Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Joseph Smith And Mohammed


Recommended Posts

Posted

I do not have academic credentials in Islam. I lived it for 6 years, so my reference is cultural. One example of the variance in the various beliefs is that every Muslim man I ever met will tell you that he can have 4 wives. Yet if one investigates about what the Qur'an actually says about it, the book starts out saying that man can only have one wife, but later, it says that because of the weakness of men, he may have 4. So, it is clear that one wife is Allah's SWT first preference. Were I a man, I would only have one wife, knowing what was the preference of Allah SWT.

Because men are weak, God calls us to better things, he does not give in to "our" weaknesses. When "or" If he allows it, it is for a very good that only he knows.
Posted

Thanks for this differentiation. I've struggled with the thought that we're too much like the Muslims in beng too legalistic, polygamy etc. Of course there are different of factions of both religions. This helped me to see it in a better light!

Daniel Peterson has a book called "Muhammad - Prophet of God at the FAIR book store.

Not sure how Muhammad could be regarded as a Prophet of God when his Quran

denies the Deity of Christ and the Atonement.

Another article states, "Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe

that Muhammad was an inspired teacher raised up by God to teach His word.

LDS Apostle believed Muhammad was "a man raised up by the Almighty".

The last page also gives Muhammad the title of "Prophet" but it doesn't use the adjective

'false'. If only the early apostles were politically correct.

Then we have another article at the 2011 FAIR conference which refers to Muhammad as

a seemingly true prophet.

I know we should be sensitive with Muslims but let's not sugarcoat it. Muhammad may have

started with good intentions but there's no way he was inspired by 'God' to teach what

he did.

Thanks,

Jim

Posted

That has to be one of the saddest stories I have ever heard. The closest I come to experiencing the same thing was saving my book files on Zip disc, and having the "click of death" manifest, thus wiping out access to entire chapters, which, thank goodness, were already in hard copy, and I could transcribe the lost parts. It took many, many months, a little at a time, rather like eating that proverbial elephant....

I am a poet...and old one. Once I have written a poem, I save it and then print it and put it in a fire safe. They may be worth little to the world, but I like them.
Posted

Because men are weak, God calls us to better things, he does not give in to "our" weaknesses. When "or" If he allows it, it is for a very good that only he knows.

I have always suspected that in ancient times, perhaps so called polygamy existed because so many men were killed in battle, there were lots of single moms and they simply needed the protection of a man, and the sistership of other women so some women could care for the children and the house while others tended to the crops and livestock. I think it is possible that a lot of these ancient arrangements were not consumated in the sense that moderns see it.

Posted

Or a finger. That is part of the interpretation regarding disciplining one's wife for obstinate behavior and rebellion. It is supposed to be more of a reminder of right action rather than an actual, painful punishment. Yusuf Ali is good. Muhammad Asad is another one. Both of these are quite scholarly if you get the editions that have many footnotes. Prepare yourself to be barraged by statements that are anti-Christian teaching in nature, and that denigrate Jesus as nothing more than a mortal man who died. My preference has been Muhammad Asad, followed by my close second preference, Yusuf Ali. Another advantage to Muhammad Asad is that it has English transliteration of Arabic words on the same page as the English translation and the original Arabic text. Muhammad Asad also expands and unfolds the multiple layers of meanings of the Arabic as best as one can into English, whereas Yusuf Ali tends toward the more literal in most but not all instances. There are others out there but these two are the best for new readers. Avoid like the plague those with a Wahhabi bent. These insert all sorts of parenthetical and bracketed interpretations directly into the English text, making for clumsy reading and often forcing the reader to follow Wahhabi thinking concerning the meaning of the Qur'an.

I agree with your assessment that the punishment was meant to be symbolical, however far too many men have interpreted it in a literal sense. Of course we all know that a certain percentage of women, world wide, are abused by their husbands and I have always wondered how the percentages of female abuse between Western and Middle Eastern cultures compare. My own treatment in Islamic culture was wonderful, yet I knew that there was a point where I must yeild to the men.

