God is not the author of confusion

Advertisements


Categories: Bible

35 replies

  1. Cheap Bilal.

    “Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood,” (96:2).

    “We created man from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape, (15:26).

    What was man created from Bilal?

    Like

  2. Is that what Allah says in the Quran that he is not the author of confusion?

    Like

  3. There is no confusion with these verses. You are simply telling half the story to create a new context to read them in instead of their original context.

    None of the Old Testament verses are opposing the concept of a sacrifice of atonement. Take Ezekiel 18 for example. Sacrifice of atonement is taught at length in the rest of the book 40:39, 42:13, 44:29, 45:17, 25. This is the same for the Torah, Psalms and Jeremiah. As a Christian I fully agree with both sets of verses.

    Paul, you must take the whole picture as you need to with the Qur’an and Hadith. The Qur’an says each bears his own load but sometimes says you can bear the load of another.

    They will bear their own burdens in full on the Day of Resurrection, and also of the burdens of those whom they misled without knowledge. Evil indeed is that which they shall bear! (Qur’an 16:25, Hilali-Khan)

    And verily, they shall bear their own loads, and other loads besides their own, and verily, they shall be questioned on the Day of Resurrection about that which they used to fabricate. (Qur’an 29:13, Hilali-Khan)

    Both of these verses refer to bearing the sins of others that you have lead astray. They are not saying that you are only responsible for leading them astray but also that you bear their load. Thus the Qur’an does have some concept of bearing the sins of others.

    There are also many hadiths that say that Allah will save some Muslims by placing the load of their sins on Christians and Jews. I will just give one:

    Narrated Abu Musa: Allah’s Messenger said: On the Day of Resurrection, my Ummah (nation) will be gathered into three groups. One sort will enter Paradise without rendering an account (of their deeds). Another sort will be reckoned an easy account and admitted into Paradise. Yet another sort will come bearing on their backs heaps of sins like great mountains. Allah will ask the angels though He knows best about them: Who are these people? They will reply: They are humble slaves of yours. He will say: Unload the sins from them and put the same over the Jews and Christians; then let the humble slaves get into Paradise by virtue of My Mercy. This Hadith is sound and mentioned in Mustadrak of Hakim. (110 Ahadith Qudsi, trans.: Syed Masood-ul-Hasan, pp. 20-21.)

    There are other hadiths which teach that a person’s good deeds can be credited to another person:

    Narrated Ibn Abbas: A man came to the Prophet and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! My mother died and she ought to have fasted one month (for her missed Ramadan). Shall I fast on her behalf?” The Prophet replied in the affirmative and said, “Allah’s debts have more right to be paid. … ” (Sahih al-Bukhuri: vol. 3, bk. 31, no. 174, Khan)

    Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: A woman from the tribe of Juhaina came to the Prophet and said, “My mother had vowed to perform Hajj but she died before performing it. May I perform Hajj on my mother’s behalf?” The Prophet replied, “Perform Hajj on her behalf. Had there been a debt on your mother, would you have paid it or not? So, pay Allah’s debt as He has more right to be paid.” (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 3, bk. 29, no. 77, Khan)

    Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: The mother of Sad bin ‘Ubada died in his absence. He said, “O Allah’s Apostle! My mother died in my absence; will it be of any benefit for her if I give Sadaqa on her behalf?” The Prophet said, “Yes.” Sad said, “I make you a witness that I gave my garden called Al Makhraf in charity on her behalf.” (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 4, bk. 51, no. 19, Khan)

    Is this confusion? I do not think so. I will just the whole picture.

    Like

    • Sins of those whom you mislead are your sins since you’re the one who’s responsible for that. The same thing goes with hadith.
      On the other hand, I can’t see the whole picture works with the example that br. Paul has given.

      Like

    • So the sins of others can be transferred to someone else? Finally, we agree!!!!

      Like

    • abdu

      The hadith have practically zero historical credibility – and whoever wrote them down copies pagan religious rituals for muslims to follow.

      There are no OT writings that command the followers of yahweh, the true god, to carry out pagan practices. Allah and mohammed cause humans to sin by commanding them to kiss a black stone, circle a pagan shrine, and pray like heathens.

