't apply to me as a non-Muslim. So im not really concerned about any other prophecy he made, nor I even care.
And as for Ramadan superseding Ashura, I never recall reading ANYTHING about that in any Islamic sources,. (which sounds like philosophy to me) Especially if Ashura also commemorates the martyrdom of Muhammad's grandson, Hussain Ibn Ali during the Battle of Karbala,.. As well the splitting of the Red sea for the Israelites being lead by Moses. - So I have to wonder;. Why would Allah or Muhammed even allow such a sacred & Holy month be superseded by another?,.. Especially if Muhammed spoke of its importance which HE held fast to himself.
The best & only reason I can see of it being superseded by Ramadan is simply because it relates to the bible, which most Muslims refuse to have anything to do with anyway (such as yourselves) _ As far as im concerned, its clearly the work of man. And as for objections of Muhammed committing genocidal acts, I'll just let the Hadith speak for itself ( without any further discussion ) regardless how unauthentic, unreliable, & non sacred you feel it is,.. That's YOUR OWN personal thing.
And lastly,. Islam DOES indeed forbid forming an alliance with Non-Muslims, So this isn't about what YOURE claiming the Quran DIDNT say., Its about what the Quran itself stated about the prohibition of forming any alliances,. in ANY instances,..- Regardless of the baseless "nutshell" explanation you gave me about "no agendas being against Hebrews" in-spite of what's already stated in Psalms 83, and Hadith that confirms it.
And a word of advice: I highly recommend searching for the definition of what an "Alliance" is before putting anything in a "nutshell" or talking about who doesn't get a cigar,. OK? - I would think someone with your knowledge & intelligence would already know these things.
@Eldon & S. Wahid
Now as for my questions to sum up: "The Muslim Narrative of faith"
Due to God now revealing His final revelation, i.e.; ("The Quran") which was sent down to His final messenger ( Muhammad ) - This now supersedes & erases ALL previous words of HIS future revelations as well as erasing ALL preordained future events of the last days that was originally projected before.., i.e.; (before creation of the world) This also includes replacing Gods name which should properly be Allah su-pana wat-ta allah
These changes also supersede His previous messengers & prophets (including Jesus) for Islamic figures because they are no longer relevant or applying to Muslims. There's no longer any need for NO NEED for any biblical characters or previous books to be acknowledged due to a new prophet being sent down, "as the seal of all Prophets"
The last Day events will now include an "Islamic figure" of the Mah-hdi
whom Christ himself will now be replaced by. This Islamic figure may include Muhammad, i.e.; ( "The comforter/advocate himself" ) along with another "unknown Islamic figure" to join in to help destroy the Dajjal and bring order to the New world, which whom THEY shall reign & be the rulers of the next world - Pre ordained by Allah. - This is why the Quran was now revealed for mankind to accept and follow because its also the perfect example for mankind and the world at large.
This whole Change is necessary because the previous books (Taurat & Injeel) have suffered many doctrinal changes over time and can no longer be trusted or relied upon because of its contradictions & strange far-fetched rhetoric as far as its last day events,- as well as its bigotted language towards Muslim descendants. The world should now replace its previous & erroneous belief systems and turn to the Quran as TRUE believers, as Muttaqin.
So does that about sum up it up?
@ S. Wahid
And if may add...( To clear up the continuing accusations of me making "ethnicity" a theme for my arguments;).. As I stated before,. My theme is about "Our TRUE identity & history ( which is what we mainly we promote worldwide )- Not a case of being Black nationalist or supremacist,.. But take it as you will,.. But I highly advise reading those Bible scripts I provided of Isaiah's chapters 14-60 & 61 (of The Next Kingdom) - & Try coping & accepting the future events of "The Next kingdom,.." because it wont benefit you at all by being disgruntled and seething about it with all the complaints.
As I stated before,.. (regardless of how you feel,..) You're free to use whatever logic you feel is necessary or believe or disbelieve at your own accord,.. (regardless of what Q10:94 advised about those being "doubtful" of the revelations of the previous books.) But at the time of our death,.. your soul shall dwell for 7 days & 7 ways in which during that time,.. everything (in this life) shall be replayed back to you,. And youll find out if it was ever true or false,. As well as seeing who was successful & who was dammed after their death. 2Edras 7:78-88
So at this point, I'm now concluding this topic. But you can still feel free to leave whatever following comments as you wish, but I cant guarantee I'll read or follow up on anything further after this.
However,. if either of you have any other UNRELATED topics at a later time,.. I may respond.
@ Wali:
You did put a disclaimer, but in affect it is meaningless, because in your remarks, you clearly stated " Today marks the beginning of Haunnakah,. Although Muslims is past the sacred month, ( 10th month of Muharram,. ) Which is actually Sunnah." You then basically assert that Muslims are "reluctant" to engage therein because of enmity towards the Bible and that such makes us "Kufr" (sic).
Let's address some of your new statements:
" And as for Ramadan superseding Ashura, I never recall reading ANYTHING about that in any Islamic sources,. (which sounds like philosophy to me) Especially if Ashura also commemorates the martyrdom of Muhammad's grandson, Hussain Ibn Ali during the Battle of Karbala,.. As well the splitting of the Red sea for the Israelites being lead by Moses. - So I have to wonder;. Why would Allah or Muhammed even allow such a sacred & Holy month be superseded by another?,.. Especially if Muhammed spoke of its importance which HE held fast to himself."
