I know T J Winter (Abdal Hakim Murad). I even stayed at his house once with my ex-wife. He is one of the more impressive religious thinkers and speakers that I have come across; and I would add that he's also a kind, compassionate and generous person as well. However, I find his theology problematic. He appears to embrace voluntarism and nominalism, as do other Ash'aris, and he seems to be comfortable with the offensive warfare of Islam when it was in its ascendency. In one of his talks on 'jihad' he said: "The jurists of classical Islam reached the conclusion that Islam requires relentless military action against non-believing peoples unless a treaty exists with them". And he seems to have no problem with that, I suppose because of his voluntarism. He thinks good and evil are not intrinsic properties but are rather subjective categories: it is simply and solely God's will which determines when x is good or evil. I find all that problematic.
Very mundane discussion and the host seems to be illprepared and intelectually lazy. She just let him paint Islam as some kind of pacifist relegion that is a solution for all the problems caused by Radical left. No question on why so much oppression and violence at the drop of a dime in Islamic communities across the workd across centuries if as per the author if Islams teaches everyone is Adams children and different nations and cultures are approved in Quran. Overall the host wanted to have a nice chit chat about his personal experience than probe him on his religious claims.
@@bayreuth79the other important part about the warfare equation is that the other side is probably thinking to knock you out when they get the chance…just human nature to kill out the other side before they kill you unless you have an agreement (and even then it’s flimsy). You also see this in nature, animals claiming their part of the woods and knowing that if they don’t proactively fight off others, the others will come for them at some point.
@@ideapulse-i2i You seemed to be threatened by my comment. I'm sorry but the Ash'ariyyah understanding of God is appalling. God as pure power and good and evil are only subjective categories. I don't care who agrees or disagrees with me- I am right about this.
I really valued this conversation with a deeply respected Muslim academic in the UK. As a former Church of England priest myself, this notion of "other people like me" crossing the bridge to Islam was very important. After 12 years within Anglican ministry I reached out to the late Idris Tawfiq (a former Roman Catholic priest who embraced Islam). His deeply pastoral and insightful email to me, led me on a journey to discover so many "others like me" , who slowly and gradually realized had left their home of Christianity, and come to realize we had been inhabiting Islam, long before actually formally embracing it. Like Dr Winter, Islam (after deep struggle to cling on to my deeply held Christian beliefs and love of Jesus) was simply a continuation on the spiritual and religious journey. At the end of the day, conversion is something that happens to you; it just happens, and whether we invite it in or not, the heart will be broken open regardless. Then, the landscape and our experience of "otherness" is not only deeply challenged, it is blown wide open. Elizabeth, your insightful words at the end were beautiful by the way. Thank you.
Beautifully put. I find this very relatable despite having quite a different experience to you - born Muslim, lapsed out for many years, but yearned for a home and God strongly, searching far and wide before the breaking open of the heart as you mentioned. I'm happy and blessed to be back. Alhamdulillah, as we say. Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad in my teens, and throughout my lost adulthood, was consistently a rope to God, Islam and the Prophet ﷺ . I pray for his well being, that he be preserved in goodness, and that he is met with success in this world and the everlasting one to come.
My dear, welcome, you who know God, the Creator of everything and the Giver of life to the fetus in its mother’s womb, a fetus that cannot work or obtain food. My dear, welcome, you are a Muslim to God, but I hope you accept my words. You will be a Muslim when you discover that Islam did not legislate slavery. You will be a Muslim when you believe in the Quran and search it from cover to cover, and you will never find any legislation for slavery. My regards
You can disagree with this man on theological grounds, but his profound knowledge about religion and spirituality as well as human nature isn’t only stunning but deeply inspiring. His overall message is that we humans must embrace each other despite our differences in religion and culture. What a profound insight and wisdom!
People don't know what an Islam is, or what the Quran is. That includes this man, Timothy, and also the majority of Muslims. The Quran is primarily the book of law, and it was the law in the entire Europe, not so long ago. In the old world.
