Can Islam prove itself without discrediting the bible?

[Yolande]

I have heard many Islam people "proving" the Koran by trying to point out "so called" errors in the bible.
I read somewhere that Mohammed took the bible, made some changes, called himself a holy prophet, and used fear, bloodshed and intimidation, to get rid of opposition and to secure some kind of following.
He promised young men virgins in heaven to fight for him.
And he forced people to convert by brutal means.
When the men had to big of a problem with lust, they made the woman to wear veils.

And today they proudly proclaim themself to be the true religion because, as their argument states, christianity is not according to them.

I have never heard any Islam person defend their faith without referring to the bible.
Is there somebody here that can make a case for Islam in another way?

[Yolande]

Have you read the article I provided?

You can't dismiss my source just because it is Christian.
The issue is not who wrote it but is it true.

As for your claims about Mohammed so-called former involvement with the Catholic church:
Even if it were true - then what is the point?
Catholicism (especially the way it was those days) is not Christian, it is just a front for Judeo Freemasonry.
So even if he was involved there, it would most likely have corrupted him.

I think there is one important thing you miss, the word "Christian" has become like a "club" name.
Like you can be "born" into it, or merely acknowledge a certain set of belief systems and then you are "Christian" and then when you change your mind you become "not Christian" again.
If you think like that you understand nothing about Christianity.

Just like a mother can not give birth to a child and tomorrow deny the child and push him back in the womb or pretend he never got born, in the same way you can not become born of God and then become "unborn" of God the next day.
Everbody wearing the "label" Christian is not born of God.
In fact, you even get something like "Christian mysticism" which is based on occult practices and occult channeling with a "Christian" flavour

So if you give me testimonies of people who wore a "name tag" Christian and then changed it to another "name tag", it doesn't mean zip.

Christianity is not about doctrines, propaganda and converting people to some ideology.
Christianity is about being born of God and living in the presence of the Most High lead by the Spirit, with His laws written on the heart, a brand new creature, crucified with Christ and risen up in a new life in Him.

And God is the one that picks and draws people unto Himself by His grace, I can't even do that, even if I could debate how well.
And God is the one that convicts people of sin, and reveals to them their need for His mercy and grace.

[TrueReligion]

I have heard many Islam people "proving" the Koran by trying to point out "so called" errors in the bible.
I read somewhere that Mohammed took the bible, made some changes, called himself a holy prophet, and used fear, bloodshed and intimidation, to get rid of opposition and to secure some kind of following.
He promised young men virgins in heaven to fight for him.
And he forced people to convert by brutal means.
When the men had to big of a problem with lust, they made the woman to wear veils.

And today they proudly proclaim themself to be the true religion because, as their argument states, christianity is not according to them.

I have never heard any Islam person defend their faith without referring to the bible.
Is there somebody here that can make a case for Islam in another way?

All what uve writen, is all what uve heard, and wat uve read, but there is no authentic source of this

So any of this statement cannot be accepted as truth. and I gave u the reference of authentic source U can't deny history, its all writen in history books, now if u want to follow only the books which show what u want, ofcourse its not practical, ur mind will never be open to truth.

Regarding Bible, if u want, I can show u in real, for every book, wats the source, and what are the mistakes and contradictions. Its admited by christian scholars since the time it was writen till now, u cannot deny them

The authentic source of Quran, Islam and Muhammad willl be accepted,only if u provide from any neutral source, or from Muslim scholars otherwise it will be discarded, and wil show that its just false propaganda against Muslims..

Islam have given enough proof, in Quran, read it and thn tell me, Is;nt the prroof enough for u that Quran is never been changed since 1400yrs? and it easily got spread without blooddshed. there are many examples o this, unlike christianity, which was truly spread by force by crusadars, e.g philipines etc etc.

[Bag-Of-Hammers]

I have heard many Islam people "proving" the Koran by trying to point out "so called" errors in the bible.
I read somewhere that Mohammed took the bible, made some changes, called himself a holy prophet, and used fear, bloodshed and intimidation, to get rid of opposition and to secure some kind of following.
He promised young men virgins in heaven to fight for him.
And he forced people to convert by brutal means.
When the men had to big of a problem with lust, they made the woman to wear veils.

And today they proudly proclaim themself to be the true religion because, as their argument states, christianity is not according to them.

I have never heard any Islam person defend their faith without referring to the bible.
Is there somebody here that can make a case for Islam in another way?

Good post. The koran was inspired by a jealous need to control people. The terrorists that act out today absorb the diety of Muhammad. They are the true nature of Muhammad. They are the hands of Muhammad, while the "non extreme" Muslims cover up for them and make excuses for Muhammad and the evil their cult propagates.

[TrueReligion]

I have heard many Islam people "proving" the Koran by trying to point out "so called" errors in the bible.
I read somewhere that Mohammed took the bible, made some changes, called himself a holy prophet, and used fear, bloodshed and intimidation, to get rid of opposition and to secure some kind of following.
He promised young men virgins in heaven to fight for him.
And he forced people to convert by brutal means.
When the men had to big of a problem with lust, they made the woman to wear veils.

