the earlier Jews and Christians recognize prophet Muhammad and expect his coming

Discussion in 'Comparative Studies' started by Friend, Jan 21, 2005.

  1. Witness

    Witness New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good day to all:

    First, the issue is not that many jews and christians coverted to Islam but is that is Islam the true revelation from God Almighty?

    History testifies and even Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, early islamic authentic commentaries, biography of Muhammad all show that people of Arabia converted to Islam not just of conviction that Islam is true but due to having no option. There was no option for them either they were required to convert to Islam or die. This is not just a claim but any one can find this to be true if one consults all the sources that i have mentioned above.

    Second, Muhammad is nowhere mentioned in the Bible. All the alleged quotes are only misinterpretation of Bible texts. Even if for arguments sake i agree that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible than this does not prove that Muhammad was actually prophesied because all the Muslims claim that the present Bible is corrupted and this means that all the prophesies regarding Muhammad are infact all corruptions. Muslims do not believe in the Bible then why do they believe in the so-called prophesies regarding Muhammad in the Bible?

    Third, the Bible does not contain contradictions. All the so-called contradictions are just lack of knowledge about the context and text of the Bible. I ask all muslims that if one so-called contradiction can prove that the Bible is not from God then using the same criteria one contradiction in the Quran also proves that it is not from God. I can prove it.

    Fourth, the Bible does not abuses the prophets. The Bible teaches that all the prophets except Jesus, made mistakes and committed even gross sins because they were like us imperfect. The Bible only reports the truth. It does not hides anything that should be reported. Even the Quran reports that the prophet Abraham committed shirk which is a gross sin according to the Quran. Does this not abuse the prophet Abraham?

    Fifth, the new testament contains four biographies of Jesus. But how many biographies of Muhammad do Muslims have today? Only one and that is 200 years after Muhammad. The original biography of Muhammad was written by Ibn Ishaq named "Siratul Rasoolallah" about 100 years after Muhammad and this original is lost. We christians are in a better position than muslims because we have four witnesses to jesus' life in the shape of Gospels but muslims have only one which is unreliable.

    Sixth, there is not a single verse in the Quran which says that the Torah, Zebur, Injil is corrupted. I challenge every muslim to prove it from the Quran. Only the Quran should be used and no other source because the muslims claim that it is from God so please show what God says in the Quran about the Bible.

    Seventh, Paul never twisted or changed the teachings of Jesus. Please provide specific quotes from the letter of Paul showing how he contradicted or twisted or changed jesus' teachings.

    Eight, Jesus is called son of God not in a literal sense but symbolic and spiritual sense. Nowhere does the Bible say that God had intercourse with Mary and Jesus was born. The Bible uses symbolic and spiritual words very extensively. I ask all muslims if jesus is not the son of God then who's son is he? Who is his father? Who gave him birth? The Quran says that the spirit of God came upon Mary and she became pregnant that is why jesus is called Spirit of God in the Quran because he was born by the spirit of God. The word father means giver of life. Who gave life to jesus? God. It may be noted that the word father can be literal and spiritual both. The Bible calls jesus son of God because he was born by God's spirit. Adam is also called the son of God, the angels are also called sons of God, all because they all were directly created by God and only God was their father their life giver.

     
  2. Witness

    Witness New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dear Friend:

    First, your quotations from the book of Isaiah is not a prophecy of Muhammad because these verses are addressed to Israel and is speaking about a messenager from Israelities.

    Let me ask you a question. Do you believe that the present Bible is uncorrupted or corrupted?

    If you say that the present Bible is corrupted then your quotation from Isaiah is baseless because you are quoting from a corrupted source.

    If you say that some parts of the Bible are corrupted then please answer the following with reliable references:

    • Name the persons involved in corruption
    • Name the place where this corruption took place
    • Name the date when this corruption took place
    • Name the exact verses where this corruption was made
    • Provide the original uncorrupted texts of the Bible
    Thanks

    Witness







     
  3. HaSsy

    HaSsy New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Helllo,

    First of all my buddhist freind there here is a link you will be very interested in. A scholar who has memorised every scripture, torah, bible, buddhist and hindu scriputres. Here is a link for you regarding muhammad(saw) in the buddhist scriptures.

    http://theunjustmedia.com/Islam/Non-Muslim/introduction_to_buddhists.htm

    and my freind WITNESS, regarding shir withk prophet abraham NO the Quran says his father did shirk. Prophet abraham never once did shirk he use to play with the idols and make fun of them he was an upright true prophet of Almighty god.