Thank you! More or less, it seems to me that the aim of this episode was to understand the Islamic dimension of this very British man. But, for me, a non-British Muslim, it was a way to do something else: a way to understand the Britishness of this very Muslim man. :) I've been following Shaykh Abdal Hakim's work for over a decade and I've been to Britain over a dozen times, and so both the Shaykh himself and Britishness as a social construct are of huge interest to me, and in this interview Shaykh Abdal Hakim provides more insight regarding his upbringing and background than he ever has in any other interview or talk, to my knowledge. Although he's obviously an outgoing person in terms of giving lectures, etc., he seems to be very shy and reserved when it comes to his personal life. So well done for enabling us to gain all this insight, Elizabeth.
Agree and well put. His perspective is quite unique and his upbringing is obviously an impactful one that shapes his practice and character today. Generally it is also helpful to be mindful of privilege that a given individual has, and he certainly does come from a privileged background, which explains his perspective a lot.
If only there was Podcast with Shaykh Abdel Hakim I could watch everyday! Thank you so much inviting the one every westerner interested in spirituality and meanings should invite. I had the chance to meet him and was only reassert in my conviction that this man is full of wisdom. May Allah bless you!
His Friday sermons are usually posted on the New Cambridge Mosque channel, as are many of his lectures. His "Paradigms of Leadership" series is a wonderful journey through history, leaders, religion and personal sacrifices.
Thanks for interviewing, wish he was more well known with English-speaking people. I think this deserves a part 2 can learn so much from Dr Abdul Hakim Murad.
Very interesting to see Dr.Tim’s shift to Shaykh Abdul Hakim. It’s almost like he tapped into another version of himself in an alternate universe with all the wisdoms from such a different perspective
Thank you! You did a good job interviewing Dr. Winter and delved into his personal background and family history aspects which rarely been discussed in his other interviews.
I am a former apostate, and Alhamdulillah Allah S.W.T showed me the right path, and I converted to Islam. I have been doing great Dawah in many years with a great result. Allah S.W.T. helps me and my fellow Muslims in my mission. 😊😊😊🤲🤲🤲🤲
So you're saying gouging people's eyes out, washing in sewage, raping little children, and mass murder are holy and "perfect"? Yes? Correct? That's what you now believe, right? Or Muhammad was a false prophet and you are ignorant and deceived? Which? Which one is it? Answer.
So you're saying washing in sewage, gouging people's eyes out, raping children and mass murder are holy and perfect? Yes? That's what you're saying, right? Can you see that is actually satanic and evil? Or not? Answer? Don't squirm and evade and back-bite and change the subject. Just answer the questions.
Wonderfully human and spiritual. This man is truly one of the great Muslim scholars of our age, with a global following. May God preserve him and increase him in his knowledge and station.
Thank you Elizabeth for this wonderful conversation! I would encourage you to pull further on the thread about our understanding of Jesus Christ as a pacifist, and how this should / should not inform our approach to social justice today!
Liberal Christianity eroded traditional Christianity. Most Christians of today are oriented towards liberal Christianity with their secular modern sensibilities. Secular humanism retains elements of Christianity, it's Christianity with all the calories removed.
Dr Winter is too humble to mention or rather detail his spiritual path and progress.. but as someone who has followed his work for many years now and knowing a lot of his traditional background, his unseen relationship or station with God is far greater than most know and a lot more than his theological knowledge. He, like all great Sufi practicioners, is an iceberg - what we see is only a fraction of his extensive relationship with God.
I enjoyed this a lot. And I'm taking notes on your questions and style. You're excellent at making people feel open to share, especially when they're coming from a different point of view. I hope to be having a guest on soon to talk about Islam as well, so this is extremely helpful for that reason too.
Sahih Bukhari (6:301) - "[Muhammad] said, 'Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?' They replied in the affirmative. He said, 'This is the deficiency in her intelligence.'" Why do you think Allah intentionally made women stupid compared to men?