Here are some narrations on it. Accessible online.
1- A’isha, the wife of the Prophet, said, “The day of Ashura was a day the Quraysh used to fast in the Jahiliyya, and the Messenger of Allah also used to fast it during the Jahiliyya. When the Messenger of Allah came to Madina he fasted it and ordered that it be fasted. Then Ramadan fasting was made obligatory and that became the duty (fard) instead of Ashura. After that, whoever preferred fasted the Ashura, whoever not, did not fast.
(Bukhari, Sawm, 1, 68; Muslim, Siam, 113 (1125); Tirmidhi, Sawm, 49; Abu Dawood, Sawm 64; Muwatta, Siam, 33)
2- Narrated Ibn ‘Umar: Fasting was observed on the day of Ashura (10th of Muharram) by the people of the Pre-lslamic Period. But when (the order of compulsory fasting in) the month of Ramadan was revealed, the Prophet said, “It is up to one to fast on it (Ashura) or not.”
(Bukhari, Sawm, 68; Muslim, Siam, 117 (1126); Abu Dawood, Sawm, 64).
The battle of Karbala did indeed take place in Muharram, and for Shiites it 'Aashoora is observed, but a coincidental event subsequent to the Prophet's time and perhaps coinciding with an observation of the parting of the Red Sea in the time of Prophet Moses, peace be on him, are all just historical coincidences.
The issue of what is a "sacred" month and how it is observed is an interesting subject, one which I will perhaps reply to later on. Briefly, what I am saying is that for Muslims, the "sacred observances" (ordained by God in the Qur'an and practiced by the Prophet Muhammad, upon whom be peace) are all God centered, and not centered upon cultural events per se. So, for Ramadan, the fast during that month is ordained in the Qur'an, fasting itself is ordained, for the development of God-awareness (taqwaa). It also (according to the Qur'an itself) was the time the Quranic revelation first came. So we can see it as a more universal practice, as opposed to a practice that commemorates a moment in a particular community's time.
@ Wali:
You write " The best & only reason I can see of it being superseded by Ramadan is simply because it relates to the bible, which most Muslims refuse to have anything to do with anyway (such as yourselves) _ As far as im concerned, its clearly the work of man. And as for objections of Muhammed committing genocidal acts, I'll just let the Hadith speak for itself ( without any further discussion ) regardless how unauthentic, unreliable, & non sacred you feel it is,.. That's YOUR OWN personal thing."
The first half of your statement above is a bit oversimplistic, after all, Muslims do believe that God communicated before Muhammad, and acknowledge that many of the Biblical figures are among those who were so blessed, the issue is that Muslims do not believe the Bible as we currently have it is reflective totally of what was originally conveyed. Indeed, the article itself has cited concrete examples, and despite your active posting in the comment thread, you haven't addressed even one single example that was cited.
As for the second part (regarding our approach to the narrations on war situations), that approach is largely mainstream. Reports in hadeeth literature (or any other extra Quranic sources for that matter) are not seen as sacred. With any historical event or figure, there will be correct and incorrect assertions in literature, subjected to analysis and scrutiny.
Muslims have always employed this to narrations found in the hadeeth tradition, and a similar approach is found within both mainstream Jewish and Christian approaches to their scripture. Returning to the article, there are examples cited. I can-if you really wish- show you a video of a Jewish scholar addressing what I call genocidal actions attributed to Moses in the Bible. He rejects it as "false news". This is similar to the Muslim approach- not only to Muhammad, but Moses and the Prophets in general- May God's peace be on them. We don't accept (although you do) the Biblical assertions of Moses ordering genocidal actions. We assert that Prophets and messengers of God do not do actions that contradict God's orders like that.
@ Wali:
You state " Due to God now revealing His final revelation, i.e.; ("The Quran") which was sent down to His final messenger ( Muhammad ) - This now supersedes & erases ALL previous words of HIS future revelations as well as erasing ALL preordained future events of the last days that was originally projected before.., i.e.; (before creation of the world) This also includes replacing Gods name which should properly be Allah su-pana wat-ta allah
These changes also supersede His previous messengers & prophets (including Jesus) for Islamic figures because they are no longer relevant or applying to Muslims. There's no longer any need for NO NEED for any biblical characters or previous books to be acknowledged due to a new prophet being sent down, "as the seal of all Prophets" "
Okay, I appreciate you are attempting to summarize the Islamic argument. Let's smooth out the rough edges.
God's revelations -in particular to the Israelites- are often relevant to their time and place. Moreover, there has been (as you stated in a different paragraph summarizing Muslim beliefs) textual distortions along the way. This has been confirmed by modern scholarship.
I don't think the "Biblical characters or previous books" are not needed. The Bible is a collection of interesting writings on a variety of subjects, and has value in many ways, but from an Islamic perspective, the purest summaries of their accounts and lessons are preserved in the Quranic revelation. Moses is in the Qur'an more that Muhammad. Jesus is there by name 25 times, whereas Muhammad is four times (five if you count "Ahmad").
But in terms of treating the Bible as an authoritative scripture on Muslims, no- that would be incorrect, from both theological and historical foundations. May God's peace be on all of his messengers.
As for the assertion that Allah is God's proper name, I know that many people believe that, but "Allah" is simply "God" (literally "THE God") in Arabic. Every language and culture has their particular term. I have no qualms if a different word is used according to their language. So while I know that this issue is often asserted by Muslims, and subjected to debates from missionaries of other faiths, for me -it's unnecessary.
