In Judaism, the punishment for apostasy, adultery, blasphemy

>>2308908
European subversion of traditional Judaic values.

>>2308908

Largely because you don't have enough influence from the Jewish religious circles to set up religious courts and execute people who commit such acts.

There are, by the way, people who pine for such things.

>>2308908
jewish religion had reforms

>>2308908
Religious shift away from fundamentalism.

Lack of Jewish critical mass, don't think they wouldn't of they could

>>2308928
But such reforms go against the Torah. Why did so many Jews found them acceptable?

>>2308908
>in Judaism


you mean in THE HEBREW BIBLE
Jews have a nice saying that a Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in a generation is called a murderous one

>>2308938

I thought it was 2 times in a generation.

>>2308935
because jews became more cosmopolitan and less tribal

>>2308938
>you mean in THE HEBREW BIBLE

Well, yes, it's in the Tanakh (or, more specifically, in the Torah). Are you implying that the Jews are allowed to ignore the Tanakh in general and the Torah in particular?

>>2308908
Because they'd have to immediately kill their entire population?

That's what happens when Jews follow their own laws.

It's like the thing with Muhammad and the Jews, Muhammad gets a lot of stick for beheading 600 Jewish men, but the ironic bit is, those captured Jewish POW who were allies which betrayed the Muslims, asked to be punished according to their own Jewish law, not Muslim law. They opened up the Torah and found the punishment to be death.

Oops

>>2308953
The meaning of the punishments have been reinterpreted by the rabbis who wrote the Talmud, and no one complained.

>>2308953
Yeah, just like how many modern Christians don't read the Bible on a regular basis other than what their church leader makes them read during service. I'm not really one to dictate "what is a Jew/Muslim/Christian" but strict adherence to every bit of an ancient holy text doesn't sit right with me as the criteria.

>>2308961
What passages for the Talmud say that the Jews can ignore the commands to stone to death those who commit aforementioned crimes that are contained in the Torah?

>>2308935
Reaction to the bar kokhba revolt where all the Jews in Judea embraced a guy claiming to be the Messiah in the early 100s who actually led a successful revolt against the Romans, defeated the 10th legion and declared an independent Jewish kingdom. Then 2 years later Hadrian invaded with 8 legions and completely devastated the region almost to the degree of Carthage. 3 of the legions were destroyed, but hundreds of thousands of Jews, perhaps more, died from starvation.

After the complete destruction of the temple, priestly class, and the Jewish homeland the religion was very open to change. Many rabbis argued that the willingness to declare bar kokhba (which means son of a star) the Messiah was where everything went wrong, and that in the future the Messiah should not be looked at as a literal person but a symbolic ideal. Interestingly in the Talmud he gets derisively referred to as bar koziba which means son of a lie.

>>2308908
Because Israel is a modern, relatively secularised state, whereas Saudi Arabia isn't.
Bosnians and Indonesians stone people as often as say Serbians and Indians, that is to say, not too often, but it rarely does happen.

>>2308979
By the way, I never understood why Israel is a secular state. Isn't Judaism incompatible with secularism, just like Islam?

File: 1485549144732.jpg (23KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 480x480px

>>2308908
that photo is so fucking intense!

I think that it is because Judaism has had more time to mature as a religion. Islam is a bit younger-- as a sci fi reader, I could expect the global Khalifate or w/e the fuck evolves later to go more moderate after their equivalent of the Reformation.

Or, more likely, we will be eaten by 'phage microbots unleashed by nonstate actors. Ya know

>>2308984
Because Europeans played a big part in its creation.

Christianity also isn't technically compatible with secularism, but look at Europe...

>>2308995
Islam already had its equivalent of Reformation - it's called Jadidism. But the Jadids became popular only among the Turkic people of the Russian Empire.

>>2308984
It's not fully secular, as different religious groups have different privileges. Jews have the right of return, Muslims and druze are exempt from the draft (but can still volunteer), Orthodox Jews are responsible for marriage and will refuse to do gay marriages or no fault divorce.

But aside from that it is a Western model parliamentary democracy with freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

>>2309004
>Christianity also isn't technically compatible with secularism

Protestantism is, although other branches of Christianity are not.

>>2309004
>>2309013
King James Bible
Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

>>2308908

Jews don't consider their holy text to be inerrant, they consider it to be more like a history of the Jewish people's relationship with God, something to draw inspiration from, not to follow slavishly.

