One big thing that confuses about Islam and perhaps someone can explain it.

[Uranus]

Who is Sharia? Why don't they follow Mohammad?

Sharia is the islamic law. It is based on the Quran and the tradition of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

 

[irosie91]

No. We have prophets and menssengers. The words have a different meaning. All messengers are prophets, but not all prophets are messengers.

words mean what the people using a language MEAN.. It is ok----you are doing what lots of people do---
nitpicking on WORDS

 

[Uranus]

words mean what the people using a language MEAN.. It is ok----you are doing what lots of people do---
nitpicking on WORDS

I don't understand. You seemed to be claiming the words messenger and prophet are synonymous for Muslims, but they're not. Not in Arabic and not in English.

 

[irosie91]

I don't understand. You seemed to be claiming the words messenger and prophet are synonymous for Muslims, but they're not. Not in Arabic and not in English.

I am "claiming" nothing-----I have interacted with lots
of muslims in the USA----mostly from Southeast Asia.
THEY refer to prophets as "messengers" ----in english. The word in arabic is approximately "NABI" the word in Hebrew is approximately "NAVI" Just words--they mean what the speakers of any language
"know" them to mean

 

[Uranus]

I am "claiming" nothing-----I have interacted with lots
of muslims in the USA----mostly from Southeast Asia.
THEY refer to prophets as "messengers" ----in english. The word in arabic is approximately "NABI" the word in Hebrew is approximately "NAVI" Just words--they mean what the speakers of any language
"know" them to mean

Perhaps the people you spoke to were talking about messengers. That or their English was not that advanced. A messenger in arabic is rasool. A prophet is nabi. There's a great difference between those words.

 

[irosie91]

Perhaps the people you spoke to were talking about messengers. That or their English was not that advanced. A messenger in arabic is rasool. A prophet is nabi. There's a great difference between those words.

I spoke with MANY MANY muslims----BUT the fact is that few of them knew arabic. Most of them were
medical school graduates from Southeast Asia and
Iran. ----a fun fact-----if I recited the hebrew alphabet (to the extent I knew it) ---the response
was, often "OH!!!! YOU SPEAK ARABIC"

 

[Uranus]

I spoke with MANY MANY muslims----BUT the fact is that few of them knew arabic. Most of them were
medical school graduates from Southeast Asia and
Iran. ----a fun fact-----if I recited the hebrew alphabet (to the extent I knew it) ---the response
was, often "OH!!!! YOU SPEAK ARABIC"

Most Muslims do not have Arabic as their mother tongue. Fun fact, anyone can be a Muslim, regardless of their mother tongue.

 

[there4eyeM]

Perhaps the people you spoke to were talking about messengers. That or their English was not that advanced. A messenger in arabic is rasool. A prophet is nabi. There's a great difference between those words.

Then, which is Jesus?

One thing of many things that confuse me in regards to Islam among their followers. Muhammad by their own admission isn't God. The term blasphemy is a term reserved only for God. So, why are they claiming it is blasphemy if anyone even depicts Muhammad in a picture of any kind but not any of their other Muslim warlords?

Meaning people can show pictures, photographs or paintings of the Sultans or Ayatollah etc and no problem.

You can even criticize them, but if anyone paints a painting or drawing or speaks out against Muhammad it is considered blasphemy.

That makes little sense and that reaction of exalting Muhammad as God (which they all say he wasn't) is a blasphemy unto itself.

How am I wrong?

Limiting the divine deity is blasphemy. Words limit, especially nouns. All religions speak of the supreme being in words and assign nouns.

 

[Uranus]

Then, which is Jesus?

He's both.

 

[irosie91]

Most Muslims do not have Arabic as their mother tongue. Fun fact, anyone can be a Muslim, regardless of their mother tongue.

what does "mother tongue" have to do with it---the
book has been translated into many languages---I read the PICTHALL "version" more than 50 years ago. Lots of muslims do get some education in arabic (fun fact)

 

[rylah]

How do you tell prophecy,
from an imperialist goal driven by common
pride and greed, according to Islamic doctrine?

If Islamic doctrine has any clear definition for a prophet,
and terminology to tell prophecy from theft - I'd like to know.

Another question, does Islamic doctrine, predetermination abide by the
limits of the freedom of choice, or rather choice, essentially is only an illusion?

Uranus have You thought about these questions?

 

[there4eyeM]

He's both.

Then the Koran is in error, because Jesus cannot be a prophet.

 

[irosie91]

Then the Koran is in error, because Jesus cannot be a prophet.

I am intrigued. The koran supplies the islamic
version of Jesus which is entirely different from
the christian version. What made you decide that
the islamic version of Jesus cannot be a "prophet"
How do you define "prophet"

 

[irosie91]

I don't understand. You seemed to be claiming the words messenger and prophet are synonymous for Muslims, but they're not. Not in Arabic and not in English.

