Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 10
11
Quote
I don't agree very much with your proofs, that babylon here is meant arabia

Wa Alaikum As'salam Wa Rahmatu Allah Wa Barakatuh,

I never said Arabia is Babylon, brother.  The Torah and NT speak of three Babylons:

1-  Actual literal Babylon (Iraq and other territories in Syria, Jordan and Iran).

2-  Virgin Daughter of Babylon, Arabia.

3-  Future Babylon of pornography.  Asherah in the OT, Jezebel in the NT:

https://www.answering-christianity.com/goddess_asherah_pornography_return_of_messiah_damascus.htm

All Bible theologians agree that the Daughter of Babylon is Arabia, and it is virgin because it had no Scriptures nor Prophets.

Aslam alaikum Brother Osama,

I have sent you a message, did you recive it?, because I don't see it in my send messages
12
Even Sam barfoon quotes the early church considering those who say that Jesus died for your sins as a blasphemy.  Click the link above.
13
Isaiah 53 proves that the Messiah will not be killed.  His life will be prolonged by GOD Almighty.  This is even listed in Isaiah 53 itself.  And if you look at the Psalms, GOD Almighty will save him.  Jesus and Mary even thank GOD Almighty for saving Jesus from death and harm:

www.answering-christianity.com/isaiah_53.htm
14
The New Covenant that is promised in the Torah includes both the Messiah and Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon them.  They both compliment and complete each other.  It is not one on the expense of the other.  The Torah is filled with Prophesies about the two great Prophets:

www.answering-christianity.com/predict.htm

The Bibles all greatly support that the Messiah was never crucified.  He was saved:

www.answering-christianity.com/isaiah_53.htm

15
Quote
I don't agree very much with your proofs, that babylon here is meant arabia

Wa Alaikum As'salam Wa Rahmatu Allah Wa Barakatuh,

I never said Arabia is Babylon, brother.  The Torah and NT speak of three Babylons:

1-  Actual literal Babylon (Iraq and other territories in Syria, Jordan and Iran).

2-  Virgin Daughter of Babylon, Arabia.

3-  Future Babylon of pornography.  Asherah in the OT, Jezebel in the NT:

https://www.answering-christianity.com/goddess_asherah_pornography_return_of_messiah_damascus.htm

All Bible theologians agree that the Daughter of Babylon is Arabia, and it is virgin because it had no Scriptures nor Prophets.
16
the part from Isaiah 52= 13 See, my servant will act wisely[a];
    he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.
14 Just as there were many who were appalled at him
    his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being
    and his form marred beyond human likeness—
15 so he will sprinkle many nations,[c]
    and kings will shut their mouths because of him.
For what they were not told, they will see,
    and what they have not heard, they will understand.

53 Who has believed our message
    and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
    and like a root out of dry ground.

to makes sense if it could have been talking about the prophet muhhamd (pbuh) but when the text continuous, = He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
    nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by mankind,
    a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces
    he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

4 Surely he took up our pain
    and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
    stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
    he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
    and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
    each of us has turned to our own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
    the iniquity of us all.

I began to doubt!, do you brother Ahamad have any valid arguments it could talk about messianc fifure in emd times (Muhammad pbuh), the isiah 52:13-15, is without no doubt about the prophet Muhammad (pbuh)
17
Pease b upon you,

I want to prove to you that according to Isaiah chapter 53, it’s crystal clear that the man God spoke about is not Jesus.

   1 Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

   2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

The verse says (like a root of dry ground). Jesus came from Nazareth which is a fertile land. While Mohamed came from Makkah which is desert land e.g. dry land.

   3 He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

•   The verse says a man of suffering… Like one from whom people hide their faces: Mohamed was rejected by his own tribe and his uncles and they all fought against him.

•   The verse says a man of suffering, and familiar with pain: Mohamed’s father died before he was born while his mother was pregnant; his mother died when he was five to six years old; he does not have brothers or sisters; his grandfather who adopted him died when he was eight years old; his beloved wife Khadegah who loved her so much died two years after he became a prophet.

•   The verse says that we held him in low esteem: his tribe used to assault and mock him and they accused him that he is crazy. They expelled him from Mecca to Medina. All the teaching of Mohamed tells us that he perfected good manners, but up to today the majority of people call him a terrorist.

   4 Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.

Quran says that Mohamed bores our suffering.

•   Quran (9:128) There has certainly come to you a Messenger from among yourselves. Grievous to him is what you suffer; [he is] concerned over you and to the believers is kind and merciful.

   5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that made us whole, and with his stripes we are healed.

Mohamed was engaged in several battles to defend the believers from the aggressors who used to invade them.

   6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Please note that Christians misunderstood the meaning of (the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all) and assumed that it means a savior who will carry our sins. The correct meaning is that God put him in charge of mankind to preach to them the His law so we repent in order to be forgiving. The proof that Christians misunderstood the meaning of savior is in Ezekiel which says that a wicked man needs to turn from his sins and repent and do righteous in order to be forgiving. It did NOT say that you need another person (savior) to carry our sins.

