St. Ignatius of Antioch who struck out three times….
I remember back in the day when I was in elementary school. I wasn’t the greatest student and always feared report card day. In the teacher’s comments I often got “Disruptive in Class” next to my percentage grade.
I’ve been thinking, if Islam is true how would Christians do on their report card? If the Jesus of the 7th century Quran is the true Jesus over the first century gospels, what did we get right? How did we do?
It seems that the only thing that we got right is the Virgin Birth. This is clearly documented in the gospels and alluded to in Romans 1:3. It has also been an important belief since early on. It’s clear that it’s important in St. Ignatius of Antioch’s Epistle to the Smyrnaeans. It’s also a part of the Creed chanted a every Mass.
Unfortunately the Virgin Birth is the only A that we get as Christians. I suppose that we get an A for the fact that He is the Messiah. The Quran certainly agrees with that. So we have two A’s.
Everything else is essentially an F. Obviously in terms of Christology we fail since Jesus Christ the Son of God and Word made flesh according to the New Testament and Christian belief. Jesus denies these claims in the Quran.
The next part is the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The Quran comes out at this as well. It takes Jesus Christ off the cross and puts Him straight into heaven. We Christians get an F here as well.
The last part is the lack of prophecies regarding Muhammad. In Surah 61:6 it reads:
And when Jesus son of Mary said: “O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah sent to you, confirming the law which came before me, and giving glad tidings of an apostle to come after me whose name shall be Ahmad.” But when he came to them with Clear Signs they said “This is evident sorcery!”
I suppose that the Church gets an F on this as well. It’s obviously the clearest prophecy ever fulfilled. Forget Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, and Deuteronomy 18. This one beats them all. The Church is to blame for forgetting what is probably the most important saying of Jesus according to the Quran. A statement that for some reason no historical Jesus scholar believes to be authentic.
So the Virgin Birth and Jesus being the Messiah is all the Church got right. To any Muslim who reads this post, I have a question. I understand that every answer I get will be pure speculation so don’t worry. I’m just interested in hearing Muslim answers. Here’s the question:
Why was the Church able to transmit these two truths with great success but completely drop the ball on Christology, His death by crucifixion, and His clear statement of a prophet to come named Ahmad?
I don’t think that this is an unreasonable question. We hit two home runs with five at bats but we struck out three times. Not only did we strike out, it’s comparable to some AAA player who’s been brought up for his first MLB game striking out to Corey Kluber; in other words no chance at all. I’m curious as to why this happened. Muslims?
Nice! I am interested as well.
But I am afraid that the answer will simply be what I would say to a protestant who asks me a similar question: it is perfectly possible that you understand and believe certain aspects about the truth about the nature of God and the conditions of our salvation and still be terribly wrong about other things.
Hi Maria,
Well, as you know as Catholics, we have answers to those questions just like a Muslim will have answers to this one. I’m not trying to lay a trap for the Muslim. I’d just like to hear their explanation.
God Bless,
Allan
I too am keen to hear of an explanation from a Muslim.
If Islam is worth anything then it ought to be something that can be properly and soundly defended without having to resort to mere devotion.
Hi Christopher,
I’m not really asking them to defend anything. I’m not trying to trap them but I’m just curious why. I want to hear their explanation. It’s essentially an opinion since nothing can be proven either way.
Hopefully one of my Muslim readers responds.
God Bless,
Allan
God knows best. But perhaps this is the answer to your question.
“But the people divided their religion among them into sects – each faction, in what it has, rejoicing.” 23:53
“But the denominations from among them differed, so woe to those who have wronged from the punishment of a painful Day.” 43:65
Also, the Catholics were not the only groups that got the first two points correct even from what little we know about the other sects. [“Orthodox” writers contradict each other when explaining what the “heretics” thought and did].
Non-“orthodox” groups like Arians and the Anomoeans also believed these 2 points and they probably would score higher in this test.
Thus different factions had different aspects of the truth.
Hi Fawaz,
Thanks for the response. I was actually hoping that you would respond to this one.
If I could clarify something though, is there any particular reason that the orthodox writers got these two and not the other three? The three being Christology, Crucifixion, and the Prophecy of Muhammad.
Did the NT authors just find these two mutual truths more appealing than the others? Were they lost by the time the NT was written? I’m curious as to what your answer would be because the two Quran quotes tell what happened but not why.
