Is ISLAM telling LIES About ISRAEL/JERUSALEM BEING HOLY TO THEM?
Debate Rounds (5)
Watch the video, and provide your disagreement.
I will in return raise questions of how your disagreements are valid or invalid.
This will be fun, unless I can be convinced I am wrong on this...
I would request it to be either someone who is MUSLIM, but an ATHIEST I think may attest to be of adequate response as well (I hope).
"Jerusalem has been a Jewish holy city since the days of King David, 3000 years ago."
Jerusalem is much, much older than the days of King David. In fact, Jerusalem was originally settled in the fourth millennium BCE, about 3,000 years before King David. According to the Bible, Jerusalem was originally a Jebusite city, captured by King David and made his capital. It is not an inherently Jewish city any more than New York is inherently British, since it was founded by the Dutch as New Amsterdam. And since the capture of Jerusalem by King David, the city has changed hands dozens of times. It is a very cosmopolitan city, and no one group has any more claim to it than any other.
"In the year 638 CE the muslims captured Jerusalem from the Byzantines and built a mosque on the site of the Jewish holy Temple."
True. But again, I bring my opponent to the Jebusites. Did the Jews under King David have some kind of holy claim to the City that legitimized seizing it from the Jebusites? They believe they did. So, too, did the Muslims: To them, it was the City of the Prophets. God had ordained the Prophets there, in Jerusalem, and thus the Muslims felt that they had a claim to it. Since we cannot definitively prove that either Judaism or Islam is correct over the other, we have to look at the struggle over Jerusalem from a secular point of view.
"While Jews pray facing Jerusalem and the Temple mount , Muslims pray towards Mecca. When Muslims pray in Jerusalem they point their behind to the Dome of the rock and the temple mount."
This is simply because Jerusalem is not the MOST holy city in Islam, it is the third, behind Mecca and Medina. Saying that Muslims are lying about Jerusalem being holy to them is like saying Catholics are lying that the Vatican is sacred to them because the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is more so.
"An Islamic holy site ? Palestinians use the temple mount as a playground where they have picnics and play soccer."
Does this then mean that any parish that hosts a church picnic is no longer holy, because the ground is being used for secular purposes?
"Sary Nusseibeh , palestinian professor and the president of the Al Quds university had to go underground after admitting that the temple mount is a Jewish holy site."
The Temple Mount is a holy site for BOTH Jews and Arabs. Being a holy site for one religion does not exclude all others.
"Ibn Taymiyyah (1263-1328) , whose writings influenced the Wahhabi movement in arabia ruled that sacred islamic sites are to be found only in the Arabian Peninsula and that " in Jerusalem, there is not a place one calls sacred , and the same holds true for the tombs of Hebron"
This is where things get interesting. Ibn Taymiyyah was by modern standards a radical jihadist. While it is true his writings influenced modern Wahhabism, therein lies the flaw in this line of thinking: Most Muslims in the world today are not Wahhabi, only about 0.5% of the world's Muslims according to most estimates. In addition, many of his philosophies have been heavily contradicted by the Hadith, including his view that the only holy places in Islam are in Arabia.
"Jerusalem is mentioned in the Bible 667 times , while in the Quran : 0 times ."
There are two flaws on this argument. First, The Bible takes place overwhelmingly in the Levant, whereas the Quran was written down in Arabia. This argument makes as much sense as saying that since the Vatican is not mentioned in the Catholic Bible, it cannot be a holy site (In fact, when Rome is mentioned, it is aligned with the evil Whore of Babylon, not referred to as a holy place). Secondly, although the word Jerusalem does not appear in the Quran, it IS referenced as the "Farthest Mosque" many times. Most Muslims believe this is the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.
According to the quran , the holy land was written by Allah to Israel (quran 5:21) and that the Jews will return to their land (quran 17:104) The jews are coming back home from the diaspora.
Taken out of context, this would appear to confirm that the Jews are the rightful owners of the Holy Land even according to Islam. However, these quotes must be taken in the context of the rest of the chapters, namely, that Israel in both the Bible and the Quran was originally called Jacob. According to the Quran, Jacob was a Muslim. Thus by that book the Holy Land belongs to the Muslims. But the Bible says he was a Jew. We cannot prove this one way or the other since archaeologically we are unsure if Jacob was even real. For the second part, we must see that the Jews "returning to their homeland" is an act that will be punished by God according to the Quran. The Muslims believe that the Jews will take back Jerusalem and eventually will be punished by god for claiming land that didn't belong to them in the first place.
