Thanks for the comment Royalson, thanks for remaining respectful. I'm pushed for time. Here is a quick response to your comment. For those who want to view the debate review, see here:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/debate-was-muhammad-true-prophet-osama.html
Here is Royalson's comment:
Ok Yahya, I see your comment has made its way back. Thank you for that. I look forward to your coming response when time permits.
On another note, in reading your review of the debate itself, I observed that you handed the victory to Osama purely on the basis of his argument for Deuteronomy 18:18. However, Anthony pointed out that the context demonstrates that the bretheren being spoken of are the bretheren of the Levites, which of course would refer to the remaining 11 tribes of Israel. In light of this you acknowledged that it was an interesting point that you would need to look into.
I draw attention to this Yahya, because if Anthony is correct regarding the interpretation based upon the context, then it would seem to me that the single point that you felt won Osama the debate is actually lost to Anthony. In fact, there is absolutely nothing in the text that would lead one to look beyond the 12 tribes of Israel to some foreign peoples. Such an interpretation breaks the flow and intention of the text.
I would like to point out a couple of other things as well. You mention that Muhammad did in fact see Allah face to face in the Night Journey. However, I do not see any Hadith which recount the Night Journey, ever mentioning Muhammad seeing Allah's face. Could you please direct me to the reference which mentions Allah's face?
With regards to what Radical Moderate is saying, the doctrine of the Divine Trinity is certainly compatible with the "prophet like Moses" seeing God face to face. God is often used as an appellation of any one of the three persons of the Divine Trinity, much like in Acts 20:28 which speaks of God's own blood. The understanding in that verse is not that the Father shed blood, nor the Holy Spirit, but specifically the Son. In like manner, Christ the Son saw God face to face. In other words, He beheld the Father. To back up this interpretation, we find Peter identifying Christ as the prophet like Moses in His sermon in Acts chapter 3 and Stephen's defense in Acts 7 likewise identify's Christ as that prophet like Moses. Would you not agree that these are the earliest interpretations of Deuteronomy 18:18 we have attributed to Christ's followers? I believe you would be hard pressed to find something to the contrary in the manuscript tradition that would lead you to original readings of these verses against the ones that we have in the New Testament.
1. With regards to Osama's points winning the debate - yes his points on Deut 18 won the debate. I say this based on an accumulative case he presented. Anthony was floundering and was in fact shifting the goal posts - that's not because he is an inferior debater than Osama (in fact he presentation-wise is much stronger than Osama). It's simply a case of what he had to appeal to was less convincing than that of which Osama had.
The point of brother or relative is the only one which Anthony could lay reasonable claim to being stronger than Osama's imo. That's all. Think about it, Deut 18 is always going to be about an accumulative argument, thus you can't just point to one reasoned contention Anthony presents and then dismiss all the other points which happened to be noticeably weaker than Osama's.
2. No, I did not mention in the debate review that the Prophet (p) saw Allah face to face. The Prophet (p) spoke directly with Him (he had direct communication with Him).
3. I don't understand why appeals from the NT claiming Jesus (p) is that Prophet (p) are that important - especially their earliness. Early in this regard does not matter as Prophet Muhammad (p) came roughly 600 years later. For all we know there could have been false claimants to being 'the Prophet' before the Common Era.
4. Aside from this, Osama did not point out that in John 1 (19-21) the Messiah and 'the Prophet' were in fact differentiated as two distinct beings, thus going by that reading Prophet Jesus (p) could not be 'the Prophet' as Prophet Jesus (p) is the Messiah.
5. The debate was a little one-dimensional. It's almost like these people who organise debates don't think about serving up something different. In my view, the debate would have been more interesting if the Christian side had to get off the fence and present a case for whom they thought Deut18:18 was referring to as well. As far as I know, this type of debate has not been done before; who does Deut 18:18 refer to, Prophets Jesus or Muhammad (pbut)? Now that is an idea. If there is any debate organiser reading, please ensure the debaters for this topic are of a higher standard.
6. Royalson, also keep in mind, Osama just accepted the debate at short notice - 11th hour stuff. He took up 4 debates too. Here you have a guy who just turns up unprepared and still manages to present more of a convincing argument on Deut 18 than Anthony who would have had weeks/months to prepare (?) whilst his opponent has 4 debates to do. Factor into this equation that Osama is not a comfortable debater. For me that is a testament to the strength of the argument that the Muslims have with regards to Deut 18.