God Bless,
Allan
Hi Allan,
I actually do not accept that any of the NT writers could be considered orthodox as per how major denominations understand orthodoxy. I believe that some of the “orthodox” beliefs (like the Trinity) are read into the texts when the plain meanings of the text convey the opposite meaning. I understand that you believe that every NT author would be 100% orthodox as understood by Catholics.
As for the three points you mentioned:
Christology: I believe the NT authors themselves differ on Christology. Luke states that Jesus is called son of God because of the virgin birth. He does not indicate that Jesus was co-eternal with God. This perspective would be neither Islamic nor “orthodox” Christian.
There were early denominations like the Ebionites and Theodotians who are reported to have believed that Jesus was human and not God. You might argue that Ebionites denied the virgin birth or that the Theodotians claimed he became God at a certain point in his life. But there are proto-orthodox writers who state that in fact not all who were identified with these labels held these ideas respectively.
Crucifixion: I agree that the NT writers who mention the crucifixion believe that Jesus was crucified. I personally believe that there were people at the time the books of the NT were written who denied that Jesus was crucified and who affirmed that he “rose from the dead” in the sense that some Jews used this expression for a person who is saved from imminent death. I believe that Galatians and Hebrews are addressed to people who earlier believed that Jesus had been crucified but later came to believe that he was saved.
The Prophecy: I would say that the NT and the writings of non-“orthodox” sects contain multiple prophecies concerning the Prophet Muhammad. In Islamic sources we are told of some Christians who became Muslim at the time of the Prophet based on descriptions that they found in their scriptures/traditions.
You seem to be referring specifically to the Ahmad prophecy. Some Muslim writers say that the Ahmad prophecy has been (mis)-translated into the Greek. But even if the NT does not contain it this does not pose a theological problem for us. None of the NT authors tells us everything Jesus said or did.
Hi Fawaz,
I just want to say a couple things.
“I understand that you believe that every NT author would be 100% orthodox as understood by Catholics.”
Bingo.
“Luke states that Jesus is called son of God because of the virgin birth. He does not indicate that Jesus was co-eternal with God.”
In Acts, which was written by the same author, St. Peter refers to Jesus Christ as the Author of Life. As you know an author exists before a book is written or even before the book is thought of. I think that this is a good argument for Jesus being co-eternal with God the Father.
“I personally believe that there were people at the time the books of the NT were written who denied that Jesus was crucified and who affirmed that he “rose from the dead” in the sense that some Jews used this expression for a person who is saved from imminent death. I believe that Galatians and Hebrews are addressed to people who earlier believed that Jesus had been crucified but later came to believe that he was saved.”
Well, I would say that the earliest identifiable person to hold this is Basilides in the 2nd century, so not during the NT but shortly after. Muslims like to point to him although I don’t think this is wise as these are gnostic beliefs that are irreconcilable with Islam. I think the problem for Muslims is that there is no evidence of proto-Muslims between Christ and Muhammad. In other words, a group that affirmed His being the Messiah who was born of a virgin, who didn’t die on the cross, and who believed that a Prophet named Ahmad was coming in the future, not to mention had an “injeel” that he received from God.
“You seem to be referring specifically to the Ahmad prophecy. Some Muslim writers say that the Ahmad prophecy has been (mis)-translated into the Greek. But even if the NT does not contain it this does not pose a theological problem for us. None of the NT authors tells us everything Jesus said or did.”
I’m going to be doing a whole post on this so stay tuned. There is more to this argument than I can cover here but there are definitely some interesting things to say about it.
God Bless,
Allan
Thanks for the response, Allan.
Regarding “Author of Life”: It really depends on how you see the words “Author” and “Life”.
The word author in the text could mean prince/captain/leader/champion/founding member/first in order etc. See Acts 5:31.
And does life here mean biological life? Or does it mean salvation?
On the view regarding crucifixion held by the addressees of Galatians and Hebrews, I have preliminary thoughts on this topic. God-willing I plan on writing an article on this.
Regarding the criteria for identifying proto-Muslims I think we should take a Quranic perspective. People who do not possess the full truth and do not have access to the full truth may still be rewarded by God even if they fall into some errors. A classic example of this is the Quranic take on monasticism.(57:27)
Hi Fawaz,
I don’t think the translation of Author makes a difference. Life is clearly about salvation since its about spiritual life. The Greek word zoe is used which means spiritual life. The Greek word for physical life is bios where we get the word biology from. Is anyone else in the Scriptures involved with salvation like this except almighty God? We could even widen the scope to include the Quran and Hadith.
