Thursday, April 2, 2020

Acts17apologetics need to look at the broader picture; context of Jesus' prophecy?

In answer to the video "Zakir Naik Declares: "Jesus Is the God of Muhammad!""

The persecution and rejection of Jesus by his people, the murders of John the Baptist and Zechariah Matt23:30-37, along with the fact that punishement would be unleashed on the nation of Israel, were the main reasons why the apostles grieved.

To comfort their grief, Jesus gave them the glad tidings of the paraclete who would honor Jesus' name and bring justice to the world.

The Holy Spirit was already acting before Jesus, and during these times of sorrow for the apostles. The apostles already believed in Jesus, and according to Jn14:17 they even already experienced the indwelling of the holy spirit. If the paraclete was the holyspirit and not seperate from it then how could an indwelling phenomenon cure the reasons of their grief and bring justice considering it has always been present and did not solve anything. They grieved, among other reasons because the people did not believe in Jesus. Since the apostles already believed in Jesus then how does an indwelling paraclete resolve this particular grief?

By the time of their death, the Temple was destroyed, Jerusalem was sacked by the gentiles. So how did the situation change for Jesus' followers? How does the intangible paraclete judge and convict the guilty according to Jesus' prophecies, when many of the apostles were persecuted and killed, after Jesus and after the alleged descent of the holyspirit on them at pentecost Acts4-5,7–9,12:1, 13:42-51,14:2-5,19,17–18,24:5,26:9-11,Gal1:11-16,4:29,Phil3:5-7,1Thess2:14-16. Even some prophets who received the Holy Spirit were killed by the Israelite leadership, as Jesus reported Matt23:37. Such a prophecy about the paraclete being the indwelling holyspirit would never have consoled the apostles, and it is quite clear that by "another" paraclete Jesus was referring to the coming of "another" prophet.

The very first phrase of Jn14 is
"Do not let your hearts be troubled".
Jesus is clearing making this statement in the context of their total helplessness. In the precedent chapter Jn13 Jesus is speaking of his future betrayal, hinting to his death at the hands of the unbelievers. This added to their already existing sorrow from John and Zechariah's unjust murders which further emphasized their marginalisation and powerless situation. The disciples grieve, prior to the prophecy of the paraclete, at their master Jesus' rejection by his own people and over the fact that according to Matt24, and Jn16 they will all be persecuted and slaughtered as well as "hated by all nations because of me", as repeated in Jn15. They grieved over the coming abomination and destruction of the Temple because of their nation's rejection of Jesus, and their repeated transgressions. In Matt24 Jesus was predicting gloomy days ahead which put the apostles in great distress. Their grief is about what Jesus prophesized as a whole regarding Israel.

The prophecy of the paraclete comes at the climax of their grief, after he announces his disciples' future torments, his impending death, betrayal and denial by his close disciple
Jn16:6"Because I have said these things, you are filled with grief".
He comforts their troubled hearts by giving them the glad tidings of the paraclete, a powerful salvific figure who will put an end to this injustice which he and his followers suffered by judging the guilty, bringing justice and honoring Jesus in a world where he wasnt given any
Jn16"and concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged"
he will convict those who rejected Jesus as a worthless liar. As Jesus prophesized many times in the NT, the rejectors were going to be punished for their rejection. For example, he alludes to this in the parable of the King, His Son, and the Servants. The paraclete will receive revelation, will establish justice and convict the guilty. That never happened in the life of the apostles. Men will see this person, and judgement will be laid down, because the people rejected Jesus.

Did the apostles ever judge the world and condemn the guilty after allegedly receiving the indwelling Paraclete at Pentecost? Did judgement ever descend on the gentiles at the hands of the apostles? It never did.

Jesus in those statements is speaking in prophetic terminology by addressing them directly as is the case of the long term prediction made in Deut18 where God addresses the ISraelite community directly, saying that a specific prophet will come to them, but the intent is for the future. In Jesus' days, the Pharisees still awaited the fulfillement of that prophecy and questionned John, asking him if he was "that prophet".

Even within the Greek writings, it is a recognized terminology to involve the audience in a long term prophecy. For example it is accepted that Jesus' second coming predictions, although explicitly spoken to the disciples and telling them that they will witness his return, was not meant for their generation.

Acts17apologetics cannot find the intangible spirit; paraclete is the same as holy ghost?

In answer to the video "Zakir Naik Declares: "Jesus Is the God of Muhammad!""

The paraclete predicted to come by Jesus cannot be the same thing as the holy spirit filling the people who subsequently become prophets, because of several reasons:

In Jn16:7-8 Jesus sets the condition that he has first to go away for the paraclete to come, while throughout Luke and other places such as Jn20:21-22 the Holy spirit is present during Jesus' life time and he is even already indwelling the disciples if one wants to equate paraclete with holyspirit in Jn14:17. The NIV footnotes on this particular verse show that it is in the present tense in early manuscripts which renders the verse
"But you know him for he lives with you and IS in you" and not "But you know him for he lives with you and WILL BE in you".
What gives even more credence to those present tense early manuscripts is that the beginning of the sentence itself
"But you know him for he lives with you"
in all available manuscripts is in the present tense, whether the ones that end in the future or the ones that end in the present tense.

