Muhammad, Satan and Biblical Theology I of III

[Hans021220]

Interesting video!

[zanzbari]

Man, you are fishing on murky woaters. Your whole argument is based unestablished reports. I read in your book (bible) that your lord Jesus was visited by devil himself!

"Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil." (Mat 4:1).

As for Prophet Muhammad (may the peace of Allah be upon him), then he was the most trustworthy of his people, he was not known to lie.

[satancreatedallah]

@zanzbari Jesus Christ was visited by Satan and Jesus Christ defeated him where as Muhammad Satan defeated him, that is why he spoke about 3 god in the original Sura 53, killed thousands, had sex with a 9yr little girl, lied to his army about a carnal Paradise with virgins, wine All earthly carnal desires. Trustworthy look at what Jesus did and what Muhammad destroyed.

[seaplaneguy1]

This video has excellent points.

God of the Bible is not a fear machine...the devil or his agents are...

Mo was visited by the dark side...if he was visited at all.

No angel of God makes a guy want to kill himself...

Why is this so hard to see...for billions of Muslems? Blind? Wake up please....

[yaseraljohaim]

look how many People become muslim every day.......do you think you are smarter than them

[yaseraljohaim]

i think that you heat some muslims thats why you made this video ...but l want you not to look for what some muslim dos but look for the islam it self with no heat i am sure you will find it please do not listen to your satan

because this life is worth no thing we all going to die and no thing going to help us but the true and will be asked about every thing you are doing when you was a life think about what i am saying because i am not loosing no thing ....again look for the true

[yaseraljohaim]

what i think about you .....i think that you read

about islam and about mohamad not to look for the true but you look for what satan want you to look for by your video you are not hearting no body but your self you will find out about this after death ..help your self and look for true faith before its to late

[yuukannahoshi]

I would like to say that Khadija wasn't a pagan, but u hanifiya, a monotheist. She believed in 1 God like Abraham did..

[LothairOfLorraine]

Sorry, but Khadija was born into a pagan family, and there is nothing from the early Islamic sources that she was a hanifa.

[psychlopes1976]

I agree with you on that one, I don't think she was a Hanif. But I soubt she was a practicing pagan either, because in early Islamic sources there is no mention of her ever taking part in any pagan rituals or worship. (to my best knowledge)

[LothairOfLorraine]

If she wasn't a Jew, Christian or Hanifa, then she was a pagan. There is no reason to think that there was another option. On the otherhand, Waraqa b. Nafal was allegedly a Christian and it was to him that she resorted after the incident in the Cave, so her religion is debateable. Nevertheless, NO Christian or Jew would test the nature of a spirit by unclothing her body and declaring that the modesty of the entiry is evidence of its holiness.

She was most likely a pagan.

[maatwerk67]

The women has tempted man again just like in the garden of eden...

[psychlopes1976]

Another thing to bear in mind is that you're building your entire argument around the stories of the bible, which Muslims do not accept as the divine revelation of God. since we believe its been tampered with. But even if we assume that the bible wasn't corrupted, does that mean that the bible gives the entire story with every detail about first encounters with the angels or God? In the Quran Mary was very frightened when she first saw the angel for the first time

[LothairOfLorraine]

This raises some serious doubts about Islamic theology. Why would Allah allow mere men to tamper with his own Torah and Injil, only to suddenly decide to preserve the Quran?

Assuming that the Bible was preserved at least in the Torah, Zabul and Injil, it would be the most important source for the stories that we are discussing. Islamic claims need to be considered no differently than those of the Mormons. Both fail when tested against the Bible.

[psychlopes1976]

God safeguards his word by sending messengers that reminded people of the original message, the fact that people corrupted what was revealed to them by God is not a problem, God sent the Quran and preserved it because it was the final revelation and by that he safeguarded his message and word for eternity.

And there is nothing called Zabul, it zaboor or Zabur. Islamic claims come backed by the Quran, a miracle on its own merit, of language and content.

[LothairOfLorraine]

Sorry to have mis-spelled 'Zabur'.

The fatal weakness and error of your argument rests in Allah's decision to finally decide to protect his own word, allowing many centuries of shirk [Trinity] that lead whole nations and people to commit the unforgiveable sin.

The Quran is poetry, not revelation, and demanding that mere words are miraculous reveals just how bizzar Islamic theolgy has had to become in order to keep up with the REAL word of God.