By contrast Christians believe God has intervened to keep their Bible accurate, and of course the Muslims believe their Koran is the literal word of God himself, so they have less wiggle room.

>>2309017
I was talking about politics and ideology here, not some silly book.

File: You+don+t+need+to+be+burning+in+hell+to+be+_df158ca482a50344618b4b4e825e9e9a.jpg (25KB, 326x309px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 326x309px

>>2308908
>OP thinks Judaism is about Jews following the mosaic law, not the Talmud.

File: IMG_0413.jpg (192KB, 600x429px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 600x429px

>>2309032
>Timothy McVeigh cited the Waco incident as a primary motivation[119] for the Oklahoma City bombing, his April 19, 1995 truck bomb attack that destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, a U.S. government office complex in downtown Oklahoma City, and destroyed or damaged numerous other buildings in the vicinity.

>>2308972
the competence to inflict capital punishment ceased with the destruction of the Temple
Sanh. 52b, Ket. 30a; cf. Sanh. 41a

>>2309046
you're incoherent

>>2309037
> Talmud
I think you mean Mishnah.

>>2309051
Secularism can traced directly back to that "silly book". At the time the Roman state was a tool of pagans, Christians coexisted with that without relying on it.

>>2308953
In the Torah it is written that the Hebrews must listen to their elders who interpret the laws, which mean that the rabbis have the right to interpret the Torah. Anyway, Judaism is about following the Law of God not about being the clone of Muhamad, which is pure idolatry.

>>2309059
Secularism in Judaism really began in 19th century Germany
t. Secular Jew

>>2309059
oh good, now you're only slightly incoherent...

Are you talking about the fact that 18th century secularism as well as the various practical and theoretical precedences of separatoin of feudal authority from the, as it were, consecration by the church are inherently the product of a culture intertwined with christianity or what?

Because I'm not disputing that...

>>2309068
As an Enlightenment ideal, secularism is a function existed in Judaism during Jesus' time. The religious Pharisees pretended to be law abiding Roman subjects while maintaining varying degrees of independence.

>>2309076
>As an Enlightenment ideal, secularism is a function existed in Judaism during Jesus' time.
Wtf

>>2309086
>>2309086
"as a function" instead of "is a function" and that was the point of the Bible verse. They were discussing independence from the Roman state, "render unto Caesar", why tax collectors were so negatively viewed, etc.

>>2309037
>what are 613 mitzvot

So do modern versions of the Talmud still have anti-Christ passages that say Jesus was a whore son who is in Jew hell boiling in feces?

>>2309096

"Independence from the Roman state"is not secularism you retarded faggot. You do understand that they wanted to REPLACE the Roman state with a Jewish one, right?

>>2309120
Where are the Jewish invasion schematics?

>>2309133

Invasion of what? They wanted to liberate Israel and Judea, they tried and they got BTFO.

>>2309108
Do Christian Bibles still have the gospel of Luke that says the Jews killed Jesus and the Romans were good boys who dindu nothing?

It was all tit for tat attacks on the other religion in a very specific context.

>>2309144
>>2309144
Against the advice of Jesus to love their enemy, and a liberated Israel was not an invasion of Rome.

>>2308908
Jews are kinda laid-back and blase about the whole religion thing.

>>2309155
>and a liberated Israel was not an invasion of Rome.

I never said it was you dense faggot.

>Against the advice of Jesus to love their enemy

Why would they take the advice of a false prophet?

>>2308908

Complex theological reasons, but the short version is that Muslims venerate one particular prophet as the most perfect example of a human being to ever live and the last prophet of the Christian / Jewish / Muslim God.

Unfortunately, while he may have been a progressive reformer relative to his time period, he was basically a Middle Eastern warlord and once you decide that a Medieval Middle Eastern warlord is the most perfect example of a human ever to live then, frankly, you are in a struggle to adapt your theology to the modern world.

Christians are fortunate in terms of the religious figure they venerate didn't really say or do much of substance and Jews are fortunate in that there isn't a permanent "stamp" of a particular way to behave set down by their religious beliefs.

>why don't any religious people do the crazy contradictory shit in their historical texts.

Because the smarter and more educated you get, the less you follow that shit. And Jews are currently the smartest and most educated, so they ignore their religion the most.