The aim of bible editors is to promote the idea that the holyspirit was present in Jesus' lifetime but not indwelling the believers yet until Pentecost where the disciples where filled with the holy spirit, and that this is what Jesus meant when he said he will pray God to send "another" paraclete. But this verse's tense in early manuscripts clearly contradicts this notion, besides the simple fact that there was never "another" holy spirit. Further why would it be impossible for the holyspirit to come to the disciples in Jesus' presence when it is established that it can indwell a limitless number of people simultaneously?

So the disciples, per Jesus' words already know "the spirit of truth", because it is with and in them, during Jesus' lifetime. Jesus therefore did not need to go away as a precondition for that other paraclete to come, if "the spirit of truth" the holyspirit and the paraclete all refer to one and the same thing. Besides the fact that there was never "another" holyspirit, but there certainly was "another" paraclete.

The Greek "spirit" is pneuma and is neutral, without gender. According to 1Jn4 "the spirit of truth" is what distinguishes, among all the "spirits" those who accept Jesus as God's envoy
1Jn4"do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God..Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God. This is how we recognize the spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood".
Anyone recognizing Jesus as a human being sent by God has "the spirit of truth" in him such as Muhammad, and by extension the Muslims, as opposed to the spirit of falsehood dwelling in the world that rejects Jesus as God's human envoy. This paints trinitarians as spirits of the antichrist since they do not recognize that
"Jesus Christ has come in the flesh"
but that "God has come in the flesh".

It says that God dwells, through His spirit, in those who recognize Jesus
"This is how we know that we live in him and he in us: He has given us of his Spirit..God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them".
The spirit of truth is therefore coming from God and filling those who recognize Jesus' true identity. This applies to any individual, past, present and future. The disciples addressed by Jesus "know" this "other" paraclete because he is like them filled with the spirit of truth
Jn14:16-17"I will ask the Father, and he will give you another paraclete to help you and be with you forever, the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and is in you".
If by "another" paraclete Jesus meant "another" holyspirit then it would mean the disciples never knew or experienced the holyspirit. Besides the fact, again, that there never was "another" holyspirit, but there certainly was another paraclete.

The expression of being "in" eachother can easily be understood if one looks at the context of its use throughout the NT and its application for both physical and abstract subjects. Trinitarian proof texting has obscured the meaning of that expression, as it did in so many other cases. The plain meaning of Jesus, and any other entity being "in" another one simply is to share a common position. The examples are too many to cite and i can provide them upon request.

Acts17apologetics searching the true Ahmad; the prophet mentionned in the NT?

In answer to the video "Zakir Naik Declares: "Jesus Is the God of Muhammad!""


61:6"And when Isa son of Maryam said: O children of Israel! surely I am the messenger of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Taurat and giving the good news of an Messenger who will come after me, his name being Ahmad, but when he came to them with clear arguments they said: This is clear magic"
Ahmad in this verse is in the grammatical form of ism tafdeel. For example a sentence might say "this person is kabeer/great but that one is akbar/greater". Ism tafdeel indicates that the characteristics described are greater in the individual concerned. It is an observable reality that the prophet Muhammad's name is much more revered than that of Jesus. That characteristic reached a point that the ism tafdeel became equivalent to the prophet Muhammad's proper name. It is reported that nobody had that name prior to the prophet. Shortly after the prophet's time however, Muslims began using it as a name. Ibn Abi Ahmad for instance, who narrated ahadith from Abu Hurayra who himself died around 59AH. Or another hadith narrator who was his contemporary, named Al Jamdi Abu Ahmad. The prophet referred to himself as Ahmad, among 5 other names. His companions did too, including in poems about him. Ibn Ishaq in his sirah refers to "Ahmad" while relating the story of the prophet's birth.
 Hassan b. Thabit said: ‘I was a well-grown boy of seven or eight, understanding all that I heard, when I heard a Jew calling out at the top of his voice from the top of a fort in Yathrib “O company of Jews” until they all came together and called out “Confound you, what is the matter?” He answered: “Tonight has risen a star under which Ahmad is to be born.”
According to world renowned Islamicist professor Déroche, the earliest Quranic manuscripts contain the exact same wording as 61:6 (Catalogue des manuscrits Arabes). Arthur Jeffrey's proposition that 61:6 did not originally contain the reference to "Ahmad" is based on a marginal quote in a late 13th century book on qiraat by a certain "al-Marandi". Outside what that late source supposedly says, no evidence exists for Ubay's alleged variant reading, while every early manuscript containing the passage agrees with the Uthmanic recension. Also, just because someone claims something about Islam and is Muslim means nothing in terms of authenticity. There are many variants attested to this day that do not pass the standards and that do have at least a partial chain of transmission, contrary to this supposed variant that has none.