And today they proudly proclaim themself to be the true religion because, as their argument states, christianity is not according to them.

I have never heard any Islam person defend their faith without referring to the bible.
Is there somebody here that can make a case for Islam in another way?

Good post. The koran was inspired by a jealous need to control people. The terrorists that act out today absorb the diety of Muhammad. They are the true nature of Muhammad. They are the hands of Muhammad, while the "non extreme" Muslims cover up for them and make excuses for Muhammad and the evil their cult propagates.

BOH, Islam means Peace, and it was spread peacefully, not like christianity through killing of inocent peoples:)
If you have any evidence, bring it on, just passing statements will make u more likely to be dishonest here

[otseng]

The koran was inspired by a jealous need to control people. The terrorists that act out today absorb the diety of Muhammad. They are the true nature of Muhammad. They are the hands of Muhammad, while the "non extreme" Muslims cover up for them and make excuses for Muhammad and the evil their cult propagates.

Moderator formal warning:

You have repeatedly made such statements across several threads. Repeatedly making flamebaitish comments should be avoided.

[Wyvern]

BOH, Islam means Peace, and it was spread peacefully, not like christianity through killing of inocent peoples:)
If you have any evidence, bring it on, just passing statements will make u more likely to be dishonest here

History would disagree with you. India was repeatedly invaded by islamic crusaders between the years 1000 until 1739. Spain was invaded in the years 711 and 712 and only stopped from conquering the rest of europe due to the defeat at the battle of Tours. On the eatern end of Europe muslim invaders had repeatedly invaded the balkans and in 1683 made it to the gates of Vienna before being pushed back. Right after Mohammed died Abu Bakr was named caliph and immediately began to wage war against his nearest arab neighbors conquering the rest of the arabian peninsula by 633 and by 638 had conquered Syria, Iraq the mediterranean coastal states Armenia and much of what is now Turkey. In 640 Egypt was conquered. Persia was conquered around 642. Afghanistan was invaded in 642 and eventually was conquered and converted by 1187. All the rest of north africa was conquered by 698 with literally hundreds of thousands of slaves taken. Constantinople was in a nearly constant state of siege from 718 until it fell in 1453.

For such a "peaceful" religion they certainly did invade a lot of places, make no mistake these were not defensive wars they engaged in but offensive wars of conquest in the name of their new found religion.

[TrueReligion]

BOH, Islam means Peace, and it was spread peacefully, not like christianity through killing of inocent peoples:)
If you have any evidence, bring it on, just passing statements will make u more likely to be dishonest here

History would disagree with you. India was repeatedly invaded by islamic crusaders between the years 1000 until 1739. Spain was invaded in the years 711 and 712 and only stopped from conquering the rest of europe due to the defeat at the battle of Tours. On the eatern end of Europe muslim invaders had repeatedly invaded the balkans and in 1683 made it to the gates of Vienna before being pushed back. Right after Mohammed died Abu Bakr was named caliph and immediately began to wage war against his nearest arab neighbors conquering the rest of the arabian peninsula by 633 and by 638 had conquered Syria, Iraq the mediterranean coastal states Armenia and much of what is now Turkey. In 640 Egypt was conquered. Persia was conquered around 642. Afghanistan was invaded in 642 and eventually was conquered and converted by 1187. All the rest of north africa was conquered by 698 with literally hundreds of thousands of slaves taken. Constantinople was in a nearly constant state of siege from 718 until it fell in 1453.

For such a "peaceful" religion they certainly did invade a lot of places, make no mistake these were not defensive wars they engaged in but offensive wars of conquest in the name of their new found religion.

It was all forself defence, may u dont have information,and war against christian invasion towards muslims,
For India, the fight was always between muslim rulers with another muslim ruler. it was mainly for land only, not for a religious cause. If Islam was spready by of force, muslims ruled India for long time, still in India, majority is of Hindus.
Also in Indonesia, christians forced many people for christianity. but still people choose Islam, did any muslim army went to Indonesia to convert Indonesians to Islam?
How about Africa, how many people were made christians forcefully, but stil people choose Islam, how many muslim army went to Africa to make people muslims there?

Your reserch and knowledge is very weak and not good enough.

[Wyvern]

It was all forself defence, may u dont have information,and war against christian invasion towards muslims,

Please look into the historic record before making an uninformed statement. The first crusade wasn't declared until 1095, long after the majority of islamic conquests. Also of course most of the islamic conquests happened in areas where there were no christians. You can't defend yourself against something that didn't happen yet neither can you defend yourself against something that simply does not exist.

For India, the fight was always between muslim rulers with another muslim ruler. it was mainly for land only, not for a religious cause. If Islam was spready by of force, muslims ruled India for long time, still in India, majority is of Hindus.

You do understand that at one time Pakistan and Bangladesh was part of India and that after India was split up after independence there was massive population shifts. Yes it is true that even after India was conquered by muslims they still continued to be invaded by other tribes of muslims. Islam conquered older and/or weaker cultures as in Persia, Byzantines and Egypt. When confronted with a younger or more vital cultures they did not have very much luck as examples christianity in the west and hinduism and buddhism in the east.