•   Ezekiel (18:21) “But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22 “All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live.

•   Ezekiel (18:30) “Therefore, I will judge each of you, O people of Israel, according to your actions, says the Sovereign LORD. Repent, and turn from your sins. Don’t let them destroy you!

God commanded Mohamed to convey His message (Quran) to mankind, and God warned Mohamed that if he does not convey the message, God will hold him liable for the sins of humanity. But Mohamed conveyed the message.

•   Quran (5:67) O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people.

   7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

As I said in verse 5 above that Mohamed was engaged in several battles, and also his tribe used to assault him and they wounded him, yet he did not complain or opened his mouth. When the angel came to him and asked his permission to destroy the city on the wicked, Mohamed refused and told the angel that perhaps their offspring may become believers.

•   Children in Ta'if stoned the Prophet and caused his blood to flow. Whilst he sat and cried, an angel came seeking his permission to destroy the city but he tearfully said, "No, for I have hope that their offspring shall believe

   8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished.

The verse says that he was cut off from the land of the living: When Mohamed and his followers couldn’t handle the aggression of his tribe, he escaped from Makkah to Medina.

   9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.

This is one crystal clear evidence that God was not talking about Jesus in this verse. The verse says that he was assigned a grave with the wicked, but Jesus does not have a grave on earth because he rose. However, Mohamed has a grave and he was buried with the wicked who rejected him and assaulted him.

   10 Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.

This is another crystal clear evidence that God was not talking about Jesus in this verse. The verse says that he will see his offspring, but Jesus does not have children while Mohamed has.

   11 After he has suffered, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.

The meaning of (he will bear their iniquities) is that he will be patient from their assaults against him because verse 7 above says that he was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth.

   12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

I already explained the meaning of (he bore the sin of many) above, and the meaning of (made intercession for the transgressors) is that God granted him intercession to take out of hellfire anyone who associated none with God.

•   Prophet Mohamed said: …When I see Him (God), I will fall down in prostration before Him, and will remain in prostration as long as He will, and then He will say, “Raise your head, O Muhammad, and speak, for you will be listened to, and intercede, for your intercession will be accepted, and ask, for your request will be granted.” So I will raise my head and praise Allah as He has taught me and then I will intercede and He will put a limit for me (to intercede for a certain type of people). I will take them out of hellfire and let them enter Paradise, till none will remain in the Fire except those whom Quran will imprison (i.e., those who are destined for eternal life in the fire)…
Sahih al-Bukhari 7440

As verse 9 above says that he was assigned a grave, and Jesus does not have any grave on earth, therefore, Christians have no excuse not to believe that God was talking about another man. Please send this message to all your Christian friends that perhaps God may guide them and you will receive the reward.

Regards,


Assalamualaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh brother Fadi,

I wouldn't even try to imagine that Is. 53 is talking about Muhammad (pbuh),

53: 2= ... ''He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.''

I have came across some interpretation, I lost sources of it, in regards to this,  they did say that it talks about the Isrealite nation between the nations after exile, and many jewish interpretation agree with it.

Christian Infidel Trinitarians on the other hand believe it reffers to Isa (pbuh)

some interpertations say it talk about 2 diffrent persona, one righteous but opressed and other punished

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnCf7EotIco&t=2455s  , scroll to 28:35 , were brother Ibrahim is analyzing in righteous serverant in Is 53.

53: 2= He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.  this is the orgin ofthe isrealtis=

Surah Yusuf (12:100)
"And he raised his parents upon the throne, and they all fell down to him in prostration. And he said, 'O my father, this is the explanation of my vision of before. My Lord has made it a reality. And He was certainly good to me when He took me out of prison and brought you [all here] from the desert (البَدْوِ) after Satan had induced discord between me and my brothers. Indeed, my Lord is Subtle in what He wills. Indeed, it is He who is the Knowing, the Wise.'"

Now lets look at the Book Abraham fulfilled comment on Is. 53=

Book { https://sapienceinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Abraham-Fulfilled-A-Biblical-Study-of-Gods-Plan-for-Ishmael-and-Arabia.pdf }
Go read the following pages concerning Is. 53=  324 - 325 - 326 - 327 - 328

Here is the text of the pages=

Another example is the 53rd chapter of the Book of Isaiah which is the crown
jewel of Christian apologetics. They claim that it is a prophecy about the
crucifixion of Jesus:

Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the
Lord been revealed?

He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of
dry ground.

He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his
appearance that we should desire him.

He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering,
and familiar with pain.

Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and
we held him in low esteem.

Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.

But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our
iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and
by his wounds we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our
own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its
shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away.

Yet who of his generation protested?

For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression
of my people he was punished.

He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in
his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit
in his mouth.

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will
prosper in his hand.

After he has suffered, he will see the light of life and be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he
will bear their iniquities.

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will
divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life
unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors.