Muhammad, through his appellation and the praises he receives virtually every second of the day, fulfilled that prophecy in both ways, as established in the Quran
94:4"And We raised for you, your remembrance."
Further, nobody came after the prophet Jesus claiming to be a messenger of God and whose evidences were repeatedly and consistently treated as magic
46:7"Our clear lucid verses were read to them. But, referring to the truth as it came to them, the unbelievers said, “This is obviously a magic!”".
The prophecies speaking of the prophet Muhammad that were written down were not removed which is why the Quran says that the people of the book
2:146"recognize him as they recognize their sons".
The Quran does not speak of alteration but of deliberate misinterpretation of these prophecies by those who heard the Quran, because of the implications
2:146"and a party of them most surely conceal the truth while they know (it)". 
Jn14:16"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor (paraclete) to be with you forever. The spirit of truth, the world cannot accept him because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him for he lives with you and will be in you"
Jn15:26"When the Counselor (paraclete) comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me"
Jn16:7"But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor (paraclete) will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you"
The Greek "paraclete" is used in the New/Greek Testament for a comforter, advocate, counselor etc.
1Jn2:1"..we have an advocate (paraclete) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous."
Here the paraclete is translated as "advocate". This is one of a prophet's functions, and although anyone could potentially be qualified as an advocate, the context of its use in the Greek writings is that of an envoy from God. It is applied to Jesus the human prophet, who identified himself as a prophet, and who was similarily recognized by the multitudes as a prophet Matt21:11,Mk6:3-5Lk13:32-4 who was a human being
"made like his brothers in every way"Heb2:17.
So when Jesus prays God to send "another" paraclete in Jn14, one can justifiably argue that he is asking God to send another prophet like him who will be an advocate, a counselor and comforter, all of these being the descriptions of a prophet. Like Jesus the advocate 1Jn2:1 and prophet of God Matt21:11. There was never "another" holy spirit.

More on that point later on.

Apostate prophet prefers it the hard way; complicating the sharia?

In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"

Besides the twofold message that there is wisdom in having some things not known to us, that one should not ask about minutiae related to the religion which may have the opposite effect of making it obsessive compulsive, hard to follow and the potential danger of falling out of religion, the verse 5:101 also carries a timeless import in regards to one's understanding of the Quran itself.

It teaches one not to be hasty, but instead wait for the detail that will elaborate on a topic requiring further explanation. This detail, present in the book, will not cause the religion to become a burden. It will eventually appear as one progresses through the Quran with an open heart, as it is being revealed to oneself. For these reasons, the Quran is to be approached with patience 75:16, one should ponder and meditate on its verse before forming any adverse opinion.  

God's law as originally intended is meant at providing spiritual purification. It would then be contrary to that purpose for God to make it complicated. He has lightened our burdens through a simple and natural sharia
22:78"and has not laid upon you an hardship in religion".
Man, being a creature endowed with freewill, has a frail spirituality 4:28 that makes him lack resolve when a moral crisis arises. That spiritual weakness is only a natural outcome of an original, untrained spiritual state just as a newborn is physically weak. Only the appropriate training, spiritual or physical can make one overcome the challenges, abstract or concrete 70:19-35. Therefore to facilitate the attainment of that goal, the sharia has been made simple and appealing to man's nature
2:185,5:6"Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you and that He may complete His favor on you, so that you may be grateful".
Had Allah wished
2:220"He would certainly have caused you to fall into a difficulty; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise".
Even after mentioning clear prohibitions, the Quran stresses the soulful nature of the Sharia by declaring lawful these same things whenever the circumstances make it too burdensome to abide by them 5:3. God's law is thus very close to human nature, it does not run contrary to it, rather it is the disobedience to the law of the Creator that is unnatural. Neither is a person expected to be over-zealous in his religious duties
24:53"reasonable obedience (is desired); surely Allah is aware of what you do".
Sincerity, not perfection is required and so if one stumbles during the pursuit of the right course, God is forgiving 4:17,53:32. One can therefore clearly see that this notion of the naturalness and simplicity of the divine law is not based on some whims by the Muslim scholars and jurists, but on Quranic indications which occur so frequently that they cannot be mere metaphors. It is the principle of facilitation/taysir of the sharia as stated in
2:185“God wills that you shall have ease, and does not want you to suffer hardship”.
This verse is treated as belonging to the category of muhkam/decisive or explicit verses, corroborated by many others cited above. The traditions reflect that Quranic axiom
“I was sent to people with the lenient, tolerant, True Religion”
or
“Do [good] deeds that are within your capacity”
or
“This religion is very easy and entails no hardship".
The prophet instructed Muadh as he sent him to Yemen
“Facilitate things for the people and do not make things difficult for them. Be kind and lenient [both of you] with the people, and do not be hard on them and give the people good tidings and do not reject them,”.
Based on the traditions and the Quran, the scholars have thus asserted that making things easy/taysir is one of the higher objectives of the Sharia. It aims at protecting the life, property, and dignity of the whole community without causing inappropriate hardships. Throughout the ages, despite the mindless islamophobic rant, nations have been receptive to the teachings of Islam without any difficulty or hardship.

This is evidenced by the transformation that Islam has brought about in the daily lives of the Arabs, the Persians, the Copts of Egypt, the Berbers, the Tartars, the people of India, the Chinese, and the Turks, without these peoples facing any difficulty in discarding their age-old bad habits, or being compelled to abandon their good customs.

Acts17apologetics deny Muhammad in the NT; Paraclete is sent by Jesus?

In answer to the video "Zakir Naik Declares: "Jesus Is the God of Muhammad!""