File: IMG_0414.png (8KB, 220x377px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 220x377px

>>2309159
>Why would they take the advice of a false prophet?
Because they didn't they were bundled together into a faggot and slaughtered.

>>2309168

Except they weren't? They lost their war, sure, but they weren't bundled together and they weren't slaughtered, as the continued existence of Jews to this very day should prove.

>>2309162
>last prophet of the Christian / Jewish
Fuck off achmed

>>2309171
>The Jewish–Roman wars had an important impact on the Jews, turning them from a major population in the Eastern Mediterranean into a scattered and persecuted minority. The Jewish-Roman Wars are often cited as a disaster to Jewish society.[6][dead link] The events also had a major impact on Judaism, after the central worship site of Second Temple Judaism, the Second Temple in Jerusalem, was destroyed by Titus' troops. Although having a sort of autonomy in the Galilee until the 4th century such as the Council of Jamnia (or Yavne), and later a limited success in establishing the short-lived Sasanian Jewish autonomy in Jerusalem in 614–617 CE, Jewish dominance in parts of the Southern Levant was regained only in the mid-20th century, with the founding of the modern state of Israel in 1948 CE.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish–Roman_wars

>>2309174
Yes the next prophet is alive and well.

'Look to the east'

>>2309178

So when Jesus said they would gathered in a faggot and slaughtered, what he MEANT was that they would be scattered to the four winds for millennia, but would survive as a major world religion into the modern day? Wow, what a prophet!

>>2309202
New Living Translation
They will crush you into the ground, and your children with you. Your enemies will not leave a single stone in place, because you did not accept your opportunity for salvation."

>>2309213

Protip idiot, this passage was written AFTER 79 ad. Also, it's not accurate anyway, the Wailing Wall still stands and as I said Jews still exist, so "their children" at least were spared.

>>2309174

If a post where I described Muhammad as a Medieval warlord made you call me "Achmed" then I just feel bad for you, you're an idiot.

>>2309231
>The destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE marked a turning point in Jewish history. In the absence of the Temple, the synagogue became the center of Jewish life.[35] When the Temple was destroyed, Judaism responded by fixating on the commandments of the Torah. Synagogues replaced the temple as a central meeting place, and the rabbis replaced high priests as Jewish community leaders. Because of the rabbis' dominance after 70 CE, the era is called the rabbinic period.[35] The rabbis filled the void of Jewish leadership in the aftermath of the Great Revolt, and they created a new kind of Judaism through their literature and teachings.[36]

>>2309162
>Unfortunately, while he may have been a progressive reformer relative to his time period

No, he was a puritanical psychopath who outlawed everything he didn't like (music, dogs, people overstaying their visits, wives arguing with husbands, etc etc) and whose vision of "law" was basically "do everything Mohemmed tells you to." This is why he is venerated, his cult of personality has outlived him like that of Lenin, or a successful Jim Jones / David Koresh.

>>2309242

What do you think you're proving? Your quote is from Luke, written some time in the 80's or 90's. It doesn't count as a prophecy if it's already happened.

>>2309233
I don't see the contradiction. Were you implying that there is something wrong with being a Medieval warlord?

>>2309252
Jesus prophesied it would happen, and how, and by whom, in 32 AD.

And Luke likely wrote his gospel in the 50s.

>>2309247
I said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, I have not seen anything like what I saw today. Hamzah attacked my camels, cut off their humps, ripped open their haunches and he is still drinking until now in a certain house’. The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, called for his outer garment and walked off. Zayd ibn Harithah and I followed him. He proceeded until he arrived to the house where Hamzah was drinking. He asked permission to enter and permission was granted. They were all drunk. The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, began reproaching Hamzah for what he did while Hamzah’s eyes were red from being completely drunk. Hamzah looked at the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace; then he stared at him, looked at his knees, then stared at his face and said: ‘Are you not but the slaves of my father?’ The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, realised that he was very drunk. He stepped back, left the house and we left after him”. Narrated by Bukhari from Ahmad ibn Salih. This incident was among the reasons which made incumbent the revelation of forbidding intoxicants.

>>2309269

Haha yeah no, Luke dates from the 80's at the earliest. And even if I granted that Jesus said these words in 32ad, he was wrong so I don't know why you'd bring it up.