    In the Quran Allah says Invite man to the lord with beautiful preaching and wisdom and it says invite the jews and christians but speak to them in a gentle way and in a good manner. When the prophet muhammad(saw) went to madinah he made treaty with the jews and christians that no one will be harmed, christians and jews are free to practice their religion. Yes if they fight against you fight but do not trangres limits. And Allah says Permission is only given to fight to those who have been oppressed, tortured, fought against. This is what the beloved prophet(saw) has said
    "If anyone kills a man who had made a covenant (anyone who belongs to a Non-Muslim community with whom a treaty of peace has been made, or a member of protected communities) will not experience the fragrance of paradise."
    Please have a look at this link. talking about how islam spread by sword or moral force
    http://www.islamcan.com/dawa/2.shtml

    I wish you could hear Sheihk Khalid yasin a former christian. Please search for him and download his lectures regarding the prophet jesus. He has defeated every christian scholar and debater. This sheihk knows the christian religion better than 95% of the christians in the world. So please look in it.

    Did you check out the book 200 ways the Quran corrects bible?

    How can someone be forcefully converted? If so than why did like 50 nations in the world adopt islam, why is the fasting converting religion is islam especially from christianity no one forced them?

    You should also check out former malcolm X where Islam fixed the problem where christianity could not.

    qoute by ex jew "I myself was influenced by my knowledge of the Bible to accept the Prophethood of Muhammad, and have had two Jewish rabbis admitting to me in Speaker's Corner that Muhammad was the Prophet spoken of in their books. It has long been recognised that a sure sign of the truth of a claim to Prophethood is the ability of that individual to accurately and consistently predict future events."

    It does not make sense how books by men, which say they inspired by god to write them, not straight from god to them. I wish you could hear the lecture of historical jesus by khalid yasin. Or please look up Yusuf estes former preist he will explain the contradictions the alterations of the bible.

    How come in the old testament god is always referred to ONE THE MASTER AND THE first commandment to moses was You shall not have any gods but God who is ONE. Than we got 4 books with no last name, no authencity men who did not colloborate with each other. And this is the first time God is given a son, first time. As Khalid yasin says no christian even knows what or where is the whole bible because the christians themselves over 700 denominations with differnt chapters verses which they dont even agree about.

    Regarding God sacrifcing his only son Begotton. That does not sound right how can the almighty have a son. How can God appear as a human being. If so why after so many prophets? Use say the world had too much sin it so he send his son. The sin is not gone? Every man is responsible for his own actions no man shall carry the burden of another this is what Allah says in the Quran.
     
  4. iBrian

    iBrian Peace, Love and Unity Admin

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,532
    Likes Received:
    8
    Hmm...this thread seems to be something of a posturing match at the moment, with people simply stating that one perception is better than the other.

    Fair to say, if there is no more constructive use of this discussion soon, then I may as well close it.
     
  5. Awaiting_the_fifth

    Awaiting_the_fifth Where is my mind?

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    0
    The I better get my two cents worth in quick.:)

    Just a quick response to the link posted by HasSy regarding Mohammed in Buddhist scriptures.

    The page claims that the prophecy of Maitreya is actually prophecising mohammed. It quotes

    Mohammed did not realise anything by his own supernatural knowledge, he learned everything he told from God through the angel Gibreel (sp?)

    I dont see therefore how you could possibly mistake these two.

    Quad Erat Demonstratum
     
  6. Saltmeister

    Saltmeister The Dangerous Dinner

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,130
    Likes Received:
    2
    I hope it is okay with Brian (admin) for me to post this message.

    I think you've misinterpreted the meaning of "the Son of the Divine."

    Here are some examples.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Pharoah king of Egypt was regarded as the son of the sun god Ra. The Pharaoh had a natural biological father, but was called "the son of the sun god" because it was believed that the spirit of the sun god would descend on the Pharaoh. The Pharaoh would go in a trance and serve as a medium for the spirit of the sun god. He would bring revelations from the sun god.

    For the Pharaoh "Son of the Divine" means someone who brings messages from a god.

    The Chinese Emperor was called "the Son of Heaven." Heaven is a place. How can a place have a son? The reason is that the Emperor was regarded as a representative for the divine. He was Heaven's authority on earth. That's the Chinese version of "Son of the Divine."

    Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life."

    If Jesus was God's only Begotten Son, then ultimately it means God begets The Truth. The Son of God is The Truth. Jesus was revealed as The Truth that came from God.

    That is what we mean by the Son of God.

    Most of us know the story that Adam ate the fruit from the Forbidden Tree and gained knowledge of evil. He caused the human race to stray from a path of holiness because we are all descended from him. Our human nature inherits from Adam's human nature. Adam opened a pathway for evil and sin because he tasted Knowledge of Evil.

    It follows that Christ is the Second Adam. While Adam opened a pathway to evil, the ritual that Christ performed, the atoning sacrifice, opened another pathway back to God. It is now our choice to follow that path. This path leads us to the Kingdom of God, which is a spiritual kingdom.

    The atoning sacrifice was two-fold: (1) cancel our sins prior to us entering the Kingdom of God, because enemies of God cannot enter the Kingdom. (2) open a pathway leading to this Kingdom.

    Jesus not only lays the pathway, but opens the gates to God's kingdom.

    The sin is not gone. However, there is a way to free yourself from the power of sin. It's by following the "pathway of holiness" opened up by Christ.

    Islam has five pillars. The Christian Gospel has three -- faith, hope and love. Faith, hope and love keep us alive spiritually on this journey to God's kingdom. This is how we drive out evil. We will never achieve moral perfection in this world, but we can conquer it. Because of the path we follow evil will not succeed in conquering us. Faith, hope and love are not something that make us "morally superior." No, it's more like food and water. It keeps us alive.

    It's righteousness and holiness by faith, hope and love and in this way we stay on the path to God. We do have a substitute for behavioural prescriptions that is explained in the New Testament. To find out what it is you should read it for yourself.

    My intention here is explain my beliefs. I am not saying my religion is superior to your's, but I'd like to tell you the way of thinking taught by the Christian Gospel. Perhaps you can learn and better understand what Christianity is about even if you don't accept it.

    As a Christian, I don't follow what some people call "systems of morals, ethics, values, doctrines, principles, dogma, etc." Nor do I follow behavioural prescriptions. Behavioural prescriptions are useless because by following them we admit that we have a corrupt human nature.

    What do I mean by behaviour prescriptions? Morals, ethics, rules, regulations, doctrines, dogma, principles, tenets and values. They are specific definitions of what is right and wrong in our society and how we live. They are codes of conduct.

    Rules are made to be broken. Likewise, people who follow rules and regulations are law-breakers. If you were not a law-breaker, why do you need to follow rules and regulations? You would be able to live without rules and regulations because you naturally do what is right without being told how to. You do it by instinct.

    Isn't it true that a little bit of yeast makes the whole bread rise?

    Yes. Break one rule, and you are guilty of breaking the whole System of Law. That is why you should no longer think or live by the Law because then you will be judged by it. You may become proud, conceited and arrogant because of the System of Law that you follow. Conceit and arrogance in itself is sinful. Hence, a little bit of yeast makes the whole bread rise.

    You may think of Christians as law-breakers because they don't follow rules, regulations or behavioural prescriptions, but that's because we follow different realities.

    You may argue that God doesn't need to reveal Himself and that all He needs to give us is behavioural prescriptions, but why does He need to send behavioural prescriptions in the first place? Is God not self-sufficient and capable of making a creation that is pure and holy by nature?

    Is it not interesting that plants transform themselves into really beautiful things without following rules, regulations, behavioural prescriptions or codes of conduct. Can we not say the same about human beings?

    My view is that God doesn't follow behavioural prescriptions because he doesn't need to. He is holy and righteous by nature. That's why He revealed Himself to us. It was to show us that we don't need moral codes of conduct or behavioural prescriptions.

    The problem is not the lack of behavioural prescriptions but that Adam ate the fruit from the Forbidden Tree. It was not God's fault. To say that we need behavioural prescriptions is to say that God's creation was not perfect.

    Islam's school of thought isn't compatible with the Christian Gospel. The Quran doesn't even explain why the theory I explained above is wrong.

    Please show me verses where Mohammed refutes the Second Adam theory.

    This theory (and it is only a theory) existed before the coming of Islam, so you cannot say that early Christians foresaw Mohammed's coming, because they were never told to expect another law-giver or a messenger of "behavioural prescriptions."

    The theory explained why all ideologies, codes of conduct and behavioural prescriptions were obsolete. According to this theory, Islam simply could not possibly have been foreseen by the early Christians.

    This is how we can explain Christian beliefs.

    Jews have explained why they don't accept Christianity as a "successor" and likewise, Islam. That is okay. I will not argue with them. This is how I explain why I disagree that Islam was foreseen by the early Christians.
     
  7. Friend

    Friend In the Name of God

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    2
    Waw,,,,,,Do You want me to return to that time :eek:
     
  8. aburaees

    aburaees Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    0

    If an allegation of corruption is to be made against any book, surely it is reasonable to request the evidence and not just take someone's word for it?
     
  9. aburaees

    aburaees Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please read Deuteronomy 18:18



    Muslims claim that this verse is talking about Muhammed, as they believe that the verse is addressed to the Israelites and the brethren of the Israelites must be the Ishmaelites.

    Please read the whole chapter



    It is obvious that the chapter is addressed to the Levites, who's brethren are the other 11 tribes of Israel.

    And Muhammed certainly was not in the midst of the Israelites.




    Let's also look at Moses' Geneaology....

    Moses son of Amram son of Kohath son of Levi son of Israel (Jacob) son of Isaac son of Abraham son of Terah.......

    Firstly Moses is the brother of Aaron

    Secondly he is an Amramite who's brethren are the Izharites, Hebronites and Uzzielites.

    Thirdly he is a Kohathite who's brethren are the Gershonites and Merarites.

    Fourthly he is a Levite who's brethren are the Judahites, Simeonites, Reubenites, Benjaminites, Josephites, Issacharites, Zebulunites, Danites, Naphtalites, Gadites and Asherites.

    Fifthly he is an Israelite who's brethren are the Edomites.

    Sixthly he is an Isaacite who's brethren are the Ishmaelites, Zimranites, Jokshanites, Medanites, Midianites, Ishbakites and Shuahites.




    If you look at chapter 18, you can clearly see that the Subjects are the Levites, and it was in this capacity that Moses was being spoken too and speaking as.
    The brehtren of the Levites are the other 11 tribes of Israel.


    It is incorrect to assume that the Israelites are being spoken to, and even if they were, the brehtren of the Israelites are the Edomites - not the Ishmaelites!


    And if you want to hang on to the idea that the brethren of Moses are the Ishmaelites - you must prove that Muhammed is in fact and Ishmaelite using authentic sources only.


    Thank you,
    Aburaees


    P.s. The prophecy in Deuteronomy could be applied to every Israelite prophet who came after Moses, a promise that Israel will continue to have prophets to harken to.
     
  10. Azure24

    Azure24 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    0
    May i ask friend (with no offence) what is the point of you saying this (i mean in your thread). It does not matter what early Jews or Christians think,the question is what do you think? Or have you used early Jews and Christians to encourage you to think the same or, indeed encourage everyone on this forum to think the same?
     
  11. Janz

    Janz What's Amatta U

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    421
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is this thread still open to discussion? I have some information to add for clarity but I do not want to begin another posturing match. I think that Witness has answered from the Gospel of John with a logical response. I would like to share from my study of Aramaic and also from another source: Codex Vaticanus (Codex B), one of the oldest near complete copies of the original Greek NT.

    It dates from the 4th century (200 years before the birth of the Prophet of Islam) and is located in Rome. This information is from a trusted friend of a friend, not my eyes. However, the Aramaic explanation is from 2 different scholars that I have studied regarding the meaning of the Paraclete.

    Please respond to my inquiry if anyone else is interested in my findings and I will post them on a new entry.