7. Royalson, for me you have to also look at things holistically, you can't just look at arguments against Prophet Muhammad (p) in this case as you have to look at who else is being argued to be 'the Prophet' (p) - namely Prophet Jesus (p). For me the arguments Christians present here are messy and actually get even messier when factoring in the Trinitarian theology. Think about it, the Trinitarian whilst arguing for such a case (based on his/her Trinitarian beliefs) is effectively saying; Prophet Moses (p) is like God, God put His words into His Mouth, God is the brother of Jews, God will tell people what God commanded, God will raise up God
Here is the verse and just look how messy it would get for Trinitarian arguments for Prophet Jesus (p) to be such a person:
“I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.” (The Holy Bible, New International Version, Deuteronomy chapter 18, verse 18).
I know the Trinitarians have this belief of three persons but even if they attempt to reconcile based on the argument of 'persons' (and incarnation) they still have the issue of why the verse just doesn't say something such as 'I [God] will come...'
So for me, the Trinitarian understanding is deeply flawed and their arguments for Prophet Jesus to be 'the Prophet' (pbut) raises more confusion for the Trinitarian.
From a Unitarian point of view, the arguments for Prophet Muhammad (p) to be 'the Prophet' (p) are indeed still stronger - especially in light of John 1 where it's implied the Messiah is not 'the Prophet' (they are two distinct people).
PS Royalson, I may do a separate one on Deut 33:2 so in this comment section perhaps it's better to solely focus on Deut 18. You can always remind me about Deut 33:2 at a later date. Thanks
Conclusion
So for me, the question is, if not Prophet Muhammad (p) then who? There's nobody else who fits the criteria better. Muslim debaters need to start adding other aspects to debates rather then playing out the same debate with different personalities as it just becomes a personality contest where they all present the same arguments but in a different manner. So if you're a Muslim debater and are thinking of agreeing to a topic concerning Deut 18 then add this new aspect to the debate - it's more beneficial to the truth-seeker and actually benefits the MUSLIM ARGUMENT!
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
Dr Shabir Ally on Deuteronomy 18:18
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/shabir-ally-on-deuteronomy-1818.html
Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.
Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com/
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteWhy u delete comments you scared Yahya snow you hater
ReplyDeleteTo say that Allah is three persons is idol worship and paganism, and if you die upon that belief the reward will be eternal hell. To say that Jesus (peace be upon him) is Allah the Allmighty is blasphemous.
ReplyDeleteour God is One, none has the right to be worshipped but He. That is the straight way.
He's comments are very childish and disrespectful, He's language is so bad that its hard to read his comments in a serious way really. But of course all Christians are not like him.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteSam and his buddy, why are you looking to destabalize this post?
ReplyDeleteIt was set up to open up/continue a discussion with a user under the name Royal Son.
I really don't have to do this. Please respect the post.
PS If you're going to comment at least refrain from appearing as though you are in a fit of rage. This is a rage free zone. Relax. Go and sit in a darkened room for a bit fellas. Sit this one out.
Jazak for this post, you made a very good points br. Yahya.
ReplyDeleteSnowman, you didn't answer my question on another post. I am still unsure what Mohamed was, I keep getting different responses from different Muslims. In your opinion was Mohamed a Prophet, A Warner, a Messenger? Which one is he?
ReplyDeletePlease no more tough questions for Yahya.
ReplyDeleteHello Yahya,
ReplyDeleteThank you for taking the time to address this post to me in the midst of your heavy schedule. I appreciate it. I will quote you and respond accordingly.
From Yahya:The point of brother or relative is the only one which Anthony could lay reasonable claim to being stronger than Osama's imo. That's all. Think about it, Deut 18 is always going to be about an accumulative argument, thus you can't just point to one reasoned contention Anthony presents and then dismiss all the other points which happened to be noticeably weaker than Osama's.
My response:Since we both agree that Anthony's claim is stronger on the point of who the bretheren are, it stands to reason that the cumulative case cannot begin to be made on Osama's part, since genealogically there is no foundation to begin with. If the "prophet like Moses" comes from Israel, and not from Ishmael, then already, Muhammad is out of the picture.
