Christians! Do you believe Mohammed's prophethood?

I recognize this thread seems to be addressing Christians only, so
I would not like to barge in .... but I did notice some errors in the first
reply here that I would like to address.

Hey Postmaster,

A couple of things I would like to correct here. Firstly, the Prophet was not rich. Even at the end of his life, after he was the ruler of all Arabia, he rejected material wealth of every kind. He owned, I think, one goat from which he and his familly used to derive milk. He even used to repair all his own clothes himself, instead of buying new material. He had no servants, as far as I know, and used to spend a good amount of time taking care of his household chores. Unlike the 'men of the house' these days... This piety by the way was not just present in the Prophet himself, but in his followers as well. Sadly however, it did not last past his own generation and the few that came afterwords.

Also, on the point about killing, I would like to point out that while the Muslims were in Makkah, they were not allowed to fight-back. So much like Jesus and his followers in Israel, the Muslims were commanded to turn the other cheek, and exercise patience. Because at this time, the Muslims were persecuted, but usually, the persecutions were limited to torture, economic and social boycott etc.. It is true that some Muslims did indeed die of torture, and that the Prophet himself faced many ordeals of course, but nonetheless, God's command while the Muslims were in Makkah remained the same to them, as they had been with Jesus PBUH. *(In the Quran, God has said that His way with His prophets never changes).* There were only like 60 or something Muslims in the entire city at this point.

The command to kill (in battle) came when Islam was the state religion of the Muslims in Medinah. And it is very crucial to understand why at his point the Muslims were allowed by God to defend themselves using force. We have to ask ourselves what made the situation different? Well, you would assume that the Muslims were more secure at this point in Medina then they were living under the rule of the Quraysh at Makka right? But this is not the case. When they migrated to Medinah and Islam was established as the state-religion, and it was not that the Makkans basically said "the gloves are off"... and made war on the Muslims. The basic difference between the two situations is that in Makkah, the Muslims faced torture (mostly) but their lives were safe. But now, they were facing genocide because if they lost the war... they would lose everything (including their lives). If they did not defend themselves, the Muslims would be put under the sword, and their new religion would be wiped off the map. Life is sacred. So the command to defend life, is also in line with Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him) teaching's as well, as far as I know.

What is really important to understand here is that Jesus (PBUH), in his ministry, never reached this point. He was never the ruler of a city-state, nor were his followers citizens of their own city-state. Therefore, we can not use Jesus's (PBUH) life as a model of conduct for the Prophet Muhammed's (PBUH) and his followers in its entirety. The challenges faced by the Muslims were different in nature that the Jews who were following Jesus. While the Muslims faced the same threats as Jesus and his followers in Makkah, they were advised to follow the same commandments that Jesus PBUH had been told to follow. (interesting isn't it?) But when their situation changed, after they migrated to Medinah, God progressed their revelation to a point that Jesus (PBUH) had not reached during his ministry (i.e. as independent citizens of a free city-state facing genocide).

Finally, at this point, the command to carry out war in defense was really a command to defend the new revelation. And since the Quran is the final revelation to mankind, it was imperative that this time, no force be allowed to do what had been done in the past i.e. mess with the words of God. This is why the Quran today is preserved in its original form. It is exactly the same today, as it was 1400 years ago.

 

Thank you for that insite. I believe the bible comes off more as a collection of stories. The koran is from a more rule oriented view. I wonder if the idea is that all three the torah, bible, and koran were intended to be used as a continuim of each other. There are many things that factor in to inconsistancies of the three books, time, translation, and interpretation are to name only a few.
I have been muslim 13 years. I have studied the history and the differences of all religions. I came to the following conclusions:

1. Whatever one person may or may not BELIEVE doesn't change the fact that GOD exists.

2. Believing in one book and not the other or whatever will never change the fact that there is only one GOD.

3. The believe in one GOD is far more important than the small details that are debated about religions.

The one thing that is certain is nothing can ever change the fact that there is only one GOD of this universe.