>>2309252
New Living Translation
But he was pierced for our rebellion, crushed for our sins. He was beaten so we could be whole. He was whipped so we could be healed.

>>2309274

Mohemmed hated drunkenness, and lo, God reveals that being drunk is a sin. Hmm, that's pretty convenient, don't you think?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRICs4iJd1w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9lj895qKEg

>>2309302
(Here is) a Parable of the Garden which the righteous are promised: in it are rivers of water incorruptible; rivers of milk of which the taste never changes; rivers of wine, a joy to those who drink; and rivers of honey pure and clear. In it there are for them all kinds of fruits; and Grace from their Lord. (Can those in such Bliss) be compared to such as shall dwell for ever in the Fire, and be given, to drink, boiling water, so that it cuts up their bowels (to pieces)?
Qur'an 47:15

>>2309299

Exactly, Luke was written AFTER the revolt. It was an explanation for why god has forsaken Israel, just like the prophets of the past had come forward in times of calamity to save the nation, so the writer is putting forward Jesus as the salvation for the Jews now, in their time of greatest suffering. By all accounts the appeal was very successful, since Christianity grew rapidly in adherents after the revolt.

Sorry for asking an off topic question, but I just don't see the point in starting a new thread about Judaism. Is Judaism compatible with Zionism? Aren't the Jews forbidden to have their own state while waiting for the Messiah?

>>2309311

So the paradise that Mohemmed knew didn't exist contained rivers of wine?

>>2309247
>he was a puritanical psychopath who outlawed everything he didn't like

Literally nothing wrong with this.

>>2309315
New International Version
"But you are not to be called 'Rabbi,' for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers.

>>2309264

Are you seriously implying there isn't?

>>2309247

I'm happy to agree his cult of personality has outlived him, that was, in fact, my entire point.

I'm not sure claiming he was a puritanical psychopath in terms of the society in which he lived have much relevance.

>>2309329
>Are you seriously implying there isn't?

Yes I do, what's wrong with it?

>>2309323
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." They ask thee how much they are to spend; Say: "What is beyond your needs." Thus doth Allah Make clear to you His Signs: In order that ye may consider-
Qur'an 2:219

>>2309329
>I'm not sure claiming he was a puritanical psychopath in terms of the society in which he lived have much relevance.

It's pretty fucking relevant when the founder of a religion is a psychopath, doubly so when he is held up as an ideal to emulate, as Mohemmed is.

>>2309340

Fighting wars and taking women as rape slaves etc was pretty standard for his time and place.

>>2309332

See above.

>>2309334
>Say: "What is beyond your needs."
This is wrong, the meaning is "only what you won't miss", ie, only spend what is superfluous.

>>2309358
>Fighting wars and taking women as rape slaves etc was pretty standard for his time and place.

Sure, but you would want a higher than baseline level of morality in a religious figure, one would think. Especially one such as Mohemmed, who never stops telling us how wonderful God thinks he is.

>>2309364
They ask you about wine and gambling. Say, "In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit." And they ask you what they should spend. Say, "The excess [beyond needs]." Thus Allah makes clear to you the verses [of revelation] that you might give thought.

>>2309269
> Jews get kicked out of Jerusalem
> by the Romans
> with violence
> At a nonspecific point in the future
WOW WHAT A PROPHESY, I BET NO ONE ELSE SAW THAT COMING. LET ME CONVERT RIGHT NOW.

>>2309369

What do you think this proves? That Mohemmed hated drinking and gambling? That he at first urged restraint, then later when he was politically secure outright banned both?

>>2309366

You are just subscribing modern values to a Medieval warlord.

Obviously you would want a better baseline than that for a religious figure, unfortunately that's what Islam got.

>>2309377
"The prophet said: "Do not write down anything from me except the Quran. Whoever wrote other than that should delete it." [Sahih Muslim, Book 42, Number 7147, also Ahmed, Vol. 1, Page 171]

>>2308984
It isn't a secular state. It is a Jewish state, religiously and 'ethnically'. It's 'freedoms' of religion and worship are better than many of its neighbours, true, but it is not a fully secular state.

>The Bar Kokhba revolt (132–136 CE),[21] (Hebrew: מרד בר כוכבא or mered bar kokhba), was the third major rebellion by the Jews of Judaea Province and Eastern Mediterranean against the Roman Empire and the last of the Jewish–Roman Wars. Simon bar Kokhba, the commander of the revolt, was acclaimed as a Messiah, a heroic figure who could restore Israel.

File: 1484079324258.jpg (40KB, 529x404px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 529x404px

>>2309027
Honestly sounds like a massive cop out. I mean, if I thought I really was able to go to heaven or hell, I wouldn't just stop stoning people to death because society thinks that is bad now all of the sudden.

>>2309384

No, I'm ascribing psychopathic values to a psychopath. There are plenty of religious figures from that era and earlier with vastly more advanced moral notions than Mohemmed. He was, as you say, a warlord. But he pretended to be a prophet and ruled as a holy man, the fact he falls so short of even his own times is a significant problem for the modern age, since he is held as some sort of ideal. Jesus has his militant passages but it's easy to point to gentle ones and even an atheist can agree Jesus was a morally advanced person, but there's nothing in Mohemmed's ravings or in his personal conduct that offers hope of reforming Islam.

>>2309400
New American Standard Bible
Do not be excessively righteous and do not be overly wise. Why should you ruin yourself?

>>2309405

In what way Mohammad fall short of his time and place? Given that we are agreed he was a warlord.

As for Jesus I'm not agreed there is any terribly good sources for what Jesus said or did or that he has contributed anything to human thought that is not fairly banal or derivative.

>>2309408
Doing what your Holy Book tells you to do is not being excessively righteous.

>>2309424
John 10:34-36 New International Version (NIV)

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[a]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?

Footnotes:

John 10:34 Psalm 82:6

>>2309431

I'm not clear what your point is.

>>2309441
And in their footsteps, We sent 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2). S. 5:46 Al-Hilali & Khan; cf. S. 57:27

He [Jesus] said, "Lo, I am God's servant; God has given me the Book, and made me a Prophet." S. 19:30 Arberry

It is He Who has sent down the Book (the Qur'an) to you (Muhammad SAW) with truth, confirming what came before it. And he sent down the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel). S. 3:3 Al-Hilali & Khan

>>2309405
All you're really doing is trying to make sense of several centuries of apocryphal traditions that contradicts itself at every turn, thinking they're in any way a coherent snapshot of Muhammad the historical figure rather than a pastiche of dozens of religious traditions that imposed their own ideals onto him.

>>2309449

Sorry, dude, you've completely lost me. Good night, have a good one.

File: IMG_0018.gif (28KB, 500x351px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x351px

وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ وَالْأَنفَ بِالْأَنفِ وَالْأُذُنَ بِالْأُذُنِ وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ ۚ فَمَن تَصَدَّقَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَّهُ ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
SAHIH INTERNATIONAL
And We ordained for them therein a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution. But whoever gives [up his right as] charity, it is an expiation for him. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

File: IMG_0033.jpg (536KB, 1280x1707px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1280x1707px

1 Corinthians 13 King James Version (KJV)

13 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

>>2309289
Luke wrote his gospel before he wrote Acts.

As far as dating the gospel goes, Luke was written before the book of Acts and Acts does not mention "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A.D. 64 or the deaths of James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65)."8 Therefore, we can conclude that Luke was written before A.D. 62. "Luke's Gospel comes (Acts 1:1) before the Acts. The date of Acts is still in dispute, but the early date (about A.D. 63) is gaining support constantly."

So, 50s.

And neither Luke's gospel nor Acts mentions the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.

>>2309474

Yeah no, you're at least a century out on your biblical scholarship if you think Luke the apostle wrote Luke the gospel.

>>2309376
"When you see the city encircled, drop everything and run."

When the faithful saw the city encircled, they made a break for it and successfully escaped the city prior to the siege.

"Not one stone will be left upon another."

38 years later, the Temple was demolished with not one stone left upon another, as the gold from the temple melted in the fire and ran down the cracks of the stones.

The greedy Roman soldiers pursued the gold until not one stone lay upon another.

(The wailing wall is a retaining wall, not the wall of the Temple.)

So, wrong again.

>>2309477
Luke was never an apostle.

Luke wrote Luke.

You people who throw away 2000 years of Christian scholarship for Bart Ehrman are absurd.

>>2309329
>Are you seriously implying there isn't?
Nope

Plentiful of genuine prophets were warlords, but Muhamad isn't one of them.

