Why Convert?

[ronniv93]

I am brand new to this forum but not new to online discussions with people of other religions.


I am a Christian, a very strong believer in my faith. I am simply interested in knowing, from a Muslim viewpoint, why a person should convert from being a Christian to a Muslim.


Thanks in advance for any replies.


- Ronni (Female)

[Muslimah]

Peace ronniv93


First off welcome to the boards, in a nut shell simply because when u embrace Islam u revert dont convert. Because one is originally born a Muslim then parents turn the child to a Jew, Christian or other.


I advice u to look into this thread:


http://www.islamsms.com/bb/index.php?showtopic=1559


Insh a Allah u will find enough replies.


http://www.islamsms.com/bb/index.php?showtopic=1708


this one too


Just read thru them, if still not satisfied. we are more than ready Insh a Allah to try and answer your questions.

[ronniv93]

Hi Muslimah,


I've read through both links and while I'm still digging into some specific statements on each, I don't quite have what I'm looking for.


I'm trying to determine the reason why a person should leave Christianity to become Muslim. I don't accept the premise that we were all born Muslim; I see no support for that in the Bible anywhere. So, beyond that, I don't see what I am missing now that I would have if I were Muslim.


I will keep searching for the answer, if there is one to be found.


Thanks.

[ronniv93]

I feel I should be more clear with the problems I am having. As I go back over the other thread and read everything, I feel bad asking you or anyone else to basically go over the same things with me that were said to Josh.


All of the arguments and statements I read were/are things I've heard and read before.


In my opinion, much of the dialogue surrounding Islam involves having to put other religions down. Just as one example, to establish the Quran as the true word of God, it's often stated that the Bible has been corrupted, it's tampered with and wrong, yet the Quran has no changes.


But frankly, neither of the above statements is true. And if that is all that Islam has to stand on, then that is not enough to convince me.


Or then, some people will try to prove that Jesus prophesied about Muhammad's coming and frankly..... He did not. Each scripture I have seen must be twisted, and pulled and distorted (the same thing that Christians are accused of) to make it fit Muhammad (or any other human being for that matter).


You know what? I apologize for taking up time and space here. I guess that at this point, I've heard all the arguments that I'm ever going to hear.


I still believe in what I believe and feel confident in it.


You don't have to respond. Please forgive my rantings... :-)

[Anyabwile]

Chsritianity seems very confusing to me, i'm no Christian expert but i have read up on it before i became Muslim a long time ago when i was studying history. And it seems no one knows who's version is right. Gods word would be complete...one guide solid for man to follow not the mess you see today. It is man who has changed it, thus you have the many about 20 i think, different denominations. Someone even said to me the number is higher around 75, but i don't know that myself. I'm not really interested in modern Chritianity, just Jesus (PBUH). but Who is right? To put it short Jesus (PBUH) had his words corrupted...how as a Christian can you follow the changes made by man?? Where do you go for the original source, every Christian family/sect will tell you something different. Is this how God wanted it? Or would he have wanted one complete uncorrupted guide for man. Hmmm seems like an easy question to me.


Here is an interesting snippet from an article i read a while ago...


<i>"In ancient times there was no standardized version of the Old Testament. Different Jewish groups and different regions had their own versions. There were the Septuagint, the Aquila, Theodotion's version and Symmachu's version, all containing different text and different numbers of books. The Old Testament used by modern Christians is based on the Massonetic version which only appeared after the Jamnia Synod at the end of the 1st century AD. <b>The New Testament did not appear in its present form until the year 404 AD, nearly four hundred years after the death of Jesus. </b>Before that time, the Gospels of Thomas, the Gospel of Nicodemus, the Acts of Peter, the Acts of Paul and a dozen other books were included in the Bible. In 404 AD these books were simply <b>cut out of the Bible </b>because they contained teachings that were contrary to Christian theology of that time. One of the oldest existing Bibles, The Codex Sinaiticus, includes the Epistle of Barnabas, a book that is not included in the modern Bible. <b>If these books were considered to be revelation by early Christians why don't modern Christians consider them to be revelation?</b> When we look at the Bibles used by modern Christians we find that there are several different versions. The Bible used by the Ethiopian Church, one of the most ancient of all churches, contains the Books of Enoch and the Shepherd of Hernias which are not found in the versions used by Catholics and Protestants. The Bible used in the Catholic Church contains the books of Judith, Tobias, Banuch, etc which have been cut out of the Bible used in Protestant churches. Prof H.L. Drummingwright of the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in his introduction to the Bible explains how these books came to be cut out of the Bible used by the Protestants. These books were, he says, <b>"in most Protestant Bibles until the 19th century, when publishers, led by the British and Foreign Bible Society voluntarily began to omit them". </b>Once again, <b>these books contained ideas which the churches did not like </b>so they just cut them out. How can a book like Judith be the infallible word. of God one moment and not the next? Why are there so many different versions of the Bible? <b>And which version is the infallible word of God?"</b></i>