In talking with a Lebanese woman who lived in Kuwait until she came to America, she complained to me that her husband uses the Qur'an against her. I apologise for the personal references but I do not know how else to explain.

Posted

Daniel Peterson has a book called "Muhammad - Prophet of God at the FAIR book store.

Not sure how Muhammad could be regarded as a Prophet of God when his Quran

denies the Deity of Christ and the Atonement.

Another article states, "Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe

that Muhammad was an inspired teacher raised up by God to teach His word.

LDS Apostle believed Muhammad was "a man raised up by the Almighty".

The last page also gives Muhammad the title of "Prophet" but it doesn't use the adjective

'false'. If only the early apostles were politically correct.

Then we have another article at the 2011 FAIR conference which refers to Muhammad as

a seemingly true prophet.

I know we should be sensitive with Muslims but let's not sugarcoat it. Muhammad may have

started with good intentions but there's no way he was inspired by 'God' to teach what

he did.

Thanks,

Jim

We're not sugarcoating anything. I'm open to the idea that Muhammad he was in fact visited by Gabriel and inspired to write many of the things he wrote (even if he may have misunderstood some of it or filled in the gaps with his own well-intentioned but incorrect ideas). He also fought intensely against polytheism and idol worship. That's one thing I believe God "raised him up" to accomplish. He also taught great things about loving others. Who else taught that? Oh yeah...

Posted

Daniel Peterson has a book called "Muhammad - Prophet of God at the FAIR book store.

Not sure how Muhammad could be regarded as a Prophet of God when his Quran

denies the Deity of Christ and the Atonement.

Another article states, "Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe

that Muhammad was an inspired teacher raised up by God to teach His word.

LDS Apostle believed Muhammad was "a man raised up by the Almighty".

The last page also gives Muhammad the title of "Prophet" but it doesn't use the adjective

'false'. If only the early apostles were politically correct.

Then we have another article at the 2011 FAIR conference which refers to Muhammad as

a seemingly true prophet.

I know we should be sensitive with Muslims but let's not sugarcoat it. Muhammad may have

started with good intentions but there's no way he was inspired by 'God' to teach what

he did.

Thanks,

Jim

See my post 22 in full...

"The great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God’s light."

If Mohammed received God's light and put it in the Koran, then that makes him a prophet. A prophet according to a dictionary is "a person regarded as an inspired teacher or proclaimer of the will of God"

The bible dictionary states: "The work of a Hebrew prophet was to act as God’s messenger and make known God’s will."

Posted (edited)

Daniel Peterson has a book called "Muhammad - Prophet of God at the FAIR book store.

Not sure how Muhammad could be regarded as a Prophet of God when his Quran

denies the Deity of Christ and the Atonement.

...

You are assuming that the Qur'an of today is the one that Muhammad originally recited. There is evidence that it has been altered but Muslims typically deny that like Evangelicals deny that theological changes occurred in the Bible. All original copies of the Qur'an were burned after the official version was made by Uthman (if I recall correctly the name of the person responsible), so there is little chance of seeing some really good material dealing with this--other than things like the so-called Satanic Verses and suchlike passages claimed to have been in the original by some. Edited by MormonMason
Posted

A sad story. I wrote a very lengthy paper on this very issue many, many years ago. Personal computers were in their infancy.

One day in Berkeley, after finishing the last sentence, I saved it. The computer failed at that precise moment, and I lost both original and back-up. And, though I took it around to various specialists there in Berkeley, nobody could recover it.

It's been twenty-three years. I'm finally in the psychological position where I may try it again.

A digital "stupor of thought"? :diablo:

Posted

I'll have to take a look at that one in the near future. Thanks making mention of it. I do not think I have ever read a translation of the Qur'an by an Egyptian. Does he use the Egyptian text (regarded the most accurate) of the Qur'an as his basis for his English version?

Within Sunni Islamic culture, Egypt is seen as the intellectual center of Islam. Interestingly, outsiders think that it is in Saudi Arabia, but the Saud family runs it at the pleasure of Wahhabis. It is a delicate balance for them, and were it not for them, women would be driving, traveling and doing business with freedom.