[psychlopes1976]

Let me ask you something, knowledge of Angels or Demons aside, can you honestly tell me that if you saw a supernatural being manifest in front of you and start talking to you in a dark cave where you're all alone that you wouldn't run for cover yourself? What does knowing "of" angels and other supernatural beings do in the way of making such experience less shocking and frightening? Think about it! You're attacking a natural human reaction to an event instead of what the even represents.

[LothairOfLorraine]

If I was visited by a supernatural being thast claimed to be an angel of God, I would test the claims of the angel against the Scripture already confirmed by God. If Muhammad had done that, he would have known better.

In the Bible, Mary had no such reaction. Neither did Zacharia, Joseph, Etc. In the OT, neither Moses, Abraham or Adam reacted in the same way as Muhammad. Like it or not, if Muhammad had done his research, he would have seen the 'angel' as an abomination.

[psychlopes1976]

"...against the Scripture already confirmed by God" Exactly how was it confirmed by God? just saying that it was doesn't make it so.

[LothairOfLorraine]

Yes, I agree with you here, 'just saying that it was doesn't make it true'. So very true. Words to live by.

[positron66]

Furthermore a prophet speaks for God and not for other prophets. One can see that Muhammad speaks for many other prophets more than for allah. The law on 2 valid witnesses shall apply to the message given by God to mankind. The message in the Quran failed to pass the test of coherency with the established words of God.

[positron66]

Surah 3:3 says Quran is for Confirming the Gospel.

Sura 19:71 There is not one of you (believers) BUT shall approach it (Hell). That is a fixed ordinance of thy Lord. Sura 19:72 Then We shall rescue those who kept from evil, and leave the evil-doers crouching there. (Pickthal)

Obviously Surah 19:71-72 contradicts with

Luke 16:26 [Yeshua said] And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able.. [ESV]

[KodGexde]

Muhammad is satan, death to muslims - long live Holy papal Benedict XVI

[superakarma]

you just keep going and going about accusations without addressing any of them with proves,how did mohamed pligarised the poems and stories,he lived 40 yrs of his life not writting or reciting any poem,daniel 8:15-17 ,discribes how daniel was terrified by seeing gabriel "So he came near where I stood; and when he came, I was terrified, and fell upon my face; but he said to me: 'Understand, son of man; for the vision belongs to the time of the end" ,you make no point

[LothairOfLorraine]

Daniel was given the name of the angel, while Muhamamd had no idea who or what the specter was until it was identifed by his pagan wife and her cousin. In fact, Waraqa bin-Nawful misnamed the specter and called it the 'namos' which has never been used to identify Gabriel. Sorry, but the point has been made.

[superakarma]

the "namos" is not a misname of the angel gabriel,the namos is a word in arabic derived from greek that means "the law" of god, and it's written in the arabic gospel many times,which alone shows your ignorance, besides you can't prove that khadija was pagan,and khadija didn't tell him who was the spector,she didn't know,she only told him that he is a very moral and good honest person and it can never be something wrong,waraqa knew it's the law being revealed,sorry your point is not made

[LothairOfLorraine]

Waraqa calls the angel 'the namos' and its a greek word, and means 'law'. Gabriel is not the 'law of God' he is only a messenger.

So, Khadija wasn't pagan? Be serious. Khadija annointed Muhammad as a prophet, and her cousin helped out in confirming the mistake.

[superakarma]

hmm,let me clarify myself another time ,the word "namus" ,means "law" or "rule",it's an arabic word,a person who speaks arabic can use such a name to simply means "law " that governs something ,and waraqa used it explictily to discribe what the gospels use it for "the law of god" ,or the commandments of god" ,islamic tradition says that the namus was given to moses and then to mohamed , and in literature refering to a person,or something with what he represnts is quiet common....cont

[superakarma]

and i don't think i need to give examples , and you want me to be serious,ok great let's be serious , give me an account of khadija worshipping idols instead of rambling as you did in the videos, mohamed was never a pagan and khadija wasn't either ,they believed in god and knew the religions around are filled with heresies,that's why mohamed stayed away from the pagan celebrations and rites,khadija annointed mohamed as a prophet? you are officially an ignorant,i'll be waiting for your response

[LothairOfLorraine]

Islamic tradtion can say and claim whatever it wants, but the facts are indisputeable. The Gk word 'namos' is not a name for Gabriel, nor is Gabriel the 'law of God'. I agree that the 'namos, law, torah' was given to Moses. But no angel was called by the term 'namos'. Gabriel translates 'strong man of God', not 'law of God'. So, for Waraqa to call him 'namos' is an error.