Per Jn14:16 the Father is the only sender of the paraclete and none else. Jesus saying he will send the paraclete in Jn15:26 depends entirely on the will of the Father. As Jesus says, the paraclete comes from the Father and goes out from the Father. Jesus will send him to the world through his prayers Jn14:16 to the Father. The sending of the paraclete depends entirely and exclusively on the Father and Jesus saying he will send him simply means that he will ask God to send him per Jn14:16. It doesnt say the paraclete will come to the people speaking in Jesus' name, but that the Father will send him in Jesus' name meaning at his request as reflected in other translations, because Jesus will pray the Father for this
"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another paraclete"
Muhammad the son of Ishmael is the result of the preceding prophets' prayers like Abraham' prayers to God in the Quran to raise a prophet among his descendants settled in the area that will bring them to the straight path.

Apostate prophet has been deceived; all questioning comes from Satan?

In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"

This favorite of the misinformed critics of Islam will be addressed shortly, but in introduction it would be appropriate to mention one particular story. 

The Quran relates an occasion where, due to their arrogance the religion became a burden on them. Their lack of obedience and will to bend to God's will, or "stiff-necked" as Moses and other prophets labelled them collectively in their scriptures, is demonstrated in 2:67-73. During the incident, they were offensive towards their prophet, accusing him of ridiculing them when he simply conveyed God's command. They had to sacrifice any cow in a ritual that would clarify the confusing circumstances of a murder. They went on asking Moses that he might ask "his lord" as though He was not their Lord, for more and more particulars regarding cow to be sacrificed.

After ridiculing their prophet, discrediting God's answers to their demands as unclear because
"to us the cows are all alike",
they finally reluctantly agreed to perform the ritual. The truth is that they were trying to delay it through their hairsplitting demands because they sought to hide the truth about the crime. This command to sacrifice a cow comes in the context of manslaughter as described in Deut21, with the taking of oaths over the blood of the sacrificed cow.

The Quran gives details on the first time this command was issued to the Israelites and their reaction when they actually had to put it to practice, their final acceptance of the command without any intention and conviction despite their prophet answering all their objections. When it was performed for the first time, the ritual resulted in the resurrection to life of the victim. This exposed what they were trying to hide as well as provided a living proof for the concept of bodily resurrection.

The Jews disagreed on this issue for long and for centuries until the coming of Jesus and his own miraculous evidence for the resurrection. Because of the dramatic demonstration, the ritual remained inscribed in their justice code as a means of atonement for an unsolved murder. It is interesting to note that in the time of Moses, other similar miracles were performed, such as when
Numbers21:9"Moses made a copper snake and put it on a pole, and whenever a snake bit a man, he would gaze upon the copper snake and live". 
Together with condemning them for their rebellious trend, the passage above hints at another reality. Through this Quran as was done with the sending of prophets among them, God is 2:72 mukhrijun/continuously unveiling their lies.

However their disobedient trend would continue after that, their 
2:74"hearts hardened after that, so that they were like rocks, rather worse in hardness; and surely there are some rocks from which streams burst forth, and surely there are some of them which split asunder so water issues out of them, and surely there are some of them which fall down for fear of Allah". 
The verse eloquently increases the effect of its simile on the audience. It first gives a recognizable, observable point of reference that is already strong in itself, a dry rock. It then carries its audience's imagination further by alluding to abstract imageries that are stronger in intensity. This gradual rhetorical device achieves a stronger impact on the minds than immediately jumping to the most intense simile. This simile was relevant to the historical context of the Israelites. When they needed water they had seen it gush forth from one solid rock. They had seen how a mountain crashed down, humbled by Allah's glory 7:143. But their hearts, devoid of faith and fear of God remained rigid despite the intensity of miracles and divine favors they witnessed.
Their hard heartedness is a recurrent theme and accusation in their own Books Ezek3:7,Jer5:3etc.
This attitude of obscuring a simple religious directive is not restricted to this particular ordinance. They have done the same in other circumstances and for different reasons, and so God gave them free rein in forging their own laws. This resulted in them following their base desires and idolatrous tendencies
Ezek20:25-26: “Moreover, I gave them laws that were not good and rules by which they could not live. When they passed every first issue of the womb, I defiled them by their very gifts — that I might render them desolate, that they might know that I am the Lord”.
There is a reason why the Torah we have today includes a list of 613 codes for the Israelites to live by. God from the onset as He established a covenant with this "stiff necked" nation, had to check their heavy propensity for deviation. This was done through a set of laws meant at controlling them, keeping them on the straight path. Their rebellious nature however quickly took the upper hand, as it did even while Moses was among them performing miracles for all to see. Instead of humbling their selves, gratefully abiding by these directives as David did Ps19, they progressively took control of the laws, making their application only secondary to the man made practices that "validate them". Their ritual obsessions and hairsplitting conjectures basically turned the Divine law into a man made one. Divine law should instead be agreeable to the human soul, and if its recipient are mature and obedient, which was overwhelmingly not the case of the Israelites in their history, then it should make room for the evolving circumstances of the world. This adaptability however can never compromise the original spiritual principle and intent. This nature and purpose of the Mosaic law was rightly observed since the earliest days of Judeo-christian internal debates. In his dialogue with Trypho, Justin Martyr cites every aspect of the law, including the institution of sacrifice and observance of Sabbath, as burdens forced upon the Jews to contain their tendency to disobedience
"Wherefore, God, adapting His laws to that weak people, ordered you to offer sacrifices to His name, in order to save you from idolatry, but you did not obey even then, for you did not hesitate to sacrifice your children to the demons. Moreover, the observance of the sabbaths was imposed upon you by God so that you would be forced to remember Him, as He Himself said, ‘That you may know that I am God your Savior’ [Ezk 20.20]".
The Mosaic law in most part did not originate at Sinai but progressively came on the Israelites to contain their repeated disobedience and punish their endless conjectures on clear instructions. Many were then retrospectively painted as revealed to Moses since the beginning, and for different reasons. The Sabbath became a day of rest that mimics God's resting from creation Gen2,Ex20,31. Another passage gives a profoundly different reason for Sabbath. It is a remembrance of Egyptian bondage Deut5. This shows the confused manner in which tradition was transmitted prior to being written down.

