Was Muhammad a Ebionite heretic? Where did the Qur'an come from?

Was Muhammad a Ebionite heretic? Where did the Qur'an come from?

Attached: muhammad.jpg (335x323, 28.95K)

Other urls found in this thread:

wikiislam.net/wiki/Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha#Aisha_consented_to_the_marriage._If_it_was_abuse.2C_she_would_have_left_Muhammad
archive.fo/J8uXS
archive.fo/hvFj4
archive.fo/8REaa
archive.fo/pyelg
etymonline.com/word/mores
archive.fo/ib4kd
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

He wrote it by stealing from the Bible and Torah, then spliced BS into it that was convienent for him

Don't forget the polytheistic religions of Mohammad's community and folk tales that where popular at the time.
Really more of those make up the Koran then anything straight from the Old and New Testaments

Attached: 1506676450587.jpg (478x478, 35.87K)

I don't think that the Ebionite/Arian/ even Nestorian link can be underestimated here.
After the affirmation of Orthodoxy of the Equality of the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ Jesus, many heretics fled to places outside of the Empire like (non-occupied) North Africa, Arabia or Persia where they tried to start again, although since we never really hear about them again, presumably with limited success. Plus Muhammad's biographers make it clear that he had many dealings with Christians (particularly monks) prior to becoming a prophet, so it's possible that these too were Arians or Ebionites. The trouble is, no distinction is made as to what kind of "Christians" these are, so they could have been anything from totally orthodox who were just completely misunderstood by Muhammad, lukewarms who, like those today, believe Allah and God are the same thing, or outright heretics who peddled their lies to Muhammad, and which he ended up believing.

From what I understand, there were some orthodox Christians in Arabia at the time, mainly in the region of Yemen, but by far most Christians in Arabia were heretical Nestorians or Monophysites, as well as Ebionites, and even some Gnostic groups. Part of the reason Muhammad (cock and shit and lava semen be upon his shit covered body which is currently rotting in demon piss) thought Mary was apart of the Trinity was because there was a heretical group in Arabia, known as Collyridians, who worshiped Mary as a goddess next to God and even offered sacrifices to her. Arabia was a hot bed of heresy at the time, no doubt the majority of Christians there at the time held heretical beliefs.

Is that really necessary? You're supposed to be an ambassador for Christ. I guarantee you that Christ would never have used such foul language to express his message.

>>>/islam/

So, you think "Be ye perfect as your father in Heaven is perfect" means "I get to shit all over anyone I don't personally like"?

Love thy enemy, user.

Muhammad is in hell tbh so winnie the pooh him.

I wish I could shit on Muhammad tbh. It'd be funny.

Are you feeling ok?

Islam just really pisses me off. It's so blasphemous and retarded. I'm sorry, the simple thought of Muhammad and Islam enrages me. I have wrath issues.

Clearly. I will pray for you.

How are you not enraged by this stupid winnie the pooh religion? Seriously, winnie the pooh MUHAMMAD! winnie the pooh HIM AND winnie the pooh ISLAM AND winnie the pooh THE winnie the pooh STUPID QURAN!

That's not a picture of Muhammad. That's Imam Ali, fourth Caliph. Might want to do better research before you make yourself look foolish when trying to convert Muslims.

It is no different than a thousand other false religions. I pray for Muslims that they will come to Christ. Spitting on them and hating them is not the way to convert them.

But Muhammad was literally a pedophile who raped little girls, as well as a warlord who committed numerous genocides!

One of his 13 wives was underage by today's standards, yes that's true. I'm not so sure about the "numerous genocides", though. I don't recall any civilization that he personally wiped out of existence.

You really should go back to /Islam/ Ahmad.

I knew that wasn't, but Muslims are for the most part iconoclast and don't portray Muhammad and the best I could find was of Ali.

Yes, the orthodox christians lived along the coast of the Red sea, and Yemen (across from Eritrea and Ethiopa) and to the east of Sinai, all of which were parts of major trade routes which Muhammad, as a merchant, would have followed.


Genocide is an overstatement but ethnic cleansing was certainly perpetrated by him, against the Bani Quraza Jews of Medina whom he believe had tried to betray him and the city to the beseiging Meccans, in violation of an agreement they had made years before.

Honestly someone needs to cease this. I have a long post history and I'm Christian, so if the mods come they know this was legit.

Our Lady was 12-14 when she had Our Lord, Muhammad married a girl at 9 and likely consummated when she was around the same age.

Wasn't too uncommon y'know. Today's standards are a reaction to modern conditions and economy.

Mary was 14 when she was impregnated, you know. By "today's standards", that's considered pedophilia. I know it makes you feel better to think I'm from some other board or website, but that's just not accurate.

came from the battle.

Gee, I wonder what this meant?

What is ebionite?
Either (((them))) or muhammad as (((they))) tell us. Does islam even recognize the old testament or the new testament? If they don't I can't really attack their doctrine biblically other then pointing out they are liars.