For the sake of discussion however, I will address the cumulative case you have alluded to in your review, despite the fact that the genealogical case eliminates Muhammad from the list of candidates. Before I do so however, I would like to point out that it is not only Christians who recognise Jesus as being a prophet like Moses. Ibn Kathir wrote in His biography of Muhammad:
"In Book 4 of the existing Torah, there is a verse which says: It is clear to them and to everyone that Allah ... did not send a prophet from the offspring of Ismael except Muhammad ... In fact, there was no prophet from the Children of Israel similar to Moses ... except 'Issa" . While he obviously held to the Islamic interpretation of identifying Muhammad as that prophet, he nevertheless acknowledged that Jesus is like Moses.(The Sira of Prophet Muhammad, abridged by Muhammad Ali Al-Halabi Al-Athari [Al-Firdous Ltd, London, 2001: 1st Edition], part 2, p. 24)
Now, onto your criteria. We read:
Normal birth, married, had children, came with a new law, passed away, Moses was accepted by his (Jewish) people as a whole but Jesus was not (according to is own did not receive him, they all forsook him and fled at the) most Jews do not accept him (though Jesus was a Jew) whilst most Arabs accept Muhammad as a Prophet, both Muhammad and Moses were rulers of their respective people, Jesus was not.
First of all you mention his birth. Well, if you recall, Moses was born an Israelite, just like Jesus whereas Mohammad was born supposedly as an Ishmaelite. Moses' birth was under a time when the Israelites were subjected to the rule of the Egyptians, just like Jesus' birth during the occupation of the Romans.
When Moses was in his infancy, his life was under threat by Pharoah's command to cast the Hebrew children into the Nile just like Jesus, whose life was under the threat of Herod who commanded children under the age of two to be killed. Moses' life was hidden in secrecy as was Jesus' life who was taken to Egypt.
Regarding Moses marrying, the nature of Moses' marriage is different to that of Muhammad. However, if you believe that the manner in which the marriage takes place is irrelevant then I would simply point out that Christ Himself marries the Church as is pointed out in the Gospels, the Pauline Epistles, and the book of Revelation.
Regarding having children, although Jesus did not have physical children, He certainly spoke of His people being His children like a mother hen to her chicks: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!" - Luke 13:34. This is just like Moses who tried to gather the Israelites under His shepherding care from Egypt and into the wilderness.
I would suggest that this spiritual sense is of far greater import and relevance than whether Moses, Jesus or Muhammad had physical children or not.
You mentioned that people accepted Moses just like they accepted Muhammad, but Jesus' own people, the Jews rejected Him even though He was a Jew. Well again, you have implicitly conceded the similarity between Jesus and Moses, both being Jews. However, when you speak about Jesus being rejected by His own people, actually the majority of His disciples were Jews. The majority of the early Christians were Jews, until of course the gospel had spread out from Jerusalem to "all the nations" (Matthew 28:19).
ReplyDeleteYou speak of Muhammad coming with a new law. Well according to the Qur'an - so did Jesus: And (I come) confirming that which was before me of the Torah, and to make lawful some of that which was forbidden unto you. I come unto you with a sign from your Lord, so keep your duty to Allah and obey me. (Surah 3:50)
On the point of Jesus' disciples forsaking him and fleeing, this was at the arrest. However, only 4 verses later Mark 14:54, Peter follows from a distance right into the courtyard of the High Priest. I don't think it is fair to make a generalisation about Jesus' followers by appealing to something which finds an about turn only 4 verses afterward. To be fair in our exegesis, we must allow the context to explain the situation.
You stated that Muhammad was a ruler of His people whereas Jesus was not. I would say that Christ being King of Israel (Luke 19:38, John 12:13), King of Kings, Lord of Lords(1 Tim 6:15, Revelation 17:14) most certainly shows Him to be a ruler of His people, and in a much higher capacity than that of Muhammad, because not only is He a King in the Earthly sense, but He has dominion over the heavens as well (Matthew 28:18).
Finally, I would venture as far as to say that the Qur'an itself is not in the position to speak on Deuteronomy 18:18, at least in support of the Muslim position that it must be referring to Muhammad without question. The reason for this is found in Surah 3:84, which reads: "Say (O Muhammad): We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and that which was vouchsafed unto Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered."