 

In only one post ummehdi has proven wiser than many other members of IO who seek to divide God over petty cultural differences.

 

God is free, for the giving.

 

Debbie these verses are not refering to Mohammed. It is funny to me how the Christians are doing the same thing to the Muslims that the jews did to them. It was the "jews" who supposively killed Jesus. It was the jews who deny that jesus was a prophet or has even been born. The believed he was the same things you are accusing the Prophet Mohammed of. It is very easy to find verses to interpret to fit your arguement. I will not do that. Let us assume you are correct and Mohammed is not mentioned in the bible. Does that matter? Does that take away from there being a God or not? Muslims are required to believe in all three books. No we do not believe they are 100% authentic translations. However one thing we do not do is bad mouth, insult, slander, curse, or judge the people or YOUR book. Now I wonder if saying those things are worth the arguement you are trying to present in GOD's eyes. Shame on you. And before you try to get the splinter out of Islam, first consider removing the plank from christianity.

 

Namaste Unmehdi,

Couple of interesting first posts. I was listening today about a new book from someone in the new Iraqi government on the corruption and use of Islam for power. Complaining how the radical element is taking over the religion...

Do you see that?

 

wil, I think ummehdi already covered that.

Goodness knows that Christianity has never been known to abuse power or get caught up in corruption.

But I know... I know... you weren't asking me.

 

Jesus delivered the only message necessary; there is nothing to add to it, nor is there any reason to modify it. I don't believe that Mohammed was actually a prophet, but I can respect those who do. I'd have a better answer if someone would lend me their Quran so I could read it (six or seven years ago I prayed that if God wanted me to read the Quran, that somebody would offer to lend me one. I'm still waiting.)

May I ask a question: What was it that Mohammed added to "the truth" that Jesus did not already say?

 

Marsh if you are sticking out you hand and waiting for someone to stick a koran in it you may be waiting away. But if you really want to research it you will find yourself one. the bible was a collection of stories written by many men. As muslims we believe in the bible and torah. We believe in the same prophets. Jesus was the prophet of the time. Apparantely the preaches or jesus that came from God were not followed. IF they were God would not have felt it necessary to send another prophet. Jesus was also sent to the Israelites if i am correct. They denounce and killed jesus. Now christians have an ally with the jews we do not believe Jesus has yet to be born and again who killed the imposter that was jesus. As a christian that would be a major concern to me. However there is a lot of politics involved with that one. the jews are now a minority and their religion is struggling to survive (an no not because Muslims are killing them) Again another story. The koran you ask comes from a authoritarian aspect almost as if GOd is saying you did not hear my first message let me show you in another way. No it is not lovie dovie. Yes it does say that god is merciful but it also says why you should behave a certain way. WHy you should not do this or that. It tells you that GOd knows better than you and trust him. I once as a woman why she eats pork when it says in the bible not to. She said, Oh back then they did not have the means to clean them now it is okay. did God change the rules? Or does she know better. it is not unconcievable to believe that Mohammed was a prophet it is true. the problem is that many feel it will change the face of religion. We this has already been done, but we just are not aware of it. The jews have a unrevised version of the torah, their followers have a revised version. The catholics are notorious of hiding the truth. A believer of God would'nt we want the truth even if at the ruin of our religion. The truth is what leads us closer to god not being christian, fewish or muslim. The truth is what we as believer should seek everyday even if it means saying my book is in error. Does it change the fact their is God. The book is the tool we use to get to GOd and there are many tools. So I would say Marsh if you really want the truth close your hand and open your heart. I say to the that want proof you will never find it because the proof will only come in your heart and not in your eyes. Sometimes you just have to have faith

 

Well, I think I do have faith, which is why I am still waiting for that Quran. I have made prayers like that many times in my life, and have had them answered. Incidentally, my initial prayer involved me purchasing a copy; I prayed that if reading the Quran was good for me to do that God would put it into the heart of the manager of any bookstore in the city I was living in to put one on display, and I'd buy it. Hasn't happened. But then, I'm still young; perhaps that prayer will be answered in due time.