I believe that is all of the written slides on this video presentation. I look forward to hearing my opponent's response.
Also, the quotes from the video are copied word for word, so the spelling and grammatical errors on them are not my own.
How is anything that the Muslims say true? I want to understand this first, before I accept any other claim about the muslims. At what point does a MUSLIM faith be taken as factual or without fault or question. Muslims say they are peaceful/friendly individuals but they require a jizya tax for being non-muslim if you are not already muslim and even then are at the mercy of the *conquered/ruling* muslims, and that is according to their holy/religious texts whether or not they choose to follow that is up to their own religious doctrine leaders that change by the beat of the drum they feel that day whether to be conservative or liberal in their teaching of faith.
For the JEWS, this is coming from a RELIGIOUS TEACHING, that has been inscribed upon their leadership to their people for years. Tell me, who are the NEPHILIM? Do you know about the angels who slept and reproduced and had offspring with the flesh? Yes, even if you do not believe in such *non-sense* scriptural backing, and archaeological diggings can prove such human beings consistently existed proving they were not *genetically diseased or diagnosed with illness of some type* look at the History of the Roman giants who conquered the JEWS.
But for muslims, because of the history of *THEIR PROPHETS!?* which ones, the ones that they can not even produce an adequate response of how the OLD and NEW TESTAMENTS were FAULTY AND CORRUPTED?! Those prophets?
I SCOFF AT SUCH A STATEMENT!
Until you can show me accurate detailed documents of this corrected OLD and NEW TESTAMENT which are referred to be from THE JEWS (JERUSALEM EVEN THE KORAN MENTIONS IT BEING THEIRS!) according to the ISLAMIC FAITH who said that the muslims should believe and not question the JEWS or PEOPLE OF THE BOOK's teachings!?
So, the muslims should have last say because they are the last mass killers without a religious text that is perfectly clear and precise without question we should just trust their doctrine of twisted, confusing, and perverted statements instead of a scriptural based doctrine that is thousands of years old (with a very precise method to record this history on writing material and punishment for error in this doctrine, which the muslims automatically accuse as being in error to support their own satanic claims of being true and accurate with scraps of information gathered from underneath one of his wife's bed that a goat ate, males who were killed off in battle expected to provide testimony from mouth but died in battle, and random writing material as the convenience struck the *prophet* of the cult's leader?
Um, let's do some common sense factoring. Which makes more sense to you?
So, are you directly saying it is wrong and faulty of me to be critical of the basic foundation of how and where the religious texts are found and produced (by the way, apparently there's a second version of the koran completely different than the current one hidden away somewhere as well. if you were to do some reading and research.
I will provide more information on this later, I presently am in-between locations unable to provide references as I speak.
I am not just parroting off a pro-islamic website, without ignoring questions of the basis of how the foundation of the religion started; this is how I see your statements, correct me if I am wrong with how you are speaking.
I hope you would never want to build your house on sand with concrete first placed on top of it; without any tests to make sure it is on stable ground.
I view both the Latter-Day-Saints faith the same as the ISLAMIC faith, both built on shaky sand unable to withstand the tests of fire for confirmation of their truths to be adequate.
With this said, if I was to create a religion. I say that due to your great-father name's connection in my cult; able to get enough followers to believe me. I presently own land that you still say you have an ancestral right belonging to you. Would I be accurate to say this land still belongs to me because my cult says so, even if I make claims your ancestral heritage is twisted and wrong but provide no proof?
This is essentially what the muslims are doing to the JEWS, but no one cares; why? Because of how powerful, economic impacting, and the worldly unrest from how violent and non-peaceful (a peaceful) religion acts and communicates to others.
I will provide links to my references next time, as I have a short-window of communication my next 24-48 time-frame right now.
But without proof of how the ISLAMIC's *CLAIM* the Old and New Testament are faulty with a copy of the correct copy; ISLAM stands upon lies claiming it proclaims the same belief and faith.
This ends your claim of *both religions are accurate* since Islam claims that the Old and New Testament are true, but "not ONCE" ever provided a copy of the 100% accurate version. Making the Jewish claim stand and the ISLAMIC one fall and fail to provide effective testimonial clout for such evidence.