Great interview! I appreciated the wide range of topics. The only thing that I miss a little bit was discussion of what and who our creator is. And our journey to him
Interesting perspective from an Islamic standpoint …mainly because he comes at this from an entirely different angle compared to other known and popular Muslim thought leaders and theologians. There is tremendous value in a multiplicity of perspectives within Islam excepting the ones who are intolerant of everyone else (wahabi, salafi)
That's a good interview Ms. Oldfield. It's always enjoyable to listen to Dr. Winter. He is someone of profound learning and he is a deeply spiritual person. Our understanding of the Holy Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) is quite deep. You would have to talk to him and other scholars at quite a lot of depth to be able to understand that. I hope the Bible has kept some sayings of Jesus (peace be upon him) recorded where he left instructions about what to do when faced with oppression. If the writers of Bible hadn't done so, then it would be a most profound problem for people who have been and are being oppressed by nations who used to be Christian or have a significant Christian population today. Forgiving those who commit a crime by mistake, or those who have a sincere deportment toward their sin is helpful. But forgiving the arrogant oppressor, empowers and boldens him or her. Turning the other cheek makes no sense to people who are oppressed when the oppressors are preaching that theology. It only feels beautiful to those who have no empathy at all. It is totally unhelpful to others. This is the reason why the British or the French or the Italian had practically no effect in converting people in India, North Africa and Middle East. My ancestors in India accepted and invited many people from outside. And people from outside made it its home. But the European colonialists really didn't impress us at all. Islam on the other hand stayed in the subcontinent for centuries and is still there. You have to think about how this sort of thing about turning the other cheek of Jesus sounds to us. It's like our oppressors have every right to destroy us in their civilizing effort. They have all the right to destroy our institutions and loot our wealth to the point of causing such massive imbalance in the the world which is still affecting us. But us, defending ourselves from such horrors is not a virtue. Virtue would have been to turn the other cheek. Do you know how ridiculous it sounds to people other than yourselves? You might know Peter Oborne. I request that you read his books and do an interview with him. He is a Christian. There are ways to be a Christian in which you don't see that redacted version of Jesus's message to be a true portrayal of Jesus. You believe in a loving God. A loving God cannot love oppressors among his creation, until he or she repents. And a loving God does not consider the martyr who give up his or her life to defend people to be morally inferior to the one who turns the other cheek. I believe turning the other cheek is very very contextual. It simply can't be Jesus' full message on how to deal with oppressors. It's a great dishonour to imagine that Jesus wouldn't physically fight to save oppressed from the oppressors. And that he wouldn't empower the oppressed to protect their women and children. Turning the other cheek is indeed beautiful, but only contextually. Not everybody should turn the other cheek. I believe that you are a good person. I just don't want you to not do anything against oppression or oppressors. And I also want you to genuinely understand the point of view of oppressed people. It's just not some nuisance that you don't think about. It is profoundly important.
Thank you for that comment, @ryameen " ' Virtue would have been to turn the other cheek.' Do you know how ridiculous it sounds to people other than yourselves? " 🤔 I have highlighted this sentence to help people slow down to give attention to what you write. Buns were handed out at infant school on Commonwealth Day and we were to celebrate our British world heritage. This was before 1960. We need to consider our attitudes and where and when we acquired them with a broader attention. 🧑🤝🧑👭👫👬🥯🥯🥯🥯🥯🥯🥯🥯 🤔
They are certainly credited for bringing Islam and its rich teachings and scholastic traditions and insight to Muslims with English as their first language. Cassette tape recordings of Hamza Yusuf lectures were almost a currency in the mid 1990s. True gems, both of them, but we are blessed with more scholars as well across the world.
Thank you for sharing such an interesting conversation. The ‘Semitic Monotheism’ is indeed an appealing concept to me, as is the term ‘Abrahamic faiths’. The Quran describes Abraham as a ‘Hanif’ ie. an upright person who believed in a monotheistic God. This word ‘Hanif’ is what I am also drawn to.
@@zenlokamaya thank you! And glad you like them. We start all our episodes with those two questions in an attempt to really get to the core of our guests!