In other words, according to Surah 3:84, there is no distinction between any of the prophets mentioned, including Moses and Jesus. Notice also, that Muhammad is speaking of those prophets that are other than himself. He is not including himself in that list, which would lead to the conclusion that from a Qur'anic perspective, the case for Jesus being a prophet like Moses is undeniable whereas Muhammad being likewise a prophet like Moses is questionable at best.
The biblical criteria
It is only fair that in gleaning for data about who this prophet like Moses would be from the Bible, that we actually derive the criteria from the same source.
The Biblical Criteria is that this Prophet would:
1) Speak with God face to face. (Deut 34:10)
2) Perform miracles. (Deut 34:11-12)
On point 1, you claimed that Muhammad fulfilled this criteria because he spoke with Allah directly. I would disagree. Muhammad did not speak with Allah face to face. The night journey was a dream.
On point 2, you claimed that Muhammad did perform miracles. But this contradicts the Qur'an which clearly states:
ReplyDeleteSurah 28:48 - But when there came unto them the Truth from Our presence, they said: Why is he not given the like of what was given unto Moses? Did they not disbelieve in that which was given unto Moses of old? They say: Two magics that support each other; and they say: Lo! in both we are disbelievers.
So on the point of Miracles it is noted that Muhammad was not like Moses. Any Hadith that claim that He did perform miracles is at odds with the Qur'an.
Ibn Kathir writes: Allah tells us that if people were to be punished before proof was established against them, they would use the excuse that no Messenger came to them, but when the truth did come to them through Muhammad , in their stubbornness, disbelief, ignorance and misguided thinking, they said:
(Why is he not given the like of what was given to Musa) Meaning -- and Allah knows best -- many signs like the staff, the hand, the flood, the locusts, the lice, the frogs, the blood, the destruction of crops and fruits -- which made things difficult for the enemies of Allah -- and the parting of the sea, the clouds (following the Children of Israel in the wilderness and) shading them, the manna and quails, and other clear signs and definitive proof, miracles which Allah wrought at the hands of Musa as evidence and proof against Fir`awn and his chiefs and the Children of Israel. But all of this had no effect on Fir`awn and his chiefs; on the contrary, they denied Musa and his brother Harun, as Allah tells us:
(Have you come to us to turn us away from what we found our fathers following, and that you two may have greatness in the land We are not going to believe you two!) (10:78)
(So they denied them both and became of those who were destroyed.) (23:48)
And: The unbelievers say, 'Why has a sign (ayatun) not been sent down upon him from his Lord?' Thou art ONLY a warner, and a guide to every people. Surah 13:7.
So instead of providing the miracles through Muhammad, Allah simply destroyed them. The excuse given is that people were stubborn in their unbelief toward Moses even after His miracles, therefore there's no need to waste time giving signs through Muhammad which would likewise be rejected.
And according to surah 13:7, the reason why He does not perform miracles is because He is only a warner.
On the other hand, we find that Acts chapter 3 and 7 identify the prophet like Moses as Christ as per the testimony of Peter and Steven respectively and recorded for us by Luke.
So just to reiterate, I believe that no cumulative case can be made for Muhammad, since the foundation points away from him with regards to the genealogy being from the Israelites. Secondly, the criteria you have proposed does not conclusively point to Muhammad either. Thirdly, the biblical criteria points to Christ. Fourthly, ibn Kathir recognises Jesus as being like Moses. Fifthly, the Qur'an makes no distinction between Moses and Christ. Sixthly. the earliest known interpretation attributed to the followers of Christ identifies Christ as that very prophet.
I would also just like to end on this little note. You based the victory of Osama's presentation upon the position of Deuteronomy 18:18. I believe that in light of the afforementioned points that there is no case for Muhammad being that prophet. I would like to ask once again if you are 100% confident that Deuteronomy 18:18 is indeed the Divine, inspired word of Allah and not the corrupted words of men, given your position of the corruption of the Torah. Are you certain that you are not merely trying to connect dots in order to try to find something that points to the authenticity of your prophet, when in fact the text has no intention of speaking of Muhammad?
Thank you for your responses Yahya.
Yahya, I'll try to get to your other points when I have time.
ReplyDeleteThank you,
Royalson.
Go slow, royal son. We want him to keep up so he can see the light.