Wali states " The last Day events will now include an "Islamic figure" of the Mah-hdi
whom Christ himself will now be replaced by. This Islamic figure may include Muhammad, i.e.; ( "The comforter/advocate himself" ) along with another "unknown Islamic figure" to join in to help destroy the Dajjal and bring order to the New world, which whom THEY shall reign & be the rulers of the next world - Pre ordained by Allah. - This is why the Quran was now revealed for mankind to accept and follow because its also the perfect example for mankind and the world at large."
There's no Muslim sect which believes Prophet Muhammad will return to the world. The issue of Mahdi and Jesus second coming are controversial, and alot to get into. If you wish to discuss eschatology in more details, do so in the comment section of the following article, which itself has more information on this issue https://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2017/02/considering-day-of-judgement-is-it-close.html
If you cannot copy/paste from your device, simply look on the search bar on this blog (upper left corner) or do a fresh google search for the title " Considering the day of Judgement: is it close?"
" This whole Change is necessary because the previous books (Taurat & Injeel) have suffered many doctrinal changes over time and can no longer be trusted or relied upon because of its contradictions & strange far-fetched rhetoric as far as its last day events,- as well as its bigotted language towards Muslim descendants. The world should now replace its previous & erroneous belief systems and turn to the Quran as TRUE believers, as Muttaqin." (Wali's quote).
The above, as your summary of Islamic teachings, can be sharpened, in order to get a better picture. The opening words of your above quote has been addressed above, but I will say that the Islamic religion teaches that faith is not centered on a particular ethnic group. Muhammad is our Prophet just as Moses is our Prophet.
It is true that the Qur'an presents itself as a scripture giving truth where darkness has previously been, guidance to replace confusion, but it does not even give a "chosen people" rendering of it's own followers. That is the part that is not really correct.
Muslims can screw up like anyone else, however, if we repent, and strive, Allah opens the ways. That is found throughout the Qur'an.
@ Wali
I forgot to address this one, your statement " And lastly,. Islam DOES indeed forbid forming an alliance with Non-Muslims, So this isn't about what YOURE claiming the Quran DIDNT say., Its about what the Quran itself stated about the prohibition of forming any alliances,. in ANY instances,..- Regardless of the baseless "nutshell" explanation you gave me about "no agendas being against Hebrews" in-spite of what's already stated in Psalms 83, and Hadith that confirms it.
And a word of advice: I highly recommend searching for the definition of what an "Alliance" is before putting anything in a "nutshell" or talking about who doesn't get a cigar,. OK? - I would think someone with your knowledge & intelligence would already know these things."
There are lots of details to go through regarding the early Muslim's dealings with Non Muslims, in particular Jewish groups (the subject of this particular discussion), but to summarize there was a treaty in place assuring mutual defense and the like, and there were groups among the Arabian Jewish tribes which broke those agreements. It was this which was the cause of conflict.
The bigger issue you are raising is whether or not Islam allows such, and the issue of alliances. In one of the comments above, I referred to a link with the relevant sources to answer this query. First of all, a treaty of any sort is an "alliance", "agreement" or whatever term you want to use. Islam does not forbid close ties with non Muslims, see Qur'an 5:5. The details of this issue, go back to the link https://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2013/04/in-belly-of-beast-questions-on-islamic.html
I hope I haven't missed anything in terms of subjects in replying to what you have brought up.
Wali writes above " And if may add...( To clear up the continuing accusations of me making "ethnicity" a theme for my arguments;).. As I stated before,. My theme is about "Our TRUE identity & history ( which is what we mainly we promote worldwide )- Not a case of being Black nationalist or supremacist,.. But take it as you will,.. But I highly advise reading those Bible scripts I provided of Isaiah's chapters 14-60 & 61 (of The Next Kingdom) - & Try coping & accepting the future events of "The Next kingdom,.." because it wont benefit you at all by being disgruntled and seething about it with all the complaints."
Actually, based on past discussions, it is precisely that of nationalistic or supremacist (the latter being more appropriate) thinking. Early in the discussion, Eldon, a stranger to you, saw the racist language. I have told you the same repeatedly. If everyone is seeing the same problem, there has to be at least some truth to it, and no amount of denial is going to erase that.
But it's not just you. The HI movement teaches that. It is reflective in their tactics of picking arguments with everyone, particularly with Non-Blacks, on the streets of the East coast. Unfortunately, their views (and yours) are products of a variety of social and religious factors unique to the American experience, creating a back- projection upon many subjects, such as Islam as a religion.
What I mean by that is that just because some individuals in USA believed this or that, that does not mean it reflects what was taught or lived by others outside of this generation or society.
Not everyone is racist, not everyone is anti-Jewish, or anti-women or anything like that. Jews continued to live in Arabia long after the Prophet's death, Islam did not seek to wipe out neither the Jews nor Christians in some religious crusade, although Christian Europe has had repeated attempts to wipe out Jews, Muslims and Christians of different persuasions.
It is very tempting to go into this discussion on the "true identity" of the Jews, but I have avoided that because it's a red herring. It's also a reflection on the chosen people syndrome that has been in the American religious landscape ever since the founding of this country. In essence, HI is simply putting a black face on an ideology which whites had largely seen themselves as. If applied in a metaphorical sense, it would be more sensical than in a literal sense for any party.
