Why I say Muslims don’t understand Islam

Islam says that 124,000 Prophets were sent by God although only 25 are mentioned by name in the Quran. And, according to Islam, every community without exception received a Prophet, sometimes more than one at one time.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

This was a comment posted yesterday by Malay Ultraman in my article The perception of right and wrong:

Salam and greetings.

Faith is so precious. Yet, it doesn’t carry a price tag. It can’t be bought or sold. Even a father can’t transfer the same faith to his children.

Being a Muslim, as what being written in scriptures, Allah had sent down thousands of anointed prophets since Adam pbuh until prophet Muhammad pbuh.

When the prophets delivered the message about "ilah" and the only God, there were sceptics, denials and rejection very much like what we are seeing in MT. These people asking questions like "why can’t God send an angel rather than a mere human being? Why can’t God descend himself? Why can’t we worship whatever we like? Why can’t we do whatever we enjoy to do?” Why is this, why is that, all kind of intelligent questions, and very much like we are seeing now.

YM Raja Petra, you are very smart. I believe you have read Surah Yassin and read the translation as well. Then, you can relate your piece of writing to Yassin. See how it works.

May Allah bless you, Insyallah.

By the way, MT has always been a good platform to bash Islam. I never see anybody bash other religions. What a great job! I hope you are not advocating Atheism.

**********************************************

I really don’t know what Malay Ultraman is trying to say. What is the point he is trying to make?

This is the problem with some ‘apologists’. They feel it is their religious duty to ‘defend’ Islam but they don’t understand what the issue is and are certainly less equipped to engage in a debate.

If you had understood what I wrote, you will see that my article was not an Islam bashing article at all. In fact, it is not even about Islam. For all intents and purposes, it should be the Christians who should be upset with me, not Muslims like Malay Ultraman.

My article talks about the Christian era of almost 2,000 years ago. I was of course not specific but any learned person would know that I was talking about Nicaea of the 300s, an era before Islam. This was a city that is now in Turkey but then part of the Eastern Roman Empire under Constantine. Resulting from this, the Nicene Creed was adopted and, more than 50 years later, the doctrine of the Trinity became the akidah (foundation) of the Christian faith.

Malay Ultraman, Islam was even not around yet then.

Of course, just like in all religions, Islam included, not every Christian accepted this and many opposed what was decided in the 300s. And those who rejected the ‘new Christianity’ were persecuted and killed.

That was what I was referring to.

Christianity came to England’s shores around the years 100-200 and for more than 1,000 years England was under papal authority. Then, around the 1500s, during the reign of King Henry VIII, England broke away from Rome and the Church of England was founded.

York refused to adopt the ‘new Christianity’ and it revolted and tried to declare its independence from England. The revolution was put down and the leaders all hanged and their bodies left to rot. Henry VIII also ordered all the churches in York to be burned to the ground.

That, Malay Ultraman, is what I was talking about in my article and I even mentioned that until today no Catholic can sit on the throne of England or became the British Prime Minister. Remember the case of Tony Blair who converted to Catholicism only after he retired as Prime Minister?

So, Malay Ultraman, you need to read more than just the Surah Yassin, as you suggested I do. The issue has nothing to do with the Surah Yassin or even Islam. And, as I said, if anyone should get upset it should be the Christians, not you.

You mentioned ‘angels’ in your comment. I take it you are talking about Malaikat. Are you aware that Malaikat comes from the word Mal’akh, which is a Hebrew word meaning a messenger of God or an angelic envoy?

You also mentioned ‘ilah’. Il or El means God for both the pagan and Israeli religions. And Ilahi means ‘The God’ or the Chief of Gods. So the word existed before Islam and was even a word that pagans used for God.

Malay Ultraman, Muslims must read more than just the Quran, the Surah Yassin of course being one small part of the Quran. I also suggest you read more than just the scriptures. And when I mention scriptures you take it I am talking about the one sent down to Prophet Muhammad whereas there is more than just one scripture.

Malay Ultraman, you also talk about the thousands of Prophets whom God sent to humankind. Islam says that 124,000 Prophets were sent by God although only 25 are mentioned by name in the Quran. And, according to Islam, every community without exception received a Prophet, sometimes more than one at one time.

What is the purpose of Islam telling us all this? Why not just talk about Prophet Muhammad and leave it at that? Why talk about 124,000 Prophets and tell us that every community has received a Prophet from God?

So you see, Malay Ultraman, there is still much we need to learn and things may not be exactly what we think they are.

My pursuit of religious knowledge is not focused on trying to learn about the differences between the many religions. I am exploring the possibility that there is only one religion. You, Malay Ultraman, would say that there is only one religion, Islam, and that all other religions are false. Yes, I have heard that argument thousands of times from fellow Muslims.

I am not about to agree or disagree with that. I reserve judgment at this stage mainly because I consider myself not yet fully learned enough to come to any conclusions. And I admit I am still looking for the answers.

So what is the focus of my research then? Simple. Is there a possibility that there is actually only one religion and that through the ages it transformed and mutated into versions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and so on?

In other words, what is the oldest religion? And did this religion change over time so that, for example, the religion of Moses is an improved version of the religion of Abraham and the religion of Jesus is an improved version of the religion of Moses and the religion of Muhammad is an improved version of the religion of Jesus?

Is this far fetched? If it is then why would the Quran say that the true believers or submitters (Muslim) are those followers of Moses and followers of Jesus who abide to the teachings of Abraham? And do we not call Judaism, Christianity and Islam the Abrahamic faiths, which means the roots are all in Abraham’s teachings, as what the Quran declares?

Note that the Quran says the followers of Moses and Jesus who follow the teachings of Abraham. The Quran does not even mention the followers of Muhammad in that particular verse.

So, if all religions are merely new versions of the old religion then we should go back even further -- before Moses, Jesus or Muhammad -- and see where it all started. This would then take us to what Islam calls the Majusi or fire worshippers. Islam regards these as also ‘People of the Book’, which means Islam recognises this religion.

Yes, Zoroastrianism, the religion I am talking about, overlaps Islam in many areas. They also have the kabah and the practice of tawaf and they take wuduk before they conduct the ritualistic prayers just like in Islam, and much more.

So, Malay Ultraman, hold your horses and don’t be too quick to label any discussion on religion as an Islam bashing exercise. And when I talk about faith that is not meant to bash Islam. It is meant to show that faith can make us accept what cannot be proven, that is all. And religion needs faith because without it we would never believe in religion since very little can be proven according to modern standards of what is considered proof.