Showing posts with label Islamic claims. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islamic claims. Show all posts

Refutation: Islamic claim of Jeremiah 8:8

Muslims assert that Jeremiah 8:8 says that the scribes used a "false pen" in their feeble attempt to justify their outrageous claim that our great sages corrupted the Torah and Tanakh. They make these claims by misquoting the Tanakh, and relying on defective Christian translations.

The translation and general lack of understanding lead Muslims to such a dim-witted conclusion. The proper translation of the verse is:


How can you say, We are wise, and the Torah of the L-rd is with us? Surely,
the pen wrought in vain, in vain the scribes. The wise men are ashamed, they are
dismayed and taken: Lo, they have rejected the word of the L-RD; and what wisdom
is in them?
(Jeremiah 8:8)

The verse is telling us that they rejected the Torah, so they have no wisdom. They essentially did not follow the Torah, so their writings and study were in vain. Jeremiah then writes a bit later:

And you shall say to them: So said the L-rd, If you do not heed Me to walk in My
law that I have placed before you
, To heed the words of My servants, the
prophets, whom I send to you betimes, and you did not heed. I will make this
house like Shiloh and this city I will make into a curse to all the nations of
the earth.
(Jeremiah 26:4-6)

How could we follow the law that G-d places before us (bold text), if the law was corrupted? This presupposes that the Torah was uncorrupt and available during the time of Jeremiah. Since Jeremiah wrote Jeremiah 8:8, who better than he to tell us the precise meaning of the passage in question? The mistranslation of the Islamic claim is quite evident.

Refutation: The Islamic Claim on Deuteronomy 18

Claim: The Torah Itself Predicts Mohammed as a Prophet

Many Muslims will claim that the Torah itself (apparently the "uncorrupted" part) predicts the coming of their so-called prophet some time after the giving of the Torah. All Bible translations are directly from the Hebrew, all of them literal.

Where Did They Get That Idea?

The relevant verse of the Torah is as follows:

Deuteronomy 18:18 A prophet I will raise up for them from amongst their brethren like you and I will give my words into his lips and he will speak about them all that I command him.

We must ask the following: who is "I", who is "you", who is "them/their"? "I" is G-d, "you" is Moses, "them/their" refers to the Israelites.

So a paraphrase could be: G-d will raise up for the Israelites a prophet from the Israelites' brethren some time in the future that will be like Moses and speak the words of G-d.

Having established that, what's the connection?

The assertion is that "from amongst their brethren" refers to the Ishmaelites, and as Muslims assert many times, Mohammed is descended from Abraham through Ishmael.

In order to properly analyze this, I will not make a table comparing Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, as many do on both Christian and Muslim websites in order to pervert the meaning of this verse.

Instead, I will make a minor sidestep into the world of Jewish thought.

For those of us that do not have the presumption that the Torah is wrong and faulty, there is a list of thirteen basic rules on how to deduce meaning from the Torah. They are provided as the introduction to Sifre, and are recited in the preliminary portion of the daily morning prayers.

Just as in the Torah where there are laws that are obviously "just" and those that we cannot comprehend, a parallel applies here. Some rules make sense, and others are assertions of rules. I will make use of two rules that make a good deal of sense.

Rule number 2 states quite simply "mig'zerah shavah" which means "From a decree of equality".

Rule number 12 is that "davar halamed m'inyano, v'davar halamed m'sofo" which is often translated like "An item is taught/clarified from it's context, or from nearby verses."

Why these two rules? Rule number 2 tells us that if we have a word in one location that is vague, and the same word elsewhere more clear, we can use one to clarify the other. The reason for the second rule will be evident shortly.

The Rebuttal

Just a chapter back, in Deuteronomy 17, we find a similar phrase, but the voice is different. This time Moses is delivering a message from G-d directly to the Israelites, speaking to the Israelites as a single group, instead of us hearing what G-d says to Moses.

Deuteronomy 17:15 You shall put (appoint) upon yourself a king that G-d will pick him; from amongst your brethren you shall appoint a king; you will not be able to give upon yourself a foreign man that is not your brother.
This verse, just a chapter behind the verse about the prophet is quite explicit. It uses the phrase "amongst (their/your) brethren" and then clarifies that a foreigner, which is definitely a non-Israelite, is not the Israelite's brother.

For further explicitness of the term foreigner, let's turn to Exodus 12.

Exodus 12:43 And G-d said to Moses and Aaron: This is the ordinance of the Passover offering, every son of a foreigner shall not eat of it.

Conclusion
Since we can now see that a foreigner does not take part of something as central as the Passover celebration, which is incumbant on all Israelite males when the Temple stands, we can see that a foreigner is simply a non-Israelite, and it doesn't matter their genealogy.
That being said, we have also shown that a foreigner is someone who is not from "amongst the brethren" of the Israelites.