@ S. Waheed
I forgot to mention: ( although I didn't bother to wade through any pervious following comments) If you were still interested in having any further discussion with the Elder / s regarding our topics regarding the history Islam,...
Youtube: "Israel Roots within Black Heritage".. leave any questions or comments to Elder Rawchaa
from W. Djazzique (above )
@ S. Waheed
And mind you,.. the video it'self wasn't intended for YOU to watch,. ( Only for those who relate to the topic,.) However, l thought the topic would be a good source for you share any comments or questions.
W. Djazzique ( above)
@ Wali.
Everyone is welcome to read, comment and ponder the content of this article or any of the other content we share.
As far as I am concerned, the core of assertions made by the speakers you shared almost a year ago has been addressed, and up to now there has been no attempts to really counter that.
If you have contact with the people who produced last year's video you posted (the ones who falsely claimed that Prophet Muhammad used to practice beastiality), you can share this article with them, and if they chose to reply, they can do that.
@ S. Waheed
If you're still continuously having doubts & concerns about "the bestiality issue" with Mohammad, I highly suggest having the discussion with THEM. -I'm sure they'll provide you with the source of the information, ( most likely found in the hadith ) - which you seem to denounce anyway. But if you feel you wont make any further attempts to counter that, then why continue to bring it up with ME? You obviously still seem to be having issues & concerns about it.
You don't have to be afraid to engage with them about the topic. - Its better that you get a 2nd perspective of the matter directly from THEM if you're having issues with any false claims. - After all, THEY are the ones that shared the info on their platform, so that's where you should go at this point. - I don't see any point in continuously addressing your concerns to ME about it. I only "co-sign" on something if there's sources that give confirmation.
@S. Waheed
Sorry for the double post
@ Wali:
As mentioned before, You brought the particular video to my attention, and when I told you about the beastiality claim, you yourself rejected that. Now, in above comment, you are stating that it can have a foundation in hadeeth.
I have brought it up to you because you introduced the video to me, and it is important to illustrate that such a claim goes beyond religious discussion, it is simply a ridiculous slander which takes away any semblance of respect and credibility, just as if someone claims the earth is actually flat!
In any case, the core of this article, so far, you have not actually addressed. While you co-signed on a reading of Biblical texts insulting Ishmael (leading to a long discussion between Br Eldon and yourself), the other points you basically ignored. The core of the article addresses the Quranic verses cited by the HI movement (and Christian missionaries generally) as evidence of Islamic validation of the Bible, it also shows examples of interpolations and editing of Biblical texts, and a number of other items. Those issues you have overlooked in your comments.
Back to the Youtube video, you can share this article with the speakers, or with anyone else. They are welcome to address this article, because this article addresses the essential arguments advanced by the video.
I am not afraid to address the bestiality argument, LOL. I am actually appalled that anyone would make that claim, one which, seemingly, you are now at least slightly on board with.
@ S. Wahid
One again,. I'm aware that I brought the video to your attn, which I've also long since ended as well (over a year ago)- But you continue to bring this issue up after I've given my views & opinions about the matter. - Anyways,. You say I even rejected the bestiality issue myself,. (which I did) because there was no mention of Muhammed (in particular) engaging in those acts,- although its forbidden according to Quran & Hadith 38: (Jami at Tirmidhi 1455 bk 17 Vol, 3)
However, it was still practiced anyway by some in the Muslim community ( As the Elders addressed on the video ) which most likely was a pre-Islam pagan-Arab practice.
Why else would there even be a mention of it in the hadith?.. Obviously because it was happening. So yes,... I'm going to be on board with being critical about it. So Im sorry if that disappoints you.
And its not quite clear to me of the parts I supposedly "ignored" as you claimed. And besides, I believe we've already discussed the "core issues" of the Qur'anic verses with the" HI" & Christians anyway,... - involving all the interpolations & editing of the texts. But before you make any definitive claims of the Bible,.. Make sure you've studied it from its original texts and not relying on the watered-down modern revisions of it to fit your conclusion.
Our movement is well aware of the doctrinal changes its suffered. That's why we also study from its original manuscripts & not relying on just the modern English, ( as Muslims do ) - Whereas WE know how to distinguish ( while doing comparisons & translations ) of what's been revised or edited,.. - Something MUSLIMS should be doing before making any arguments. its seems according to you,. You would love nothing more if the Bible was just totally discredited & obsolete altogether from mankind, Along with its history, people & biblical figures.
I guess EVERYTHING about it should be irrelevant and no more in remembrance at this point, (SEE Psalms 83) - even if God stated Ashar-Ehyeh-Ashar ( "I Am That I Am" ) would be his true name FOREVER ( Exodus 3:15 ) I guess to Muslims, "Everything" should be reformed & replaced now, (including His name) with "Allah" & "His new messenger." If you're having such an issue with anything associated with Judaism or Christianity then why stay and take residence & citizenship in a non-Muslim country (which is also against Islam anyway ) instead of moving to a Muslim country?
I still feel its best to visit the Elders comment section of the source I provided instead continuously having this same discussion with ME.
@ Wali..
A number of things. (1) Since we both agree that beastiality was not something done by the Prophet Muhammad, and in fact the reference you posted shows that it was forbidden, how can YOU share a source which has stated that the Prophet did such things? (2) As an aside, the Old Testament has the same sort of prohibitions and edicts, so if the suggestion is that "Arabs used to do that, let's use it as a way to attack Islam", then the same thing would have to be said about the Jews, because the same prohibitions appear in the O.T. text.