When we look at the teachings of Jesus, he’s often seen as a figure of peace and nonviolence, promoting love and forgiveness even in the face of injustice. His message of turning the other cheek can sometimes feel idealistic in today’s complex world. In contrast, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, is viewed as both a spiritual leader and a reformer who addressed injustices through active leadership, balancing peace with action against wrongdoing. Islam emphasizes the importance of justice and freedom, particularly in its teachings about freeing slaves. The Prophet Muhammad encouraged the gradual emancipation of slaves as an act of righteousness, allowing for societal change without widespread conflict. This approach contrasts sharply with the violent struggle for abolition in America, where the fight against slavery resulted in significant loss of life. The Islamic method highlights a path to justice that mirrors the pacifist ideals of Jesus but does so in a way that fosters practical, non-violent change.
I agree completely, Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) represented a response to the challenges of his time, particularly under the Roman Empire, where his message of peace and forgiveness took center stage. However, it’s hard to argue in it as a realistic practice to the world we live and where to turn the other cheek only, is an impossible feat to do constantly and is simply idealistic and utopian, and is particularly explicit in today’s world and what is happening around us. In contrast, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) faced different circumstances, including a leadership role that allowed him to embody both mercy and justice, similar to the role of Prophet Moses (peace be upon him). From my perspective, while all prophets hold significance, Prophet Muhammad stands as the final model for our time a balance of forgiveness and righteousness in defence in my opinion, a great choreography of God’s positioning of the prophets . I love the concept of “mizaan” (balance) in all elements of the religion and is what draws me in, a practical way to live. This doesn’t diminish the importance of Jesus (peace be upon him), but Islam uniquely honors all the prophets as they are portrayed in the Quran, and we are also told not to measure and compare them as they are all examples in different aspects of our lives .On the other hand, Christianity elevates Jesus to a divine status, which overshadows the examples set by other prophets. Then with the other issue of associating partners with the one God.
@@SK-hq6ux Yes, the Old Testament as well elevates the Messiah in a way that overshadows the other prophets. There’s a reason why he is the Messiah, and they are not. Also, Islam very much does elevate Muhammad above the rest
@@SK-hq6uxit’s crazy how you claim we take the example of Jesus and have it overshadow the others and that’s unlike what you do with Muhammad yet can you give me the example and teachings of Moses or Jesus or anyone other than Muhammad? You only care for Muhammad and his example. You fluff it up and put on sheep’s clothing, claiming to care about other names but you don’t even read or know their message and example. Muhammad is the only name you include in the shahada. You very much do elevate him above the rest. If I ask a Muslim about the example of anyone else they will just refer to Muhammad and say it’s the same.
Woah, a debrief like that earned a subscription. Very honest. Thought i was only watching for the Shaykh, guess i'll be sticking around to see other content you produce.
i say to all please watch the full series of sheikh ahmad deedat , who's so many debate to many pastor , and their so many speech about islam and christianity,
no where i see their most of the speech is alway of in good facts of data and the investigatiion about the research is ok, and they tells truth, and they show the books numbers which is match to their statements, no one tells lie without any ambiguity or misleading so their research is great, i accept and i will turn ourselves christianity to islam.
Sister Elizabeth , if you have time to read the translation of The Quran I am sure will have a wider understanding. By the way , Dr Winter has also translated The Quran.
@@KGS922 : Exactly; Shaykh Abdal Hakim has access to the video just like the rest of us, and if he decides to watch it, he'll find this part and may decide to respond, perhaps through private correspondence. But, in any case, it's not behind his back.
Great interview, thank you, please could also interview Paul Williams of blogging theology another English Muslim who was devoutly Christian before becoming Muslim. I think it would be a great interview. Sheikh Abdal Hakim was talking about the real historical Jesus (peace be upon him). There is a time and place for pacifism in Islam as well but after a certain line self defence is a must. Both Jesus and Muhammed (peace be upon them) are brothers of the same faith Islam, which essentially translates to submission to God and the Muslim is one who submits themselves to God. Islam is the continuation, reestablishment and finalisation of the original religion of Jesus and previous prophets messengers (peace be upon them). and their messages were for a certain people for a certain time, and that’s why they haven’t been fully preserved but in fact changed / corrupted. Where as Muhammed the final messenger (peace be upon him) had a mission to deliver the final message of God to all humanity until the day of judgement. And that’s why it has been preserved since until this day.