    Blessings and Shalom, Jamarz :)


     
  12. lunamoth

    lunamoth Episcopalian

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,915
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Jamarz, As long as the thread is not locked that means further posts are welcome. Please do share your findings.

    luna
     
  13. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    I too would be most interested you your findings...and welcome to CR. ;)

    v/r

    Q
     
  14. Janz

    Janz What's Amatta U

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    421
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would be happy to share with all of you my studies on the topic "Parakletos"or "Periklytos." I have been researching this for months now, ever since I came across a similar Muslim and Christian debate on another forum- even down to the same exact words. I have quoted part of Friend's post that caught my eye and either Friend is the same person who is posting this agrument all over cyberspace or cutting and pasting is happening in order to proselytize Christians by claiming that "Periklytos" is "Muhammad" in Greek. Did you notice that the author of the book below is a Christian(a former Roman Catholic Bishop, no less) convert to Islam?

    Now that I have those of you who are reading this, waiting in anticipation, I am not quite ready to present my response. I want to have all my sources lined up and more organized in order to reference them properly, plus I do have to do some more studying of the Greek and I am curious about copyright issues on my own thoughts. Any comments? I promise that I will have all this info available by tomorrow(July 31) morning Rocky Mountain Daylight Savings Time. :D

    Post # 25 by Friend on 1-25-2005:
    In his book "Muhammed in the Bible", Professor `Abdul-Ahad Dawud, formerly Rev. David Benjamin Keldani, Roman Catholic Bishop of Uramiah, submits a much more eloquent and scholarly presentation in defense of these assertions, far beyond the limited abilities of this humble author. For those who which to read a truly scholarly study of this matter, you may obtain a copy of that book. The following is a very brief quotation from that book:
     
  15. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    We aren't exactly going anywhere...however, time is a two way street. You present your thoughts, and of course we take time to research and present ours...only fair.

    Irony is the "fact" that you perport "results of studies", yet you are not quite "ready to present said results"? Hmmm.

    Best if you simply stated you had ideas you'd like to present, then present them as you have them...

    v/r

    Q
     
  16. Janz

    Janz What's Amatta U

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    421
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't see the irony..I do have results of my studies in my head and notes all over the place but they are not organized in a logical presentation on paper. So in order to clear up any confusion, I have ideas that I am going to present to the forum in the order that I have them.
    I wish that I could just go to a web page and cut and paste but some of us just have to struggle thru the old fashioned way of translating thought, notes and resources onto a blank screen with some degree of coherence. But never mind because I am just going to present my notes.

    This is what I found:

    So from the Codex Vaticanus (Codex B), one of the oldest near complete copies of the original Greek NT that dates from the 4th century (200 years before the birth of the Prophet of Islam) and is located in Rome, two distinguished professors Dr. Phillip Payne and Prof. Paul Canart examined each occurence of Parakletos in John 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7; and they say that there is absolutely no sign of any alteration of these words in the actual Codex B. In addition, Petermasih states that he has checked photographs of the oldest fragments of the passages that mention PARAKLETOS(dating from the 2nd century). He, also sees no evidence of alterations. So he is convinced that the original word was revealed was PARAKLETOS and not PERIKLETOS. source: Jelsoft Enterprise v.Bulletin v3.5.4.

    Does the above information help? I will post the Aramaic sources in a few. I have decided to just give all of you my notes since I am not writing a formal presentation.
     
  17. Quahom1

    Quahom1 What was the question?

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    9,906
    Likes Received:
    5
    Which displays...what?, in your words?
     
  18. Janz

    Janz What's Amatta U

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    421
    Likes Received:
    0
    I said:

    So from the Codex Vaticanus (Codex B), one of the oldest near complete copies of the original Greek NT that dates from the 4th century (200 years before the birth of the Prophet of Islam) and is located in Rome, two distinguished professors Dr. Phillip Payne and Prof. Paul Canart examined each occurence of Parakletos in John 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7; and they say that there is absolutely no sign of any alteration of these words in the actual Codex B. In addition, Petermasih states that he has checked photographs of the oldest fragments of the passages that mention PARAKLETOS(dating from the 2nd century). He, also sees no evidence of alterations. So he is convinced that the original word was revealed was PARAKLETOS and not PERIKLETOS. source: Jelsoft Enterprise v.Bulletin v3.5.4.