I think you are grasping at straws while at the same time attempt to be honest enough. You shared a video making that argument, when I called you out on it, you admitted that the slander was in fact false, but in above comments you seem to want to defend it anyways.
(3) The parts of the article you have not addressed till now is pretty much everything. You may need to read it again. You did attempt to address the points on Ishmael and Isaac (peace be on them both), and the question of Islam being for Arabs only, but ignored the core of the article. The Qur'an vis-a-vis Bible, which shows the context of all the Quranic verses cited by H.I. movement (as well as Christian missionary groups in general) that allegedly give a superior status and recognition of the Bible, the points of differences, as well as the copious details in the footnotes, these points have not been addressed.
(4) You have written the following as a reading of my views " You would love nothing more if the Bible was just totally discredited & obsolete altogether from mankind, Along with its history, people & biblical figures." I have already stated that is not the case. The Bible, regardless of what historical or theological views I have, is an extremely important text from cultural and religious perspectives. Indeed, the KJV is an example of classical English literature, taught in order to get a feel for language dynamics.
However, in terms of historical accuracy, theological purity and textual preservation, it does not have that sense of reliability. This is proven by the field of Biblical studies itself, and happens to coincide with the Quranic assertions as well.
@ Wali cont...
(5) You write" I guess EVERYTHING about it should be irrelevant and no more in remembrance at this point, (SEE Psalms 83) - even if God stated Ashar-Ehyeh-Ashar ( "I Am That I Am" ) would be his true name FOREVER ( Exodus 3:15 ) I guess to Muslims, "Everything" should be reformed & replaced now, (including His name) with "Allah" & "His new messenger.".
I have not advocated that the Bible should be thrown away. Not at all. Nor have I made it an issue of the Creator is called "Allah" or the name you have written above.
But from the Islamic perspective, The same God who sent Abraham, Moses and Jesus before, has also sent Muhammad, peace be on them all. The Islamic perspective is that all the Prophets and messengers have to be recognized, and that all of them are teaching- at core- the same fundamentals. Our belief is that clarification and completion is found within the Qur'an.
The bulk of our point is summarized as follows (a) Believe what you wish, but don't misrepresent the Qur'an and Sunnah to give some sort of "Biblical superiority". (b) Be honest with texts.
(6) You have penned above " If you're having such an issue with anything associated with Judaism or Christianity then why stay and take residence & citizenship in a non-Muslim country (which is also against Islam anyway ) instead of moving to a Muslim country?"
I confess to laughing at this assertion. We have already spoken of residency in Non Muslim lands before, but rather than calling you out on this attempt to be insulting, let me ask you this...why bother going back and forth on this blog? Why send me messages critical of Islam? You could stick to H.I. websites.
And as an FYI, last year we did in fact post comments in the comment section of the video you sent, as well as a link to this article, however the video owners did not reply. They didn't share that video with us, YOU did.
Generally, that means you have to either defend or reject the content of their message. On one issue atleast, you have seemingly distanced yourself (albeit reluctantly) from one of their assertions.
This article addresses the core issues and arguments such speakers advocate. It is filled with references. It contextualizes the Quranic passages misrepresented by the HI speakers (in that video) and others alike.
If you want to share with them, or anyone else, this article, for them to address, go right ahead.
@ S. Wahid
As stated before, YOU decided to continue to go back & forth on this topic about the bestiality issue (as well as about Ishmael) after I've given you the source to address your views & concerns, However if you've already sent your comment to the Elders,.. I'm sure they'll respond when time is convenient for them, - As im sure they're very busy answering & responding to other with arguments similar to you're, They haven't even responded to MY questions as of yet since our last contact.
However, should they respond to you when timely matter:. I highly advise making sure that you have solid proof of THIER information being misinformed, As well as not accepting the clear Ayatts they provide you, ( but instead,. YOUR own personal ISLAMIC perspective ) with no real bases,. Otherwise it'll just be a pointless & futile argument (as with me) - which they're not dealing with. I'm not sure if you can recall what he expressed about that from the previous radio show with Muslim Umar. And also,.
If you plan on having a discourse with them, be sure to come in with a "universal" or biblical perspective about the Bible and its history & Revelations, and not with just an "Islamic" perspective,. Unless its with points the Quran itself has already supported of the Bible. And Im sure they wont be too interested in hearing about how "erroneous" you & Eldon believe the Bible is,. which gives the impression you believe it should be obsolete. And as for taking "residency" in a non-Muslim country;. it wasn't intended to be an insult,.. Its just a simple fact, according to the Quran ( which is conditional only in cases of seeking refuge from danger ) - Not about seeking a more convenient life.
And for the record,. I didn't ignore ANYTHING about the videos, I just didn't agree with YOUR perception of it, i.e; (Biblical superiority) which I didn't bother to dignify with a response, Especially after I already shared scriptures. And in regards to both of us agreeing that Muhammad didn't engage in bestialities acts, (as you stated,) - But then you turn right around and ask; "How can I share a reference where he did such things, which was forbidden?" - Especially after I just stated,. " NO REFERENCE SPECIFIED MUHAMMAD IN PARTICULAR engaging in such acts"- which is why I rejected it,. However it was still practised in the Muslim community (according to hadith & Quran) So What reference did I exactly share about HIM engaging in those acts? - Perhaps its YOU grasping for straws, in attempt to discredit me.