I mean what a mess man. I can't remember now, i think the above was written from an athiest or hindu or something viewpoint but it just shows the mess of Chritianity. Not the prophet who bought it's original word, but the mess man made afterwards. I'm not claiming to be an expert on Christianity like i said, but it seems blind to follow the changes of man, as opposed to the prophet. Which is what christians do. How shameful of man. Jesus said not to eat swine am i right? But pork is muched daily by christians in the west, not even thought about. Wouldnt the Chritians sects changing this and those following the thousands of changes feel deep shame when Jesus returns? No matter how many different Islamic sects there are...they are false...there is only one Quran, no matter who picks bits from it, there is only one Quran, not 100 versions. ONE. you follow that to the letter alongside our prophet (PBUH) and that's it. Christianity? No, not for me ta.

[ronniv93]

Hi Anyabwile,


See, for me, I don't believe I'm falling the whims and corruptions of mere men. I've heard and read all the so-called proof that the Bible's been intentionally tampered with and altered. But, frankly, I don't see REAL proof.


There's lots of speculation and truth-twisting and sometimes, outright distortions and lies. So, when it comes to trying to prove the Bible false, I don't really even pay attention to that anymore.


Islam has got to stand on it's own, in my opinion. It can't stand on the basis of proving the Bible corrupted (which it's not).


And let's just say that they CAN prove it's corrupted.... that would NOT then mean that the Quran is true. I mean, I could turn to Mormonism or Bahai or Sikhism.


If you would like I can explain to you why I don't believe the Bible to be corrupted, but in my mind, that issue has already been settled with me.


I mean, there are old copies of the Quran that differ in the number of surahs contained in it or some wordings are little different between one text and another. I mean, this is something any studier of Quranic history acknowledges; they just "explain it away". So, I'm not hung up on this issue.


In a sense, "I've been there and done that".

[Anyabwile]

I mean, there are old copies of the Quran that differ in the number of surahs contained in it or some wordings are little different between one text and another. 

Ok so compare those minor changes (you have not shown me proof of as i have you) to these changes...

In ancient times there was no standardized version of the Old Testament. Different Jewish groups and different regions had their own versions. There were the Septuagint, the Aquila, Theodotion's version and Symmachu's version, all containing different text and different numbers of books. The Old Testament used by modern Christians is based on the Massonetic version which only appeared after the Jamnia Synod at the end of the 1st century AD. The New Testament did not appear in its present form until the year 404 AD, nearly four hundred years after the death of Jesus. Before that time, the Gospels of Thomas, the Gospel of Nicodemus, the Acts of Peter, the Acts of Paul and a dozen other books were included in the Bible. In 404 AD these books were simply cut out of the Bible because they contained teachings that were contrary to Christian theology of that time. One of the oldest existing Bibles, The Codex Sinaiticus, includes the Epistle of Barnabas, a book that is not included in the modern Bible. If these books were considered to be revelation by early Christians why don't modern Christians consider them to be revelation? When we look at the Bibles used by modern Christians we find that there are several different versions. The Bible used by the Ethiopian Church, one of the most ancient of all churches, contains the Books of Enoch and the Shepherd of Hernias which are not found in the versions used by Catholics and Protestants. The Bible used in the Catholic Church contains the books of Judith, Tobias, Banuch, etc which have been cut out of the Bible used in Protestant churches. Prof H.L. Drummingwright of the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in his introduction to the Bible explains how these books came to be cut out of the Bible used by the Protestants. These books were, he says, "in most Protestant Bibles until the 19th century, when publishers, led by the British and Foreign Bible Society voluntarily began to omit them". Once again, these books contained ideas which the churches did not like so they just cut them out. How can a book like Judith be the infallible word. of God one moment and not the next? Why are there so many different versions of the Bible? And which version is the infallible word of God?"