I am "claiming" what muslims told me and the words they used when speaking of this or that character in
the book called 'bible' in english and also about
muhummad. to wit, Noah, Moses, Elijah, Ezra,
Jesus and Muhummad were "messengers" <<<english. I don't remember if anyone ever mentioned Joseph
or Jonah-----it could be that neither is considered
either a messenger or a prophet since muslims
were delighted to destroy their shrines

 

[irosie91]

Perhaps the people you spoke to were talking about messengers. That or their English was not that advanced. A messenger in arabic is rasool. A prophet is nabi. There's a great difference between those words.

ok what's the "difference" since muhummad seems to be designated as BOTH. Their english
was fine. In southeast asia one needs english to
get into medical school

 

[there4eyeM]

I am intrigued. The koran supplies the islamic
version of Jesus which is entirely different from
the christian version. What made you decide that
the islamic version of Jesus cannot be a "prophet"
How do you define "prophet"

It isn't mine, but the 'technical' definition. To my knowledge, the Biblical requirements are that a prophet be always correct, truthful and have predictions come true in order to prove guidance by the "One Who Is". With that in mind, we can see that what Jesus said precludes his possibly being a prophet. Many things done and said can be cited. Perhaps one interesting one will suffice. As he was being harassed by Pharisees who insisted Abraham was their father, Jesus told them, "Before Abraham was, I am." This not only declared superiority to the founder of the faith, he used the "name of God" referring to himself. That would be blasphemy of the highest order (and they were about to stone him for it there and then) unless it were true. Either way, they are impossible words for a prophet.
Of course, the argument is used that what Jesus said in the New Testament is not what he said.

 

[irosie91]

It isn't mine, but the 'technical' definition. To my knowledge, the Biblical requirements are that a prophet be always correct, truthful and have predictions come true in order to prove guidance by the "One Who Is". With that in mind, we can see that what Jesus said precludes his possibly being a prophet. Many things done and said can be cited. Perhaps one interesting one will suffice. As he was being harassed by Pharisees who insisted Abraham was their father, Jesus told them, "Before Abraham was, I am." This not only declared superiority to the founder of the faith, he used the "name of God" referring to himself. That would be blasphemy of the highest order (and they were about to stone him for it there and then) unless it were true. Either way, they are impossible words for a prophet.
Of course, the argument is used that what Jesus said in the New Testament is not what he said.

I have never heard of your "technical, biblical
definition of "prophet" IMO your definition
seems to be that of a Greek Soothsayer. Jesus
was a pharisee. I do not recall pharisees harassing him. At that time a crowd of
pharisees could not just DECIDE TO STONE
someone. In fact, pharisees were, in general,
anti-capital punishment. From where did you
get your information?

 

[there4eyeM]

I have never heard of your "technical, biblical
definition of "prophet" IMO your definition
seems to be that of a Greek Soothsayer. Jesus
was a pharisee. I do not recall pharisees harassing him. At that time a crowd of
pharisees could not just DECIDE TO STONE
someone. In fact, pharisees were, in general,
anti-capital punishment. From where did you
get your information?

John 8:48 - 59
as for prophets: (from What Does Scripture Teach About the Office of Prophet and Gift of Prophecy?)
Those who claimed to speak for God were held to a strict standard of judgment. Even should an alleged prophet perform a sign or wonder or accurately predict the future, if he says “Let us follow other gods . . . and let us worship them” (Deut. 13:2), he is to be rejected (Deut. 13:3). Likewise, if the word he speaks “does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken” (Deut. 18:22; see also Jer. 14:14; 23:21, 32; 28:15; Ezek. 13:6). The punishment for speaking falsely in God’s name was death (Deut. 18:20).

 

[irosie91]

John 8:48 - 59
as for prophets: (from What Does Scripture Teach About the Office of Prophet and Gift of Prophecy?)
Those who claimed to speak for God were held to a strict standard of judgment. Even should an alleged prophet perform a sign or wonder or accurately predict the future, if he says “Let us follow other gods . . . and let us worship them” (Deut. 13:2), he is to be rejected (Deut. 13:3). Likewise, if the word he speaks “does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken” (Deut. 18:22; see also Jer. 14:14; 23:21, 32; 28:15; Ezek. 13:6). The punishment for speaking falsely in God’s name was death (Deut. 18:20).

there is something that you do not know about that leads you to misunderstand. When the word "death" as a penalty is used in Deuteronomy----it DOES NOT ALWAYS or even most of the time mean a JUDICIAL
DEATH PENALTY-----it refers to a HEAVENLY death
penalty----meaning that the sinner will either die
young OR JUST CHILDLESS. Actual execution by a \
court was rare and at the time of Jesus----FUNCTIONALLY NON-EXISTENT

 

[there4eyeM]

there is something that you do not know about that leads you to misunderstand. When the word "death" as a penalty is used in Deuteronomy----it DOES NOT ALWAYS or even most of the time mean a JUDICIAL
DEATH PENALTY-----it refers to a HEAVENLY death
penalty----meaning that the sinner will either die
young OR JUST CHILDLESS. Actual execution by a \
court was rare and at the time of Jesus----FUNCTIONALLY NON-EXISTENT

It isn't clear why you would think that isn't known. Further, when, as in John, it is mentioned that stones were picked up, was that to inflict other than earthly demise?
In other words, with what are you disagreeing? Are you maintaining that, indeed, Jesus was a prophet?