In addition to the above example of divine stiffening of the law as a punishment, their scholars reached sometimes ridiculous heights of hairsplitting conjectures, which they obtained through subjective methods of deduction and then put forward as God's ordinances. Put briefly, the creators of the Oral Torah (the sages of the Mishnah and the Talmud) completely ignored the laws of the (Written) Torah, only using them as a convenient framework within which to legislate laws adapted to their own time. These ideas are expressed in the Talmud/Oral Torah, considered as God-given and revealed as the written Torah of Moses is.

Their known soulless interpretations and conjectures caused them to create insurmountable legal criteria.

For example some purity rituals must be fullfilled before or just at the start of the Messianic era, but the preconditions are impossible to achieve due to the supposed impurity of the entire community. There is also the sacrifice of a "red heifer" whom none has been able to breed and raise yet, despite the continuous attempts up to this day. It is said that even Solomon, the wisest of all men, tried throughout his life to understand the matter of the red heifer and did not succeed.

The religion of Allah is not a burden, and neither is the set of ethical discipline it imposes upon man meant at narrowing down his feel of life 20:2, it rather is meant at enhancing it by deepening his consciousness of right and wrong. It is a blessing meant at purifying mankind or as the Quran says when speaking of the objective of religion being for spiritual tazkiya/purging. Allah calls it His favor and grace
4:113,5:3,2:231"and remember the favor of Allah upon you, and that which He has revealed to you of the Book and the Wisdom".
Here, this favor is described as being in the Book and the Wisdom referring to the body and soul of the Sharia respectively, to its commandments and their philosophy. This phrase is often used to connote the fact that God's guidance is perfectly balanced between both these aspects.

Allah has not ordained a soulless sharia concerned only with the body of deeds. The Quran constantly parallels internal with external purity and warns Muslims not to fall into the error of those before them, namely the Jews, who neglected the spirit of the Sharia for soulless external rituals and exaggerated legal hair-splittings, superstitious restrictions and regulations.

The prophet Muhammad actually came as a mercy to them and to relieve them from these shackles 7:157.

Allah has restored the Sharia to its original simplicity in order to lighten our burdens 2:286,4:27-8 because
"man is created weak".
This means man's weakness is due to the fact that he cannot by himself find the true path, he is in need of Allah's guidance. That is why the preceding verses speak of Allah's will to guide mankind, turn to us mercifully and lighten our burdens. 2:286 also implies that Allah could burden mankind with a difficult Sharia as a form of punishment as was done with the Israelites and as plainly stated in the book of Ezekiel quoted above. When we create an innovation and complicate the Sharia on ourselves, then we will charge ourselves with greater burdens than God asked of us. God allows this to happen as a form of punishment.

What Allah demands from us is not unreachable and He does not impose what is beyond our power and understanding. This is why Allah expects us to answer the call of religion with
2:285"We hear and obey".
It is an unconditional declaration of faith and obedience to a system which is not meant, as already said, at narrowing down man's feel of life through ethical discipline and other teachings of the Quran but on the contrary, to enhance it by deepening his consciousness of right and wrong 20:2.

With the above issues in mind, one can appreciate why the Quran tells the audience not to insist on investigating the unimportant things or minute details of a story. It diverts not only oneself but also others from the moral and spiritual import of the narration 18:22. Similarly the Quran warns the Muslims not to ask questions about the things regarding which the Sharia is purposely silent 5:101 because such questions call for answers that tighten the limits of a directive, and then people are not able to follow them and as a result invite the wrath of God, as what happened directly and indirectly with the Israelites. God wants that a directive be followed the way it is given. Difficulties should not be created by asking to explain what is concise and by asking to limit and restrict what is absolute and in fact
5:102"A people before you indeed asked such questions, and then became disbelievers on account of them"  
2:108"Would you then ask your Prophet such questions as were asked of Moses in former times? and whoever adopts unbelief instead of faith, he indeed has lost the right direction of the way".
The simplification of the Sharia/Law leaves room for human common sense and judgement, allowing different nations and communities to frame laws for themselves to meet new and changed situations. The Quran has laid down a handful of laws as explicit, while most provide a foundation and philosophical framework by which things can be negotiated, as long as it is in accordance with the principles of morality and wisdom laid down in the Book. The Prophet is reported to have said:
“The most sinful person among the Muslims is the one who asked about something which had not been prohibited, but was prohibited because of his asking”.
He further said
“God has set boundaries, so do not transgress them; He kept silent on certain things out of mercy for you rather than forgetfulness, do not ask about them”.
As is clear, the Quran doesnt prevent the honest debate and search of knowledge. Many Quranic verses begin with questions that are stated very compactly and their real purport becomes evident through their answer
2:189"They ask you concerning..".
The verse 5:101 rather warns against questioning that could lead to unnecessary complications in religious laws. In addition, and as demonstrated through the Israelites' example, such questioning also stems for shallow belief and hypocrisy. Asking questions, politely humbly with pure intent is never disallowed. The angels were permitted to voice questions to God directly 2:30. No religion says, almost at the end of every argument for its truth, to reflect, ponder, think for themselves. It invites sceptics to bring forth any constructive criticism and argument. As just stated, the epitome of that principle is the angels' questioning God's plan for creation, questioning God Himself and yet they arent condemned at anytime. Justified curiosity is not wrong but even encouraged
21:7,16:43"ask those who possess knowledge if you do not know”.
In 58:1 a reference is made to an incident in which a pious woman had to face a severe difficulty regarding a religious issue; instead of becoming frustrated and showing distrust in God, she presented her case before Him and His Prophet with purity of intentions. Her difficulty was resolved and her case set forth as an example in the Quran: that of a person who adopted the correct attitude when troubles came her way.