ReplyDeleteI think you have overloaded the snowman and caused a meltdown
ReplyDeleteIn the name of Allah the Gracious the Compassionate
ReplyDelete//For the sake of discussion however, I will address the cumulative case you have alluded to in your review, despite the fact that the genealogical case eliminates Muhammad from the list of candidates. Before I do so however, I would like to point out that it is not only Christians who recognise Jesus as being a prophet like Moses. Ibn Kathir wrote in His biography of Muhammad:
"In Book 4 of the existing Torah, there is a verse which says: It is clear to them and to everyone that Allah ... did not send a prophet from the offspring of Ismael except Muhammad ... In fact, there was no prophet from the Children of Israel similar to Moses ... except 'Issa" . While he obviously held to the Islamic interpretation of identifying Muhammad as that prophet, he nevertheless acknowledged that Jesus is like Moses.(The Sira of Prophet Muhammad, abridged by Muhammad Ali Al-Halabi Al-Athari [Al-Firdous Ltd, London, 2001: 1st Edition], part 2, p. 24)//
Royalson,
I never knew about this reference. Kind you kindly show me the original quotes in English or arabic so I can understand the context.
Now, onto your criteria. We read:
Normal birth, married, had children, came with a new law, passed away, Moses was accepted by his (Jewish) people as a whole but Jesus was not (according to is own did not receive him, they all forsook him and fled at the) most Jews do not accept him (though Jesus was a Jew) whilst most Arabs accept Muhammad as a Prophet, both Muhammad and Moses were rulers of their respective people, Jesus was not.
//First of all you mention his birth. Well, if you recall, Moses was born an Israelite, just like Jesus whereas Mohammad was born supposedly as an Ishmaelite. Moses' birth was under a time when the Israelites were subjected to the rule of the Egyptians, just like Jesus' birth during the occupation of the Romans.
When Moses was in his infancy, his life was under threat by Pharoah's command to cast the Hebrew children into the Nile just like Jesus, whose life was under the threat of Herod who commanded children under the age of two to be killed. Moses' life was hidden in secrecy as was Jesus' life who was taken to Egypt.//
This can not be verified. I dont think, Herod commanded to kill infant nor baby Jesus. It is not mentioned elsewhere in the gospels or by the well-known Roman Jewish historian, Josephus (37 – c. 100). verified outside of the biblical source.
The same also true for Jesus in egypt, it is not based on any archaeological evidences.
//Regarding Moses marrying, the nature of Moses' marriage is different to that of Muhammad. However, if you believe that the manner in which the marriage takes place is irrelevant then I would simply point out that Christ Himself marries the Church as is pointed out in the Gospels, the Pauline Epistles, and the book of Revelation.//
Moses and Muhammad (p) lived real marriage life. Jesus mystical marriage to the Church can only found ground christian priests who try to imitate Jesus something other christian sects disagree
//Regarding having children, although Jesus did not have physical children, He certainly spoke of His people being His children like a mother hen to her chicks: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!" - Luke 13:34. This is just like Moses who tried to gather the Israelites under His shepherding care from Egypt and into the wilderness.
I would suggest that this spiritual sense is of far greater import and relevance than whether Moses, Jesus or Muhammad had physical children or not.//
This is creative invention. The facts that both Moses and Muhammad (pbut) married and had offsprings made Jesus is very unlike them. Not only Moses married but he was also a polygamist (at least three wives in the bible) and reportedly had an african wife, like prophet muhammad .
In the name of Allah the Gracious the Compassionate
ReplyDelete//You mentioned that people accepted Moses just like they accepted Muhammad, but Jesus' own people, the Jews rejected Him even though He was a Jew. Well again, you have implicitly conceded the similarity between Jesus and Moses, both being Jews. However, when you speak about Jesus being rejected by His own people, actually the majority of His disciples were Jews. The majority of the early Christians were Jews, until of course the gospel had spread out from Jerusalem to "all the nations" (Matthew 28:19). //
Royalson,
The fact is the jews rejected Jesus to this day on the basis he did not fulfill the messianic prophecies and did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
Muslims are the torch bearer of the true messiahsip of Quranic Jesus which is the messiah will be a normal human being, born of human parent and become one of notable prophet in history.