If proof comes from the heart, which I think it does, then I'm pretty certain that Jesus' message was the final message. It wasn't followed, but then Jesus himself said that it would not be followed: the wide and narrow gates, yeah? Few find the narrow one, but there are lots of people out there calling themselves Christians. For those of us who believe in Jesus as messiah, it's pretty hard to imagine the necessity for God to send Mohammed with a new message.

 

Jesus Christ is the final and supreme revelation of God. He cannot be succeeded by another prophet. Since Jesus’ lordship is perpetual and universal (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 4:12; Ephesians 1:15-23), all who deny it have denied Christ himself and have excluded themselves from the only way of salvation. As Jesus warned, “watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them” (Matthew 7:15-16). Islam denies that Jesus is the Christ, rendering him a merely human prophet. As such it denies the gospel, the only way of salvation in time and eternity. Thus, it falls under the warning issued by the apostle Paul to an early church in Galatia that had betrayed the gospel:” But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!” (Galatians 1:8)

 

Well I am not a Christian per se (NOW), BUT I was baptized as a Protestant and in Europe where I am from there was never a question of whether Mohamed was a prophet or not. It was taken for granted that he was and this is from a background of a Hungarian whose country was occupied by the Turks for 150 years.....only in the USA some people are ignorant to even question this issue.....

 

Hermes, thanks for the good comment. Where are you at in NORCAL? I grew up in Stockton and Berkeley (and Carrizozo NM). The problem here (US of A) is that most of our Christian Churches have only tenuous ties to the Christian Tradition. Most Christians here belong to Churches that are less than 200 years old.

It's kinda like when the Turks hit what we now called Turkey. As recent converts they became focused on conquest in the name of the Prophet. As recent Churches most congregations in the US of A want to proselytize the world and are not very cosmopolitan about their beliefs.

Neither bad nor good, just how it happened here. We as a culture just do not understand that people of good will can have different religious beliefs. Anyway, that is what I think.

 

We live near Davis, CA - my wife works for the University of California. I still consider Jesus my master but I reject any divinity of Jesus. I was taught that we all are better of acknowledging a guide, guru and a master. Gurus are not around so you can be self-initiated but a guide is a given and you can take your pick from Masters - Krishna, Moses (Abraham?), Mohammed, Buddha or Jesus....
Most people in a religion do not recognize this and think only their prophet is the true one but people who transcend religions (mystics) like the Sufi, or Kabbalists will pick a master, i.e. Muhammad or Abraham respectively.

 

No. Mohammed was not a prophet of the Lord.

Truly I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes in the One who sent me possesses eternal life and will not come under condemnation, but has passed from death to life.
Truly I tell you, the hour is coming and is now here when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who have heeded it will live.
For just as the Father has life in himself, so too has he given his Son the possession of life in himself.
And he gave him power to pass judgment, because he is the Son of Man.
Do not be amazed at this, because the hour is coming in which all who are in there tombs will hear his voice and will come out, all those who do right shall rise to live, the evil doer’s will rise to be damned.

I do nothing on my own; I judge as I hear, and my judgment is just, because I’m not seeking my own will but the will of the one who sent me.
The Lord who sent me has testified on my behalf.
I came down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of the One who sent me.Whoever chooses to do his will shall know about this teaching namely, whether it comes from God or whether I‘m speaking on my own.
Whoever speaks on his own seeks his own glory, but whoever seeks the glory of the one who sent him is truthful, and there is no dishonesty in his heart.

I am the light of the world. No one who follows me will ever walk in darkness, cause he will possess the light of life.

 

Yep, he sure was (as were nearly every Holy Being, alive and deceased, in history).

 

The question is moot because Logos is the breath of all prophets.

 

Clay birds.....hmm are they talking about fallen angels...

 

When a heavenly being incarnates into the human egg it has a forgetfullness of its prior existance. This means some aspects of its life can be imperfect but when its right about the truth it knows it. The prehuman self is filtered through its incarnated body. The false self is the imperfection and true self would be the perfect things about the one. Make sense.