“On the view regarding crucifixion held by the addressees of Galatians and Hebrews, I have preliminary thoughts on this topic. God-willing I plan on writing an article on this.”
Do you have a website that this will appear on?
“Regarding the criteria for identifying proto-Muslims I think we should take a Quranic perspective. People who do not possess the full truth and do not have access to the full truth may still be rewarded by God even if they fall into some errors. A classic example of this is the Quranic take on monasticism.(57:27)”
I take this as a concession to the fact that there are not proto-Muslims in the way that there should be if Jesus, Mary, and the disciples were Muslim. I’ll probably touch on this in my post about the Paraclete. Again, stay tuned.
God Bless,
Allan
Hi Allan,
I am glad you clarified what you meant by “Author of Life”. I thought you were trying to say that the text meant he was “Creator of (biological) life forms”. I take it to mean that he is regarded as the founding leader/ pioneering leader/ champion / prince/ trailblazer of salvation so that all are saved because God vindicated him in a post-crucifixion resurrection. I don’t see an eternal essence in this narrative only that his own salvific activity (crucifixion,resurrection) precedes the salvation of all others.
I do not own any websites. Will see about how to get it published.
I was not conceding the point about proto-Muslims. My view is that the world of “heretic” Christianities preceding the time of the Prophet is quite diverse and we have very limited knowledge about them. Even some info we have is quite mixed.
That is why I mentioned the Ebionites who affirmed virgin birth and the Theodotians that denied that he ever became God. Generally, Christians say Ebionites cannot be pre-cursors of Islam because they rejected the virgin birth. But there is evidence that not all did. The Theodotians also could be rejected on the grounds that they supposedly held that at some point he became God. But apparently, not all did.
Similarly, we are told that Arians regarded Jesus as a type of divine semi-god/demi-god. Certainly some did. But not all who were given the label Arian subscribed to this notion. C J Speel argues that Teutonic Arianism held a more human view of Jesus.
Then we also have unnamed sects that are reported in Muslim sources like the sect that Salman, a Persian companion of the Prophet is said to have been part of. They did not deify Jesus and they believed in a Prophet to come. The narration says that Salman studied and served under multiple teachers of this sect. Each of his teachers pointed to another teacher at his death bed. Until his final teacher said that he was the last of their sect. I do not know what they thought about the crucifixion but they may have ticked most (if not all) of your boxes. If this report is accepted then they were a small sect (and a dying one at that). So even if they don’t show up in mainstream works of heresiography, it does not mean they did not exist.
Hi Fawaz,
Regarding the author of life, you said:
“I take it to mean that he is regarded as the founding leader/ pioneering leader/ champion / prince/ trailblazer of salvation so that all are saved because God vindicated him in a post-crucifixion resurrection. I don’t see an eternal essence in this narrative only that his own salvific activity (crucifixion,resurrection) precedes the salvation of all others.”
Actually, if you take a look at Acts 3:15 St. Peter says:
“You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.”
He’s the author of life when He was killed so it’s not a post resurrection vindication.
“I was not conceding the point about proto-Muslims. My view is that the world of “heretic” Christianities preceding the time of the Prophet is quite diverse and we have very limited knowledge about them. Even some info we have is quite mixed.”
Sorry, I should clarify what I meant to say as I actually didn’t say what I was thinking now that I re-read it. We don’t know of any identifiable group that would be ideal proto-Muslims. It’s true that we only have Christian sources to go on identifying heretics, that’s true. But no group based on what we know resembles Islam. I will concede that the Ebionites are closer to Islam than the proto-orthodox but there is no proof that they denied the crucifixion and resurrection, said the Torah was corrupted, believed in a future prophet named Ahmad, etc.
The Muslim sources talk about Salman the Persian but we don’t have any of his writings nor do we have any of his Catholic proponents saying stuff about him. I would need more evidence to go on this.
I’m curious, what Muslim sources mention Salman?
God Bless,
Allan
Allan,
Apologies for the delay in responding to your post.
1)Regarding the “prince/author of life” used in 3:15, it appears to be a title. But in 5:31 it appears to be saying that God made him prince by exalting him.
2)Regarding the Ebionites, actually they are said to have regarded the Pentateuch as a distorted version of the Torah.
3)Salman the Persian is mentioned in many Hadith collections (including Bukhari) and also in Seerah books. His journey to Islam is mentioned in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad.