Making Muslims be displayed accurately in the video, and are just occupying JEWISH territory and not giving what belongs to the JEWS back to the JEWS according to the JEWISH TEXTS that the MUSLIMS CAN"T PROVE!
Am I talking gibberish to you, or do you understand?
"How is anything that the Muslims say true? I want to understand this first, before I accept any other claim about the muslims. At what point does a MUSLIM faith be taken as factual or without fault or question."
I will answer this question with another question. "How is anything that the Jews say true? I want to understand that first, before I accept any other claim about the Jews. At what point does a JEWISH faith be taken as factual without fault or question." Muslims are nor more nor less likely to lie than any other religion. There is nothing special about Islam over Judaism or Christianity that makes Muslims any less trustworthy than Jews or Christians. Also, I would like to remind my opponent that this debate is not one over whether or not Islam is the One True Faith, but whether or not Muslims are lying about Jerusalem being holy to them.
"For the JEWS, this is coming from a RELIGIOUS TEACHING"
As it is for the Muslims. Jerusalem is holy to both of them and thus should be shared by both of them.
"But for muslims, because of the history of *THEIR PROPHETS!?* which ones, the ones that they can not even produce an adequate response of how the OLD and NEW TESTAMENTS were FAULTY AND CORRUPTED?! Those prophets?"
Again, this is NOT a debate over whether Islam is correct or not. This is solely and completely over whether Jerusalem is holy to them. Whether the Bible is corrupted or not is irrelevant. The Muslims believe it is and have a right to their beliefs.
"JERUSALEM EVEN THE KORAN MENTIONS IT BEING THEIRS!"
This is actually untrue. As stated in my opening argument, this quote from the Quran was not reffering to Jerusalem belonging to the Jews; it was referring to Allah punishing the Jews for claiming Jerusalem as theirs. There is no doubt a conflict has existed between the two faiths for millennia. However, this quote from the Quran was completely taken out of context.
"So, the muslims should have last say"
No. Jerusalem, being holy to both of them, should be shared. Neither side has a universal claim to the city.
"scriptural based doctrine that is thousands of years old"
The same thing could be said of the Bible. There are some truly horrible things commanded by God in both texts.
"their own satanic claims"
At this point my opponent is resorting to base insults to an entire religion. He has provided literally no evidence that could not be effectively refuted to support his claim that the Muslims are lying about Jerusalem being holy to them.
"So, are you directly saying it is wrong and faulty of me to be critical of the basic foundation of how and where the religious texts are found and produced (by the way, apparently there's a second version of the koran completely different than the current one hidden away somewhere as well"
No. I am not claiming it is wrong to critically analyze religion. I very much support that. What I am claiming is that this is not a debate on Islam itself. It is a debate about whether Muslims are lying about Jerusalem being holy to them. As far as the second version of the Quran, that is superficially true. However, the two different Arabic Qurans differ almost entirely in grammar. The content is completely identical. Also, the second version is not "hidden away." I found it after 30 seconds of searching. This very anti-Islamic website attempts to prove that the two Qurans differ greatly but in fact they only differ because of what is essentially poor handwriting; strokes of the brush were slightly different. (http://www.answering-islam.org...)
"I am not just parroting off a pro-islamic website, without ignoring questions of the basis of how the foundation of the religion started; this is how I see your statements, correct me if I am wrong with how you are speaking."
I'm not a Muslim. I am also not parroting off a pro-Islamic website. Quiet frankly, I don't care how the religion started. I am simply refuting your claim that Jerusalem is not holy to Muslims.
"I view both the Latter-Day-Saints faith the same as the ISLAMIC faith, both built on shaky sand unable to withstand the tests of fire for confirmation of their truths to be adequate."
Again, I urge my opponent to remember that we are NOT debating whether or not Islam or Mormonism is true. We are ONLY debating whether or not Muslims are lying about Jerusalem being holy to them. Please remember that.
"With this said, if I was to create a religion. I say that due to your great-father name's connection in my cult; able to get enough followers to believe me. I presently own land that you still say you have an ancestral right belonging to you. Would I be accurate to say this land still belongs to me because my cult says so, even if I make claims your ancestral heritage is twisted and wrong but provide no proof?"
Both the Jews and the Muslims make the "ancestral right" claim about Jerusalem. In fact, even according to your Bible Jerusalem originally belonged to the Jebusites. Then the Jews annihilated them, seized their city, and claimed it has always belonged to them. The truth is, NEITHER Jews NOR Muslims have an ancestral right to the Holy City. Both, however, CAN share it.
"This ends your claim of *both religions are accurate* since Islam claims that the Old and New Testament are true, but "not ONCE" ever provided a copy of the 100% accurate version. Making the Jewish claim stand and the ISLAMIC one fall and fail to provide effective testimonial clout for such evidence."
Neither the Bible nor the Quran should be taken literally. I don't believe EITHER religion is accurate. I am simply insisting that we look at this topic from a secular point of view. I'm not saying Islam is superior to Judaism an any way. Both religions have their flaws. However, given that freedom of religion is a basic human right, both religions have equal claim to the Holy Land. You have provided no arguments about Islam "lying" about Jerusalem being holy to them, you are simply trying to disprove Islam as a legitimate religion.
"Am I talking gibberish to you, or do you understand?"
To be frank, your arguments were somewhat unclear.
I thank my opponent for his response and I look forward to Round 3.
My view point primarily is this:
If ISLAM cannot prove the foundations of what they believe without piggy-backing off of the Jewish and Christian Faith HOLY TEXTS (which they claim is in error and at fault yet never clarifies how, when or where... http://www.judaism-islam.com... http://www.givingananswer.org...
It is not worth believing.
You ask me in a counter statement how is anything the JEWS say is true? Okay, do this then tell me what part in history where archaeology will openly show historical texts similar to the Quran stating this:
"Despite the fact that this tradition contradicts Zaid"s own testimony that no Qur'anic text had been compiled in Muhammad"s time it does confirm, however, that other Qur'ans were in circulation at the time of Zaid"s codex. Owing to this fact, controversy evolved among the Muslims as they began accusing each other of tampering with the Book of Allah, which eventually led to the third Caliph Uthman taking drastic measures.
'Hudaifa b. al Yeman came to `Uthman direct from the Aderbaijan and Armenian frontier where, uniting the forces from Iraq and those from Syria, he had had an opportunity to observe regional differences over the Qur'an. "Commander of the faithful," he advised, "take this umma in hand before they differ about the Book like Christians and Jews." `Uthman sent asking Hafsa to lend him the sheets [inherited by her father, `Umar, from Abu Bakr, and now in her possession] "so that we can copy them into other volumes and then return them." She sent her suhuf to `Uthman who summon Zaid, Sa`id b. al `As, `Abdul Rahman b. al Harith b. Hisham and `Abdullah b. al Zubair and commanded them to copy the sheets into several volumes. Addressing the group from Quraish, he added, "Wherever you differ from Zaid, write the word in the dialect of Quraish for it was revealed in that tongue."
When they had copied the sheets, `Uthman sent a copy to each of the main centers of the empire with the command that all other Qur'an materials, whether in single sheet form, or in whole volumes, WERE TO BE BURNED"' (Burton, pp. 141-142- citing Ahmad b. `Ali b. Muhammad al `Asqalani, ibn Hajar, "Fath al Bari", 13 vols, Cairo, 1939/1348, vol. 9, p. 18; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Understand my logic:
If ISLAM cannot provide certainty without question where their original creation, purpose and ending is without piggy-backing making claims and accusing another faith (they claim have the wrong texts but cannot provide correct texts themselves or specifically lay out where and how with evidence other than their teachers later in the years who alter, change and deviate the answers not being 100% consistent) how is the Jewish teaching the same?
The only reason why ISLAM claims, the same prophets is to provide a cover for taking JEWiSH territory ordained to them by their religious teaching; that previously were filled by the inhabitants who worshiped idols and pagan gods that the GOD of ISRAEL openly revealed their errors (reference https://www.biblegateway.com... 1 King 18 NJV).
A religious claim cannot be validated, approved, or accepted as any merit of value or trustworthy without proof offered to confirm the claim.
To Moses We did give Nine Clear Signs:
As the Children of Israel: when he came to them, Pharaoh said to him:
"O Moses! I consider thee, indeed, to have been worked upon by sorcery! Moses said,
"Thou knowest well that these things have been sent down by none,
But the Lord of the heavens and the earth as eye-opening evidence:
And I consider thee indeed, O Pharaoh, to be one doomed to destruction!"
So he resolved to remove them from the face of the earth:
But We did drown him and all who were with him.
And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel,
"Dwell securely in the land (of promise)":
But when the second of the warnings came to pass,
We gather you together in a mingled crowd. (2314)
surah 17:101-104 Al Isra' (The Night Journey)
"2314. Some commentators understand the second warning to be the Day of Judgment, the Promise of the Hereafter."
Abdullah Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur'n, p. 703.
"Quran explicitly refers to the return of the Jews to the Land of Israel before the Last Judgment" - See more at: http://www.adishakti.org...
I cannot state to you that there is proof I am an alien without first establishing claims from scientific and archaeological studies to prove who my ancestors are right to include my DNA tests proving this.
Muslims are just that, they are an alien faith (from Satan) without establishing first claims from scientific and archaeological studies to prove tho their ancestors are or where their sources came from in a consistent basis that does not counter the archaeological and scientific studies of who they claim are with error.
One faith is based upon love, the other faith is based upon purely works and even then those works do not guarantee their god's love.
Theocracy (in the form of Sharia) really is the the explicit goal of Islamic teaching, whereas Christianity leaves room for the separation of religion and government (Mark 12:17, John 18:36). Terrorism really is an expression of devotion to Allah and not just criminal activity or warfare by disinterested parties with a nominal religious identification (ie. "born a Catholic").
If threatening people with eternal damnation is considered distasteful, then Christianity has far less to be ashamed of than Islam, which not only alludes to the terrible fate awaiting unbelievers in nearly every other chapter of the Quran, but includes vivid descriptions of torture at the hands of a psychopathic god.
Just consider it...
If you are truly not just parroting make sure it is accurate I am just asking in what you are saying.
If you're anti-GOD you're pro-muslim, because anti-GOD individuals say it is based upon only works disregarding anything one is needing to do for asking FORGIVENESS after cleaning up the SIN that was/is plaguing human kind from the perversion of the Nephilem Angels who bred with human kind and taught forms of Sorcery other forms of conduct unbecoming a loving and caring human being. And to not convert to a muslim in a muslim dominated country you will be subjective to death or requirement to pay a jizya tax.
If someone adds some yeast to a little leaven of bread, what happens?
The leaven of bread rises even if it is just a little drop because of the germination of the yeast.
This is what happened when the Quran was claimed to have its root based in the jewish and christian faith.
Am I making sense?
Bottom-line, MUSLIMS are based upon a religion that SATAN made and established to destroy (the yeast added to) jews and christians teaching which has so far done a fairly adequate and exceptional job let alone the Christian and Jewish faith imploding on itself because they are not teaching according to their own religious teachings of JESUS CHRIST coming onto this earth to heal the sick to day which still happens for those who are willing to believe:
https://flames-of-fire.org... and https://flames-of-fire.org... just for an example of references still taking place today where healing and deliverance still occurs.
Muslims don't teach this about CHRIST, because they know to teach it would make them an apostate even though CHRIST himself said this was possible, and the New Testament gives reference of at least one account:
In Acts 19: 13-17. Several people tries to drive out demons by using Jesus's name.
13 Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, "In the name of the Jesus whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out." 14 Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15 One day the evil spirit answered them, "Jesus I know, and Paul I know about, but who are you?" 16 Then the man who had the evil spirit jumped on them and overpowered them all. He gave them such a beating that they ran out of the house naked and bleeding.17 When this became known to the Jews and Greeks living in Ephesus, they were all seized with fear, and the name of the Lord Jesus was held in high honor.
MUSLIMS will not acknowledge this, because their faith is not true and their faith does not heal in the same manner.
But the MUSLIMS claim they believe the same books. This is False, which makes their religion false, which makes their claims of holy sites and holy prophets false.
Does this make more sense with my references.
Also, please post your links next to your sources referenced so it is easier to know where the information is taken from.
Am I still speaking gibberish to you as I type this?
Do you understand why I say any territory claim needs backing and proof?
Or would you still say that Baal Priests (if still practiced) should be allowed to make their own religious tolerance?)
shatteredseren forfeited this round.
shatteredseren forfeited this round.
shatteredseren forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.