For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. [Isaiah 53:1-12]

Now, statements such as “for the transgression of my people he was punished” and “he bore the sin of many” do, at face value, seem to bear a striking
resemblance to the theology of the crucifixion. However, when we analyse
this chapter in its entirety, we will see that it cannot be a prophecy about
Jesus. Verse 10 states “he will see his offspring and prolong his days”. The
Hebrew word used for “offspring”, ‘zera’, carries the meaning of progeny
and semen. So, in the context of this verse, it means he (whoever “he” is)
will see his children. This cannot be a reference to Jesus as nowhere does
the New Testament state that Jesus had children. The verse also mentions
that his days “will be prolonged”. This statement makes no sense in the
light of the Christian Trinitarian belief that Jesus is God. A mortal man’s
days can be prolonged, but God is eternal. A being that is eternal cannot
have their lives prolonged.

Now, those who consider this prophecy to be a reference to Jesus tend
to interpret such verses metaphorically, as a literal interpretation is problematic. The issue with this approach is one of inconsistency. Why interpret
the mention of those things that support the crucifixion, such as suffering,
literally, whereas those things that go against Jesus, such as having children and a prolonged life, are interpreted metaphorically? The suffering,
offspring, and prolonged days are all mentioned together within verse 10,
and yet there is nothing within the context of the verse which indicates a
mixture of literal and metaphorical interpretation:

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see
his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will
prosper in his hand.

So, to be consistent, we should interpret all the statements literally or metaphorically, rather than picking and choosing according to our desires.
The question then arises: if Isaiah 53 is not talking about Jesus, then whom
or what is it referring to? The Jewish people have historically associated
the chapter with the suffering of the Israelites. There are even prominent
Christian sources which agree with the common Jewish perspective. For
example, the Harper Collins Study Bible says:

The early church identified the servant in this passage [Isaiah
52:13-53:12] with Jesus, and Jesus’ own sense of identity and mission
may have been shaped by this figure. In the original historical
context, however, the servant appears to have been exiled Israel.

The commentary found in the Oxford Study Edition of The New English
Bible associates Isaiah’s mention of death with the destruction and exile
of Israel:

The crowds, pagan nations, among whom the servant (Israel)
lived, speak here (through v. 9), saying that the significance of
Israel’s humiliation and exaltation is hard to believe... The death
probably refers to the destruction and Exile of Israel.

In fact, Isaiah 53 can be applied to any people of God that suffer. There
is support for this interpretation in the Old Testament book of Jeremiah.
Prophet Jeremiah faithfully communicated God’s words to the people of
Israel, warning them about the impending Babylonian captivity that was
sure to come unless they repented. But no-one listened to him; he was
rejected, even by his own family: “Your relatives, members of your own
family— even they have betrayed you” [Jeremiah 12:6]. Jeremiah suffered
greatly as he was beaten and imprisoned: “They were angry with Jeremiah
and had him beaten and imprisoned in the house of Jonathan the secretary,
which they had made into a prison” [Jeremiah 37:15]. Here Jeremiah seems
to quote Isaiah 53 and applies it to himself:

Jeremiah 11:18-19 =
 Because the Lord revealed their plot
to me, I knew it, for at that time he
showed me what they were doing. I
had been like a gentle lamb led to the
slaughter; I did not realize that they
had plotted against me, saying, “Let
us destroy the tree and its fruit; let
us cut him off from the land of the
living, that his name be remembered
no more.”

Compare it with Isaiah 53:7-8 =
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet
he did not open his mouth; he was
led like a lamb to the slaughter, and
as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

...For he was cut off from the land of
the living; for the transgression of my
people he was punished.

In conclusion, we have looked at a number of alleged biblical prophecies
about Jesus and have seen that they suffer from some serious inconsistencies. If one has no problem accepting such a standard for Jesus, then in
the name of fairness one should also accept the prophecies we have presented about Muhammad as they are far more consistent. These Arabian
prophecies, which have been covered in great detail, hold to a much higher
standard as they suffer from none of the issues that have been highlighted
with regards to Jesus. A methodology that is fair and balanced ought to be
adopted when it comes to analysing biblical prophecies about both Jesus
and Muhammad. Having one set of standards for Jesus and another for
Muhammad is the hallmark of religious partisanship. END [from the book Abraham fulfilled]

For me, the textual analysis made by one of the brothers or together, brothers Adnan Rashid, Abu Zakariya, and Zakir Hussain are very valid arguments!
18
Assalamualaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh brother Ahamd,

I wouldn't even try to imagine that Is. 53 is talking about Muhammad (pbuh),

53: 2= ... ''He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.''

I have came across some interpretation, I lost sources of it, in regards to this,  they did say that it talks about the Isrealite nation between the nations after exile, and many jewish interpretation agree with it.

Christian Infidel Trinitarians on the other hand believe it reffers to Isa (pbuh)

some interpertations say it talk about 2 diffrent persona, one righteous but opressed and other punished

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnCf7EotIco&t=2455s  , scroll to 28:35 , were brother Ibrahim is analyzing in righteous serverant in Is 53.