You said...

See, for me, I don't believe I'm falling the whims and corruptions of mere men. I've heard and read all the so-called proof that the Bible's been intentionally tampered with and altered. But, frankly, I don't see REAL proof. There's lots of speculation and truth-twisting and sometimes, outright distortions and lies. So, when it comes to trying to prove the Bible false, <b>I don't really even pay attention to that anymore</b>.

I highlighted what you said in dark letters because it's very important. What i highlighted is denial. I understand why most christians will never become Muslim, when you're bought up or follow something strongly especially over time it's impossible to change. Thats why instead of just saying come with us...Muslims will show you facts. Then if you don't want to accept facts, historical facts, then that's denail. And denial has no base, no standing and no foundation of logic and therefore denial is getting close to madman territory. Once again what i highlighted is really important...the actual denial


Riiight so the above is proof, historical records, tracing back the roots of christianity. You have to belive historical records, and research like the above article, or else if you think historical records are not valid enough to constitute "REAL" proof then what is the bible if not records from history. That means if you don't accept one set of historical records, why accept the next. What i'm saying is besides actually being there, the only proof there can ever be is in historical records like the article above which rips Christianity as man has defined it, to shreds.


You also avoided my question asking...

And it seems no one knows who's version is right. Gods word would be complete...one guide solid for man to follow not the mess you see today. It is man who has changed it, thus you have the many about 20 i think, different denominations. Someone even said to me the number is higher around 75, but i don't know that myself. I'm not really interested in modern Chritianity, just Jesus (PBUH). but Who is right?

I'm not sure why you avoided this but i'll ask again who is right? Also could you clear this other little one up for me...

Jesus said not to eat swine am i right? But pork is munched daily by christians in the west, not even thought about.

I've looked outside of this article and traced the history back and it coincides with the article. I would feel very uncomfortable as a christian in thinking "my way is right" when there are 70 or so other versions of the book / books / stories, who's readers and followers think that THEIR way is right. Poor a very poor shabby embaressing scattered mess. It's almost as if man would need one complete manual form God, surely God would see what's happened with his message and choose someone to clear it up. Clear thinking christians eventually embrace Islam, one look back at history from outside the bias of being a christian will show you the mess Christianity has became over time.


Your overall response was most dissapointing, you have shown me as a new Muslim nothing at all, except this. You have no explination because there isn't one, it's historical fact that the resulting corruption of the original words of the prophet Jesus (PBUH) has made a mess of his original pure message. Man has done this. No wonder you had nothing to counter the article i placed, because it's solid. You can say "been there done that" and hold your hands over your ears crying "i don't want to hear it, i dont want to hear it" as much as you like. But deep down, inside you'll know what the truth is that it's waaaaay to tampered with and has so many different books and versions and sects and etc. How is it the pure word of God, which one of you is God happy with? None...that is why the prophet Mohammed (PBUH) breathed and lived, to give man the final word. Which is why to this day...there has been ONE Quran to follow, one solid word from God, one message for humanity. And still, even those more knowledgeable i imagine than me in these matters, walk the wrong path.


When our time comes...i'm going to feel very confident in knowing i read Gods ONE word (the Quran) and followed it. How confident are you going to be? What if you chose the wrong book to follow...like King James tampering for example. What a risky risky chance to take, especially when the final word of our lord as cousins (Christians and Muslims) has been given for us and we KNOW it's been given for us, it's just taking the step and embracing. It's just near impossible to let go i know. I felt the same about being Agnostic/Athiest for 25 years. Then after i felt the pull to God, i studied science hard and it bought me to Islam. This is from a fresh U.K. everyday normal man, no religion belief at all, to a Muslim. Proud and sooo happy and settled, i can enjoy this stop called "life" so much more now. It's like seeing the world new.