There are so many interesting points in this discussion that I'll just pick up on one to avoid writing a whole essay here. Because the Abrahamic religions are very historically oriented, I think we all agree that it is also appropriate to see their figureheads in historical context ("all agree" means "all apart from ahistorical literalists"). Jesus' pacifism strikes me as appropriate for the times. The Roman Empire could be cruel and oppressive, but it was also pretty tolerant so long as people paid their taxes and didn't cause trouble, and of course you got all the good stuff like peace and aqueducts (echoes of Life of Brian). Rebelling against the Roman Empire, on the other hand, would bring about your destruction, as the Jews found out shortly after. If you're not prepared to go full-on Masada, rendering under Caesar made perfect sense. The situation in Mecca was very different. Revolution was in the air, and Mohammed had the capability of achieving it. And it's worth pointing out that the Muslims only took up arms when peaceful alternatives had been exhausted. There are also esoteric aspects to the difference between Jesus and Mohammed, and all the other prophets going back to Adam. In what you might call Sufi depth psychology, they represent different conditions or stations of the soul - I've even seen contemporary Sufi teachers mapping them onto the chakra system because, hey, it's the 21st century ;-)
@@stylembonkers1094because Ishmael, the son of Abraham, is a direct ancestor of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). This lineage is one of the reasons many Jews of the time did not accept him, as he did not come from their lineage, where prophets had traditionally emerged. Despite this, they had also rejected Jesus (peace be upon him), who was from their own tribe. Isaac, Abraham’s other son, fathered Jacob (Yaqub), and the Jewish tradition of prophethood continued through his descendants. However, with Prophet Muhammad, Islam introduced the universalization of the message, when the time was right under God’s wisdom, where the divine laws were no longer confined to a specific people or tribe but were meant for all of humanity due to the actuality of this happening now, marking a departure from the exclusive Jewish lineage. We also believe a prophet was sent to every nation (extra info). So it’s Abrahamic in that prophet Mohammed is a descendent of Abraham, but outside of the Jewish lineage.
@@SK-hq6ux Thanks for that. Muhammad in the Quran repeatedly says that he believes in the prophets of the God of Abraham, and repeatedly confirms the validity of the Jewish and Christian scriptures. To deny this you must deny Muhammad, Quran, and Islam. Those prophets and scriptures themselves prove that Ishmael is NOT in the prophetic line. The Bible provides several key passages that establish God's covenant with Abraham passing through his legitimate marriage to Sarah, rather than through her slave-girl Hagar: God's explicit promise to Abraham: "God said to Abraham, 'As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. I will bless her, and moreover, I will give you a son by her. I will bless her, and she shall become nations; kings of peoples shall come from her.'"1 *God's rejection of Ishmael as the covenant heir:* When Abraham suggested Ishmael could be the heir, God responded: "No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him."1 Confirmation of Isaac as the covenant heir: "But I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this time next year."1 Sarah's status as the legitimate wife: The New Testament affirms Sarah's position as Abraham's true wife, referring to her as "the free woman" in contrast to Hagar "the slave woman" (Galatians 4:22-31). Muhammad says that Jesus is the Messiah, whereas Muhammad is NOT the Messiah, according to Muhammad. Therefore according to Muhammad and Quran, salvation will come through Jesus, not Muhammad. Isaac's lineage through Sarah: The genealogies of Jesus in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 - which Muhammad CONFIRMED - trace His ancestry through Isaac, NOT Ishmael, confirming the covenant line through Sarah. These passages clearly demonstrate that God intended His covenant with Abraham, including the Messianic line, to pass through Sarah as his legitimate wife, not through Hagar. Therefore Muhammad in his illiterate ignorance himself proves that he is a false prophet, and you agree with that, because if you don't, you are denying the Quran and Muhammad, and sentencing yourself to death in shariah law. Okay? So which is it? You're saying the Quran is false, and therefore Islam is false? Or you're saying the Quran is true, and therefore Muhammad is a false prophet and Islam is false? Which? Answer! The Quran tells you. If you are in doubt about the Quran - and you are, for the above reasons - then you should consult with Christians to understand. Hint: bathing in sewage, raping children, gouging out people's eyes, preaching hatred, committing armed robbery, torture and mass murder are NOT holy and perfect, and are NOT from God, they are from Satan. How OBVIOUS does it have to be before you wake up. Repent, brother! CHANGE YOUR MIND about you, sin, and God! The truth will set you free!