I was astonished to find out that Yusuf Ali was Indian, though some sources have told me he was Pakistani. One of the best teachers I ever met was from Camroon.

In my opinion, for what that is worth, I think Indian and Indonesian Muslims are much more mild than Middle Eastern Muslims.

I have Shia friends who simply can not understand why our government and the Iranian Government are at odds. None of it makes sense to me.

Posted

The seeds of the United States of America and the best of it (its potential for liberty), which was in turn the soil for the restoration of the gospel, were first sown when God called Mohammed, saw, to do the work that he did. The principals we hold dear, if you trace their 'idea origin' go back to Islamic principles. Read the book "Mainspring of Human Progress". The reason I bring this up is not to convince anyone, but to provide a suggestion of why God would have called Mohammed, saw, and THEN Joseph Smith, but provided somewhat different information. Because God was laying plans for the restoration of his gospel all along (in my opinion). If at that time there was a movement that did accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, it would not have been any new news, and would have been swallowed up in Christianity of the time, which was in error as well, so its no recommendation. The way Islam came about created a 'peculiar people', so my main point is not that my opinions or suggestions are the correct ones, but that there could very well have been deep purpose the way things unfolded and that God's hand was over it all.

Posted

The seeds of the United States of America and the best of it (its potential for liberty), which was in turn the soil for the restoration of the gospel, were first sown when God called Mohammed, saw, to do the work that he did. The principals we hold dear, if you trace their 'idea origin' go back to Islamic principles. Read the book "Mainspring of Human Progress". The reason I bring this up is not to convince anyone, but to provide a suggestion of why God would have called Mohammed, saw, and THEN Joseph Smith, but provided somewhat different information. Because God was laying plans for the restoration of his gospel all along (in my opinion). If at that time there was a movement that did accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, it would not have been any new news, and would have been swallowed up in Christianity of the time, which was in error as well, so its no recommendation. The way Islam came about created a 'peculiar people', so my main point is not that my opinions or suggestions are the correct ones, but that there could very well have been deep purpose the way things unfolded and that God's hand was over it all.

The seeds of the United States of America and the best of it (its potential for liberty), which was in turn the soil for the restoration of the gospel, were first sown when God called Mohammed, saw, to do the work that he did. The principals we hold dear, if you trace their 'idea origin' go back to Islamic principles. Read the book "Mainspring of Human Progress". The reason I bring this up is not to convince anyone, but to provide a suggestion of why God would have called Mohammed, saw, and THEN Joseph Smith, but provided somewhat different information. Because God was laying plans for the restoration of his gospel all along (in my opinion). If at that time there was a movement that did accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, it would not have been any new news, and would have been swallowed up in Christianity of the time, which was in error as well, so its no recommendation. The way Islam came about created a 'peculiar people', so my main point is not that my opinions or suggestions are the correct ones, but that there could very well have been deep purpose the way things unfolded and that God's hand was over it all.

After visiting with the Sisters for a few weeks, it became clear to me that Mormonism was an extension of God's purpose. I began seeking the author of creation when I was about 12 years old but did not find him until in my mid 20's. Why I do not know. Can it be that Heavenly Father was teaching me through the years of pure, unadulterated hell I survived in those years? I have said in other places on this forum that I could never understand why God would talk to humans all down through history and then suddenly stop with Jesus Christ?

I agree with you that the prophet Muhammad PBUH was sent by Allah SWT (God) to start a work that would be continued down through the ages with people like Wycliffe, and Luther and finally to Joseph Smith. I believe that his work is continued in our Church Presidents. It makes me sad that many who were born into the covenant struggle with their faith and obedience today, While I, raised in hell, and convinced I was created to fuel the fires of hell, then made benificiary of the Atonement of Jesus Christ and the love of Heavenly Father, have no doubt what so ever about these things. Even if I never receive further blessings from the church, I will die knowing that the church is true, that Joseph Smith is the prophet, and the Book of Mormon is the true story of those who lived here.