“What if Islam turns out to be true?” is a question a friend of mine asked once, and he was pretty much unprepared for my answer. “Don’t worry”, I said, “We Christians are still in a good position”. How’s that? Well, if Islam is the only true religion, that means God has a really twisted sense of humor and doesn’t really care about His divinely ordained rules, He can change His mind on anything anytime and sometimes His divine revelations are meant as jokes. He sent thousands of prophets and messengers to the nations under the sun, but somehow the Jews ended up being the only ones, preserving the memory of prophethood and divine laws. He created and strengthened Christianity, Islam’s biggest rival in the world. He chose to preserve detailed information of the menstrual cycle of Muhammad’s wives and Muhammad’s manner of going to the bathroom, but neglected His own words, contained in the “original” Torah and Gospel. He decided to make a warmongering pedophile His final and greatest prophet, and “best example for mankind”. With this kind of “God”, we don’t really need to worry whether Islam is true or false. Even if it turns out to be true, this kind of “God” may just say: “Now, my final prank- you will escape hellfire, despite not being a Muslim, because I spare mushriks when I’m in a good mood”.
Hi Orangehunter,
I’m curious, was this friend a Muslim or a Christian who was just concerned that Islam might be true? If it was a Muslim, I would then have asked “What if Christianity turns out to be true?”
God Bless,
Allan
He is a Christian. He didn’t ask because of some doubts, we were just discussing the way Muslim apologists and dawamongers think and reason with their opponents, and the mentality behind this process.
Ah okay. Makes sense. Although it isn’t an argument it’s good to have an answer to questions like that.
You crossed the line by calling the beloved Prophet, SAWS, a “pedophile”, never mind his monogamous relationship with Khadja. I could easily talk jokes about fly and camel urine mocktails and people drawing the Prophet as a roundabout dog (it is just tasteless expression), but not that and insinuations that Islam is inherently violent.
I have actually neglected to use polemical based arguments on the Old Testament a part of my repertoire since it seems to be a New Atheist trademark, but I am sure only could find some warmongering Old Testament prophets.
I was going to say this, but since Jesus, SAWS, had a human nature, it seems that God also did have to use the restroom too, a point that some Muslims emphasize in dawah. Also, Rome has made it a heresy to speculate about the nature of Jesus’ foreskin, not that I want to talk about that, but I couldn’t help but wonder if it has some divine, or sacramental properties, or if it is just human flesh with no divine nature. (Thankfully, that’s all I’ll say about that.) The Gospels were written decades after Jesus’ purported death, and perhaps there weren’t any oral traditions going around about how Jesus went to the bathroom, or that the author of Mark just omitted them from his account in order to provide a more concise and more palatable story. Some Christians like to talk about “embarrassing details” concerning the Resurrection story, such as the women first seeing the Resurrected Jesus. Why could this bathroom stuff be considered a part of that too?
God is gracious. I suppose he would spare from the hellfire some of those who weren’t hostile to Islam. Allah, SWT, certainly dislike the hypocrites (defined as those who profess Islam, but seek to harm the deen), and he would be less likely to extend his mercy to those who slander the Prophet, SAWS. (I phrased it “spared from the hellfire”, since there is a minority of Muslim scholars who do not think one’s suffering in the hellfire is eternal.)
I envision James White to be more a Corey Kluber type. I like lefties, so I’ll pick Chris Sale. (Price, Hamels, Kazmir, Cliff Lee, Kershaw, Sabathia, Keuchel aren’t playing (Lee) or they haven’t been doing so well.) Patrick Corbin and Eduardo Rodriguez are going okay, though.
I suppose a Muslim would say that the Gospel of Luke’s Jesus is most similar to the Islam Jesus. I remember Paul Williams saying that. I suppose Christology evolved as a reflection of the human infirmity to worship humans. As for the crucifixion, Allah, SWT, made it appear that he was crucified.
Hi Latias,
Thanks for sharing your opinion. You did mention at one point that you would give the apologetics Cy Young award to James White. That would make him either Kluber or Scherzer. Chris Sale is pretty awesome. You know your MLB pitchers I’ll say that.
Little story since you like lefties, back in the summer of 2004 I was in New York. The Diamondbacks were in town and they played the Mets. None other than The Big Unit aka Randy Johnson was pitching. Not only did he get the win but he got 14 KOs.