[superakarma]

this is funny,i think i expalined that before ,and that waraqa didn't say the angel is the "namos" ,what waraqa said is that "the "namos" is being delivered again ,so you go and try to twist things up all over again after you found out your mistake about your claims of waraqa using a wrong name ,give me a break

[superakarma]

ok,here are the exact words of waraqa after the angel gabriel told mohamed to recite after him : "this is the "namos" "the law" that was delivered to moses , want to go in circles some more? i'm up for it

[LothairOfLorraine]

He descried the angel as the 'namos', not what was being delivered. Waraqa is speaking of the angel as the 'namos', not his message [Bukhari 9.87.111; Ishaq 107; Tabari VI:68] Let's go around in circles some more.

[superakarma]

before you even think about replying maybe you should make a search about the word "namus" ,in the english spelling i found some informations in wiki but if you don't trust wiki then make a search in dictionaries or something , i don't like when people come up with false informations and make it the base of their arguement without even having a solid knowledge of the subject , you are taking your misconceptions for granted

[superakarma]

and i just found out that the torah is called "al-namus" ,which means the law

[LothairOfLorraine]

That is correct. In the Gk translation, the word for Torah is 'namos'. As you have now pointed out, it is not a name or title given to Gabriel.

[superakarma]

and being given the name or not is not an evidence of anything ,in fact knowing previously about the angel and his name is suppose to help him overcome the shock or have a shock at all, god didn't say his prophets will be born knowing the name and shape and appearance of the angel gabriel.

[webdawah]

Am I supposed to discuss a video already refuted?

[LothairOfLorraine]

I suppose it depends on your definition of 'refuted'. You Muslims tend to think yourselves, rather than the sources, as the ultimate deciders of truth.

Khadija had enourmous influence on determining the nature of the phantasm in the cave. It was only AFTER her annointing that Muhammad saw the angel again, which this time identified itself properly. Why did it take Khadiaja and Waraaqa's influence and intervention before the phantasm finally gave itself a name?

[webdawah]

Khadija(ra) had no influence whatsoever on whether the Prophet(pbuh) knew he saw an angel or not. She did what any loving wife would do, which is comfort her husband. No human was responsible for his visions, neither did they have the knowledge of what was revealed to him before he told them about it. The revelations speak for themselves. Remove his wife, and her uncle from the equation, and read the narration... It's still clear he would have found out on his own.

[LothairOfLorraine]

Khadija had the highest level of influence on idendifying the nature of the phantasm., but she wasn't alone. It did not identify itself at Hira, and Muhamamd's understanding of what it was culmiated in the presence of two particular people [Khadija and Waraqa]. It was only after he had be comforted by his pagan wife and instructed by a local Arab that the subsequent confrontation with the apparition included an announcment of its identity.

[webdawah]

Can you show this from the hadiths? Why did he still show fearfulness of the angel's presence if his wife was the influence?

[LothairOfLorraine]

That's a question that needs to be formed a little better. Here's a better formulation: Why did it take the intervention of his pagan wife and her cousi for the prophet to come to an understanding that the apparition was an angel. And, how can Waraqa be any more credible then Khadija when he mis-identifed the phantasm as the 'Namus'? [Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Number 111].

It seems the prophet may have been suffering from 'mythomania' and had a tendency to change his story with new facts.

[webdawah]

Actually, your "better formulation" of the question invalidates your argument. If Waraqa could not accurately identify the angel, then his influence is insignificant.

"Namus" is the word he used to denote the angel. It is not a name.

[LothairOfLorraine]

She did far more than comfort her husband. She put the phantasm to some pagan test, then she determined that the entity was from 'Allah' and not the Devil. There is soooooo much wrong with this, I don't know where to begin.

[webdawah]

...and you can show references from sahih hadiths?

[LothairOfLorraine]

Here is one where the Greek word 'Namus' is incorectly applied to the angel: [Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Number 111]. Notice that Waraqa misidentified the phantasm, and did not even know its name.

I can also use both Ishaq's sira and Tabari's history as well to shed more light on this encounter.

[webdawah]

What I don't get is, why are you interested in what Waraqa said or did not say. What he said has nothing to do with revelation.

