Difference Between Catholic Bible and King James Bible

Catholic Bible vs. King James Bible

There has been a lot of confusion surrounding the Holy Bible that both Roman Catholic s and Protestants use, because of the varied versions that have been printed and distributed throughout the world today. It may be because of the never ending dispute between Catholics and Protestants on what should be an

d shouldn’t be included in the Christian Bible that lights the continuity of the said argument.

The Catholic Bible is actually the generic term for the Christian Bible. By nature, it includes the so-called Old and New Testaments. It includes the 5th century Latin Vulgate, which is primarily St. Jerome’s work.

Conversely, the King James Bible version is just one of the many versions of the Holy Book circulated throughout. Some of the other versions made or edited by Roman Catholics include: The Latin Vulgate itself, the Douay-Rheims Version, The Jerusalem Bible and the New American Bible, amongst many others.

At the dawn of the 17th century, the making of the King James Bible version was initiated by the English King James the First. It was said to have been completed around 1611. The King James Version (KJV) is regarded as one of the first English translations of the Catholic Bible, with the Great Bible and the Bishops Bible as its first two English predecessors. The KJV was translated or written with the use of the most original manuscripts in Hebrew and Greek. The problem with the translating process at that time was that the translators were mostly pure Englishmen, with limited knowledge of Hebrew. There were also a small number of texts to which their new version had to be based, including the Greek Textus Receptus for the New Testament and the Hebrew Masoteric for the Old Testament. Their translation also included the Apocrypha, although newer versions of such do not include the said books. Moreover, the scholars who were tasked by the king to do the translation asked for little or no help from anyone in translating the Catholic Bible. The result is a book that contained lots of errors. No wonder there has been many revised versions of this English Bible, named the New King James Version.

Overall, no matter what Bible version you are reading, more or less the message remains the same. Even if the phrasing and wordings are somewhat altered, almost all Bible versions, including the KJV, tells of the same message about God. All in all:

1. The Catholic Bible is a more generic term for the Holy Bible.

2. The KJV is just one of the many other versions of the Holy Bible.

Read more: Difference Between Catholic Bible and King James Bible | Difference Between | Catholic Bible vs King James Bible http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-catholic-bible-and-king-james-bible/#ixzz2CaFgPU9w

❀ The Fruits of Muhammad (PBUH) ❀

☛ Often time's people ask what are the fruits of the prophet Muhammad? So here is a list of the accomplishments and fruits of the ➬ blessed prophet Muhammad:

▣ The prophet Muhammad completely ➬ succeeded in his mission of getting rid of the overall ➬ pagan religion that had poisoned the Arab Hijazi society. He had taken the society and established order includin

g the ➬ elite away from the worst imaginable polytheism, this reprehensible polytheism was replaced ➬ by pure monotheism, ➬ no longer were the 360 idols being worshiped, ➬ no longer was any object or person worshiped alongside the true God, rather ➬ all worship became sincerely for God alone.

▣ The prophet Muhammad succeeded in bringing social ➬ reforms to a backward people. These were a people who looked down upon the poor as being worthless, in fact the enemies of the prophet Muhammad used to mock him because most of his followers were from the poor, and the pagans used this as their proof against Islam, saying if Islam ➬ was the truth then the strong and rich (the elite) would have been following it, not the weak and poor. Islam completely got ➬ rid of this backward concept, Islam elevated the ➬ status of the poor people, and no longer was this a society that looked down upon the poor, rather they were looked ➬ on as equals, and the society took it as an ➬ obligation to themselves to help the poor, rather than simply look down on them and leave them as they were.

▣ The prophet Muhammad ➬ elevated the status of women. Prior to Islam the women of the Hijazi society were paraded around as sexual tools, they would dance half naked for the drunk and raving pagans, and would often afterwards have to fornicate with the pagan men. Women also didn't have a legal right to an inheritance, and often times they wouldn't have a ➬ legal right to a voluntary marriage as well, they would be forced to marry into other family members once the husband died, and at many times were forced to remain in a marriage against their will. Islam ➬ gave the women the right to an inheritance, and the ➬ right to who she wants to marry, and the ➬ right to not be forced to remain in a marriage. On top of that the hideous act of burying daughters alive was ended once and for all, and thanks to that the genocide of generations of females had been averted.

▣ The prophet Muhammad brought ➬ modesty to an immodest people. As stated above, the women used to be paraded ➬ half naked singing and dancing, and the people used to perform their religious rites while ➬ naked as well! After the prophet Muhammad these people became some of the ➬ most modest people ever known. They became a people who ➬ covered up while praying, the women became a people who ➬ covered their beauty, ➬ not displaying it out in the open, rather now it was what is inside her that counts.

▣ The prophet Muhammad fixed the backward ➬ moral character of the people; they were a people who loved alcohol, fornication, and gambling. After the advent of Islam ➬ alcohol was gradually forbidden, ➬ gambling was outright forbidden, and so was ➬ fornication (even given a punishment if committed). They became a people who rather than being drunkards, fornicators, and gamblers, to a people who became religiously committed with ➬ observing prayers, ➬ fasting, giving ➬ charity, and performing several other ➬ religious rites.

▣ The prophet Muhammad got rid of the ➬ tribal culture, before the advent of Islam people would look after one another based on tribal belongings, after the advent of Islam it did not matter which tribe you belonged to, you became ➬ one community, all equal, and all under protection of each other. It did not matter if you were from Makkah, or Medinah, you would not be discriminated against because of your tribal roots.

▣ The prophet Muhammad got rid of the ➬ backward culture of taking advantage of the weak, and not looking after them properly. Islam brought strict rules on treating orphans and the weak, warning of severe punishments if these groups were mistreated, and if any of their belongings which had been passed down to them had been abused or withheld from them.

▣ The prophet Muhammad turned ➬ a weak and useless people into one of the ➬ strongest most disciplined society, a society that became feared and respected by its enemies, and a society that eventually overthrew the oppressive regimes and the two major world empires of the pagan polytheistic Persians and that of the Nazi like Byzantine empire, the events of these began to set into ➬ motion during the last years of the prophet Muhammad, and came into complete impact just a few short years after his death.

●►|●► So ladies and gentlemen these are the fruits of the prophet Muhammad, he achieved success on a complete level, both on the theology and social affairs.

➲ And Allah Certainly Knows Best! And May Allah send his Mercy and Blessings upon the prophet Muhammad and his family just as he sent his Mercy and Blessings to Abraham and his family, Ameen.

http://www.gainpeace.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=63:what-non-muslim-scholars-said-about-prophet-muhammed-peace-be-upon-him&catid=41&Itemid=105

Interview with Jesus, his Disciples and Paul.

To Jesus: who are you ??

"I am a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God." John 8:40 

To the Disciples: who is Jesus?

"Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know."Acts 2:22

To the people: who is Jesus ??

"He was a prophet who did powerful miracles, and he was a mighty teacher in the eyes of God and all the people." Luke 24:19

To Paul: who is Jesus ??

"Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body." Colossians 2:9

To Jesus: what do yo teach ??

"'I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices.' For I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners." 

"I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." Luke 5:32

To the Disciples: what did Jesus taught??

"Now repent of your sins and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped away." Acts 3:19

To Paul: what did Jesus taught??

"Christ died for our sins" 1 Corinthians 15:3

To Jesus: to whom you were sent ??

"I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." Matthew 15:24

To the Disciples: what Jesus instructed ??

"Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel." Matthew 10:6

To Paul: Why did you go to the Gentiles ??

"It has always been my ambition to preach the gospel where Christ was not known, so that I would not be building on someone else's foundation." Romans 15:20

To Paul: do you mean the Disciples??

"I don't consider myself inferior in any way to these "super apostles" who teach such things. I may not be a trained speaker, but I do have knowledge. We have made this perfectly clear to you in every way." 2 Corinthians 11:6

To Jesus: did you came to abolish the law ??

"Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. "Matt. 5:17,18

To Paul: what do you say about that??

"Jesus abolished in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations." Eph. 2:15

"Christ is the end of the law, that every one who has faith may be justified." Rom. 10:4

To the Disciples: Is man Justified by faith alone??

"man is justified by works and not by faith alone." James 2:24

To Paul: what do you say about that ??

"man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." Romans 3:28

To Paul: so you contradict the disciples of Jesus ??

"When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong." Galatians 2:11

To Paul: so what do you say about their teachings ??

"If we or an angel from heaven preach any other Gospel to you than what we (Paul and his disciples) have preached to you let him be a curse " Gal 1:18

To Paul: why do you say that??

"all those in Asia have turned away from me" 2 Tim. 1:15

To the Disciples: did you rejected Paul??

"When he came to Jerusalem, he tried to join us, but we were all afraid of him, not believing that he really was a disciple." Acts 9:26

● The mission of Jesus was confined to the Israelites alone. It is not true that he was sent for all mankind. Jesus expressly st

"I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel". [Matthew 15:24]

● It may be said that he asked his disciples to teach all nations:

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost". (Matthew 28:19)

In the light of Jesus teachings anyone may safely assert that the words "teach all nations" mostly mean that the disciples of Jesus should go to all the tribes of Israelites. The word "nation" may readily be taken as an equivalent of "tribe" in view of the testimony which the Bible itself provides.

● For example, the following verses shows that the mission of Jesus and his disciples was restricted to the tribes of Israelites:

"Verily I say unto you, that ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel". (Matthew 19:28)

Jesus also said, while clarifying his mission to the Israelites:

"It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to dogs". (Matthew 15:26)

At another place Jesus instructed his disciples to avoid the Gentiles:

"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel' ". (Matthew 10:5-6)

● The apostles by their actions, showed that the message of Jesus was meant for and confined to the Jews only.

"Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen, travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only". (Acts 11:19)

The apostles were disturbed and annoyed when they learned that Peter, on one occasion, had preached to non-Israelites."And when Peter was come to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, saying, Thou wentest into men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them". (Acts 11:2-3)

Thus,it is obvious that Jesus message was not a universal message, it was concerned only with Israelites just as the prophets who came before him starting with Israel (Jacob) himself ending with Jesus.

● Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was sent for whole mankind unlike all other Prophets who were sent to their respective nations,clans and tribes.Their prophethood was limited to certain places/areas but the final prophethood is unlimited ,extending beyond all boundaries. 

God Almighty says in the holy Quran: "We have not sent you (O Muhammad) but as a universal (Messenger) to men giving them glad tidings and warning them but most men understand not." (Quran: 34:28)

"Say (O Muhammad to mankind): ‘If you (really) love God then follow me (i.e. accept Islam), God will love you and forgive you your sins. And God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful..." (Quran: 3:31)

Contradictory Accounts of Paul's Claim of "Conversion" On The Road To Damascus !

The Christians claim that on Paul's journey from Jerusalem to Damascus, he met Jesus and he was appointed as an apostle, and that he changed from a criminal to a righteous and truthful apostle of Jesus.

There are three separate accounts of this "conversion event" in the Book of Acts, and they contradict each other, demonstrating that Saul is nothing but a liar. 

▨ When Paul was on the way to Damascus he saw a lighty and heard a voice. Did those who were with him hear the voice?

◕ Yes. (Acts 9:7)"And the men who journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man."

◔ No. (Acts 22:9)"And the men who were with me saw the light, but they did not hear the voice which was speaking to me."

▨ When Paul saw the light he fell to the ground. Did his traveling companions fall to the ground?

◕ Yes. (Acts 26:14)"We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me..."

◔ No. (Acts 9:7)"And the men who journeyed with him STOOD speechless..."

▨ Did the voice spell out on the spot what paul's duties were to be?

◕ Yes. (Acts 26: 16- 18)"Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of me and what I will show you, I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them....."

◔ No. The voice commanded Paul to go into the city of Damascus, and there he will be told what to do. (Acts 22: 10)

"'What shall I do, Lord?' I asked. "'Get up,' the Lord said, 'and go into Damascus. There you will be told all that you have been assigned to do.'"

If Paul was in a court today, no sane judge or person would accept his contradictory accounts of the same story. and this proves that Paul was never appointed to be an apostle from God or Jesus, but he was nothing but a fraud.

Justice Story: Killer priest murders nun in chapel sacristy, leaves demonic stab pattern over her heart

Rev. Gerald Robinson slays Sister Margaret Ann Pahl on Holy Saturday in Toledo

Rev. Gerald Robinson was convicted of killing Sister Margaret Ann Pahl 26 years after her murder -- after investigators looking into child sex abuse allegations against Toledo priests reopened the case of the slain nun.

The nun's killer left behind a pointed message.

Sister Margaret Ann Pahl, 71, was murdered on the morning before Easter in 1980, an ungodly act on Holy Saturday. Her body was found in the chapel sacristy at Mercy Hospital in Toledo, Ohio.

She had been confronted by her killer as she prepared for that day’s services. Pahl was choked to death’s door, jabbed mercilessly with a letter opener, and then sexually violated. She was found with an altar cloth shrouding her torso.

It was a ritual murder with hallmarks of pathological rage.

Among 31 stab wounds, nine punctures over her heart formed the outline of an inverted Crucifix, a demonic symbol. She had been stripped below the waist and defiled with a cross.

The homicide was unthinkable. Who would do such a thing to an elderly nun?

Sister Margaret Ann Pahl's defiled body was found covered by an altar cloth in the sacristy at Mercy Hospital in Toledo, Ohio, in 1980.

On April 8, 1980, mourners attended Pahl’s funeral Mass in Fremont, Ohio. During his homily, the Rev. Jerome Swiatecki, assistant chaplain at Mercy Hospital, called the murder “not only blasphemous but patently absurd.”

Seated nearby, the priest’s co-celebrant — the Rev. Gerald Robinson, Mercy’s head chaplain — nodded in agreement.

Pahl had dedicated her life to her Catholic faith.

Born to an Ohio farm family, she was 19 when she joined the Sisters of Mercy, an order recognized for its nursing. She became a registered nurse and spent 50 years working in Catholic hospitals, mostly as an administrator.

The petite nun was known for her meticulousness, and she expected the same from subordinates. Those who did not measure up were subjected to her glowering wrath. Some complained that the bristly taskmaster treated colleagues like third-graders.

With her hearing failing as she reached her 60s, Pahl was assigned to Mercy Hospital in Toledo, an hour east of her hometown, to ease into retirement. She lived with about 20 other nursing nuns in a convent on the hospital’s top floor.

The scene of the crime: A chapel sacristy in Mercy Hospital in Toledo, Ohio, where Sister Margaret Ann Pahl was killed in 1980.

Pahl was Mercy’s sacristan, the caretaker of its two chapels. Her duties included everything from overseeing cleaning to preparing hosts and vestments for daily masses.

She hadn’t mellowed with age.

“She was very, very strict,” housekeeper Shirley Lucas told the Toledo Blade. “Things had to be done a certain way.”

But her fussiness hardly seemed a rational motivation for murder.

Police questioned scores of witnesses and potential suspects, including hundreds of hospital staffers, her fellow Sisters of Mercy, and the Catholic clerics who worked with her.

But Toledo police said they could find none of the physical evidence — fingerprints, fabric threads, secondary blood — that often turns up at murder scenes. As months and years passed without an arrest, the shocking crime faded from the front pages and sank ever deeper in the homicide squad files.

It might have been buried forever except for a bit of crime kismet.

In 2003, at the height of the Catholic child-abuse scandal, a woman reported that she had been subjected to a childhood of ritualized sex assault by Toledo priests. She named Gerald Robinson, Mercy’s chaplain in 1980, as one of her abusers.

An investigation of that allegation went nowhere, but prosecutors took a fresh look at the Pahl case — dormant for two decades — when they discovered that Robinson had been the chief suspect in the murder.

Although it was not made public in 1980, detectives had found the letter opener used to stab the nun in Robinson’s office. He had been interrogated and given two lie-detector tests.

The weapon in the murder of sister Margaret Ann Pahl is a letter opener belonging to Rev. Gerald Robinson. The round object is a medallion that has been taken off the letter opener.

But he was never charged — insufficient evidence, police said.

Robinson, a native of Toledo, grew up in the city’s Polish section, Kuschwantz, and was ordained in 1964. After a decade of parish pastoring, he was assigned as Mercy chaplain in the mid-1970s, which put him squarely in Sister Margaret Ann Pahl’s infamous glower.

The nun could not countenance what she saw as his laxity. And the priest could not stand her withering criticism.

On April 23, 2004, the case returned to front pages when Robinson was charged with the murder, based upon evidence available 24 years earlier.

What changed? In a book about the case, the Blade’s David Yonke wrote that the Catholic Church had Toledo “wrapped around its little finger” in 1980.

Officer Dave Davison told Yonke that all five detectives who investigated the homicide were Catholics.

“They sat on it as a courtesy to the church,” Davison said.

Robinson’s trial in 2006 featured the testimony of Jeffrey Grob, a Catholic priest from Chicago who specialized in exorcism. He said Pahl’s killer was intimate with religious ritual. The mode of murder was meant to denounce her faith, Grob said.

Prosecutor Dan Mandross told the jury that Robinson, a timid introvert, grew furious over the nun’s nitpicks — for example, that he left the sacristy messy when he changed before Mass.

Their final argument came on Good Friday 1980, when Pahl criticized the priest for cutting short that afternoon’s traditionally long, solemn Mass. She was killed the next morning.

“I think this was the final straw,” Mandross said. “He just snapped.”

Robinson was convicted and sentenced to 15 years to life in prison. He continues to claim innocence, though he has failed in a series of appeals. Now 74, he becomes eligible to apply for parole in 2016.

In 2011, Rev. Gerald Robinson tried to get his conviction overturned. He failed. He is eligible for parole in 2016.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/justice-story/justice-story-killer-priest-murders-nun-chapel-sacristy-leaves-demonic-stab-pattern-heart-article-1.1162927#ixzz2By7QwPVp

Prophet Muhammad From the Lens of Non-Muslims

If we ponder over our contemporary world, we have to end up accepting that the humanitarian values, moral principles, ethics and our ethos all have taken a backseat and have provided ample room for materialism, hatred and chauvinism.

According to Alfred Adler, the urge to dominate is a very potent instinct embedded in the human nature. The 20th century itself can give testimony for this greed for dominance. Capitalism vs. communism, World War I and II, Israel–Palestine conflict, Gulf War, Vietnam War, etc. (counting such events in itself is a formidable task), all were uncannily, if not directly, connected with this idea of dominance over others. In India, Maoist attacks (which according to HT has killed 1597 people since 2007), the demand of sovereignty by ULFA and the ruckus Bal Thackeray and his stooges create from time to time in Maharashtra can be regarded as exemplary affairs to prove Adler’s point.

But one thing that cannot be ignored and is quite evident is that because of this lust to dominate, the meaning and essence of the words like love, peace, unity, tolerance, moral values and ethics have been blown into smithereens. Gujarat pogrom of 2002, Genocide of 1984, the predicament of the people of Kandhamal (2007-2008), ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, racial discrimination in Australia and other parts of the world, and ordeal of the people of Gaza, can corroborate to the fact of our dehumanisation. Dehumanisation to such an extent that destroying the whole country to catch one man is justified.

As it is now evident that our contemporary world is plunging deeper and deeper into the gloom of hatred and chauvinism, what can be the remedy, what can be the way out, who can be looked up to as a role model for us to follow, who can guide humanity from the narrow and dingy lanes to the illuminating boulevard, who can throw away our ego and restore humanitarian values in our hearts, who can replace hatred with love, who can bring hope in place of despair and who can strewn smiles all over the world again.

The emphatic answer according to me is none other than Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be to him), the Last Prophet, the benefactor of humanity, the saviour of the world, the bearer of glad tidings and the mercy to the whole of humanity.

A Prophet, according to the Oxford Dictionary, is a person sent by God to teach people and give them the message from God. And almost all the major religions of the world like Islam, Christianity and many minor religions like Judaism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, etc. all agree to the fact that there is one supreme Lord of the world, the Lord who is controlling all the affairs. And hence it becomes quite rational to look up to the Prophets of God Almighty for proper guidance and smooth sailing of humanity, since God has made prophets a link between Him and the humanity at large to transfer His divine message.

The above sentence is nothing but the reiteration of one of the ayaat (verses) of the Holy Qur’ān:

“Indeed in the messenger of Allah (Muhammad), you have a good example to follow.” (33:21)

The present scenario of the world does not augur well for the peaceful existence of different nations. The only thing which the people of this world yearn for is love and in fact the world desperately needs it to restore its position as a haven for all.

It is the love between the people which breeds peaceful existence among them. If this peaceful existence is without love, it will be nothing more than a compromise which can be ruptured with the slightest instigation and provocation from any side, whether it be a nationalistic instigation, regional or communal. And if this peace among humans is flanked by love for each other, it will give rise to oneness and brotherhood which eventually will increase tolerance and hence foster unity.

Many people argue how a man, who lived 14 centuries ago, could be considered a source of inspiration and a role model in solving the conundrums of the contemporary world.

Let us now analyse what great historians and philosophers say about this man, Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be to him).

Lamartine, a famous French writer, poet and a politician quotes in Historie de la Turquie:

“If greatness of purpose, smallness of means and outstanding results are the three reasons to judge a man’s genius, who could dare to compare any man from the modern history with Muhammad.”

In the above statement, Lamartine clearly specifies in a succinct manner, that there is no one in the modern history to be compared with Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be to him), and hence he becomes the ultimate choice for us to refer to.Lamartine also pointed out how Prophet Muhammad shunned all racial discrimination and what makes him different from the rest of statesmen.

“The most famous men created arms, laws and empires only. They founded, if anything at all, no more than material powers, which often crumbled away before their eyes. This man (Muhammad) not only moved armies, legislations and empires, but he also moved ideas and beliefs, he founded upon a book, of which each letter becomes law, a spiritual nationality embracing all languages and races.” (Historie de la Turquie)

H. G. Wells, an English author, historian, teacher, and journalist, writes in his book The short history of the world: “Although the sermons of human freedom, fraternity and equality were said before also, and we find a lot of them in Jesus of Nazareth, but it must be admitted that it was Muhammad who for the first time in history established a society based on these principles.”

The above tribute to Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be to him) is not given by one of his ardent followers, but from a man who had criticised him much.

Yet Wells agrees to the fact that Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be to him) not just taught and preached freedom and equality, but more importantly, he is the only man in the known history, who for the very first time established a society with all good characteristics.

In the late 70’s of the 20th century, Michael Hart, an astrophysicist and a historian, paid tribute to Prophet Muhammad in his book The 100: A Ranking of Most Influential Persons in History. The book is basically a selection as well as gradation of the most influential persons in history.

Besides being a Christian, he places Prophet Muhammad at the top and Jesus (peace and blessing of Allah be to them both) at number three, and he writes in his book that naturally I owe an explanation to this and writes: “because he is the only person supremely successful in religious as well as secular fields”.

Michael Hart reiterates what Lamartine said approximately two centuries ago.

Prophet Muhammad, throughout his life has, been known for his kindness, compassion, generosity and truthfulness. Even the mushriks of Makkah gave him the title of As-sadiq and Al-ameen (Truthful and Trustworthy). Throughout his life at Makkah, he never raised his hands at anyone, although he was born in the times of tribal warfare and bloodshed.

Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be to him) was a man of sound intelligence. He was the man who united the whole of the Arabian Peninsula, and brought truce between the warring tribes of Makkah as well as Madinah.

This quality of the Prophet, to unite people irrespective of their caste, colour, creed and ethnicity was noticed by Thomas Carlyle.

Thomas Carlyle, a writer as well as a historian writes in his book Heroes and Hero Worship:

“How one man singlehandedly could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades!”

Prophet Muhammad established the system of congregational prayer, which is embodied by his followers even today, in the same fervour. This congregational practice is done five times a day, everyday in cities, towns and villages across the globe. Nearly a quarter of people on earth stand shoulder to shoulder, bound together by the enduring spirit of Islam.

Sarojini Naidu, the first Indian Woman President of the INC expresses this beauty of unity in her book Ideals of Islam as, ''When the call for prayer is sounded and the worshippers are gathered together, the democracy of Islam is embodied five times a day, when the peasant and the King kneel side by side and proclaim God alone is great. I have been struck over and over again by this indivisible unity of Islam that makes man instinctively brother.”

It has been 14 centuries since Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be to him) departed from this world, yet the overwhelming respect for him in the hearts of many non-Muslims and the umpteen numbers of tributes leave no doubt in the minds that indeed Prophet Muhammad was the greatest man ever walked the surface of the earth.

Prophet Muhammad had a very tolerant and peace loving nature. He was tolerant in every field, whether it was a matter of religion or personal grudge.

Even after becoming the statesman in Madinah, where he had the full authority, he never forced a single non-Muslim to convert to Islam, and this rule was what Sahabas (companions) adhered to, when they started preaching Islam.

Once Prophet Muhammad went to Taif to seek help from the tribes living there, but instead of getting any help, the tribesmen told the street urchins to chase him and oust him from Taif. The street urchins threw stones on the Prophet’s shin such as his shoes were full of blood. On this an angel appeared and said, “If you say, I will crush this city between the two mountains.” But Prophet Muhammad said, “No, maybe Allah will give them hidaya (guidance) later.”

This story of the Prophet is in itself sufficient to describe how peace loving and tolerant a person he was. He did not let his personal grudge for the people of Taif to overcome his tolerant nature.

Prophet Muhammad was the man who throughout his life, disseminated and propagated love and humanitarian values, which is the very essence of his message to humanity.

In the last sermon Prophet Muhammad destroyed racial discrimination and undue precedence of any group over others by quoting:

“All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor does a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action.”

Finally I conclude by a quotation from George Bernard Shaw, an author, critic and a political activist.

Shaw rightly opines that only Prophet Muhammad can bring this world a much needed peace. He writes: “He must be called the saviour of humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness.”

But Prophet Muhammad will not come to the earth again, hence it is incumbent upon us to study the Seerah (biography) of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be to him), and to come up with solutions to the problems of humanity and can establish a Just World Order where everyone will be taken care of.

Where does Paul’s Authority Come From?

Taking a New Testament class over the summer, I was again immersed in the vast array of writings from the early Christian leader Paul. I’m always surprised at the vast amount of Christian doctrine that was borne about through a single individual: seven of the epistles of the New Testament are certainly Paul’s writing and seven more are generally attributed to him but remain in dispute among scholars. Paul is largely responsible for the doctrine of Atonement, the idea that Jesus came to fulfill the law and that it no longer applied, and a considerable amount of eschatology of the NT.  

His pastoral epistles are still used in modern church communities in order to help structure the authority of a church’s staff, and even his questionable views on women are still exercised in certain denominations. His imprint on modern Christianity is undoubtedly important, and it still largely resides today.

Paul was educated as a Pharisee and was an escalating figure in the Jewish tradition. He regularly considers himself perfect in the practice of Judaic laws (those ones in the OT about not eating shellfish and not wearing mixed clothing). In fact, he actually persecuted Christians as a Roman and tried to stamp out the early flames of the religion himself.

For a figure that is so central to a dominant religious tradition, it seems only natural to ask where Paul’s authority is derived from. Did he receive special education that made him privy to such information?  Did he speak to Jesus directly and formulate opinions based off of his background as a Pharisee? Was he convinced by testimony around him that Jesus was God incarnate? Had Paul carefully weighed the evidence of the Torah and decided that Christ had fulfilled the Old Testament prophecy of the impending savior?

The real answer is quite disappointing. Paul had a vision on the road to Damascus, and considering this vision a prophecy from God. In Galatians 1, in an attempt to assume doctrinal authority, Paul recounts the tale:

11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Here is the story itself, for those who haven’t heard it before: (Acts 9: 1-7):

1 Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples. He went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem. 3 As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.

“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. 6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything.

Paul has this dramatic conversion on the way to Damascus and finds himself believing that he received divine revelation. If I put on my Christian hat and pretend that I do believe that  people receive divine revelation from God, there are still a lot of questions. Why should I believe Paul’s story of divine revelation over someone else’s? When people making competing claims about the physical reality, we can test and observe those claims and eventually weed out the ones that don’t hold up to scrutiny.

This is the difficulty with substantiating supernatural claims: to what evidence do we appeal if we want to test claims of divine inspiration? Most Christians presently say ‘the Bible’, but this appeal doesn't work when we’re questioning the divine revelation of someone who wrote [up to] 14 books of the New Testament. Why should I believe Paul actually spoke to God?