Analysis: The religion of "Islam"

From "messiahtruth.com":

Using logical analysis, let us examine the primary proofs used for Islam.

1) The Claim of Corruption in the Bible -- Do Muslims offer proof supporting corruption in the Bible? Yes, they do. Where do they derive this proof? They derive it mainly from atheists whose aim in pointing out "contradictions" is to convince people that G-d does not exist. For someone who already believes in G-d's existence, this should seem to be a rather questionable ethic. Secondly, Muslim apologists will sort through biblical archeology and biblical criticism, each of which range from both ends of the spectrum, from supporting the Bible 100% all the way to saying that the Bible is 100% fiction. Once having done that, they present the material that is best suited for their purposes, never telling anyone what a hot issue biblical criticism is, or that for every negative view, there is an equal and opposite positive view. Thirdly, the Qu'ran itself says that the word of G-d cannot be altered, all the while making the claim that the Bible was originally the word of G-d but corrupted by man. This is a contradiction in itself. If the Torah was the word of G-d, that means, according to the Qu'ran, that it is categorically impossible for man to change it. Hence, using Muslim logic, the Torah we have in our hands today is the same Torah that Moses handed down to the Jews at Mount Sinai.

2) Mohammed's Illiteracy -- Even when he lived, proving this would be problematic. The possibility that this is a lie exists, alongside the impossibility of proving that Mohammed was illiterate. Taken into account with the fact that the Qu'ran quotes from Jewish sources such as the Mishnah (the legal part of the Oral Torah, committed to writing around the year 170 CE) and the Midrash (a separate part of the Oral Torah, dealing with extra details of stories in biblical texts, committed to writing around the same time), this "proof" of Islam's legitimacy wears somewhat thin.

3) Miracles -- As with any religion, miracles are claimed. Islam claims some very famous miracles, such as the splitting of the moon. Realistically, had this happened, everyone on Arabia's side of the planet would have seen it, yet no one else ever wrote anything about it. Less advanced peoples would likely have used this to start their own new religions! In speculation, the Catholic Church might have found some way of using it to reinforce Christianity in places distant from where Mohammed was. Since they are objectively unverifiable, the credibility of Islam's claims of miracles is identical to Christianity, no more credible and no less credible.

4) The Arabic Language -- The claim is made that if a person were to learn the Arabic language, and read the Qu'ran in the original tongue, the person would be totally convinced that it had a Divine author. There are problems with this proof as well. Firstly, this is far too subjective to use as reliable proof. What inspires one person might not inspire another. Secondly, this interferes with us explaining the creative genius of figures like Einstein in the sciences, or Michelangelo in the arts. Should we assume Judaism is true because Einstein was inexplicably brilliant and also a Jew? Should we assume Christianity is true because Michelangelo's art was beautiful and he was a Christian? Of course not. Thirdly, less than one thousand years ago, Arabic was the most common language spoken by the Jewish people, replacing Aramaic, which had been their common language for approximately 1500 years, since the Babylonian Exile. Moses Maimonides (or Rambam, the acronym name by which he is known to the Jews) lived under Muslim rule and wrote his great works under Muslim rule. Among those works is the Moreh Nevuchim (The Guide for the Perplexed), which was written in Arabic to reach the largest possible audience. Maimonides had a brilliant mind, knew the entire Jewish Bible, the Talmud, and numerous other Jewish writings exceedingly well, in addition to being the personal physician of the sultan of Egypt. Jews have known Arabic, Jews have read the Qu'ran in the original tongue, and Jews such as Maimonides have been completely unimpressed by it (for reasons such as those listed at the end of item #2).

5) Rapid Conquest -- Shortly after Islam began, Muslim armies conquered a great deal of the world in a rather short time. Muslims attribute this as proof that Islam is true. Is this proof? Alexander the Great conquered what he had thought was the entire world before he died. Alexander, by all contemporary accounts, was a pagan idol worshipper. Are we to attribute Alexander's success to his gods (heaven forbid!)? Secondly, the book of Genesis tells us that G-d promised Abraham that Ishmael would become a great nation. The indoctrination of Islam into the Arab population and the subsequent conquest can surely be interpreted as a fulfillment of that prophecy.

So, when we examine these proofs with even a superficial eye, we see that they do not hold water. Even more so if we were to examine them under greater scrutiny.


http://messiahtruth.com/analysisi.html

Analysis: Quran Confusion

It is always interesting when reading what the Quran says about Pharaoh. I mean, with the Tower of Babel and Haman running around during his time period according to the Quran, I am pretty confused when looking over that part. I then realised, did Pharaoh even die according to the Quran when Moses split the sea?

Was Pharaoh killed or not killed by drowning?