>>2309501
He wasn't a warlord, I agree

>>2309516
Or a prophet, as he never spoke to God, or for God.

>>2309522
Yes he did

>>2309529
kek

He didn't even claim to.

>>2309529
Argument A—false gods and false prophets

A1. If a person speaks in the names of false gods, that person is a false prophet.
A2. Muhammad spoke in the names of false gods.
——————————————————
A3. Therefore, Muhammad was a false prophet.

Argument B—false revelations and false prophets

B1. If a person delivers a revelation that doesn’t come from God, that person is a false prophet.
B2. Muhammad delivered a revelation that didn’t come from God.
——————————————————
B3. Therefore, Muhammad was a false prophet.

>>2309541
False premises into false conclusions.

>>2309571
They're straight out of Deuteronomy 18, the same chapter muslims swear mentions Mohammad.

In Deuteronomy 18, Moses stated that God told him: "I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account." (Deuteronomy 18: 18-19)[4]

The book goes on to argue that Muhammad fulfilled this prophecy in numerous ways. While such claims have been refuted ad nauseum,[5] I will simply note that Muslims have here granted that Deuteronomy 18:18-19 is inspired by God (since they regard it as a miraculous prophecy). Surely, then, we can’t ignore the next verse, where God says:

"But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die." (Deuteronomy 18:20)

Here we have two criteria for spotting a false prophet: (1) delivering a revelation which God has not "commanded him to speak," and (2) speaking "in the name of other gods." Since Muslims who appeal to so-called biblical prophecies of Muhammad have given this passage their stamp of approval, they cannot deny the truth of A1 and B1. To sum up, Muslims have appealed to a passage in Deuteronomy 18, and that passage entails premises A1 and B1. Thus, according to Muslim claims, the first premise of each of the Deuteronomy Deductions is true.

>>2309571
To conclude, I would like to emphasize again that my entire argument (in two deductions) has been based on the writings and claims of Muslims. Early Muslim historians, in an astounding display of honesty and integrity, admitted that their prophet had delivered the Satanic Verses to his listeners. In acknowledging this, they provided all the evidence we need for premises A2 and B2. Modern Muslims, in an effort to defend Muhammad’s claim to biblical support for his ministry, have granted that a passage in Deuteronomy 18 was inspired by God. In doing so, they have given us all the evidence we need for premises A1 and B1. Since both of the Deuteronomy Deductions are logically valid, we have two proofs, based entirely on the claims of Muslims, that Muhammad was a false prophet.

Since the Deuteronomy Deductions are sound (i.e. logically valid with true premises), any honest seeker will have to admit that Muhammad was a false prophet. It should be an enlightening exercise, then, to present these arguments to Muslims. If a Muslim examines the arguments carefully, inspecting the premises and weighing the evidence, and then rejects the conclusion without refuting the argument, we can only assume that such a person is less interested in truth and more interested in the comfort provided by blindly accepting the faith he was raised in. Although my experience leads me to believe that most Muslims are of this type, my experience has also shown me that there are Muslims in the world who are actively dedicated to learning the truth about God. The first truth such Muslims must learn is that their prophet Muhammad was no prophet at all. The second is that their prophet Jesus is much more than a prophet.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Wood/deuteronomy_deductions.htm

>>2309573
Except there's absolutely no criteria for deciding Muhammad was not commanded to speak by nor spoke in the name of others besides God, besides your false premises.

>They're straight out of Deuteronomy 18, the same chapter muslims swear mentions Mohammad.
And there's your other problem. This haphazard prophesy egg hunt reeks of Christian heresy.

>>2309579
>answering-islam
Figures. Into the trash, etc.

>>2309579
>answering-islam.org

What's next, http://wikiislam.net?

File: IMG_0112.jpg (75KB, 1000x545px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1000x545px

King James Bible
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

>>2309481

Doesn't matter how long people were wrong for, they were wrong.

File: jeb!.png (88KB, 205x256px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 205x256px

>>2309634
>Teddy Roosevel

>>2309591
Yes, kill the messenger when the message is so clear.

Mohammad gave the Satanic Verses as though they were from his god.

And ironically they were.

>>2309833

When it comes to Christianity: If it's true, it ain't new. And if it's new, it ain't true.

>>2309856

Christianity lost all right to be trusted with regard to its own history when it burned 90% of its holy texts to push a simplistic literalist narrative.