      The point here, is that muslims sin every time they bow down towards the pagan city of mecca and submit to its false idol.

      Allah confuses muslims by commanding them to worship like pagans completely contrary to the words of yahweh. Since allah authors confusion by commanding people to sin, he cannot be god. Ergo.

      Like

    • Paulus,
      If you’re the cause of these sins, then they are yours. How could that have anything to do with the exampke that br. Paul has given?

      Liked by 1 person

    • “Sins of those whom you mislead”

      You’ve admitted that the sins are and were first the other persons, not your own. They then Become your own. That is, that are transferred from one to another.

      Like

    • Abdullah.

      You cause me to really dislike Muhammad and go astray. Is that now your sin? Or am I guilty of blasphemy?

      Like

    • Rather, they are all the deceptive and hypocritical apologists that you follow.

      Liked by 1 person

    • No abdullah, you caused it. Because of what you say I hate Muhammad. Now, can u expect Allah to transfer my sin of blasphemy onto you since it was you who led me astray?

      This is the result of your Koran. Hard to swallow, right?

      Like

    • “Hard to swallow” ??
      The fact that you’ve not dealt with the example on this post? Sure!
      It’s a big contradiction that you can’t even swallow.

      Note:
      (Luke 17:1-4)is a good example for your deceptive apologists that you follow.

      Liked by 1 person

    • They will bear their own burdens in full on the Day of Resurrection, and also of the burdens of those whom they misled without knowledge. Evil indeed is that which they shall bear! (Qur’an 16:25, Hilali-Khan)

      And verily, they shall bear their own loads, and other loads besides their own, and verily, they shall be questioned on the Day of Resurrection about that which they used to fabricate. (Qur’an 29:13, Hilali-Khan)

      These verses indicate that those who mislead others will bear their own sins, and that the sins of those they mislead will be added on top of their own sins as well. It does not say that those who were mislead will have their sins forgiven as in the Christian context of atonement.

      However, those who were mislead can be forgiven through various mechanisms such as Shahadah (accepting Islam) Tawbah, (sincere repentence) etc.

      Liked by 2 people

    • 110 Ahadith Qudsi, trans.: Syed Masood-ul-Hasan, pp. 20-21. is also in regard to those who have been misled by others. It does not imply that those who were mislead will have their sins forgiven as in the Christian context of atonement. God is the final Judge and he punishes or forgives whom he wills.

      The other hadiths are in relation to paying debts. By paying the debts of a dead person, (such as by fasting, performing Hajj, paying sadaqa) one may be able to raise the rank of the dead person in the afterlife, but salvation does not depend solely through such acts of the living, as the paying of debt is not the same atonement of sin as in the Christian context.

      God is the ultimate judge.

      Like

    • Kev repeats his same old tired and worn out, boring cut and paste accusations, which have been refuted time and again. Meanwhile he does not attempt to address the clearly contradictory verses which Paul Williams posted at the top of this blog post.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Samuel,
      When are you gonna start reading the explanations of hadiths from scholars instead of taking them and misinterpreting them? Regarding the hadiths about the sins if the Muslims put on the Jews and Christians, they were declared as false by many scholars because they contradict the Quran and those you declared them as sahih have understood them in different ways to avoid contradiction with the Quran. This fatwa discusses this issue at a bigger detail with the words of the scholars:
      https://islamqa.info/ar/128128

      Like

    • Ibn

      Paul’s point is stupid. No man can die for another’s sins, but god can take the payment for sin onto himself in any way he chooses.

      There is no contradiction. Now back to islam.

      Why does allah claim to be the true god yahweh, yet commands his followers to perform pagan rituals. That’s pretty confusing unless allah is not the true god of Abraham.

      Yahweh abhors paganism, allah commands paganism. I’m confused.

      Like

    • Yes indeed you are are confused.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Jesus is a man, therefore he cannot die for the sins of another. Human sacrifice is an abomination to the Lord (Deut 12:31).