[LothairOfLorraine]

Then let me explain. Waraqa's flawed testimony is a critical piece of the Islamic claims that have followed for 1500 years. Muhammad had no idea whom or what the spirit was until Khadihja and Waraqa provided the missing 'backstory'. They are both the link between the initial visit, and the later understanding of the angel's nature and mission.

Muhamamd's entire understanding of the revelation is dependent on his exposure to the intervening influence of his wife and her cousin.

[webdawah]

What part of the revelation gives credit to Khadija(ra), or Waraqa? Can you establish that?

Objectively remove Khadija(ra) and her cousin from the narration, and the sequence of events are still incontrovertible.

[LothairOfLorraine]

The honest observer of the sequence of events cannot objectively ignore the centrality of the wife and cousin. To state otherwise is a refusal to accept objective reality.

After the visitation, Muhamamd's subsequent understanding depended exclusively on the intervention of Khadija and Waraqa. To illustrate my point, the death of Waraqa was so traumatic to Muhammad that the revelations ended, and Muhammad became suicidal. To discount Khadija and Waraqa as irrelevant is just wishful thinking.

[webdawah]

You are not willing to look objectively at the events. I have said, (and this is the third time) remove Khadija(ra) and her cousin from the narration, and you cannot incontrovertible deny that the revelation stands on it's own.

[LothairOfLorraine]

I am looking at this objectively, it is you who are [for the third time] ignoring the obvious sequence of events and the unreliability of both the pagan wife and her disreputable cousin.

[LothairOfLorraine]

By the way, why not place the (ra) sign after Waraqa's name as well?

[webdawah]

That should be easy for you to find out. After all, you are the scholar of Islam.

[LothairOfLorraine]

Between you and I, there is only one scholar, and it is me. Waraqa is a Christian, and regardless of his influence on your prophet, he is not important enough for the (ra).

[webdawah]

What influence? The one you cannot prove? What does "ra" mean? What is your training, that makes you a scholar? Not that I care.

[LothairOfLorraine]

ra=Radiallhu Anhu 'may allah be pleased'.

I was trained in a far off land, and more importantly, I have access to all the same sources you do.

The ifluence is right there in the Islamic sources. Your denials are not convincing.

[webdawah]

Apparently, scholarship is not all that it's hyped to be.

PS: Nobody denied anything, and one cannot convince someone who believes they have come up with the greatest argument ever, even after it is clearly refuted.

[LothairOfLorraine]

You seem to have denied the interrelated events surrounding the visitation, or are tying to disconnect them. Nothing I have said here has been refuted, clearly or otherwise. But, there is no need to argue about it.

[LothairOfLorraine]

There is a an enormous divide between religious dogma and acedemic scholarship. I am steeped in both myself and do not fault Muslims for believing, but have a very hard time accepting the notion that the Arabian god Allah has any right to force nations into submission to a prophet whose credentials are suspicious at best.

Religion must be a personal choice, and not just here in the West.

[okanovic03]

"Allah is forcing nations into submission": SURA 2-256:"Let there be no compulsion in rel. Truth stands out clear from error,whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks.And Allah heareth and knoweth all things."

[muthanagubran]

dude it wasn't Jesus it was Gabriel

[theMorgue78]

Excellent video!

[okanovic03]

Only evidance hire is that you are IDIOT.

[LothairOfLorraine]

okanovic: Good response. Well thought out and truly a creative masterpiece. If only I had your skill and mastery of prose.

[okanovic03]

That is corect my friend because we muslims are ordered to talk to people according to the level of their knowledge.Demonising and attacking something you don't understeand is not an attribute of a wise and mentally balanced intellectual.You certainly and obviously don't know much about Islam and for that reason you shouldn't be attacking it.If you have any questions about Islam ask and you will be provided with an answer[from Islam.sources] ,the other wise dont talk about it please.Sallams

[LothairOfLorraine]

Actually, you Muslims are ordered to attack anyone who ask important or embarrassing questions. My knowledge is exceptional, and the only one demonising here is you.

Like a good Muslim, you see any legitimate conversation as some kind of hate speech, and go on a blithering offensive. Play the victim on some other channel. Any more insults and offenses from you, and you are blocked.

[Islamat]

great video man might i suggest that you make it a reply to my second part though instead of the 1st one? I will address it later As I am at work right now. Peace.