    In my own words, hmm, I was following a line of thinking presented by a Bahai friend of mine who claimed that Muhammed was indeed the Paraclete of John 14:16,26;15:26; and 16:7. The spirit of God was manifested first in Muhammed, and then in Bahá’u’lláh, who was actually the second coming of Christ. Now is the time for all faiths to unite under the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh so that world unity and peace can be achieved.

    So I began to do a search for what these verses in John meant because most of my Christian walk, I have always assumed that the Paraclete was the Comforter, the Holy Spirit of Christ/God, the Spirit of Truth, who convicts the world of sin, opens the heart of the unbeliever which leads to repentance and acceptance of Christ as Savior and Lord. At that moment, the Holy Spirit indwells the believer to teach, to exhort and to comfort. This is accomplished thru study of Scripture, Prayer, corporate Worship and Teaching at a Bible-believing Church, known as the Body of Christ.

    Soon I found out that in Islam, the Paraclete was not considered a spirit but the Prophet Muhammed. Here is a portion of why Muslims believe this:

    Quote from an online discussion from the Muslim perspective:

    “All Bibles in existence today are compiled from “ancient manuscripts,” the most ancient complete collections of which being those of the fourth century C.E. Any scholar of the Bible will tell us that no two ancient manuscripts are exactly identical. All Bibles in our possession today are the result of extensive cutting and pasting from these various manuscripts with no single one being the definitive reference.

    What the translators of the Bible have done when presented with such discrepancies is to do their best to choose the correct version. In other words, since they cannot know which “ancient manuscript” is the correct one, they must do a little detective work on the text in order to decide which “version” of a given verse to accept. John 14:26 is just such an example of their selection techniques.

    John 14:26 is the only verse of the Bible which associates the Parakletos with the Holy Spirit. But if we were to go back to the “ancient manuscripts” themselves, we would find that they are not all in agreement that the “Parakletos” is the Holy Spirit.

    For instance, in the famous the Codex Syriacus, written around the fifth century C.E., and discovered in 1812 on Mount Sinai by Mrs.Agnes S. Lewis (and Mrs. Bensley), the text of 14:26 reads; “Paraclete, the Spirit” ; and not “Paraclete, the Holy Spirit.” ‘.


    This last paragraph lead me to consider finding information about the Codex Syriacus to examine further the claim that the original text may have been altered.

    Also some other accusations coming from Professor Abdul-Ahad Dawud’s book “Muhammed in the Bible” regarding the tampering of the original text to change the Greek Word Parakletos to Perikltos (praised one) which the Professor concludes would be another prophet like Jesus, a human being not a spirit.

    The evidence from Codex B suggests that that “PARAKLETOS” is the correct original word. No sign of tampering or alterations.

    From the New American Standard Bible:
    John 14-16-17
    And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper(parakletos) that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not behold Him or know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.


    So what does PERIKLUTOS (Perikltos) mean?
    Muslim scholars often assert that it means "praised one".

    From the Greek-English Lexicon by Liddell & Scott
    The literal meaning is: PERI = around, about, all around
    KLUTOS = heard of so PERIKLUTOS = (literally) heard of all around
    = famous one, renowned one.

    This is not exactly “praised one” as suggested by Professor Abdul-Ahad Dawud and other Muslim Scholars.








     
     
  19. Abogado del Diablo

    Abogado del Diablo Ferally Decent

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'm not a copyright or I.P. expert. I did take a class on copyright in law school though, and can help you find some resources to learn more if you want. But I know some basics.

    If you mean "copyright . . . on my own thoughts" literally, you are probably out of luck. In the U.S., copyrights attach when a work of intellectual property becomes "fixed in a tangible medium." That might include original matters posted on this forum (as soon as you hit the "save" button and it's written to the disk on somebody's server), but I doubt it would include your "thoughts." Posting things on forums owned and operated by someone else may create some issues as well. Before you post what you consider important original scholarship, you should probably be careful to read the disclaimers and rules of conduct for the site and forum and maybe even correspond with the site's owner. And "fixing in a tangible medium" is not the same as "registering." You can have a valid copyright, but not register it. Of course, you are in a much better position to fight copyright infringement if you can prove prior registration as well as a prior fixation in media.
     
  20. Friend

    Friend In the Name of God

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    2


    Surely ,,,because Islam is a heaven religion

    :)
     

Share This Page