"We took the Children of Israel across the sea: Pharaoh and his hosts
followed them in insolence and spite. At length, when overwhelmed with the
flood, he said: "I believe that there is no god except Him Whom the
Children of Israel believe in: I am of those who submit (to Allah in Islam).
(It was said to him): "Ah now!- But a little while before, wast thou in rebellion!- and thou didst mischief (and violence)! This day shall We save thee in the body, that thou mayest be a sign to those who come after thee! but verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!"

(10:90-92).
Moses said, "Thou knowest well that these things have been sent
down by none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth as eye-opening
evidence: and I consider thee indeed, O Pharaoh, to be one doomed to
destruction!" So he resolved to remove them from the face of the earth: but We did drown him and all who were with him,"

(17:102-103).

If your confused, so am I...

Did the deity of Islam save Pharaoh or drown him? And after we get by all that, why on earth do is Haman in this time period and the Tower of Babel as well!

Quran contradictions II

Does Mohammad ask for a fee?

Yes he does:

Spend your wealth for the cause of Allah, and be not cast by your own hands to ruin; and do good. Lo! Allah loveth the beneficent.
(Quran 2:195)

And know that whatever ye take as spoils of war, lo! a fifth thereof is for Allah, and for the messenger (Mohammad) and for the kinsman (who hath need) and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, if ye believe in Allah and that which We revealed unto Our slave on the Day of Discrimination, the day when the two armies met. And Allah is Able to do all things.
(Quran 8:41)

No he does not:

Follow those who ask of you no fee, and who are rightly guided.
(Quran 36:21)

This it is which Allah announceth unto His bondmen who believe and do good works. Say (O Muhammad, unto mankind): I ask of you no fee therefor, save lovingkindness among kinsfolk. And whoso scoreth a good deed We add unto its good for him. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Responsive.
(Quran 43:23)



Pharaoh, Haman, bricks of mud and the tower of Babel!?!

Wait a second! The Quran mentions Pharaoh, Haman, and the Tower of Babel in the same story! And contradicts known history on how the Egyptions made their bricks?

Pharaoh and Haman, and their hosts were sinners ... And Pharaoh said, "Council, I know not that you have any god but me. Kindle me, Haman, a fire upon the clay, and make me a tower, that I may mount up to Moses' god; for I think that he is one of the liars." [Sura 28:8,38]
Pharaoh said, "Haman, build for me a tower, that haply so I may reach the cords, the cords of the heavens, and look upon Moses' God; for I think that he is a liar." [Sura 40:36-37]


This is another possible example of two
historical compressions in the same story and the same confusion in both texts that recount the event. At least in this case, the Qur'an is consistent within itself.

According to Surah 28:35-42 and 40:36-37, Haman was a minister or official of the Pharoah (king of Egypt) who lived in the same time as Moses. According to Jewish history Haman served as the minister of Ahasuerus (king of Persia, Xerxes I is his name in Greek). Apart from the error in location, this is placing Pharaoh (Moses) and Haman in the same story even though they lived 1,000 years apart. [See Esther 3:1.]

Furthermore, in the Qur'an Haman is ordered by Pharaoh to build a tower reaching into heaven ("the Tower of Babel") which is a well known story of an event that took place long before Abraham, who lived at least 400 years before Moses. [See Genesis 11:1-9, especially the verses 3-4, "Let us build make bricks and bake them thoroughly. ... and build a ... tower that reaches to the heavens."]

This connection is confirmed through another piece of historical, archaeological evidence.

Sura 28:38 tells us: And Pharaoh said: O chiefs! I know not that ye have a god other than me, so kindle for me (a fire), O Haman, to bake the mud; and set up for me a lofty tower in order that I may survey the god of Moses; and lo! I deem him of the liars.

The Egyptians constructed their public buildings with cut stone, not bricks. The Mesopotamians, by comparison, constructed most of their public buildings with baked bricks since they lacked a good source of cut stone.

However, the Qur'an makes an historical error when it claims that the Egyptians used baked bricks. Except for some minor ruins at Nebesheh and Defenneh, baked [or burnt] bricks were not used in Egypt before the Roman period (Manual of Egyptian Archaeology, G. Maspero, H. Grevel, p. 4).

The Bible tells us in Exodus 5:6-7 :
That same day Pharaoh gave this order to the slave drivers and foremen in charge of the people: "You are no longer to supply the people with straw for making bricks; let them go and gather their own straw.


Archaeologists and historians agree:

"The ordinary Egyptian brick is a mere oblong block of mud mixed with chopped
straw and a little sand, and dried in the sun ... one man is told to break up
the ground; others carry the clods, and pile them in a heap, while others again
mix them with water, knead the clay with their feet, and reduce it to a
homogeneous paste. This paste, when sufficiently worked, is pressed by the head
workman in moulds made of hard wood, while an assistant carries away the bricks
as fast as they are shaped, and lays them out in rows a little distance apart,
to dry in the sun." (Ibid., p. 3)



This illustration is from an 18th Dynasty tomb painting, found in the Tomb of Rekhmara. It shows the process by which bricks were made in ancient Egypt.

