Convert Me

Thank you. I will start with rebuttals, since I believe I will have enough space for arguments this time. -- Content -- Rebuttal Section: • Argument 1 o Christian Sects - Which One is True? • Argument 2 o Response • Argument 3 o Relying on Future Evidence o 5 or 7 layers? • Argument 4 o Evidence of Uthman Having the Original Qur'an o Abrogations in the Qur'an o Contradiction with History Argument Section[*]: • 1. Prophecies o Fulfilled o Signs of Day of Judgement o What About Nostradamus? -- Rebuttals -- • Argument 1 o Christian Sects - Which One is True? My opponent argues that "most sects of Christianity require not merely the belief in Jesus as a agent of the divine but the following in addition." He listed this: 1: A belief in Jesus as the Son of God. 2: A belief in Jesus as God. 3: A belief in Jesus as the perfect sacrifice that absolves mankind of sin. Here, we are dealing with Christian sects, not the Bible. While those two are correlated, it is important to know that all Christian sects base their beliefs primarily on the Bible. If they say something that is not supported by the Bible, then what are they telling, truth or falsehood? If the Bible is true, and they say something quite contrary to what the Bible says, then again, what is there for a Muslim to fear? Where does the Bible state that not believing in the divinity of Jesus will lead you to Hell? Not believing in the message of Jesus leads to you Hell. Furthermore, where did Jesus say that whoever denies the alleged crucifixion is going to Hell? None of these are Biblical claims, but claims of Christians. In fact, I believe that my opponent if aware that Jesus never claimed divinity either. [John 7:16] "Jesus answered, 'My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me.'" [John 14:28] "The Father is greater than I." [John 5:37] "And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form" [Luke 22:42] "Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done." • Argument 2 o Link for Support My opponent wanted me to cite a source/link as support to my rebuttal. My main source is the Qur'an, but I will nevertheless do what my opponent asks me for. See source #1. • Argument 3 o Relying on Future Evidence My opponent claims that the seven heavens theory relies on future evidence. I agree, and that is why this cannot possibly be a scientific error. Therefore, I have validly rebutted the claim. It is important to know that many verses of the Qur'an seemed to be invalid in older times, yet today, science proves them right. Even historical claims and prophecies, and I will come to them. o 5 or 7 layers? My opponent said that not both arguments are true. Either it is seven layers in the atmosphere or seven heavens. I may or may not agree, but if I say that humans are made of water, and another time say that dogs are made of water, is it not possible that I am right both times? But, let us say that my opponent is right. However, one is a scientific theory, not yet disproved at all, another is an interesting observation, and one can accept it as a reference to the atmosphere or not, but it is not a scientific error. Also, are there seven or five layers? A link to Wikipedia was provided[2], which shows five layers. However, Wikipedia itself calls it a layer.[3] Due to different functions, it may not always be listed as a layer of its own. The link explains it. • Argument 4 o Evidence of Uthman Having the Original Qur'an I wish to present new arguments this time, and I will therefore ask my opponent to read a lot about that on source #4 and #5. o Abrogations in the Qur'an My opponent linked to a site showing "abrogations" in the Qur'an. What is meant by that word is that some verses are "cancelled" or "abolished." [Qur'an 2:106] "None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?" Muslim scholars interpret this verse in two ways. One is that it is referring to earlier scriptures, such as the Tawrat. It was revealed, but instead of the message being lost, God brings one that is better or similar. The other interpretation is referring to the Qur'an itself. If this one is true, then what is meant is that one verse may forbid something partially, for example, and one other may forbid something fully. Alcohol is a very good example. The Qur'an was revealed in stages, and it forbade things step by step. It started mentioning alcohol this way: [Qur'an 2:219] "They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: 'In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit.'" Allah says that there is profit and sin in wine and gambling, but the sin is greater. Is it prohibited? Not yet. Moving on, the Qur'an says: [Qur'an 4:43] "O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter..." At this point, the Qur'an prohibited being drunk during prayer. Moving on... [Qur'an 5:90-91] "O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such (abomination), that ye may prosper. (91)Satan's plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred between you, with intoxicants and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of Allah, and from prayer: will ye not then abstain?" Now, the Qur'an makes it clear that wine/intoxicants and gambling are completely prohibited. Is it a contradiction? No. It is a law made through stages. And why so? I call this a work of wisdom. In the era of the beloved Prophet, the Arabs were drunk etc., and committed many sins. For them to start embracing Islam, they had to get used to the new laws step by step. So, the Qur'an started saying that there is good in wine and there is bad, and the bad is greater than good. Then it said that intoxicants during prayer are prohibited. Lastly, a full prohibition came. This way, non-Muslims had it easier to embrace Islam. That is why the Qur'an deals carefully with everything, and I call this a masterpiece of law apply. o Contradiction with History My opponent allowed me to refute this with a link due to limited characters. I thank him for that. See reference #6 please. -- Arguments -- • 1. Prophecies o Fulfilled Islam makes prophecies/predicts the future. Before the Day of Judgement arrives, things must take place that are predicted. Some are in the Qur'an, but most are in authentic hadith. One example is: "Great distances will be traversed in short spans of time." The miraculous thing is that so far, no prophecy is wrong. Not one single. Some have yet to be fulfilled, such as women outnumbering men [50:1]. This is mentioned in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim. What about Nostradamus? I will mention him. o Signs of Day of Judgement There are minor and major signs of Al-Qiyamah[7]. A list is found in source #8. o What About Nostradamus? "The year 1999, seventh month, from the sky will come a great King of Terror. To bring back to life the great King of the Mongols, before and after Mars to reign by good luck." Is this fulfilled? Not only is the answer no, but his predictions were incredibly hard to understand and could be interpreted in any way. -- References -- [1]http://www.ilovezakirnaik.com... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org... [3]http://en.wikipedia.org... [4]http://www.answering-christianity.com... [5]http://www.islamic-awareness.org... [6]http://www.islamic-awareness.org... [7]YouTube Video, search: watch?v=qt9MuJvbZxE [8]http://etori.tripod.com... [*]To be elaborated.