I even just looked it up. Here’s the stats for the game:
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/box-scores/boxscore.php?boxid=200408150NYN
The reason that Williams says that Luke is the most similar is that it supposedly doesn’t present the death of Jesus as redemptive(though it still says that he died). He says that the verse found Mark 10:45 and Matthew 20:28 is not in Luke. That’s true, however it has other verses such as 19:10, although I will admit that this doesn’t explicitly mention His death. Williams also relies on a late textual variant in the last supper. Adnan Rashid brought this up in his recent debate with White and White responded well.
One thing regarding the crucifixion in the Quran. If you read the Surah 4:157 carefully it shows that it was only made to appear that way to the opponents of Christ, not his followers. Follow the pronouns carefully. I put them in caps.
And for THEIR saying, “We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of God.” In fact, THEY did not kill him, nor did THEY crucify him, but it appeared to THEM as if THEY did. Indeed, THOSE who differ about him are in doubt about it. THEY have no knowledge of it, except the following of assumptions. Certainly, THEY did not kill him.
Something to think about.
Anyways, you’ve explained why you think the Christians collapsed on those issues. Why do you think they got it right about Him being the Messiah and born of a virgin?
God Bless,
Allan
I will say this, and then click the link. I think Randy Johnson got a perfect game getting 14ks in that game. But I thought it was at home.
He did have a perfect game that year but this wasn’t it. That would have been so awesome to have seen a perfect game live. Johnson is probably the greatest pitcher I’ve ever seen. That includes both in person and on television. That’s just my opinion, feel free to disagree.
Hi, Latias,
1.You say I crossed the line by calling Muhammad a pedophile. I didn’t meant to offend you, I just use a psychiatric term, describing an adult that feels a sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Muhammad has had sex with the nine-year old Aisha, hasn’t he? I have two simple questions for you: what is your own definition of “pedophile” and how would you feel if a 54-year old man felt sexual attraction to you, when you were nine? In all fairness, I personally think that we don’t really know whether Muhammad consummate his marriage with a child, given that early Islamic history was thoroughly rewritten in order to suit the political purposes of the caliphs in the late 7th-early 8th century.
2. “Warmongering Old Testament prophets” is an argument that has been annihilated over and over again. In short, Christians do acknowledge that in some cases during OT times some prophets had to resort to harsh and extreme measures in order to carry out divine justice against sinners and infidels, but all the passages depicting these measures are descriptive, not prescriptive. And let me remind you that the Quran nowhere condemns the said passages. Muhammad, on the other hand, incited his followers to wage war against anyone who rejects the message of Islam- a fact, documented by Ibn Ishaq, Al Wahidi, Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Qayym and other noted Muslim theologians and historians. Even Johnathan Brown concedes this in his highly pro-Islamic book “Misquoting Muhammad”.
3. As for Jesus’ “foreskin and going to the bathroom”, this is problem of Islam, not Christianity. Ever heard of the “authentic” hadiths, in which Muhammad tells us that in the last days the Quran will take human form and dwell among the believers? Will the Quran (which is supposedly part of Allah’s divine essence) be circumcised and be going to the bathroom? Oh snap, the ahadith tell us not! Christians just say “These are not issues we should be discussing or even thinking about”. If you Muslims want to turn this into a problem, be careful with the glasshouse and the rocks you throw at it.
4. “The Gospels were written decades after Jesus’ purported death…”- some of them- yeah, Matthew was written around 45-50, Mark around 55-60, Luke- in the early 60s, John- between 80 and 90 AD. And the Quran- in the early 7th century.
5. “Some Christians like to talk about “embarrassing details” concerning the Resurrection story, such as the women first seeing the Resurrected Jesus.”- these Christians have misunderstood what the Gospel writers were implying. This is an argument of very debatable quality, so I don’t use it in polemics.
6. “God is gracious. I suppose he would spare from the hellfire some of those who weren’t hostile to Islam.”- not really, Bukhari and Muslim collected hadiths, in which Muhammad explains that Allah will put Jews and Christians in hell as a substitute for the
Muslims that earned their place in the flames.
7. “Allah, SWT, certainly dislike the hypocrites (defined as those who profess Islam, but seek to harm the deen)”- you realize that every single one, who defines themselves as a Muslim, could fit in that category, right?
8. “…and he would be less likely to extend his mercy to those who slander the Prophet…”
– uhm, nope, this is exactly what I was arguing against in my OP. Allah doesn’t seem to have a consistent standard in dealing with believers and non-believers. Read again my OP.
May God help us all.