@ S. Wahid
As of now, I'm concluding this topic, However, if you wish,.. here's 4
links containing confirmation regarding early slavery in the US. Google: "1900s: Black Slaves confirmed as Israelites" & "free Blacks of Israel Hill" ( in 1810-1811 in Prince Edward Co, VA) Also Google: "Gullah Geechee linking Good Friday & the Passover" (see video on site)
I understand Most People will be reluctant to accept any evidence or proofs we share,. Mainly its because of what they were taught their entire lives about Blacks & Africans in general;.. as being a "lesser" & uncivilized people with no societal values. That's what's being taught to the masses, (in spite of some still knowing the truth) Therefore they couldn't possibly be peoples of God,. So its impossible to accept & being quickly dismissed - So many CHOOSE not to believe it because its to hard to fathom.
But the truth is coming out for many, Even for many other races (Especially amongst many Arabs) So there's "claim" we need to make as descendants of the earlier chosen people, Although Judaism consists of a diversity of other races as well over the ages (not just blacks) it even stated in scripture that Israel shall be as as a cake ( dark on bottom & light on top) as well as a speckled bird ( with different colored spots ) So there's "SUPERORITY" being advocated. Although there's various scriptures identifying the ancient Israelites being black, which I've explained.
So at this point im finished.
@S, Wahid
Sorry for typos,. Correction: There's NO superiority being advocated here. And 2: There's NO claims that needs to be made, because the proof has already been confirmed and documented
By the way,. The 4th source:
YouTube:
"The curses of true Israel"
I will reply in detail a bit later, but my reference to going back and forth was not about the bestiality issue, but rather going back and forth in general.
What I am saying is simple, and should be clear in the thread: why keep going on a Muslim's blog? Why keep messaging me?
In other words, you have been sending me for years now anti-Islamic messages, even videos from those (such as David Wood) whose theology would go against your own views...why do you keep on that tact?
@ Wali
You wrote: " However, should they respond to you when timely matter:. I highly advise making sure that you have solid proof of THIER information being misinformed, As well as not accepting the clear Ayatts they provide you, ( but instead,. YOUR own personal ISLAMIC perspective ) with no real bases,. Otherwise it'll just be a pointless & futile argument (as with me) - which they're not dealing with. I'm not sure if you can recall what he expressed about that from the previous radio show with Muslim Umar. And also,."
This article itself can be viewed as a reply to that video and your overall assertions in general. The article is packed with references, rather than "personal perspectives", and addresses the Quranic verses cited by yourself (as well as the video owners and Christian missionaries in general ) by contextual analysis, disproving the arguments advanced by them.
" If you plan on having a discourse with them, be sure to come in with a "universal" or biblical perspective about the Bible and its history & Revelations, and not with just an "Islamic" perspective,. Unless its with points the Quran itself has already supported of the Bible. And Im sure they wont be too interested in hearing about how "erroneous" you & Eldon believe the Bible is,. which gives the impression you believe it should be obsolete. And as for taking "residency" in a non-Muslim country;. it wasn't intended to be an insult,.. Its just a simple fact, according to the Quran ( which is conditional only in cases of seeking refuge from danger ) - Not about seeking a more convenient life."
Last thing first, the entire earth belongs to Allah. While the early Muslims were eventually ordered to migrate, this is not a general command per se. And, as stated before, the earth belongs to God, each person has the right to seek his provision, to work on his or her agenda, whereever they want. If you have really believed the above, you have really had a misreading of Islam.
As for the first part of your paragraph, my impression was that the speakers in that video was engaging in misinformation and scare tactics. In any case, the core of this article looked at Quranic verses and Biblical examples, as well as historical and academic references. I have not really seen much in the way of replying to that content. The comment section is open, if they or anyone else wishes to comment, they are free to do so.
Such a reply requires researching and contemplating the argument. Check the references the article cites. Research its claims on the Bible, and the sources it cites. Read footnotes 2 and 3.
@ Wali
You write above:" And for the record,. I didn't ignore ANYTHING about the videos, I just didn't agree with YOUR perception of it, i.e; (Biblical superiority) which I didn't bother to dignify with a response, Especially after I already shared scripture"
You have shared arguments from the Qur'an (as did that video) that attempts to argue that the Qur'an gives validation to the Bible. Quranic verses from the fifth Soorah (addressed in the article itself) are among the texts you both cited. The "perception" is simply stating in clear terms what the agenda of the video presenters (and yourself and missionaries in general) has been. Indeed, if you are going to be honest, that is what you believe and argue. You believe that the Bible is superior to the Qur'an, you don't believe the latter is from God.
While it is your business to believe that, or anyone else for that matter, the issue of contention is the (mis)using of the Quranic texts to support that idea.
The Quranic teaching is not that at all, rather, it is that the Bible has suffered textually, as well as overall problems in the transmission of the lives and teachings of such important figures as Jesus, Moses, and other prophets, upon whom be peace.
Thus, the article refutes the notions missionaries preach in their misuse of Quranic verses.
@ Wali:
" However it was still practised in the Muslim community (according to hadith & Quran) So What reference did I exactly share about HIM engaging in those acts? - Perhaps its YOU grasping for straws, in attempt to discredit me."
I think you didn't read my statements carefully. Initially, when I pointed out that the video YOU shared made the assertion that Islam teaches (or that the Prophet MUHAMMAD did ) bestiality, I was giving an example of why the video lost any academic or religious credibility, because it made a baseless accusation. You agreed, and backed away from an endorsement of that, but in this thread (and even the quote here) have made a side argument that the claim had some foundation, to which YOU shared a hadeeth forbidding it.