53: 2= He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.  this is the orgin ofthe isrealtis=

Surah Yusuf (12:100)
"And he raised his parents upon the throne, and they all fell down to him in prostration. And he said, 'O my father, this is the explanation of my vision of before. My Lord has made it a reality. And He was certainly good to me when He took me out of prison and brought you [all here] from the desert (البَدْوِ) after Satan had induced discord between me and my brothers. Indeed, my Lord is Subtle in what He wills. Indeed, it is He who is the Knowing, the Wise.'"

Now lets look at the Book Abraham fulfilled comment on Is. 53=

Book { https://sapienceinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Abraham-Fulfilled-A-Biblical-Study-of-Gods-Plan-for-Ishmael-and-Arabia.pdf }
Go read the following pages concerning Is. 53=  324 - 325 - 326 - 327 - 328

Here is the text of the pages=

Another example is the 53rd chapter of the Book of Isaiah which is the crown
jewel of Christian apologetics. They claim that it is a prophecy about the
crucifixion of Jesus:

Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the
Lord been revealed?

He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of
dry ground.

He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his
appearance that we should desire him.

He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering,
and familiar with pain.

Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and
we held him in low esteem.

Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.

But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our
iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and
by his wounds we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our
own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its
shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away.

Yet who of his generation protested?

For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression
of my people he was punished.

He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in
his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit
in his mouth.

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will
prosper in his hand.

After he has suffered, he will see the light of life and be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he
will bear their iniquities.

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will
divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life
unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors.

For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. [Isaiah 53:1-12]

Now, statements such as “for the transgression of my people he was punished” and “he bore the sin of many” do, at face value, seem to bear a striking
resemblance to the theology of the crucifixion. However, when we analyse
this chapter in its entirety, we will see that it cannot be a prophecy about
Jesus. Verse 10 states “he will see his offspring and prolong his days”. The
Hebrew word used for “offspring”, ‘zera’, carries the meaning of progeny
and semen. So, in the context of this verse, it means he (whoever “he” is)
will see his children. This cannot be a reference to Jesus as nowhere does
the New Testament state that Jesus had children. The verse also mentions
that his days “will be prolonged”. This statement makes no sense in the
light of the Christian Trinitarian belief that Jesus is God. A mortal man’s
days can be prolonged, but God is eternal. A being that is eternal cannot
have their lives prolonged.

Now, those who consider this prophecy to be a reference to Jesus tend
to interpret such verses metaphorically, as a literal interpretation is problematic. The issue with this approach is one of inconsistency. Why interpret
the mention of those things that support the crucifixion, such as suffering,
literally, whereas those things that go against Jesus, such as having children and a prolonged life, are interpreted metaphorically? The suffering,
offspring, and prolonged days are all mentioned together within verse 10,
and yet there is nothing within the context of the verse which indicates a
mixture of literal and metaphorical interpretation:

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see
his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will
prosper in his hand.

So, to be consistent, we should interpret all the statements literally or metaphorically, rather than picking and choosing according to our desires.
The question then arises: if Isaiah 53 is not talking about Jesus, then whom
or what is it referring to? The Jewish people have historically associated
the chapter with the suffering of the Israelites. There are even prominent
Christian sources which agree with the common Jewish perspective. For
example, the Harper Collins Study Bible says:

The early church identified the servant in this passage [Isaiah
52:13-53:12] with Jesus, and Jesus’ own sense of identity and mission
may have been shaped by this figure. In the original historical
context, however, the servant appears to have been exiled Israel.

The commentary found in the Oxford Study Edition of The New English
Bible associates Isaiah’s mention of death with the destruction and exile
of Israel:

The crowds, pagan nations, among whom the servant (Israel)
lived, speak here (through v. 9), saying that the significance of
Israel’s humiliation and exaltation is hard to believe... The death
probably refers to the destruction and Exile of Israel.

In fact, Isaiah 53 can be applied to any people of God that suffer. There
is support for this interpretation in the Old Testament book of Jeremiah.
Prophet Jeremiah faithfully communicated God’s words to the people of
Israel, warning them about the impending Babylonian captivity that was
sure to come unless they repented. But no-one listened to him; he was
rejected, even by his own family: “Your relatives, members of your own
family— even they have betrayed you” [Jeremiah 12:6]. Jeremiah suffered
greatly as he was beaten and imprisoned: “They were angry with Jeremiah
and had him beaten and imprisoned in the house of Jonathan the secretary,
which they had made into a prison” [Jeremiah 37:15]. Here Jeremiah seems
to quote Isaiah 53 and applies it to himself:

Jeremiah 11:18-19 =
 Because the Lord revealed their plot
to me, I knew it, for at that time he
showed me what they were doing. I
had been like a gentle lamb led to the
slaughter; I did not realize that they
had plotted against me, saying, “Let
us destroy the tree and its fruit; let
us cut him off from the land of the
living, that his name be remembered
no more.”

Compare it with Isaiah 53:7-8 =
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet
he did not open his mouth; he was
led like a lamb to the slaughter, and
as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

...For he was cut off from the land of
the living; for the transgression of my
people he was punished.

