Interesting. It always seems to me that Islam is a clamor to reclaim the primitive world – the pagan world of yesteryear – like some kind of bizarre nostalgia. Unusual, arbitrary and draconian laws? Check. Oppressive power structure? Check. Etc.

As a Christian (and as a man) I believe that we are born into the fall. If this is so, that would make all Muslims fallen sinners. Revert indeed. Paul says, “If I rebuild what I destroyed, am I not a transgressor?” This can apply to many things – including Islam.

As for the factual inaccuracy of the Koran, in some cases scriptures are not ‘factually accurate’ in the sense that they are legends or myths. Unprovable and distant. My main problem with the Koran scripturally is that it does not do the task of myths and legends – which is to illuminate. Instead it darkens and imprisons if taken very deeply and literally.

The saints inspire us to be perfect, as Christ was perfect. Mohammad inspires us… to be pagans all over again?

I found, though, the sources coming from Zoroastrianism very interesting. Though fanciful, it is still beautiful. Do you know if the description of the heavens (1st heaven, 2nd heaven, 3rd heaven) used in the Zoroastrian poetry is the same idea used by Paul when he describes his vision of the heavenly mysteries?

Perhaps he was speaking to former Zoroastrians…

That is why Muslims Call “converts” “reverts”. In actuality, they should be called “perverts”.

They point to the Western historical criticism of the Bible, and say, See? Even Christian scholars admit that the Bible has been corrupted.

2. There is no reference to Muhammad in Jewish or Christian books — which leads to the Muslim charge that Jews and Christians have corrupted those books.

Robert Spencer on October 21, 2007 at 6:01 PM

How do they defend against the Dead Sea Scrolls which demonstrate that the Bible we have is the Bible that has always been.

At least, that is my understanding.

No, they strongly reject the idea that Jesus was divine. Read the Qur’an blogs on suras 4 and 5, and you’ll see much discussion of this.

Robert Spencer on October 21, 2007 at 5:59 PM

They don’t believe he was divine,though, right? I’ve seen Muslims refer to Christians as polytheists because they believe in the Trinity.

That’s a real sore point with Muslims. They get very offended by the notion that they “worship” Muhammad the way Christians worship Jesus.

Question: Is mohammed’s illiteracy, ignorance & perceived insanity veiwed as a divine sign by muslims for his ‘chosen’ status as the last (and greatest) prophet?

And where might this reference to mohammed be found in either the christian or jewish books?

1. Yes. At least as regarding his illiteracy. That is put forward as proof that he couldn’t have written this sublime poetry, the Qur’an.

2. There is no reference to Muhammad in Jewish or Christian books — which leads to the Muslim charge that Jews and Christians have corrupted those books.

That’s my take on it. Christians are basically fools who fell for a false prophet in Jesus, but Jews are the worst because they won’t listen to anybody, and both Christians and Muslims can criticize them for that refusal to believe.

Muslims don’t believe Jesus was a false prophet. They believe he was an Islamic prophet whose teachings were corrupted by his followers.

If Mohammed wasn’t a messenger of God, what was he?

We all know the answer, but we are afraid to say it, aren’t we?

Clearly you have something in mind, and I believe I know what it is, but it is not the sole and inescapable conclusion. In fact, Johannes Jansen, Christoph Luxenberg and other scholars suspect he never existed at all, but was created to justify Arab imperialism.

I myself suspect he did, as I don’t see why incidents that have always embarrassed Muslims — particularly Muhammad’s marriage to his daughter-in-law — would ever have been invented if they had not been based on an actual incident.

Opinions will differ.

How do Muslims counter the argument that there were no Muslims prior to Muhammed? It seems like they would have to argue that every single person was failing to follow Islam correctly until the Prophet showed up, but that’s a pretty weak argument. What am I missing here?

They will argue, in line with the Qur’an, that there were Muslims before Muhammad: Jews and Christians who followed the authentic teachings of Moses and Jesus, and who became Muslim when Muhammad came along.

If we are all born Muslim, and the treatment for apostates is execution…. what follows?

Nothing. Only males who apostatize after puberty are liable to a death sentence.

Onto a comment & question for you, Robert Spencer.

“…Allah shows mercy to “those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them” (v. 157).” And later, there is a verse dedicated to assuring others that Muhammad is not insane (v. 184).

Curious. In most religious books, God does not call ignorant or illitate people to postions of leadership, and I sure can’t find anything about mohammed in either christian testament nor any reference to him in the Torah.

Question: Is mohammed’s illiteracy, ignorance & perceived insanity veiwed as a divine sign by muslims for his ‘chosen’ status as the last (and greatest) prophet?

And where might this reference to mohammed be found in either the christian or jewish books?

Thank you & keep up the good work.

“How do Muslims counter the argument that there were no Muslims prior to Muhammed? It seems like they would have to argue that every single person was failing to follow Islam correctly until the Prophet showed up, but that’s a pretty weak argument. What am I missing here?

BadgerHawk on October 21, 2007 at 11:30 AM”

It’s actually not a weak argument. It’s pretty much the basis of Islam and the reason Islam is so intolerant of other religions.

Muslims believe that Islam is the last, literal, true, word of God. They believe that Muhammad was Allah’s last messenger. They don’t claim that everything that came before Muhammad was untrue. It’s just the opposite. They believe that Muhammad is actually the fulfillment of what is prophesized in the Old Testament, and they cover the New Testament, too. But they believe that the Old Testament and the New Testament have been deliberately corrupted to hide the truth about Muhammad.

Christians get cut more slack because Jesus fulfilled the Prophesy. But Jews are still waiting for the Messiah and don’t believe either Jesus or Muhammad was him, so Islam holds much more contempt for Jews because that makes them easy targets for Christians, too.

That’s my take on it. Christians are basically fools who fell for a false prophet in Jesus, but Jews are the worst because they won’t listen to anybody, and both Christians and Muslims can criticize them for that refusal to believe.

Islam is all about power over others, and pitting your enemies against each other is not a bad strategy.

If Mohammed wasn’t a messenger of God, what was he?

We all know the answer, but we are afraid to say it, aren’t we?

How do Muslims counter the argument that there were no Muslims prior to Muhammed? It seems like they would have to argue that every single person was failing to follow Islam correctly until the Prophet showed up, but that’s a pretty weak argument. What am I missing here?

BadgerHawk on October 21, 2007 at 11:30 AM

You’re not missing anything, really. That’s what they believe.

Ironically, the more I learn and the more I read here, the more I am inclined to draw the same conclusions I drew during the first week or so of study. The Qur’an is filled with circular reasoning. Muhammad was highly intelligent, but he suffered from a personality disorder that caused him to feel disenfranchised, so he craved power and did and said anything to get it. (Apologies, Robert, as I have not yet read your book about Muhammad).

My personal foray into the Islamic world did not begin because of 9/11. Rather, it began with reading the debates of theosophists who trended toward Sufism.

Understanding Islam is much easier than understanding the whacked-out theosophists, but both have the same flaws in that the requirements distract one from actually living life.

in another reminder that the Qur’an treats the Biblical prophets all as prophets of Islam, whose messages were later corrupted to create Judaism and Christianity.

How do Muslims counter the argument that there were no Muslims prior to Muhammed? It seems like they would have to argue that every single person was failing to follow Islam correctly until the Prophet showed up, but that’s a pretty weak argument. What am I missing here?