Source: "answering islam"

The Quran Comedy

The Quran says:

"The Jews call Ezra a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!" (Quran 9:30)






An odd claim indeed. The Quran claims that "the Jews" actually call Ezra the "son of G-d" like the Christians do, when they refer to Jesus. Of course, Muslims will try to explain this error, by saying that some of the "Jews in Arabia" worshiped Ezra as a "son of G-d". But I challenge those people to find me any writings of those Jews which claim they worship Ezra.

Not only that, but they seem to forget that the verse states "The Jews" the same way it says "The Christians". Yet they explain that the first part of the verse refers to "some" Jews and the second part of the verse refers to "all" Christians, despite the language being identical.

Here is the Arabic of the first part of the verse transliterated for you all:

Waqalati alyahoodu AAuzayrun ibnu Allahi
waqalati alnnasara almaseehu ibnu Allahi

You can see that both parts are identical. "yahhod" refers to Jews and "nasara" refers to Christians. "Uzayrun" refers to Ezra, while "Maseehu" refers to Christ.

A careful observations shows that the verses are exactly alike, except for the names, yet Muslims claim one refers to "some" Jews, which they in turn provide no record for, while the other refers to "all" Christians since, believing Jesus is the son of G-d is a fundamental belief in Christianity.
__________________

The Quran says, G-d created humans, however, how did he do so?

It is He Who has created man from water: then has He established relationships of lineage and marriage: for thy Lord has power (over all things). (Quran 25:54)

Proclaim! (or read!) in the name of thy Lord and Cherisher, Who created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood. (Quran 96:1-2)

Lo! thy Lord will gather them together. Lo! He is Wise, Aware. Verily We created man of potter's clay of black mud altered, And the jinn did We create aforetime of essential fire. (Quran 15:25-27)

If any do seek for glory and power,- to Allah belong all glory and power. To Him mount up (all) Words of Purity: It is He Who exalts each Deed of Righteousness. Those that lay Plots of Evil,- for them is a Penalty terrible; and the plotting of such will be void (of result). And Allah did create you from dust; then from a sperm-drop; then He made you in pairs. And no female conceives, or lays down (her load), but with His knowledge. Nor is a man long-lived granted length of days, nor is a part cut off from his life, but is in a Decree (ordained). All this is easy to Allah. (Quran 35:10-11)

These verses are in direct contradiction with eachother.

___________________________

Since Islam's "Quran" teaches the Noahide laws, I will cease from attacking the book anymore, now that I have made my point.


Oh, so your prophet performed a few miracles?

So anyone telling you, "our prophet performed miracles, and many people witnessed it"? Well, if they are, ask them if G-d spoke to millions of people when creating their religion or are they just relying on the fact that one man says that G-d spoke to him.

Well they might have very well performed miracles! After all read the Torah (Deuteronomy 13:1-5):

13:1 Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it.
13:2 If there will arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of a dream, and he gives you a sign or a wonder,
13:3 and the sign or the wonder of which he spoke to you happens, [and he] says, "Let us go after other gods which you have not known, and let us worship them,"
13:4 you shall not heed the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of a dream; for the L-rd, your G-d, is testing you, to know whether you really love the L-rd, your G-d, with all your heart and with all your soul.
13:5 You shall follow the L-rd, your G-d, fear Him, keep His commandments, heed His voice, worship Him, and cleave to Him.


So let us see, a guy comes along and says that his "prophet" named Jesus or Mohammad comes along and in violation of the verse 1, subtracts from the law, saying we no longer should follow the Torah, but instead follow their books, and to show "proof" because they perform a "miracle".

After reading the above verse, can you do anything but laugh at them? I mean, G-d describes it at a very simple level to us!

The sign of forgery within the "New Testament" and "Quran"

The "Quran" and the "New Testament" do not breathe one word of criticism against their leaders. Our Torah and also the other sacred books are full of criticisms. Errors and faults are pointed out in everyone. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the ten brothers of Joseph... Moses, Aaron, the levites Korach Judges, Eli, Samuel, Saul, David, Soloman, are all criticized. Such criticism of great men is found in no other religions. Because this is a sign on truth. The claim of infallibility is the sign of forgery.

No one is perfect but G-d, and no one has lived their entire life without committing one sin, even Moses! The easiest way to see that the books of Jesus and Mohammad are fakes, are that Jesus and Mohammad are never criticized in them. They do no wrong, which is the most obvious sign of forgery.

Some ideas and arguments have been taken from Rabbi Avigdor Miller's book "Rejoice O' Youth".