The virgin birth was prophesied in the Septuagint greek translation and this 250 BC translation was changed by latter Rabbinic Jewish translations after 90AD but adopted by Protestant bible translations into English. The Catholic and Orthodox churches reyained the 250 BC greek translation in the Septuigant. 90% of yhe OT quotes in the new testament come from the Septuigant.
There is no significance in Islam It’s a miracle for us but it is easy for God. Maybe it was a sign for the children of Israel to recognise and follow their messiah as a last chance
@@adamsnow4979 No significance, thanks. The only significance is recorded in the Bible where the Son of God assumed flesh while remaining fully divine to save mankind from death sin and Satan.
@@georgiacap9294Jesus wasn't the first or only 'Son of God' in human history, and there are many virgin birth, and pregnancy by divine intervention stories across the ages, from all parts of the world.
From Adam to Jésus to prophèt Muhammed, every event is a part of whole spiritual history of mankind and each bear its own significance. But taking a leaf from the life of Jésus and deviating from the teachings of Jésus, all the prophets and Almighty himself, and mixing it Gréco Roman legends and gentile influencés doesn't make it anything worthwhile.
Jesus is mentioned more in the Quran than Mohamed, and Mary is discussed more extensively in the Quran than in the gospels as a whole. The Quran also states a further miracle of Jesus speaking from birth to explain the survival of Mary in a Jewish community where illicit sexual actions result in capital punishment, unless there is an explanation to which Jesus speaking from birth to defend the virginity and innocence of his mother, this miracle, explains.
@@kennethmoore-cq7bj : Usually when we're talking about a Muslim "saint" in English, it corresponds to the Arabic term "wali'u 'Llah". And "awliya'u 'Llah" do exist, according to the Qur'an.
Islam did NOT "emerge in the 7th Century'". Islam began with Adam(pbuh) and Eve(Hawa-Gbph). They were the First Muslims or Submitteees ONLY to God(Allah) without associating partners with Him in worship(e.g. Trinity).or worshipping other deities-Zeus, Dionysus, Apollo, Osiris, Athena, Diana, Aphrodite, Baal, Hubal, Hanuman, Laat, Uzzat, Manaat etc. God or Allah is "The Father".
Guraan said :( oh children of Adam, take your Beauty at every place of worshipping) meaning we are all brothers and sisters, Contrary to all ideologies including the religions founded in Egypt and in Nazerth of PALESTINE, as Islam is the religion of Ibrahiem , Ishmael and Jacob and Never A Not New religion, as Quaraan said, (It's the Way of your Father Ibrahiem He Who called you Muslims
It's possible the passive Jesus thing is just the 'recasting' / marketing / reinvention of Jesus for the purpose of control / "establishmentisation" of what it was he was teaching, a suggestion which may gain credence by the the actions of other prophets.