Bestiality is an immoral practice. Could there have been people who did it? Yes, it could have happened. But to then suggest that "it was still practiced in the Muslim community" is to make a ridiculous suggestion. It is no different than saying "All Chinese are this" or "all women are that". You ignored when I said the Bible has the same sort of prohibitions. If I wanted to, I could make the same claim you did.
Could there have been Jews who did Bestiality? Yes, there could have been. Maybe it did happen. However, the Bible forbade it. The Bible didn't endorse it.
I don't know how clearer I can make this point to you.
@ Wali:
You write " As of now, I'm concluding this topic, However, if you wish,.. here's 4
links containing confirmation regarding early slavery in the US. Google: "1900s: Black Slaves confirmed as Israelites" & "free Blacks of Israel Hill" ( in 1810-1811 in Prince Edward Co, VA) Also Google: "Gullah Geechee linking Good Friday & the Passover" (see video on site)"
I'll have a look at it when time allows, but you keep missing my point on this topic. If your grandfather was a slave or a slaveowner, if he was Pharoah or Hitler, that is not relevant for your spiritual state. It can, admittedly, have some influence on your internal makeup, and of course historical relativism and the like, but proclaiming connection to one race or another does not make a person good or bad, a resident of paradise or hell fire. The Bible itself says that the opponents of Jesus made the argument (that descent from Abraham guarantees them salvation). Jesus is said to have replied "If you are Abraham's children, you would act like him. Rather, you are Satan's children".
May peace and blessings of Allah be on Abraham, Jesus and the righteous servants.
Thus, I haven't really gotten into that side of things with you. I can, from a historical perspective, but in this thread and context it's a Non-issue in my opinion.
@ Wali:
You wrote" I understand Most People will be reluctant to accept any evidence or proofs we share,. Mainly its because of what they were taught their entire lives about Blacks & Africans in general;.. as being a "lesser" & uncivilized people with no societal values. That's what's being taught to the masses, (in spite of some still knowing the truth) Therefore they couldn't possibly be peoples of God,. So its impossible to accept & being quickly dismissed - So many CHOOSE not to believe it because its to hard to fathom."
Sure, there are people who think that Africa is a lesser and uncivilized place, however I am not one of them. I lived in Africa. I'm more connected to it than you may think. However, my lack of endorsement of H.I. arguments should not be mistaken as a dismissal because of color or something like that. That is simply a cop-out, as they say.
You also write " But the truth is coming out for many, Even for many other races (Especially amongst many Arabs) So there's "claim" we need to make as descendants of the earlier chosen people, Although Judaism consists of a diversity of other races as well over the ages (not just blacks) it even stated in scripture that Israel shall be as as a cake ( dark on bottom & light on top) as well as a speckled bird ( with different colored spots ) So there's "SUPERORITY" being advocated. Although there's various scriptures identifying the ancient Israelites being black, which I've explained."
It's the superiority issue that we keep returning to. As a Muslim, we are taught something different. We are taught that superiority is based on individual ethics and God- awareness. The article highlighted this.
As Eldon said earlier in the thread "Grace, not race".
Wali, you mentioned my name in this phrase "...how "erroneous" you & Eldon believe the Bible is..."
For the record, I will say that the Bible is mostly accurate, despite some copyist errors, mistranslations, misinterpretations, commentary included into the texts, and erroneous conclusions reached by Christians and pushed as dogma in contradiction to plain Bible teachings.
The best example of error in the Bible is the verse 1John 5:7 KJV which reads "...there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one."
This verse was ADDED to a Greek text in the 16th century AD on the basis of a translator's note in the text of a Latin manuscript from earlier years in Christian history. As you know, this verse is the strongest evidence towards belief in the trinity doctrine and the claim that "Jesus is God", though it is a known addition to the words of the Bible. There are other additions and alterations in the NT text along these lines as well, which if accepted DO make belief in the Bible erroneous, if not corrected.
I would think that your black Israelite group is NON-trinitarian and aware of such faults in the Bible, but you can speak for yourself. Jesus warned his followers against "traditions of men which make the Word of God of none effect", so we have ample cause to look well to our goings in the endeavor of Faith.
@S. Wahid & Eldon
As I stated before,.. I've concluded this discourse at this time, ( which I did for a reason ) So why do YOU continue to message me as well?
But in fairness,.. I'll respond to Eldon last comments,. But first,. You say your reference wasn't only about the bestiality issue or about Ishmael & superiority etc., ( but in general ) - However, your plight seems to still be "beating the drum" focusing on those same points anyway,. Especially after I've already explained all of that to you in full. I guess everything just went right past you (not accepting the facts) - But instead, you find it more convenient to hold me accountable for simply sharing the information, rather than accept the facts I provided (from scripture itself, So blame the texts,. Not me. It seems to always be about, "what "I" said"
And for the record; The other HI videos of them at the street corners don't reflect the views & opinions other groups, (just to make that clear) Some are just infiltrators.
Any by the way, No one is asking you to agree with the Elders video. Whatever you choose to disagree on, that's YOUR prerogative. And as for the other video I forgot to add along with the "Israel Hill" article site,..