Apostate prophet defends dogs; but what about evil black dogs?

In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"

Neither Allah, the angels, the prophet nor his followers hated dogs in an absolute sense, nor any other animals, as seen from the many traditions, the Quran itself and the understanding of the scholars towards the fair physical and emotional treatment of all animals. Cynophobia is rather abounding in the HB, as will be shown later.

The prophet did not mind his grandsons having a puppy in his own house, until the incident with Jibril mentioned below. 

There was once an interval of several days where revelation stopped and which distressed the prophet. He began thinking that he had done something wrong, or that, as his opponents taunted him, that Allah had abandoned him. Once revelation descended in the form of sura duha/93 he was told that neither was the case, and that this interruption obeys to a higher reality independent of anyone's whims. This bellies the notion that the reason of the interruption had anything to do with the prophet, whether in deeds (such as having a dog at home) or thoughts. This is further borne out by the fact that the prophet did receive revelation in different locations and conditions, and that a time finally arrived where revelation was about to descend on him. Jibril came to him and told him to prepare to receive revelation at his home. But when it did not occur as announced, it was this time due to a worldly reason specific to his home 
"Jibril came to me and said; "Indeed I had come to you last night, and nothing prevented me from entering upon you at the house you were in, except that there were images of men at the door of the house, and there was a curtain screen with imagines on it, and there was a dog in the house. So go and sever the head of the image that is at the door so that it will become like a tree stump, and go and cut the screen and make two throw-cushions to be sat upon, and go and expel the dog." So the Messenger of Allah did so, and the dog was a puppy belonging to Al-Husain or Al-Hasan which was under his belongings, so he ordered him to expel it". 
The details of the hadith vary depending on the chain, but the primary point remains that angels do not enter houses where specific things are found. 

Angels are not superhumans. They are a different creature. They have likes and dislikes, capacities and limits different than humans. For example the traditions relate how the angel Gabriel himself was limited and could not ascend to where the prophet Muhammad was permitted to enter during the mi'raj. The hadith here does not specify the reason for singling out dogs, so we can only conjecture. A legitimate question one might ask is, since the interruption had nothing to do with an issue with the prophet, that revelation did and could descend anywhere outside his home, with Jibril even coming to him just a night before and at a different location to announce his imminent visit, then why didnt Jibril just choose another place than the "problematic" home in order to reveal sura duha? 

What is first important noting is that these are not any type of angels, but the angels of revelation. Regular persons arent visited by such angels anyway so the issue of keeping dogs inside doesn't necessarily apply to anyone and any circumstance. But seeing how the noblest of them would refrain entering upon a prophet for that reason, makes one appreciate that, besides the representation of unidentified male figures, there must be an intrinsic reason in the dog in question. And this is understood through a contextual analysis of the report. This reveals an important point, one ever stressed by hadith commentators. When one tries to understand a hadith, which is a snippet of a larger statement, it cannot be done in a vacuum but in light of its time and circumstances, the potential question/remark the prophet was reacting/answering to, as well as the vast corpus of extra Quran material so as to establish a pattern of thought and behavior. 

A glaring example is the report 
"Evil omen is in the women, the house and the horse". 
The narrator did not report the context of the prophet's statement, which was in fact a condemnation of what some pre-islamic Arabs believed and what contemporary Jews said. There are even reports where the prophet equates belief in bad omen with shirk. 

As to dog, they were extensively used by the Arabs in the prophet's time, for specific purposes and not as pets. The angelic instruction not to keep dogs inside homes could be due to the particular breed of the prophet's environment, one that can potentially be harmful, hence its use to ward off danger. It could have been that this breed of dogs was not meant to be, neither for its own good or the good of the owner, kept in a closed space. The prophet, by allowing a seemingly harmless puppy in his home as a pet so as to please his grandsons, could have given or started a potentially harmful (not sinful) trend in the community. As in many cases, some special circumstances, sometimes having to do with the prophet and sometimes with other members of the community, were used by Allah as a means by which to illustrate what is more appropriate and beneficial for society.  