Sir Abdal Hakim Murad is an assent of Islam. May Allah Azza wa Jal grant him long life with good health. However; the majority of Muslims have been following not Quran but Mullahs blindly for 1200 years. Truth is: though Noble Quran rejects death of Jesus on the Cross but in several other verses, Quran tells that Jesus died naturally after living long life over 100 years. He will never come back to this war-torn planet. Stories of Virgin Birth and Ascension and Return of Jesus were spread among Muslims by those Christians who converted to Islam in 7th century. Then these two fables were blended in hadith books. And then Sunni and Shia translators *started to interpolate and TAMPER translation of several verses of Quran in order to RECONCILE stories of their Concocted Hadiths with Quran.* Fact is: neither Quran+history support tales of Virgin Birth, and ascension & return of Jesus, nor even these two tales exist in the oldest available copies of 4 Gospels of NT. In order to impress new converts; it is the Church who invented and then blended these two fables in Gospels, much later. But when people like us tell this truth to followers of Sunni and Shia sects; instead of accepting the truth of Quran; they place on such person a label of Qadiani or Ahmadi. We firmly believe that last Prophet was Mohammad; and no any Prophet will come after him.
Ask ˹them, O Prophet˺, “Who provides for you from heaven and earth? Who owns ˹your˺ hearing and sight? Who brings forth the living from the dead and the dead from the living? And who conducts every affair?” They will ˹surely˺ say, “Allah.” Say, “Will you not then fear ˹Him˺? Most of them follow nothing but ˹inherited˺ assumptions. ˹And˺ surely assumptions can in no way replace the truth. Allah is indeed All-Knowing of what they do. Quran chapter 10.
Do yourself a favor and read your Bible cover to cover before committing yourself to the idea of modern Christianity which does its best to hide the real Christianity within the pages of the "holy" bible. Consider Islam once you've had your eyes opened by Your Bible. Its Salaamualikum to all.
You're saying that lying, deception, perjury, extortion, torture, armed robbery, raping children, gouging people's eyes out, raping women in front of their husbands and beheading the men in front of their wives, slave-trading, wife-beating and mass murder are holy and "perfect". That's what you're saying. Islam is a satanic cult. Allah = Hubaal = Baal = Satan. LEARN to UNDERSTAND what's in your own religion. People are only ever Muslim by ignorantly or deliberately choosing evil. Which is it in your case? Which?
Q 49:13 (God says) We created you from male and female; and the birth of Jesus is not exempted from this verse. Verse 3:36 talks about Children of Mary, and 66:12 calls Mary a MARRIED CHASTE WOMAN (Ahsanat Farjaha). Gospels tell that Mary used to have at least 7 Children
It's funny how the practitioners of all three abrahamic religions have been involved in different ways in the oppression of the black race while it was the black race that produced the first monotheistic believer and civilization, the 18 Egyptian dynasty under pharaoh Akhenaten, 1,380 b.c.
Islam is the religion of Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Idris, Jesus and Muhammad. The religion of God does not have any persecution of a class of people or class or race or color. Or your color, but God looks at your deeds. I am an Egyptian and my ancestors 6000 years ago believed in one God and the Baathists were Muslims before the eighteenth dynasty before the criminal Akhenaten.
This is just an ignorant statement. The Prophet himself said this: "All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a White has no superiority over a Black nor a Black has any superiority over a White except by piety and good action." One of the earliest converts to Islam was a black slave who was later freed, he's regarded as a hero and revered. He along with millions today are black and proud Muslims. Slavery was an industrial machine that was devoid of religion, it went against the very notion idea of Islam or Christianity. Islam was the first openly anti-racist religion. So to say that these religions encouraged oppression is just stupid.
Of course the modern day myth here, mentioned by the guest, is "the Jesus of history versus the Jesus of faith", when they are in reality, one and the same. If you choose to follow the theological deconstructionists, as the guest appears to have done, then of course you will end up with the confusion between the so called "Jesus of history" as against the "Jesus of faith", because in adopting a reductionist approach, you are in fact choosing to create your own Jesus! This is obviously a very arrogant position to take, in refusing to accept the gospels, but then persuading yourself that your own 'created gospel' is more authentic than the ones which are 2000 years old and contemporary to the time. Further, in choosing to approach the Holy book of the Bible, with a reductionist and deconstructive method, one must to avoid all hypocrisy, adopt the same deconstructionist and reductionist approach to all other ancient 'holy books', including the Quran, which is also a text that has undergone a significant process of production before the current versions now known in the world. Not to do so, would be to engage in the most hypocritical choice of personal preference, as opposed to any objective consideration of the text and their comparisons, therefore negating a conviction of holding objective truth.