I would still be Muslim were it not for what I feel is their improper treatment of Jesus Christ. I miss it greatly.

Posted

I would still be Muslim were it not for what I feel is their improper treatment of Jesus Christ. I miss it greatly.

This is also why I left Islam, ahki. One of the reasons.

Posted

This is also why I left Islam, ahki. One of the reasons.

Salaam. So perhaps you understand my feelings on the issue. As okht, I miss the prayers and the modesty. Perhaps I am simply Muslim that believes in Joseph Smith and Jesus Christ? I know a Shia sister who calls Jesus, the Holy One.

Posted

I have always suspected that in ancient times, perhaps so called polygamy existed because so many men were killed in battle, there were lots of single moms and they simply needed the protection of a man, and the sistership of other women so some women could care for the children and the house while others tended to the crops and livestock. I think it is possible that a lot of these ancient arrangements were not consumated in the sense that moderns see it.

I hope this is not out of line. But it is the fastest way to increase population. In "Israel's" case God sought to create a great people who would worship him and be a righteous people. Israel had 12 wives...one who tribulation saved them, after 430 years it was time for the Nation Israel to leave Egypt. They would have never grown to that number by conventual means. Thanks be to God we will not have to do this again. In Revelation there will be seven women to one man...but that will be an evil time.
Posted

I hope this is not out of line. But it is the fastest way to increase population. In "Israel's" case God sought to create a great people who would worship him and be a righteous people. Israel had 12 wives...one who tribulation saved them, after 430 years it was time for the Nation Israel to leave Egypt. They would have never grown to that number by conventual means. Thanks be to God we will not have to do this again. In Revelation there will be seven women to one man...but that will be an evil time.

I don't think you are out of line. Humans are in the habit of moralizing about the most inane things. I am sure that if Polygamy is ever nessessary, it will happen again, though with 7 billion souls on the earth, it would hardly seem likely. Remember the climate conference in Rio when Clinton was president? One of the products of that gathering that was filled with ego centrics was that the maximum sustainable population for the earth is around 3 billion. I wonder how they will accomplish that.

It is not about religion but about high minded, godless men men who mean to control the earth. Doubtlessly, some of them will think that they can one day dramatically extend their lives. Personally, I think around 65 or 70 years is more than enough. I can't imagine living 800 years like some of old. It would seem like punishment to me.

Posted

I hope this is not out of line. But it is the fastest way to increase population.

Only in regards to a particular man....polygamist wives tend to have less children than monogamous ones do so if you have a set number of women all of whom can be married in a monogamous relationship, then that would be the fastest way to increase population.

The assumption that polygamy is going to increase population faster is from the idea that some women would marry and have children who wouldn't under a monogamous only society.

Posted

Only in regards to a particular man....polygamist wives tend to have less children than monogamous ones do so if you have a set number of women all of whom can be married in a monogamous relationship, then that would be the fastest way to increase population.

The assumption that polygamy is going to increase population faster is from the idea that some women would marry and have children who wouldn't under a monogamous only society.

I am not in favor of it...it has been a big struggle that it ever happened by BY had children numbering in the 30's, my bio-father who was a bigamist had a lot of kids. Once my mother found out she divorced him. A friend of mine had 11 children from 3 wives (two died so he did not doing anything wrong) at age 80 had 80 descendants. Math would suggest otherwise.
Posted

I once had a lovely Muslim friend who suggested to me that being Muslim is being submitted to God, and Christians and Jews (at least, who are of the Book), can be considered submitted. He also suggested that any time a person acted in an Islamic way (according to God's laws), then in that moment they are Muslim; (and vice versa if a person who said they were Muslim but did not act that way then how is that Islam, although Allah is merciful and forgives). I also have a friend who teases me all the time and calls me a Sufi, lol. Islam = peace. In that sense, any who love peace and live it and create it--then by this, it's hard not to be Muslim. This is for you, Ellen :).

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...