After this incident, the prophet became more aware of the issue of human interaction with the dogs of his environment, which he might have taken too lightly.  He allowed domesticated dogs for useful purposes in farming, herding, guarding or hunting but discouraged keeping them as pets, inside the homes, except if it is for self-defense. It would be oppressive and cruel to keep these types of dogs and any other such animal as pets. They are unsuited to remain in a confined environment. This could have been another reason for the angelic instruction.
“The reward of a person who keeps a dog for reasons other than herding, hunting, or agriculture is decreased every day by a qiraat". 
As a side note, how did this visitor know of the presence of a puppy, hidden somewhere in the house?

Historically there was a problem of disease transmitting dogs in Medina, who carried rabies. These were stray dogs that in addition, were ferocious and attacked people. Although the problem existed, the prophet as a leader in Medina had not turned his attention to it prior to the incident involving Jibril.

The term used in some ahadith is kalb al aakur/biting, wild or rabid dog. The expression covered not only dogs but different types of wild beasts roaming the desert 
"Malik said, about the "kalb akur" which people were told to kill in the Haram, that any animals that wounded, attacked, or terrorised men, such as lions, leopards, Iynxes and wolves, were counted as "kalb akur"". 
As to the dog specie, the harmful ones were recognized by their pitch black color, as the prophet stated in his khutbah on the matter 
"If it were not that dogs were a nation among nations, then I would order that they be killed. So kill every one among them that is all black". 
During that same khutbah, some people asked what should be done with other dogs, namely the domesticated ones, to which the prophet stated they should be spared. This was a clarification of his statement that dogs, as a nation like any other isnt intrinsically evil/harmful, and should therefore not be indiscriminately killed, but there are evil/harmful elements among them who should be. 

Due to the problems they caused, the prophet referred to these black dogs as devils, as is often used in Arabic in reference to something harmful. We're not talking of chihuahuas here but specially aggressive dogs. The fear they instilled, and consequent distraction, caused prayers to be disrupted if they approached while one is performing the rituals. Even what we consider today as pet dogs are put to death by the authorities when deemed too dangerous. There is thus nothing insensitive or extraordinary in the prophet's decision, in light of the reality of his time. Following the prophet's khutbah, some people were over-zealous in the application of the command, killing dogs indiscriminately 
"Allah's Messenger ordered us to kill dogs, and we carried out this order so much so that we also kill the dog coming with a woman from the desert. Then Allah's Apostle forbade their killing. He (the Prophet further) said: It is your duty the jet-black (dog) having two spots (on the eyes), for it is a devil."
Dogs are not impure in and of themselves otherwise the Quran would not have made it permissible to consume the game hunted by trained dogs/mukalibeen 5:4. It also specifically mentions the dog that slept for years next to a group of righteous people 18:18. These people and their dog had divine miracles performed on them. 

The simple fact is the Quran had many occasions to declare these animals impure or evil but did not. Even in the case of wild/street dogs, impurity does not equal to mistreatment. In a report the prophet said 
"A prostitute was forgiven by Allah, because, passing by a panting dog near a well and seeing that the dog was about to die of thirst, she took off her shoe, and tying it with her head-cover she drew out some water for it. So, Allah forgave her because of that". 
In a similar narration where a man went down a well to save a dog from thirst, the people reacted, asking 
"O Allah's Messenger, Is there a reward for us in serving (the) animals?" He replied, "Yes, there is a reward for serving any animate". 
There is thus a general principle, well established in the Quran and traditions as regards animal and environmental welfare 
"When Allah's Messenger was asked about donkeys, he replied, "Nothing particular was revealed to me regarding them except the general unique verse which is applicable to everything: "Whoever does goodness equal to the weight of an atom (or small ant) shall see it (its reward) on the Day of Resurrection".
This is because, according to the prophet 
"In every living being there is a reward for charity" 
further 
"There is no Muslim who plants a tree or sows seeds and then a bird, or a person, or an animal eats from it except that it is regarded as a charity for him"
 and 
"If someone kills so much as a sparrow or anything larger without a just cause, then Allah the Exalted will ask him about it on the Day of Resurrection". 
There would have been ground for general assumptions as regards the Islamic stance on dogs, had there been similar depictions as the ones found in the Bible, in which one finds nothing but Contempt and negative metaphors of dogs. Whether in the mouth of Jesus in Matt7 who parallels human wickedness to the most hated animals to a Jew, dogs and pigs, or in the writings of the prophets of the HB. Down to the book of Revelation22, dogs are associated with the most wicked dwellers of hell. Even the price for which a dog, any dog, is sold is forbidden to be brought into the Temple for a vow
 Deut23"you shall not bring a prostitute's fee or the price of a dog, to the House of the Lord, your God, for any vow, because both of them are an abomination to the Lord, your God".
 This is a reoccurring theme; dogs, like swine and other morally degenerate people like prostitutes and sorcerers are intrinsically evil and hateful. YHWH's cynophobia, not that of His angels or the humans, is such that He cannot stand their presence or anything related to them in His most sacred site. 

Apostate prophet teaches dining etiquette; bismilla before eating?

In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"

Muslims dont just utter the bismillah before eating. bismillah is repeated more than a 100 times in the Quran. God begins his speech with his own great name so that all that follows is associated with Him. The words in that formula teach the supplicant that Love and Mercy are God's primary attributes in relation to man, and he should therefore reciprocate this attitude upon every endeavor which he begins with it.