Frankly there's not much that can be claimed about biblical jesus when historically; the evidence for his (biblical) existence is weak and the jesus of faith portrayed is even weaker in terms of how many changes the bible has undergone, the church dogmatic insertions as well as the multiple completely contradictory accounts of his actions. Christianity is so clearly a religion tampered with by man; islam is the only logical recourse for a believer in God almighty. Hopefully you can remove your boas stained glasses and think with an open mind
Could you please link any sources that would substantiate claims about contemporaneity of the Gospel accounts to the life of Jesus? As well as sources for the 'process of production' of the Quran?
@@Kairbek-x2l Thanks for your question. A common sense approach is required here to understand this situation, rather than an inflexible and rigid criteria for establishing 'facts', which is a typical argument used for the convenience of critics who don't like Christianity. To establish truth, (or what is false), you need more than a simplified sources argument. For instance, if one asked a Muslim to provide 1st century contemporary sources for the story of Isa in the Quran, the absence of any evidence of such sources, doesn't necessarily completely rule out the Quran as false if there are reasonable and rational explanations as to how the story came from the 1st century. The first thing to realise is that when I used the word contemporary, I used it in the Historical sense, in that the writings of the New Testament, emerged in the 1st century AD, the period in which the events described took place; and Geographically, in the area of Israel, Syria and Rome, the world in which the stories of Jesus and the apostles occurred. So in the historical sense, the New Testament was 'hot off the press', from the geographical and cultural context of the 1st century AD. By stark contrast of course, the Quran 600 years later, from a remote place in Arabia, makes references to a man called 'Isa' who appears to be an impersonation of Jesus, with a different role, purpose, history, story and teaching, that has little or no resemblance to the Jesus of the gospels. There is virtually no similarity between Isa and Jesus, in any real sense - they appear to be entirely different personalities with entirely different messages. So while the Bible has a historically contemporary description of Jesus in the land he lived in, the Quran has a revised and reconstructed personality and role, created from a land distant in time and space, remotely by someone who could not claim to have any validated receipt of information. Secondly, the gospels do have direct validation by Peter the disciple of Jesus. The author of Mark's gospels, John Mark known in Acts, was described by Papias: From the fragments Eusebius cited, we discover that Papias learnt from John the Elder what the latter knew about Mark and Matthew’s works. In regard to Mark’s work, Papias said that it was based on Peter’s preaching: "He moreover hands down, in his own writing, other narratives given by the previously mentioned Aristion of the Lord's sayings, and the traditions of the presbyter John. For information on these points, we can merely refer our readers to the books themselves; but now, to the extracts already made, we shall add, as being a matter of primary importance, a tradition regarding Mark who wrote the Gospel, which he [Papias] has given in the following words]: And the presbyter said this. Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord's sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements. [This is what is related by Papias regarding Mark; but with regard to Matthew he has made the following statements]: Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could. [The same person uses proofs from the First Epistle of John, and from the Epistle of Peter in like manner. And he also gives another story of a woman who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is to be fount in the Gospel according to the Hebrews.]" - fragments of Papias from 'THE EXPOSITION OF THE ORACLES OF THE LORD.' related by Eusibius. Effectively, Mark's gospel is actually Peter's gospel, since Mark was simply writing down what he heard Peter preach. There are no known authentic witnesses from the 1st or 2nd century, who contradict this record and assessment. When we consider that the gospels are full of named individuals who each told their story as eye witnesses and hearers of Jesus, what we actually have in the gospels is a collective eye witness account of the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.
@@Kairbek-x2l You may find this video helpful also as the study of the academic historical origins of the Quran, as opposed to the mythological tradition, is still in its early stages: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-iNdvsLh128Q.html