      Liked by 2 people

    • Correct. An important biblical fact that Christians ignore.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Ibn Issam

      Jesus is a man, therefore he cannot die for the sins of another. Human sacrifice is an abomination to the Lord (Deut 12:31).”

      Jesus is god incarnate – god chose to take payment for sin upon himself. Paul’s point remains stupid.

      Now back to islam.

      Why does allah author confusion by commanding paganism when yahweh commands against it?

      God is not the author of confusion.
      Allah authors confusion.
      Ergo, allah is not god.

      Like

    • Kev,
      It is easy for you to say Jesus is god incarnate – but Biblical Scholarship and NT Historical criticism is making it harder by the day for Christians to maintain this stance.

      Your repetitive comments about paganism in Islam are boring as they have been refuted ad nauseam. Get a new Schtick.

      Now according to your own logic:

      God is not the author of confusion.
      Bible is completely contradictory,
      Trinitarian God authors confusion.
      Ergo, Trinitarian god is not God.

      Liked by 1 person

    • ibn

      “It is easy for you to say Jesus is god incarnate – but Biblical Scholarship and NT Historical criticism is making it harder by the day for Christians to maintain this stance.”

      LOL!!!

      What rubbish!

      It is the quran’s claims about jesus that are rejected by scholars. Which NT scholars say that jesus speaking at birth is historical? Which scholars say that jesus forming little animals with his hands and breathing life into them is historical? These stories were plagiarized from christian apocrypha that were rejected as inauthentic by early christians and by modern day scholars.

      There is no majority of scholars who reject the deity of christ. Scholarship shows that jesus made self-deifying statements, his followers believed in his deity from the earliest times, and that he went before jewish religious authorities and committed blasphemy by claiming divinity.

      Since jesus was god incarnate, Paul’s point remains stupid.

      Like

    • Kev,
      Can you prove that the Qur’anic stories are not true? Conversely can you prove to me that the Biblical Miracles are true? It is agreed that Scholars cannot historically prove or disprove miracles. So your point is moot.

      As to similar stories appearing in apocrypha, it does not discount the validity of the Qur’anic account either. The Christian Canon was arbitrarily put together by a very human, and very fallible “democratic” vote. The canon was not divinely ordained, so how can you be sure that the right books or the right stories are included. There is no assurance of any truth in Christianity. The fact that some biased Christian “scholars” reject certain stories is not a surprise. The Qur’an refers to miracles that are truly believed to have occurred, according to the nature of miracles such cannot be historically proven or disproven, so one is free to believe or not.

      Jesus died, ergo he was not fully divine immortal undying God. That his followers believed he was some form of deity proves nothing except that they exhalted his status after he died. The story of Jesus going before Jewish religious authorities and committed blasphemy by claiming divinity is questionable and has been interpreted differently by many.

      Liked by 1 person

    • ibn

      “Can you prove that the Qur’anic stories are not true?”

      OMG. Did you really just ask this?

      The scholars that you claim disprove christian belief unanimously agree that the quran’s fables about jesus are false and lack historical credibility. AT best, you could say that they are parables, but the question would be parables for what?

      Awkwardly, some of these jesus stories support the belief in jesus’ divinity – he creates life and is begotten from god’s spirit. If these fables about jesus are true, then islam is false.

      Like

  4. Biblicists turning to Islamic sources for justification.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. “These verses indicate that those who mislead others will bear their own sins, and that the sins of those they mislead will be added on top of their own sins as well. It does not say that those who were mislead will have their sins forgiven”

    So you are saying that Allah punishes the same sins twice? Interesting. I guess I definitely now know that Allahbis not the Just creator of the world.

    Like

    • Allah punishes each individual for the sins that they are responsible for, in contrast to the Trinitarian God who requires a disgustingly brutal barbaric paganistic blood sacrifice of an innocent man for the sins of others, while the actual sinners are rewarded with salvation.

      Liked by 1 person

    • it takes a “special” kind of heart to be ok with someone else who they supposedly love getting slaughtered for something they did. What a wicked and corrupt heart that is.

      Like

  6. Good thing about Biblicism: it refutes itself.

    Liked by 2 people

Trackbacks

  1. God is not the author of confusion | kokicat

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: