Liberate wrote:Maybe you need to read this passage from Khalifa from submission.org since I have seen you quote from this website to support your view:
http://www.submission.org/messenger/announce.html
entitled "Why did Rashad Khalifa announce his messengership"
Thank you for the link. Yes I have used that website as reference before, but I had no idea of its heretical content in which suspicion and doubt was void on my behalf.
Didn't you say earlier you have read Rashad Khalifa's works and never heard of him being a messenger/prophet before? but in this post you try as you have done with quranic ayats to alter the meaning of what he meant by calling himself a messenger saying what he really meant was a different type of messenger!!!.
There seems to be something obviously wrong though. I read Khalifah's two works. 1) His mathematical 19 finding based on text (My view do not support this but the mathematical sequence in the reading not scriptual text)
Pls be rational here how in the world is it possible for the hearers of the koran to acknowledge the '19' miracle via counting the syllables alone? You remember the 7 different dialects thekoran was revealed in that Uthmann burnt thereby destroying parts of the revealed koran without a prophetic mandate? Since these variant 'pronounciations' in the koran will have differing syllables how does it support your '19' do you honestly believe an illiterate people will spend the time counting how many syllables are in each ayat as it is being recited to verify this '19' miracle?? This is desperation for a miracle of enormous proportions. You might as well read out loud any text in this forum and look for a miracle with such techniques I am sure you will find something.
and 2) his translation of the Quran and their introduction and commentaries. These were the very first books he published, and I have never read him saying he was a Rasoolullah ie a Messenger of Allah making him a Prophet.
compare with...
In his work he believes that Surah 27:82 was a Prophecy speaking about him and his findings. When he used the term "messenger" in his first writtings it was in the sense of a promessenger and not as a messenger of Allah ie a Prophet who receieves wahiy divinely inspired revelation.
Seems you know Rashad Khalifa even better than his followers or what he said or maybe what he really meant, just like you do with Mohammed and the koran.
God told us in 33:40 that Muhammad was the last prophet, a message-bearing messenger (Nabi), but not the last messenger (Rasool). Therefore, we must believe God - we must know that Muhammad was not the last messenger
http://www.submission.org/messenger/announce.html
On the website you posted that I had a pleasure in reading, someone slipped here, also not to mention much of the NONMUSLIM JARGON
Non muslim jargon? am I to believe you have never used King james version english even in your translation of your koran? Have a look at your translations and many english translations of the koran the king james english plagiarism is
'verily' blatant for all to see.
that is heavely used in the content. In Rahsad Khalifah's work that I have read he never used this as a claim, as a matter of fact the only so called muslims that use this arguement to claim one of their leaders was a Messenger of Allah is the NOI ie Nation of Islam.
Rashad Khalifah was indeed devout in studying the Quran as I have read his autobiography in his preface introduction of his book dealing with the Mathemtical finding in the Quran.
At least we know you are a fan.
Who can be more wicked than one who inventeth a lie against Allah, or said: "I have received inspiration," when he hath received none, or (again) who saith, "I can reveal the like of what Allah hath revealed?" If thou couldst but see how the wicked (do fare) in the flood of confusion at death! the angels stretch forth their hands, (saying), "Yield up your souls: this day shall ye receive your reward, a penalty of shame, for that ye used to tell lies against Allah, and scornfully to reject of His Signs!" Quran 6:93
Its no way that Rashad Khalifah could have made a statement of calling himself a messenger to mean he was a messenger of Allah which implies that he received inspiration from Allah:
Obviously this statement is a lie yes? Since Rashad Khalifa is dead he obviously never wrote this or didn't really mean it like everybody else thought he meant? He obviously wasn't killed because he wrote heretical statements like this. I have to wonder which islamic paradise you reside in.
It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration, or from behind a veil, or by the sending of a Messenger to reveal, with Allah's permission, what Allah wills: for He is Most High, Most Wise. Quran 42:51
My personal opinion what you posted are not Rahsad Khalifah words.
This doesn't come as a surprise either it is corrupt, being taken out of context or not being interpreted correctly. Islam is perfect next!
Rashad Khalifah died long before that website was founded, his so called followers of that website make no reference to these words.
This feels like dejavu:
"This is what the koran means to me in arabic" You know Rashad Khalifia better than his followers?
Liberate wrote:The announcement was necessary to sift away those who worship their egos instead of God. It was necessary to sift away those who say with their lips that they are believers, while doubting or rejecting God's evidence that Rashad Khalifa is God's Messenger of the
Covenant.
http://www.submission.org/messenger/announce.html
Sure dont sound like Rashad's words
Affectionate first name basis eh?
. Pay attention to "Covenant" sound like someone here has a gotten hung on Christian Jargon. Muslims dont use these terms to justify their positions.
You mean like when you include words like 'verily'...'Lord' in your translations you are not using biblical language? Even your signature uses the koranic translation from Pickthall notorious for using biblical language.
Granted you are only going by what you read on websites not knowing better especially if you already have a grudge
Ah yes I was pleasantly surprised I hadn't seen this part of your response yet the patronising comments.
Liberate wrote:H2O wrote:There is truth in everything, seperating it from falsehood is just like eating fish....you spit out the bones.
By your logic is not Apple Pie then telling you the truth about sura 86?
No.
So it's only truth if it aligns with what your presupposition of what truth really is? So when your fellow muslims kill Rashad Khalifa for claiming to be a messenger you interpret that what he really meant was a diferent type of messenger, your fellow muslim brothers who declared Rashad Khalifa an apostate had no basis, Rashad Khalifa was just a messenger just like you can claim to be a messenger?? When your shia and sunni brothers blow up themselves in the middle east to kill pregnant jewish women you claim they are interpreting the koranic ayats in error but somehow they are your fellow muslim brothers regardless alhamduillah, your stance is like a fox offering to carry a chicken in it's mouth and promising he wont snap his jaws shut because.. because... he says so.
Liberate wrote:And you told us you used to be like that (rejecting all hadiths) until some imam took you to one side and told you not to reject all hadiths.
Since you cant quote me correctly you need to post what I said rather than interpreting it in your own prejudice conceit.
Didn't you tell us you used to reject all hadiths? this is a yes or no question