1. The Prophet did not live with her until years after the marriage contract. They started living together only after she was ready for married life as would have been understood at the time by societies around the world. Not a single person anywhere in the world seems to have criticised this marriage the way you do until modern times. His opponents in pre-modern times criticised aspects of his life that are recorded in Muslim sources. Other authors (including Christian ones) invented bizarre claims found in no sources. How is it that not a single pre-modern author criticised this marriage the way you do?
2. The violence of the OT is prescriptive. The prophets in the Bible were commanded by God to carry out those violent acts. You could say those commands are no longer applicable. But they were prescriptive at their times.
Also all capital punishment laws in the OT are prescriptive.
Besides the NT endorses violence carried out by ruling authorities (Romans 13).
You said the Quran does not condemn those passages. But the Quran does not say anywhere that the previous prophets were commanded to exterminate entire populations even though it says that they were commanded to fight and it provides accounts of the very same prophets and their military activities.
3. Which Hadith states that the Quran will become a human being? Are you referring to the ones that say that the Quran will testify on the Day of Judgement? Cite the reference.
6. Wrong. Nobody is substituted for anybody else in hell. This principle is clearly established in the Quran over and over again.We don’t use a single Hadith that can be interpreted differently to overrule what is firmly, emphatically and repeatedly established in the Quran and Hadith.
That Hadith is easily understood in a different way. Imagine a person was sentenced to 3 months in prison and after his sentence he was taken out and he looks back and sees a person who had taken his spot in prison who would be serving a life sentence. Does “taking his place” in this context mean substitution?
7. No. God knows the believers and who pretends.
8. God has a consistent standard. He knows the inner reality of people along with their outward actions. So He is the perfect Judge.
As for your OP:
Why don’t we have the original scriptures of the past?-Why don’t we have the book of Nathan, the book of Iddo, the book of the wars of the Lord?
Why are their corrupted versions of the original scriptures?- Where is the Enochic prophecy of Jude taken from. Do we posses a complete unadulterated version of the source Jude used? Or do we have corrupted versions of the original text.
Also Jews are not the only ones who preserved memories of prophets or remnants of their teachings. You will find references to Noah in many religions in far-flung places of the world. You will find teachings about monotheism, heaven and hell,angels etc in many religions. Some nations have partial accounts of prophets or at-least events that involved prophets.
Also, we know that some of the prophets had a handful of followers others had zero followers. So it is not unlikely that these prophets were forgotten. Other prophets may have been turned into legendary figures or even deities.
There is no need for any of these prophets accounts to have been preserved in entirety because of the limited scopes of their missions.
And God knows best.
Fawaz, there are some very serious problems with the assertions you made in your reply to me.
1. I don’t know what was the norm in India, China, Australia, etc. at that time, but in Europe and the Mediterranean region the norm was that a girl is ready for marriage when she hits puberty. Dr. Jonathan Brown, noted Muslim scholar, while trying to defend Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha, writes:
“The reason that no pre-modern critics paid attention to the Prophet’s marriage to a ten-year-old was because marrying girls considered underage today was commonplace in the pre-modern world. Under Roman law, the earliest permitted age for marriage WAS TWELVE. In the heyday of the Roman Empire (2nd century CE), BY FOURTEEN a girl was considered an adult whose primary purpose was marriage. In many pre-modern law codes, such as Hebrew biblical law and Salic Frankish law, marriage was not a question at all. It was assumed that when a girl REACHED PUBERTY and was able to bear children, she was ready for marriage. ”
I would like to add that in the Byzantine empire the bar was raised to 16, even to 18 years in the next centuries. So no, this was not the norm of that period. From a medical perspective, at the age of nine girls are still physically and psychologically immature for sex life. It can traumatize them physically and emotionally. Besides, you believe that Muhammad is the perfect role model for all people at all times. How does his marriage with Aisha fit the picture? I’ll ask you a question, similar to the one I asked Latias: Would you be ok if your 9 yo daughter marry a 54 yo man and consummate her marriage at that age? If not, why are you even arguing?
2. My point is that the commands to the Prophets to carry out severe punishments against unbelievers are not prescriptive to the readers of the Bible. They are not direct calls to the believers to wage war against people who reject their faith (like the ones we find in the Quran). Yes, capital punishment laws in the Old Testament are prescriptive… But since the purpose of the OT law was fulfilled in Christ, they are no longer to be applied. As for Romans 13, it does not endorse “violence, carried out by ruling authorities”. It says that Christians should be loyal subjects of their rulers, which does not mean that they are supposed to obey rotten authorities that are under demonic influence.
“But the Quran does not say anywhere that the previous prophets were commanded to exterminate entire populations…”- just because it does not say so does not mean it didn’t happen. The Quran is remarkably brief in most of its accounts. In fact, a lot of important and relevant information (like the prophetic missions of the Prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah and Daniel, the functions of the title “Messiah”, etc.) is skipped for some reason. No one claims that the Quran provides full accounts of the military campaigns of the previous Prophets.
3. “Which Hadith states that the Quran will become a human being? Are you referring to the ones that say that the Quran will testify on the Day of Judgement?”- no, the hadiths you mention are problematic for Muslims in a different way, what I meant is this:
Sunan Ibn Majah, Vol. 5, Book 33, Hadith 3781:
“The Quran will come on the Day of Resurrection, like a pale man, and will say: ‘I am the one that kept you awake at night and made you thirsty during the day.”(Grade: Hasan).
And I meant also this:
It was narrated that Buraydah said: I heard the Prophet say: “The Qur’an will meet its companion on the Day of Resurrection when his grave is opened for him, IN THE FORM OF A PALE MAN. IT WILL SAY TO HIM, ‘Do you recognize me?’ He will say: ‘I do not recognize you.’ IT WILL SAY: ‘I am your companion the Qur’an, who kept you thirsty on hot days and kept you awake at night. Every merchant benefits from his business and today you will benefit from your good deeds.’ He will be given dominion in his right hand and eternity in his left, and there will be placed on his head a crown of dignity, and his parents will be clothed with priceless garments the like of which have never been seen in this world. They will say: ‘Why have we been clothed with this?’ It will be said: ‘Because your son used to recite Qur’an.’ Then it will be said to him: ‘Recite and ascend in the degrees of Paradise,’ and he will continue to ascend so long as he recites, either at a fast pace or a slow pace.”
Narrated by Ahmad in al-Musnad (394) and Ibn Maajah in al-Sunan (3781); classed as hasan by al-Busayri in al-Zawaa’id and by al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah (2829).
6. “Wrong. Nobody is substituted for anybody else in hell. This principle is clearly established in the Quran over and over again.”- and it is horribly muddled in the Hadith over and over again. Like in these:
Abu Musa’ reported that Allah’s Messenger said: When it will be the Day of Resurrection Allah would deliver to every Muslim a Jew or a Christian and say: That is your RESCUE from Hell-Fire. (Sahih Muslim, Book 037, Number 6665)
Abu Burda reported on the authority of his father that Allah’s Apostle said: NO MUSLIM WOULD DIE but Allah would admit IN HIS STEAD a Jew or a Christian in Hell-Fire. ‘Umar b. Abd al-‘Aziz took an oath: By One besides Whom there is no god but He, thrice that his father had narrated that to him from Allah’s Messenger. (Sahih Muslim, Book 037, Number 6666)
Abu Burda reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with AS HEAVY SINS AS A MOUNTAIN, and Allah would FORGIVE THEM and He would PLACE IN THEIR STEAD the Jews and the Christians. (As far as I think), Abu Raub said: I do not know as to who is in doubt. Abu Burda said: I narrated it to ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, whereupon he said: Was it your father who narrated it to you from Allah’s Apostle? I said: Yes. (Sahih Muslim, Book 037, Number 6668)
432. Abu Musa al-Ash’ari reported that the Messenger of Allah said, “On the Day of Rising, Allah will hand over a Jew or a Christian to every Muslim and say, ‘HERE IS YOUR REDEMPTION FROM THE FIRE’.” [Muslim]
412. ‘Ubada ibn as-Samit reported that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “Whoever testifies that there is no god but Allah alone with no partner and that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger and that ‘Isa is the slave of Allah and His Messenger and a word which He cast into Maryam and a spirit from Him and that the Garden is real and the Fire is real will enter the Garden WHATEVER HIS ACTIONS.” [Agreed upon] (Al-Imam Abu Zakariya Yahya bin Sharaf An-Nawawi Ad-Dimashqi, Riyad as-Salihin (The Meadows of the Righteous), 51. Chapter: On Hope
I think these are quite troublesome in light of “what is firmly, emphatically and repeatedly established in the Quran and Hadith.”
8. My point is that a hypocrite is anyone who calls themselves a Muslim but has a different understanding (compared, for example, to yours) of some Islamic doctrines and how Islam is to be practiced. One specific group of Muslims, say, the Salafi, has a different view of what the true Islam is from the view of the Sufi. That means that all members of one of the two groups falsely call themselves Muslims, therefore they are hypocrites for not holding to the right form of Islam and calling themselves Muslims at the same time.