Mohammed was a false prophet and that's really bad and he is probably suffering a lot because of that. It pisses me off to, his teaching, his militant conquest, etc, but he is a man like any other and was probably deceived an angel of light(devil) and by some very heretical "Christians". I personally feel sad for him, and even sadder if he really knew in its entirety what he was doing, but I doubt he did. Have mercy on sinners.

The Islamic holy books are Torah, Psalms, the Gospel, and Qur'an. They don't recognize the Epistles or the other books of the OT.

Same. If only he had tested """Gabriel""" by the names of the Lord, then maybe he may have gotten a legit revelation from God. Now imagine that, the middle east instead becoming entirely Christian because a dude defeated the devil instead of Muslim (and all the problems with Christians that created and is still creating).

Oh good, that makes this easier. Now is there a way I can read the qur'an in english? I need some practice should I ever encounter any muslims.

Even if he had claimed such, see galatians 1:6-10

Why have there been so many /islamic/ shills on Zig Forums lately?

First, there is no established the doctrine concerning the ages of either Mary or Joseph at the time of their marriage, and personally I believe they were probably around the same age. Though it is true that Catholic tradition portrays Joseph as an old man and Mary as a young teen,but this isn't an established doctrine of the Church but is a valid opinion on the matter. Assuming the tradition is correct, Mary still would've gone through puberty and by no means would have been a little girl like Aisha was when Muhammad raped her. On top of that, Tradition tells us Mary and Joseph never had sex in the first place since she was a perpetual Virgin. You're drawing false comparisons.

The simple fact of the matter is that Mary would've have gone through puberty and thus would have been a young woman/adult at the time, and Joseph and Mary never had sex in the first place, while on the other hand, Aisha was still a little girl playing with dolls who was forced to have sex with a man nearly 6 times her age.

You can go to quran.com and select from many English versions. It's a very dry read.

Muhammad wasn't supposed to be her husband. She was betrothed to someone else, who died in battle. Aisha's parents asked Muhammad if he would take her in and he agreed to do so provided she consented to it - which she did. Islam doesn't permit forced marriage.

If you're going to take Islam as your enemy, you should at least know something about it first. If you don't know your enemy, they'll walk all over you.

Your translation is retarded, it's talking about virgins, that is, women who never had sex, not female children.

The age range her could be 14 at the youngest, and maybe 20 at the most.

They recognise the Torah, Psalms and Gospel on principle, not in fact.
They think that Moses, David and Jesus, being prophets, were revealed their information from Heaven, but their books were either corrupted, or not written down at all. The Injil according to the Muslims is distinct from the Gospels we have now, since the Injil (Gospel) of Christ wasn't written down and is now forever lost. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are just attempts to recapture what Christ said, but since these all make Him look Divine, then they are irrelevant frauds.

By the way I found this book a while ago as an interesting bit of background reading to this period. It's really short (less than 150 pages) and is describes the religious and cultural background/politics of the region immediately before Islam, whereby the Christian Ethiopians of Axum and Jewish South-Arabians were waging a proxy war on behalf of the Roman and Persian empires respectively, and how this holy war sent shockwaves throughout the red sea which helped to further prepare the way for Islam to spread as easily as it did.

Attached: 51 RwjE-YrL._SX329_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (331x499, 50.9K)

I was referencing the average age of marriage at the time where Mary was. No reason to believe that for some reason she was special from the rest of their culture in order to appease our modern senses. And yes, she was a perpetual Virgin. I'm just saying that being married =/= having sex. Don't confuse my words. I'm not an Islamic apologist, and I believe they are a false religion.

The point I was making is that Aisha and Muhammed probably didn't consummate their marriage until later, according to things I've read about that before. Chill.

Which version do muslisms accept as authoritative?

I ain't defending the muslims, but see the God sanctioned action of Moses in numbers 31:13-18

I am using the KJV and it is the only version I am aware of that wouldn't make God a liar if it were true, which it is true. What version are you using? Do you account for matthew 7:15-20, matthew 12:33, 1 peter 1:25, 2 peter 1:20-21, 2 timothy 3:16, and titus 1:2? All of which is to say by their fruits ye shall know them and God can not lie?

Depends on the Muslim. It's sort of like how we all have our favorite versions of the Bible, but there is no true consensus on which one is the most accurate. Personally, I use the RSVCE, but others swear by the KJV.

Most of the quotes I've heard Muslims give when discussing the Qur'an in English come from the Sahih International version, but I live in America. It may be different in other countries.

Sorry, 9 year olds cannot consent, especially if they're married off by their father.

wikiislam.net/wiki/Responses_to_Apologetics_-_Muhammad_and_Aisha#Aisha_consented_to_the_marriage._If_it_was_abuse.2C_she_would_have_left_Muhammad

John Quincy Adams was appointed as secretary to the Russian ambassador when he was 13 years old. Taking into account today's standards, do you think a 13 year old could be appointed to such a position in government?

It's clear that these were young virgin women, not children.

This is now a KJV is the only one that wouldn't make God a liar if it were true thread.
RSVCE john 7:8-10 archive.fo/J8uXS

In this version it would make God a liar by Jesus supposedly saying he is not going to the feast, yet goes up in secret anyways.