Also in Indonesia, christians forced many people for christianity. but still people choose Islam, did any muslim army went to Indonesia to convert Indonesians to Islam?

Who said anything about Indonesia? As you like to say this is off topic and nothing more will be said about it.

How about Africa, how many people were made christians forcefully, but stil people choose Islam, how many muslim army went to Africa to make people muslims there?

In north africa quite a few muslim armies passed through and formed their own kingdoms which then continued on and invaded Spain to form yet another kingdom. Also to use your own words this is about muslims not christians, please stay on topic.

[TrueReligion]

It was all forself defence, may u dont have information,and war against christian invasion towards muslims,

Please look into the historic record before making an uninformed statement. The first crusade wasn't declared until 1095, long after the majority of islamic conquests. Also of course most of the islamic conquests happened in areas where there were no christians. You can't defend yourself against something that didn't happen yet neither can you defend yourself against something that simply does not exist.

It was not only muslims, started by Jews, who always make biggest mess in the world. Y before Islam 1400 yrs ago, the fights and killing of christians and invasion was done by whom? your all statements are just showing hatred towardsIslam, and you always neglect other history records and other religions. not a rule of debatge my friend

For India, the fight was always between muslim rulers with another muslim ruler. it was mainly for land only, not for a religious cause. If Islam was spready by of force, muslims ruled India for long time, still in India, majority is of Hindus.

You do understand that at one time Pakistan and Bangladesh was part of India and that after India was split up after independence there was massive population shifts. Yes it is true that even after India was conquered by muslims they still continued to be invaded by other tribes of muslims. Islam conquered older and/or weaker cultures as in Persia, Byzantines and Egypt. When confronted with a younger or more vital cultures they did not have very much luck as examples christianity in the west and hinduism and buddhism in the east.

No logic for your statement, we were talking about Indian subcontinent, you forgot how many muslims were killed by sikhs and hindus when muslims migrate to Pakistan? you are giving wrong statement with very weak knowledge of events. its clearly Bias statements from you.

Also in Indonesia, christians forced many people for christianity. but still people choose Islam, did any muslim army went to Indonesia to convert Indonesians to Islam?

Who said anything about Indonesia? As you like to say this is off topic and nothing more will be said about it.


Now you say its off-topic? because you dont have answer for Indonesia?y you can;t acept that you dont have logics in debate, and whenevr you dont have answers, you will make issue of off-topic question.

How about Africa, how many people were made christians forcefully, but stil people choose Islam, how many muslim army went to Africa to make people muslims there?

In north africa quite a few muslim armies passed through and formed their own kingdoms which then continued on and invaded Spain to form yet another kingdom. Also to use your own words this is about muslims not christians, please stay on topic.

If you want on topic, thn be on topic, dont bring other stuff here, topic is "Can Islam prove without bible".
And its proven already, so end of discussion.

[Wyvern]

It was not only muslims, started by Jews, who always make biggest mess in the world. Y before Islam 1400 yrs ago, the fights and killing of christians and invasion was done by whom? your all statements are just showing hatred towardsIslam, and you always neglect other history records and other religions. not a rule of debatge my friend

This particular debate is only about islam though, and please stop with the persecution complex we get enough of that from christians. You complain about being persecuted and then you make a stab at persecuting jews, cute. You stated islam was spread only by peaceful means to which I replied with a list of islamic wars of conquest. To that you replied that all those wars were in defense against the crusaders and I answered that the crusades didn't start until the year 1095 and many of the wars did not even occur where there were any christians to begin with. To answer your question of who was killing christians before islam first the romans did that quite a bit until it became an accepted religion.

No logic for your statement, we were talking about Indian subcontinent, you forgot how many muslims were killed by sikhs and hindus when muslims migrate to Pakistan? you are giving wrong statement with very weak knowledge of events. its clearly Bias statements from you.

No we are talking about India and no I did not forget about how many hindu's sikhs and muslims were killed by hindu's sikhs and muslims during the period of reformation however that did not occur during the time period in question and as such is irrelevant. Strange how you want to ignore the millions that were killed during the muslim reign of India but put so much emphasis on the thousands of muslims that were killed during a time of chaos, neither event is a positive so why try to brush one of them under the rug.

Also in Indonesia, christians forced many people for christianity. but still people choose Islam, did any muslim army went to Indonesia to convert Indonesians to Islam?

Who said anything about Indonesia? As you like to say this is off topic and nothing more will be said about it.


Now you say its off-topic? because you dont have answer for Indonesia?y you can;t acept that you dont have logics in debate, and whenevr you dont have answers, you will make issue of off-topic question.

Don't like it when your own tactics are used against you do you? If you say this about me then you are also saying it about yourself as well.

If you want on topic, thn be on topic, dont bring other stuff here, topic is "Can Islam prove without bible".
And its proven already, so end of discussion.

I have not seen any such proof and it certainly has not been proven. You are going to have to prove this claim if you want to have it.