“Why don’t we have the book of Nathan, the book of Iddo, the book of the wars of the Lord?”- oh, the good old “tu quoque” fallacy. Why on Earth should we consider these books to be inspired? Just because they are mentioned in the Bible? This is quite weak argument. Apostle Paul quotes the famous ancient poet Menander in 1 Corinthians 15:33. That doesn’t mean he considered Menander’s writings to be divine revelations.
“Where is the Enochic prophecy of Jude taken from”- St. Jude was under divine inspiration when he wrote his epistle. That’s how he knew it. Not everything is recorded in the Bible.
“You will find references to Noah in many religions in far-flung places of the world.”- this is natural, given that Noah’s descendants were the one who repopulated the Earth . They probably passed down stories about the flood, so it is not so amazing that we can find them around the world.
“You will find teachings about monotheism, heaven and hell, angels, etc. in many religions. Some nations have partial accounts of prophets or at-least events that involved prophets.”- this is not the case, I’m afraid. Nothing like Jewish monotheism existed anywhere in the world in in 1st century AD. If the peoples around the world had been visited by Muslim prophets, they would have certainly preserved something like a strict monotheistic beliefs, similar to what we find in Judaism. However, even the ones that worshiped only one god did not denied the existence of other gods. And the concept of heaven and hell is actually relatively rare around the different cultures, and it’s not linked to belief/disbelief in an uncreated almighty Being, but to being good/bad member of the tribal society. This is not Islam. Besides, how do you know that God did not plant these concepts in human beings as an inherent part of their nature? The burden of proof is on you, you have to provide evidence that all nations received divine revelations from prophets.
“So it is not unlikely that these prophets were forgotten. Other prophets may have been turned into legendary figures or even deities.”- without any evidence for this, it can be dismissed. And why the Jews have not suffered the same level of religious degradation as all other peoples have? Some people believe that pyramids were built by aliens, or that Atlanteans were highly advanced nation that got exterminated. Why not believing these claims? They are just as highly improbable.
May God help us all.
1) People reach puberty at different ages. Not every individual is same in this respect. The reason that the married life started 3 years after the contract is to wait until she was ready for marriage.
As for modern practices, they correspond to modern realities not existent at the time of the Prophet.
3) This is not like the incarnation idea at all. On the day of Judgement our good deeds testify for us. There are other Hadith that speak of righteous deeds appearing in the form of a man.
None of these mean that they are actual human beings but only a form that God will cause them to appear in.
This is similar to Lady Wisdom (Proverbs 8) or the vision of Wickedness as a woman (Zech 5). Do either of these mean that wisdom and wickedness are actual human beings?
6) The narrations don’t mean that anyone is paying for anyone else’s sins. The people who are being punished are being punished for their own sins.
There are narrations that show that every human being has a place in paradise and a place in hell. But some people never make it to paradise. That spot is given to those who do.
Likewise some people never make it to hell. Others make it to hell and are taken out of it after being punished.
But the ones who are punished are punished for their own sins only.This fact alone is sufficient to answer your critique.
8)No. That is not how a hypocrite is defined. A hypocrite is not sincere about his faith. A person with a different understanding (even if erroneous) is not classified as a hypocrite(Munafiq). Rather, he maybe mistaken or even misguided (partially).
Jude is quoting a prophecy. If this does not convince you then you can consider 1 Cor 2:9 which early church fathers say is a quotation from writings that are not in the current cannons. And this is speaking about what awaits people in the here-after. The only way to know something like this is revelation from God. This is different from quoting a poet.
Regarding memories of previous prophets to the nations, I am glad you acknowledge that Noah’s memories survived in some form in many cultures. As you would agree Noah was a monotheist. If these cultures preserved memory of Noah and a great flood at some ancient past, how come they did not preserve monotheism? Or maybe they did but it got distorted along the way?
Furthermore, I am not sure why you insist that the nations should have retained the stories of the prophets and pure monotheism. Even the Israelites did not do that whilst Moses was still alive and round the corner. They abandoned monotheism and fell into idolatry while he was still with them. If you could see them worshiping the golden calf and you had no knowledge of Moses you probably would not have guessed that there is a monotheistic prophet around who led them just days ago.
Not to mention all of the times throughout history when they slipped into idolatry. Or when idols were placed in Jerusalem!
The only reason they came back to monotheism is because they had more prophets than any other nation.