Again, making a false comparison and trying to change the subject. What does that have to do with the age of consent and pedophilia?

Muhammad's heresies are worse than the murder and rape he is responsible for.
He certainly was no prophet.

It shows that our modern sensibilities concerning age cannot be translated to past events.

It's pretty clear in the Muslim sources that Muhammad raped a 9 year old.

I'm not going to argue with a KJV-onlyist.

All of those versions you are quoting would make God a liar if they were true, which they are not. For NIV see 2 samuel 21:19 archive.fo/hvFj4
and 1 chronicles 20:5 and 1 samuel 17:51 all say different things that would make God a liar if they were true in the NIV, which it is not true.
In the ESV of mark 1:2 archive.fo/8REaa
This quote is not in isaiah but in malachi 3:1 ESV archive.fo/pyelg
Therefore this version would make God a liar if it were true, which is it not true.

No, it shows how you're making a false comparison between two completely unrelated things as well as introducing a sort of moral relativism.


No, it's barbaric and not ok in anyway. Would Jesus ever do anything like this?

For Muslims, Muhammad is supposed to be a champion of morality, someone who was suppose to rise above the barbaric pagan culture of his time. Yet he seems to have stooped to the barbaric level of his culture, and even lower.

And having sex with 9 year old was not common at the time.

This has to do with the fact moses, supported by God, allowed for the taking of women children for the isralites to do with as they pleased in numbers 31 KJV. I only make this point because others would argue that you could use the fruit of a corrupt tree to argue their points, which would just make them liars.

That's good, I am not a KJV onlyist as I am open to other interpretations as stated to be so in 2 peter 1:20. Care to show me a interpretation/version that wouldn't make God a liar if it were true other then the KJV?

...

I wasn't responding to that.

So, you agree that the appointment of John Q Adams to the ambassador office was wrong and we should despise our 2nd President for doing so - even though John Q was highly educated and did the job extremely well.

… because by our standards, it's wrong?

Muhammad had 13 wives. Why are you so obsessed with the one wife? Sounds like you're overly obsessed with little girls having sex. I will pray for you.

The Jews say that Mohammad wanted to convert to Judaism, but since he was illiterate, they just laughed at him.

But you were in a sense, as I asked earlier what interpretations the muslisms use so that I could better examine one they took as authortative. That way it is easier to prove their prophet's fruits matthew 7:15-20 translating those versions as liars, as God can not lie titus 1:2 and hence their fruit would not be of God since God is the only one good in matthew 19 and mark 10

Holy shit, get off of Zig Forums, members of the ELCA/Episcopal Church/UCC are not welcome here. You people literally let Mudshits pray in your churches and fag marriage. You are heretics. winnie the pooh off please and go back to /Christ/.

There is nothing morally wrong with appointing a 13 year old to office, that is the matter of civil law retard, not moral law. You are still making a false comparison.

See mark 2:16-17

You do realise that because of etymonline.com/word/mores archive.fo/ib4kd are evil as it is just doing what most of society/men want instead of what God says, right? There is no definition of "moral law" in the Bible unless you care to show me otherwise.

By welcoming Muslims prayers in houses of God, you blaspheme the name of God.


>"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils." - Ignatius of Antioch, Smyrnaeans 4

Get behind me Satan! I rebuke you!

Also the version you are using would make God a liar. See 2 John 11 KJV
But in order to make your point you were originally trying to get across try quoting 2 corinthians 6:14-16

See

Enabling blasphemy and sin in our churches does more harm than good, in no way does it heal the sick. Jesus said to the adultress,


Jesus would come into your churches with whips if he saw that you were letting Mudshits pray their abominable prayers in your churches!

You don't seem to see 2 corinthians 6:14-16 is in agreence with what you say.
Indeed, hence 1 corinthians 4:21
Doesn't change you must go to them as mark 16:16 demands. How much easier then is it, if they come to you? Just don't be unequally yoked with them.

Letting false religions invoke their moon gods in our churches is an abomination. I'm not saying we shouldn't evangelize,of course we should! We should go to them and evangelize! Enabling their sin is only going to worsen their condition and bring scandal and abomination into the house of God!

Indeed so what better place for sinners then near a christian who could rebuke them?
How so? Do you not recognize 1 corinthians 8:1-7?
Their idols are nothing, for they are simply objects that defile the sinners conscience. Simply don't let them defile your concience as stated in 2 corinthians 6 whole chapter this time and you will be fine.

The Church is a hospital, and not a courtroom, for souls. She does not condemn on behalf of sins, but grants remission of sins.

Maybe, maybe not. If he was drawn to Christ he probably would not have conquered or if so at a much slower rate, maybe a holy regional king in Arabia. If not that maybe a renowned holy preacher known for his passion for Christ. Though I doubt that, if he was not visited by this angel of light(The same who visited Joseph Smith in all likelihood!) I very much think he would have remained just another follower of his pagan faith, or not, it is not reasonable to imagine what it would have been like. Regardless I think it would be best to pray mercy on Mohammed, a sad man.