In conclusion, we have looked at a number of alleged biblical prophecies
about Jesus and have seen that they suffer from some serious inconsistencies. If one has no problem accepting such a standard for Jesus, then in
the name of fairness one should also accept the prophecies we have presented about Muhammad as they are far more consistent. These Arabian
prophecies, which have been covered in great detail, hold to a much higher
standard as they suffer from none of the issues that have been highlighted
with regards to Jesus. A methodology that is fair and balanced ought to be
adopted when it comes to analysing biblical prophecies about both Jesus
and Muhammad. Having one set of standards for Jesus and another for
Muhammad is the hallmark of religious partisanship. END [from the book Abraham fulfilled]

For me, the textual analysis made by one of the brothers or together, brothers Adnan Rashid, Abu Zakariya, and Zakir Hussain is very valid arguments!
19
Wa Alaikum As'salam Wa Rahmatu Allah Wa Barakatuh dear brother Idris,

You are most welcome, akhi.  Jazaka Allah Khayr.

As to Isaiah 21:7, we read:

From
www.answering-christianity.com/debate_templates.htm
www.answering-christianity.com/Debates%20Database%20Doc%20File.doc


Isaiah 21:7
Knox Bible (KNOX)
7 A chariot he saw, with two out-riders (chariots), one that rode on an ass (singular), and one that rode on a camel (singular); looked long at them, watching them eagerly.
   
NOTE:  A Chariot master is a Servant of GOD who is SENT BY GOD ALMIGHTY in the Bible: 1 Chronicles 28:18.
   
Also, Christ fulfilled the riding of the ass or donkey vision, when he entered Jerusalem on an ass, in John 12:14.
   
Also, “looked long at them, watching them eagerly.”  clearly means that these are two very important Servants.
   
   
8 And he cried, A lion: My lord, I stand continually upon the watchtower in the daytime, and I am set in my ward whole nights:

9 And, behold, here cometh a chariot of men, with a couple of horsemen. And he answered and said, Babylon is fallen, is fallen; and all the graven images of her gods he (Muhammad, Islam) hath broken unto the ground.
…….
13 The burden upon Arabia….

   
   
Babylon did indeed fall before Islam and the Islamic nation under the guidance of Muhammad (peace be upon him) did indeed succeed in eradicating the worship of idols from Babylon replacing it with the worship of God alone.  In fact, the Muslims were the only believers in the God of Isaiah to ever succeed in fulfilling this prophesy.
   
   
 As to "The burden upon Arabia ..." (Isaiah 21:13), what does it mean?
   
"…which also means an oracle is a word sometimes used in the prophetical writings to indicate a divine message of judgment" (Scofield Study Bible New King James Version, note 1, p. 792)


   
The pagan religions of Arabia had all originated from Babel.  Pagan Arabia is called the Daughter of Babylon: Isaiah 47:1.
   
So “Babylon is fallen, is fallen” clearly refers to the fall of ALL OF THE IDOLS AND PAGAN RELIGIONS in all of the Arabic and Arabian lands.
   
In fact, Isaiah 47:1 and Jeremiah 51:33, give a mighty prophecy against the pagan religions of Arabia, and prophesied about its end, and replacement with a NEW DIVINE RELIGION.

Let’s read the two verses:
   
Isaiah 47:1
Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon, sit on the ground: there is no throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate.
     
Now why was Arabia called VIRGIN DAUGHTER OF BABYLON?  Because the Arabs as I mentioned were fresh, and had no previous scriptures, nor religions.  Arabia was a virgin in that.  It had no previous religion, and it was ready for a Divine Religion to be sent to it, which is Islam!  Allah Almighty Said in the Holy Quran:
   
[034:043]  When Our Clear Signs are rehearsed to them, they say, "This is only a man who wishes to hinder you from the (worship) which your fathers practised." And they say, "This is only a falsehood invented!" and the Unbelievers say of the Truth when it comes to them, "This is nothing but evident magic!"
   
[034:044]  But We had not given them Books which they could study, nor sent apostles to them before thee as Warners.

   
     
Furthermore, we read in Jeremiah 51:33:
   
Jeremiah 51:33
For thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; The daughter of Babylon is like a threshingfloor, it is time to thresh her: yet a little while, and the time of her harvest shall come.
   
Arabia’s harvest is indeed the Divine Religion, Islam.  GOD Almighty’s Original Faith on Earth, and the RELIGION OF THE PEOPLE OF KEDAR is Islam.  Muhammad was the Servant of GOD Almighty to come, that was mentioned in Isaiah 41 & 42.




The Great harlot:

It is definitely quite possible that it includes the Catholic Church, since it is this church that cemented the false lie of trinity.  But most definitely, it does include all of the world's corruption, and also the people of Israel's part of it, since Allah Almighty in the Glorious Quran did Promise that the Jews will RISE IN EARTH MIGHTY HIGHTS in corruption and wickedness.  They will reach "Mighty Heights" علوا كبيرا  of evil power and might on earth.  See Noble Verses 17:4-8.  Please visit:

www.answering-christianity.com/nuclear_doom_prophecy.htm
www.answering-christianity.com/dajjal.htm
www.answering-christianity.com/666.htm
www.answering-christianity.com/ac3.htm#links
www.answering-christianity.com/predict.htm


Take care,
Osama Abdallah


Assalamualaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh brother Osama, Ramadan Mubark, May Allah bless you and your family in this holy month!