//You speak of Muhammad coming with a new law. Well according to the Qur'an - so did Jesus: And (I come) confirming that which was before me of the Torah, and to make lawful some of that which was forbidden unto you. I come unto you with a sign from your Lord, so keep your duty to Allah and obey me. (Surah 3:50)//
Thats a weird way to eisegete the surah. now where is this new codified law os Jesus? Like sharia and halacha which govern religious practice aspects such as daily prayers, fasting, charity as well as aspects of daily life such as personal hygiene, guidelines for financial transactions, and dietary regulations??
//On the point of Jesus' disciples forsaking him and fleeing, this was at the arrest. However, only 4 verses later Mark 14:54, Peter follows from a distance right into the courtyard of the High Priest. I don't think it is fair to make a generalisation about Jesus' followers by appealing to something which finds an about turn only 4 verses afterward. To be fair in our exegesis, we must allow the context to explain the situation.//
Thats a Jesus is clearly leading an armed rebellion . His anger erupted into action, when Jesus strode into the temple with a whip of cords, drove out the sheep and oxen, overturned the tables of the money changers, and poured out their coins (John 2:13-17; Matt. 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). It was this conflict that led to his arrest..although his armed conflict was not a succesful one that make Jesus unlike Moses.
//You stated that Muhammad was a ruler of His people whereas Jesus was not. I would say that Christ being King of Israel (Luke 19:38, John 12:13), King of Kings, Lord of Lords(1 Tim 6:15, Revelation 17:14) most certainly shows Him to be a ruler of His people, and in a much higher capacity than that of Muhammad, because not only is He a King in the Earthly sense, but He has dominion over the heavens as well (Matthew 28:18). //
Islam always a value actions and intentions as good deeds . This was exemplified by the prophectic struggle by both Moses and Muhammad during their time as the real leader of peopple.
Jesus does not fit this criterion. " My Kingdom is not of this world ", which led to monasticism like we have seen in christianity.
In the name of Allah the Gracious the Compassionate
ReplyDelete//Finally, I would venture as far as to say that the Qur'an itself is not in the position to speak on Deuteronomy 18:18, at least in support of the Muslim position that it must be referring to Muhammad without question. The reason for this is found in Surah 3:84, which reads: "Say (O Muhammad): We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and that which was vouchsafed unto Moses and Jesus and the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered."//
The Quran instructed not to make distrinction in faith to prophet of God but not on the nature of their mission.
The mission of propet Muhammad and Moses lasted significant length which remarkably similar phases including rejection, escaping persecution, exiles, return back to the land they belongs, and final farewells.
Yet the ministry of Jesus only lasted three years. he never claim to start the religion called “Christianity” (Matt. 5:17-20). He he was rejected by his own people, and his rebellion was crushed by enemies up to his crucifixtion which led God saved him (Q 4:157)
******************************
//The biblical criteria
It is only fair that in gleaning for data about who this prophet like Moses would be from the Bible, that we actually derive the criteria from the same source.
The Biblical Criteria is that this Prophet would:
1) Speak with God face to face. (Deut 34:10)
2) Perform miracles. (Deut 34:11-12//
Prophet Muhammad fulfill all of those perfectly, in his famous night journey Prophet Muhammad was then led to Sidrat Al-Muntaha it was the summit of the Ascension, a tree of Paradise, known as the Lote tree
There marks the roots of God’s Throne and marks the end of the knowledge of every knower, be he Arch Angel or Prophet or Messenger. The Lote tree also marked the boundary where no soul had passed before. It was there that God commanded him "face to face " the daily prayers .
As for miracles , prohet Muhammad performed many great miracles inlcuding the greatest and long lasting one: the glorious Quran.
For more info is here:
http://sunnah.org/history/miracles_of_Prophet.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gFSNNeBwmg
This has to be the worst excuse for a review I have ever seen. It is almost worse than Osama's performance.
ReplyDeleteEric wrote...
ReplyDelete"Jesus is clearly leading an armed rebellion"
My response:
LOL ROTFLOL, Side hurting I"m laughing so hard literally laughing out loud at that one.
Anon and Royalson lets just hope that Yahya can give a better response then Eric
ReplyDeleteSnowman
ReplyDeleteAre u ever going to respond to Royalson, or are you just going to hide behind Eric's pathetic response?
Anthony sent Yahya into hiding.
ReplyDelete