There's also a video I found that goes along with the article, so I'm sure you'll have the time to check out, that way, it'll give further proof of our TRUE identity. If you have time to leave lengthy messages for me,. then I'm sure you can lend 13 minutes watching a short video. If you say "you're more connected to Africa than I think" then you should be familiar with the info on this next video, as well as accepting it. But either way, it wont make much difference if you accept it or not,. The history & the evidence will still be there anyway.
( Youtube: "Israel Hill and the first black church in America" )
To Eldon:
To answer your question, ( as I suggested before,) I highly advise studying the Bible from the "original" texts and not rely on the various modernized revisions of it. You cant keep using those useless sources to support your claim. "STUDY THE ORIGINAL TEXTS" before refuting because its not giving you any sufficient bases. The same has been said about the Quran as well (suffering doctrinal changes, revisions & errors as well )- Which I've studied the translations in Arabic, on "Quran-O.com" - And besides, Surah 15: 90-92 already confirms it anyway. Yusef Ali Quran.
Hopefully, we can be finished at this point.
May both of you take the videos as you may, but as I said, it wont matter what conclusion you decide to come to.
@S.Wahid & Eldon
As I stated before,.. Ive concluded this discourse at this time, ( which I did for a reason ) So why do YOU continue to message me as well?
But in fairness,.. I'll respond to Eldon last comments,. But first,. You say your reference wasn't only about the bestiality issue or about Ishmael & superiority etc., ( but in general ) - However, your plight seems to still be "beating the drum" focusing on those same points anyway, Especially after I've already explained all of that to you in full. I guess everything just went right past you (not accepting the facts) - So you find it more convenient to hold me accountable for simply sharing the information, rather than accept the facts I provided from scripture itself. So blame the texts,. Not me. It seems to always be about, "what "I" said"
And for the record; The other HI videos of them at the street corners don't reflect the views & opinions other groups, (just to make that clear) Some are just infiltrators.
Any by the way, No one is asking you to agree with the Elders video. Whatever you choose to disagree on, that's YOUR prerogative. And as for the other video I forgot to add along with the "Israel Hill" article site,..
There's also a video I found that goes along with the article, so I'm sure you'll have the time to check out, that way, it'll give further proof of our TRUE identity. If you have time to leave lengthy messages for me,. then I'm sure you can lend 13 minutes watching a short video. If you say "you're more connected to Africa than I think" then you should be familiar with the info on this next video, as well as accepting it. But either way, it wont make much difference if you accept it or not,. The history & the evidence will still be there anyway.
( Youtube: "Israel Hill and the first black church in America" )
To Eldon:
To answer your question, ( as I suggested before,) I highly advise studying the Bible from the "original" texts and not rely on the various modernized revisions of it. You cant keep using those useless sources to support your claim. "STUDY THE ORIGINAL TEXTS" before refuting because you don't have no bases. The same has been said about the Quran as well (suffering doctrinal changes, revisions & errors as well )- Which I've studied the translations in Arabic, "Quran-O.com" - And besides, Surah 15: 90-92 already confirms it anyway. Yusef Ali Quran
Hopefully, we can be finished at this point.
May both of you take the videos as you may, but as I said, it wont matter what conclusion you decide to come to.
W. Djazzique
Sorry for the previous double post. (technical error)
@ Wali:
* I didn't "message" you. You are blocked on Facebook, and I don't actually have your phone number or email address. I have, however, replied to your comments on the blog, for the most part in this very comment section.
* You haven't "explained" the points. I shared specific examples in the above comments, in the end notes, but you have not replied to those.
* It is common sense that if you share a video (lecture, book etc), it is because you believe in what is advocated by that source, or atleast enough of its "Information". Thus, it is common sense that those you have addressed it towards would "hold you responsible" insofar as addressing the claims made by that source. It is comparable to shopping, if I shop at Kroeger's, and have a problem with their product, I don't take it to Wal-Mart to complain. I take it to the place from which the product was received.
* Again, it's not my issue if Africans are descendants of the Jews. That has not been relevant to my points, a red herring.
* Your reference to Qur'an 15:90-92 and subsequent assertions about "Quran suffering doctrinal changes, revisions and errors" is precisely the sort of out-of-context claims that we are addressing. Those verses don't support what you are saying at all.
* If Brother Eldon wants to address the "study original texts" issue, he is free to do so, but it seems he has demonstrated that he does precisely that. He has written atleast one book that does that, perhaps you should check it out. It's very accessible and affordable.
* It seems, however, that the point about original texts in original languages was meant for me. I don't see how reference to a different Bible translation (since you seem to think I am using incorrect "various modernized revisions") addresses any of the points I have shared here.
* When I asked earlier in the thread about this point, you shared particular Bible translations which I already have access to.
@ Eldon & S. Waheed
UPDATE:.
I'm just returning this note in response to any opinions of the previous the video I suggested of.. ("lsrael Hill & the first black church in America") on YouTube. Further evidence & confirmed of our TRUE identity, (which goes into specific detail @ 7:20sec) A long history many Muslims and many others have doubted for some time.
@ S, Wahid,
How's the communications system there? Is everything functioning properly? l heard about the cyber attack on nearly everything source there, or was it just the casinos?
@ Wali Djazzique:
Thanks for reaching out. Everything is functioning correctly for average people, it is just some of the big casinos. Because Casinos are usually inside hotels, employees and guests have been affected, having no acceess to their rooms, things of that nature.
In fact, one of the big hotels paid a ransom to the hackers, but none of this has affected the wider city.
Post a Comment