I don't agree very much with your proofs, that babylon here is meant arabia=

I have saw some interpretation concerning the verses you gave=

Isaiah 47:1 =
 
Isaiah chapter 47 was written after the Persian conquest of Babylon, ands celebrates the defeat and humiliation of Babylon. The term “Virgin Daughter” is used in the Old Testament to refer to a city in distress (cf Lamentations 2:13). The sexual references in Isaiah 47:2–3 highlight her absolute humiliation. Verse 5 declares Babylon shall no more be called “The lady of kingdoms”.

Jeremiah 51:33 =

For this is what the LORD of Hosts, the God of Israel, says:
This phrase establishes the authority and divine origin of the message. The title "LORD of Hosts" emphasizes God's sovereignty and command over heavenly armies, underscoring His power to execute judgment. The "God of Israel" highlights His covenant relationship with Israel, affirming His commitment to His people despite their current exile. This introduction is typical of prophetic declarations, ensuring the audience understands the message is not from the prophet himself but from God.
The Daughter of Babylon is like a threshing floor at the time it is trampled:
The "Daughter of Babylon" personifies the city and its empire, indicating its vulnerability and impending judgment. A threshing floor is a place where grain is separated from chaff, symbolizing judgment and purification. The imagery of being "trampled" suggests destruction and the removal of what is worthless. Historically, Babylon was a powerful empire, but this prophecy foretells its downfall, aligning with the eventual conquest by the Medes and Persians. The metaphor of threshing is also used elsewhere in scripture (e.g., Micah 4:12-13) to describe God's judgment.

In just a little while her harvest time will come:
This phrase indicates the imminence of Babylon's judgment. The "harvest time" metaphorically represents the time when God will execute His judgment, reaping what Babylon has sown through its actions. The use of "in just a little while" suggests that although Babylon seems secure, its downfall is near, reflecting the certainty of divine prophecy. This concept of a coming harvest is echoed in the New Testament (e.g., Matthew 13:30), where it often symbolizes the final judgment. The prophecy was fulfilled when Babylon fell to Cyrus the Great in 539 BC, demonstrating the accuracy and reliability of God's word.

Do you have clear-cut evidence that it means Babylon of Arabia,

We know of that the book of Revaltion=

We know that The Book of Revelation symbolically refers to Rome as Babylon, supported by several clues:

Revelation 17:9 describes Babylon as sitting on seven hills, a well-known reference to Rome.
Revelation 18 portrays Babylon as a wealthy, corrupt power, aligning with Rome's dominance.
1 Peter 5:13 also refers to Babylon as a coded term for Rome.

Early Christians used “Babylon” to describe Rome’s oppressive and idolatrous nature, especially under emperors like Nero and Domitian.

But Babylon of Arabia??? Is there evidence for that, I didn't came across Hadiths about Jews who talked about Babylon of ''Arabia''.
20
As-salam aleikum wa rahmatullahi wa baraketuh,

dear brother Ramihs97, it is a long subject to discuss here all of the details, so I will try to explain it you briefly:

1. In regards to the word etmak in DSS (Isaiah 42:1), there are strong cases which indicates that it is an altered form of ahmad. Kab al-Ahbar (d. 652), a learned rabbi from Yemen was quoted by Ibn Asakir as saying:

I find in the Torah: Ahmad, My Chosen Servant (in another narration: My Servant Ahmad, The Chosen). Verily, he is neither rude nor harsh. He would not yell or scream in markets. And he will never award an ill deed with an ill deed, rather, he will always award ill deeds with forgiveness.

Notice that he was quoting Isaiah 42:1-3. In LXX the name Jacob appears first, and then “My servant” so it refers to the first variant narration mentioned by Kab i.e. “Ahmad, My servant”. In Masoretic Text, the chapter begins with [Behold] My servant, and then etmak, so it refers to the second variant narration mentioned by Kab, i.e. My servant Ahmad…. Now, the fact that Kab mentioned two different variant of the first fragments from Isaiah 42:1 indicates that there were different manuscripts containing different variants of reading, as I've said above in the case of Septuagint and Hebrew text we have today. In LXX, the Jews must have inserted the words Jacob and Israel instead of Ahmad, since it does not appear neither in Masoretic Text, neither in Aramaic Peshitta, nor in 1QIsaa. There are too possible way to explain the origin of etmak:

a) NON-INTENTIONAL CHANGE - The Jewish scribe could have misread the original form אחמד (ahmad), because in general, the Hebrew letter ת (tav) is visually very similar to ח (chet), and the letter ך (kaph) looks very similar to ד (dalet). The later one i.e. kaph and dalet are especially similar to each other in the old Aramaic alphabet.
b) INTENTIONAL CHANGE - The Jews could have changed the name of Ahmad when they acknowledged that Prophet Mohammed is an Arab not Israeli (6th century AD). In fact there Ibn Saad in his Kitab Tabaqat al-Kabit related a narration from which can be concluded that immediately after their acknowledgement of prophet's Mohammed Arabic roots, Jews deliberately changed the name Ahmad. It says that this Jew changed Ahmad by covering or hiding it not removing it entirely. The natural consequence of such argumentation is that till Prophet’s Mohammed time there were no attempts to corrupt his second prophetic name Ahmad, so the pre-Islamic Torah would have not made any modification. You will ask: but what about DSS ? The Great Isaiah Scroll does not mentioned Ahmad, but etmak right ? You should know that before DSS were discovered, the earliest manuscript of the Hebrew Bible were Aleppo Codex and Leningrad Codex (10th century AD). So it was easy for Muslim to claim: Mohammed was mentioned in the original Torah (i.e. from ancient times), but you Jews do not possess such one, you have only those one dated back to 10th cent. so how we would know whether your rabbis does not changed the Torah after the time of Mohammed ? So what was the plan ? They must prepare some kind of proto-Masoretic Text which would agree their Masoretic one from 10th cent. (but in order to eliminate a possible suspicions from intelektualists they gave a multiple variations of textual reading so to keep scholars constantly working on formulating new theories, resolving puzzles etc.). Can you believe in this fairy, stupid story about a Hebrew text from 2 cent. BC which perfectly agrees in chronological order of chapters and verses, and with no significant departure from its Masoretic version ? I will never believe in such a crap. There was different arrangement of whole chapters in Isaiah. Frankly, there are serious reasons to think that this so called Great Isaiah Scroll which has been claimed to come allegedly from 2 cent. BC. is not an ancient autograph (at least in part). This Isaiah Scroll in many passages shares the same textual variant as the Hebrew MSS from medieval period collected by Kennicott and de Rossi.

Let us return to the subject of mentioning Ahmed in DSS.

If you recall Matthew 12:18 you will see that his quotation is unique, i.e. is not similar as in Old Testament Hebrew Isaiah or Greek Septuagint:

Behold, my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved (agapetos) with whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.

According to early church tradition, the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, and then it was translated into Greek. Notice that in Matthew you will not find such word as whom I uphold/I support for Hebrew etmak. Why ? Here is the answer… the Greek term ἀγαπητός (agapetos) for my beloved which occurs in the text of Matthew 12:18 is actually an equivalent for Hebrew חמד (chamad) found e.g. in Joshua 7:21 under the form אחמדם which can be read as ahmadam or echmedem. The point I ’am going to is that the Hebrew scroll from which Matthew quoted Isaiah 42:1 must have contain the word composed with the root חמד (chamad), yet it cannot be found in today’s Masoretic Text ! Beside this, there are many other details which supports the view that the name Ahmad indeed was mentioned in the original text of Isaiah 42:1.

2. In regards to the Zohar book, it is a great possibility that it talks ocasionally about Ahmed, notice the words occurring around it: through him in ancient of days, Isaiah, sent etc. I ’am simply guessing that it is about prophet Ahmad who was foretold in Isaiah and from ancient of days. I currently waiting for the answer of some certain rabbi. The text of Zohar is specifically in Aramaic, not in Hebrew as I previously thought.

Take care, and salam
Ahmed (Poland, Warsaw)


salam alaikum brother wa rahmatullahi barakatuh ahmad,

Abdullah bin Issa Al Abdul-Jabbar (عبدالله بن عيسى آل عبدالجبار) stated that Matthew 12:18 is evidence original Isiah did have a word with h-m-d root, because the word αγαπητος [agapétos] (means= beloved, Strong's Dictionary) and מחמד [machmad] (means= beloved, Strong's Dictionary), but the problem with that that agapétos does not come from h-m-d root,

the old testemant greek translation (LXX) uses agapétos word words with no h-m-d roots.=

Old testament = https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g25/lxx/lxx/0-1/#lexResults
New testamnet (only greek) = https://biblehub.com/greek/agape__26.htm

Now i get the hadith narations mentiond about Ka'b Al A7bar,

[ في السطر الأول محمد رسول الله عبدي المختار ... ]،
[ أجد في التوراة: أحمد عبدي المختار ... ]،  [ محمد عبدي المختار ... ]،
[ أجد في التوراة: عبدي أحمد المختار ... ]،  [ نجد مكتوبا محمد رسول الله لا فظ ... ]

Source=
https://ar.lib.efatwa.ir/40314/1/186
https://ar.lib.efatwa.ir/40314/1/187
https://ar.lib.efatwa.ir/40314/1/188
https://ar.lib.efatwa.ir/40314/1/189

These text show that Is. 42 could possibly also have the word Machmad written in it, not just Ahamd.
We did see that ka'b Al A7bar did qoute torah verses that are very similiar to our modern day one specifically Is 42:1, Now the qestion that arises in my head is...