Just look at facts...not what's been buried in your head, look at solid facts. I wont even point where to look as that's me influencing you. Look at the facts about christianity and then if you're interested, look into science...see where you end up.


I personally feel i'd be calling you brother sooner than you'd think. Just go for the facts, historical look them up from all sources as many as you can find, see if Christianity as man has defined and changed it, doesnt look more than a little confused with itself.

[Anyabwile]

Also...you say

And let's just say that they CAN prove it's corrupted.... that would NOT then mean that the Quran is true. I mean, I could turn to Mormonism or Bahai or Sikhism.

Wrong. The science of the Quran alone will confirm to man it's the only book of knowledge. This to me was the final final proof that God could include for those who still wish to mistrust him. Cold hard non belivers are quite often (but not always) but quite often, scientists. How else could God reach those difficult few, like me. I have read Sikhism a little in the past and if you really want to follow a religion just because it is newer than the others. Then i would say go to where you feel more pulled...wow, God left it a while to let man know, Sikhism started 500 years ago? Am i right? What was man supposed to do before then? Also i thought Mormons were racist...the black race was cursed??? Anyway, go to where you feel if you feel happy there are over 700 religions worldwide down to the most basic ones who worship sticks and stones and leaves, good...you can't just choose Sikhism, you have to look at them all. There might be another one that "takes your fancy" because it's new. Me personally i go for facts, not elephants or statues or one of the 100's of other religions that popped up after. I mean what about someone who pops up tommorow inventing a totally new religion, why not go with them? Like Sikhism? It'd never end. Hmmm...now lets be serious again huh?


Right...off to bed for now i think.

[umm Zachariah]

Hi Ronniv93,


You raised a question in the beginning here, what you would gain as a Muslim that you already do not have as a Christian?


I think that the most fundamental and IMPORTANT issue in both cases is the belief in our Creator. You cannot have faith if you don't believe in the one that created you. So mayby the 'picture' of Allah is the one to concentrate on. It is like beginning from scratch.


If you look at how He is looked upon BEFORE Christianity appeared and AFTER too when Islam entered, and now I speak of the monotheistic faiths, the 'picture' of Him is VERY clear. It is ONE God. There has never been any thought of Him as being something else than a unity God. BUT the BIG difference with Christianity is that here God is consicered to be a trinity or a tri-unity God. That concept of God is rather strange, considering that Christian also read the O.T. where the Torah can be found, and there God is considered, as always, to be a unity God. So Jews and Christians that do share the O.T. TOGETHER, and read from the same Scriptures, do have totally different views of God. To me as a Muslimah that is truly something very strange.


Islam has come to mankind as a, you could call it clear sign, since it wipes off that blurred image of God that Christianity has introduced, and takes us BACK to the original belief in One unity God, we call Him Allah in Arabic.


When you KNOW WHO you are worshipping and praying to, then everything else will also make sense.


Regards

[Muslimah]

Hi ronniv93


Although u said I dont have to reply, but as far as I understood, your questions revolve around the motive of a Christain to revert to Islam.


Well that would be very personal and differ from one person to another. Since each of them had something that brought him/her back (and I stress back) to Islam. I wont repeat what u already read on the site. U may have more threads to look at. However, from my experience, I saw people coming back because the concept of confession for example raised inquiries. Others were uncomfortable with the trinity, others saw contradictions of the Bible. and more


The most imporant point i d like to clear here, is that QURAN has no differences non what so ever since it was revealed 1400 years ago to Mohamed Salla Allah a`lyhee wa sallam. No difference about number of suras. If u r talking about changes like the dots and all. I can refer u to a site to learn about this.


But each word in Quran was, still is, will remain the same till the Day After it was not changed, tampered with.


I agree with u that when we talk we must talk about Islam only. But sometimes we face Christian members who need explanations, only then we resort to making comparisons.


At the end if u feel comfortable the way u r fine, just carry on, no one is forcing u to revert. U may still stay with us of course. We are fine too Alhamdulelah.


So that makes both parties happy


again welcome to the board....