we know that: [ early Christian tradition from the 2nd-century bishop Papias of Hierapolis. According to Papias, Matthew the Apostle was the first to compose a gospel, and he did so in Hebrew. Papias appeared to imply that this Hebrew or Aramaic gospel (sometimes called the Authentic Matthew) was subsequently translated into the canonical Gospel of Matthew. Jerome took this information one step further and claimed that all known Jewish-Christian gospels really were one and the same, and that this gospel was the authentic Matthew. As a consequence he assigned all known quotations from Jewish-Christian gospels to the "gospels of the Hebrews", but modern studies have shown this to be untenable.[1]

The hypothesis has some overlap with the Aramaic original New Testament theory, which posits Gospels originally written in Aramaic rather than Hebrew. Modern versions of the Hebrew gospel hypothesis often overlap with the Augustinian hypothesis. ]

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Gospel_hypothesis#:~:text=According%20to%20Papias%2C%20Matthew%20the,he%20did%20so%20in%20Hebrew.

ibn taymya said=

 وقد كانت ترجمة البشيطا هي الأشهر عند نصارى الجزيرة العربية وما جاورها، ونصها محفوظ إلى اليوم، وفيها ما يُعرف من مناكير التوراة التي ردّها القرآن .

وأمّا يهود الجزيرة العربيّة : فالراجح أنهم كانوا يعتمدون على الترجومات (الترجمات الآرامية)، وهي ، وإن كانت ترجمات تفسيريّة ؛ إلا أنّها توافق النص المشهور في منكراته.".

translation to English=

The Peshitta translation was the most famous among the Christians of the Arabian Peninsula and its surroundings, and its text is preserved to this day. It contains what is known of the Torah's objectionable elements, which the Quran refuted.

As for the Jews of the Arabian Peninsula, it is most likely that they relied on the Targums (Aramaic translations), which, although interpretive translations, agree with the well-known text in its objectionable elements.

source= https://islamqa.info/ar/answers/285261/%D9%83%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%B4%D9%8A%D8%AE-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%86-%D8%AA%D9%8A%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%B1%D8%AD%D9%85%D9%87-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%B9%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%AF%D9%89-%D8%B5%D8%AD%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B0%D9%8A-%D9%8A%D8%AA%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%89-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%87-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%AC%D9%8A%D9%84

As we know the greek Matthew 12:18 is from the LXX  =

οπως (ἵνα) πληρωθη το ρηθεν δια ησαιου του προφητου λεγοντος: Ιδου ο παις μου ον ηρετισα “ο αγαπητος μου” ον ευδοκησεν η ψυχη μου θησω το πνευμα μου επ αυτον και κρισιν τοις εθνεσιν απαγγελει

it came as “ο αγαπητος μου” my beloved, so its not a name rather an verb,

But an argument against it, the similarity between Isiah 42 and haggai 2: 7 wich speaks about חֶמְדָּה that will be light for nations and the gentiles same figure appears in Is. 42..

hebrew haggai 2: 7 contains חֶמְדָּה chamdat, while LXX has τὰ ἐκλεκτὰ (the chosen) instead of the word חֶמְדָּה, could that mean that ahamd was synoymous with the chosen one?

What supports the idea that the word in Isaiah is 'Ahmad' is the remarkable similarity between the texts of Isaiah and Haggai:

Isiah: הן עבדי "אחמד" בו בחירי... משפט לגוים יוציא
Haggai: ובאו "חמדה" (τὰ ἐκλεκτὰ) כל ה

Isaiah: Behold, my servant 'Ahmad' whom I have chosen... He will bring justice to the nations
Haggai: And 'Hamada' (the chosen - τὰ ἐκλεκτὰ) will come to all the nations

It seems that some of the scribes of Haggai used 'Hamada' instead of 'the chosen' because they knew that this was referring to this, based on the prophecy of Isaiah or others. And God knows best."

It is known that the book of Isaiah precedes the book of Haggai, and this is another evidence of the connection between 'Hamada' or 'Ahmad' or 'Muhammad' or 'Mahmad' and the chosen one, and that this refers to that. Therefore, in the version of Haggai used by the translators of the Septuagint, 'the chosen' was replaced with 'Hamada'. Transalted from arabic to English, Source: Abdullah bin Issa Al Abdul-Jabbar (عبدالله بن عيسى آل عبدالجبار) AHMED mentioned in Dead Sea Scroll Old Testament.

So now, I can speak my question.. is it realy valuable to use Matthew 12:18 as a clear cut evidence, We know absolutly that it doesn't have conection with the masoretic text not LXX and qumran Isiahs (Only 1Q Isaiaha, quite coincidental 4Q56 Isaiahb doesn't have the first verse 42:2-12, and 4Q61 Isaiahg 42:14-25 also, but what is more coincidental 1Q Isaiahb it contains Isiah chapter from chapter 38 to chapter 64, but there is a whole chapter lost in it, can you guess wich it?? ISIAH 422222222!!!!)

Because  “ο αγαπητος μου” can just mean MY BELOVED, not a name?

May allah bless you and your family brother Ahmad in this holy month!, looking for you response.

Greetings from the Netherlands
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 10

What's new | A-Z | Discuss & Blog | Youtube