When we associate all our activities with God's compassionate and loving attributes, we are on one hand remembering God's favor, then erforming the task with a will to reflect that favor. In this way that action would neither be rendered null and void, nor remain incomplete; it has been started in the name of Allah, and negation and annihilation cannot reach that sacred name. The very first verse revealed to the prophet's heart was to
96:1"Read in the name of your Lord Who created".
The revelation ofthis Quran is a consequence of God's compassion, His mercy
55:1-2"The Beneficent (Al-Rahman), Taught the Quran".

Apostate prophet wont wake up; importance of praying on time?

In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"

There are numerous Quran and prophetic sayings stressing the importance in the sincere performance of the spiritual duties. Laziness in these matters was so loathed and reprimanded by the prophet that he is reported as using a derogatory Arabic expression, in reference to one who oversleeps past the morning prayer
"He is a man in whose ears (or ear) Satan had urinated".
Urination has been used as a metaphor for corruption in Arabic, as attested by the earliest hadith scholars in reference to the hadith, and attributing this action to the devil as being performed in one's ears is a symbolism for the devil's corruption of one's self to the point the faculty to hear is willfully disregarded, leading one to ignore the call to prayer being heard.

The insistence of the prophet to pray and encourage others to do so, was of course not only restricted to simple physical attendance but included a broad range of related issues that all reflected one's sincerity in practice and consciousness of the seriousness of the undertaking.

 For example he reportedly used the vivid imagery of the devil being pleased when seeing someone yawning and entering the mouth of the one that doesnt put his hand in front of it.

Firstly, it is obvious the devil cannot but be pleased by any sign of human weakness, especially in a spiritual context. The hadith in question comes in the context of prayer, a moment where the devil is doing his utmost to deviate one's spiritual concentration. One could be tired or sleepy while praying, and yawning is the physical manifestation of that state. To try and prevent it or raise one's hand if it occurs is a sign of composure and self-awareness, let alone basic presentation etiquette -among others encouraged in both the Quran and hadith when about to solemnly address the Creator. The devil entering the mouth of the one who yawns improperly during prayer, illustrates that he has successfully exploited that specific weakness at a crucial moment, has defeated one's sense of self awareness and spiritual composure. Satanic entities from among the jinn have the property to enter the human body so that they might whisper their suggestions whenever one lowers his spiritual guard 
"He (the prophet) said: The devil flows in man as the blood flows in him. I feared that he might inject something in your hearts". 
Satanic entities lurk around in everyday affairs, awaiting any moment of inattention where they can enter people's minds and hearts, especially at prayer times.

In another report the prophet employed the image of one whose head is transformed into that of a donkey for preceding the imam during prayer. It is obviously not literal since he alludes to those that have already done so but were not transformed. Calling someone a donkey is equivalent to say he is stupid. To understand the image conveyed one has to picture the awkwardness of being the sole person in a room out of synchronization with all others.

This is another one among many misunderstood ahadith, often derided by critics of Islam, which need to be understood in terms of imagery.

For example the ahadith saying the satan passes wind upon hearing the call to prayer while running off fast and far away is obviously meant at depicting his intense loathing of it, and fear. To illustrate one can refer to the popular depictions (real or fake) of exorcisms and their physical effects on those undergoing it. Also in that particular hadith, what is rendered "passing wind" is the Arabic "dart", which is amply used in Arabic literature in other ways, including to escape, to disapprove, all of which equally apply in the context of the hadith.

It is very common in Arabic parlance of the past and today, to figuratively speak of Satan as influencing and/or adding to one's afflictions, physical or spiritual.

Other Semitic languages have this feature as well, as seen from Jesus' calling Peter "satan" in the NT Matt16:23, that when someone or something is associated with the devil, most of the time it is understood as a metaphor for its evil consequences. When some reports depict Satan as staying in one's nose at night, and that one should rinse it thrice (the number is just a recommendation not a strict obligation, and by the way a threefold repetion of the same action in religion is amply found within Christian rituals), it never states that such an action "flushes" Satan out. The prophet is here obviously giving a disease prevention advise and relief. It was addressed to desert people who surely experienced respiratory discomfort from sleeping in the dry desert climate. Rinsing the nose thrice helps decongesting it, humidifying it to ease breathing, but more importantly flushing out harmful dust and sand particles, things causing harm and hence the figurative association with Satan. The Prophet said,
 "When the darkness of night comes, or in the evening, collect your children, for the devil is abroad at that time, and when an hour of the night has passed let them free and shut the doors, making mention of God’s name, for the devil does not open a shut door. Tie up you buckets, mentioning God's name; cover up your vessels, mentioning God’s name, even though you should just put something on them, and extinguish your lamps". 
This again is plain common sense, while always relying on Allah for the outcome of things. Evil, whether coming from the men, jinn or anything else can and will affect all that was mentioned without precautions and relying on Allah. Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr said: In this hadeeth there is a command to close doors of houses at night. This is a Sunnah which is enjoined to protect people against the devils of mankind and the jinn. Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said: Ibn Daqeeq al-‘Eid said: in the command to close doors there are both religious and worldly benefits which protect lives and wealth from evildoers, and especially the devils.

It is interesting that among the critics of such ahadith are those who believe in Satan and demons entering people and animals' bodies, taking full control of their victims.

Apostate prophet needs pic or didnt happen; Satan urinates in ears, farts, plays with bells and sleeps in noses?

In answer to the video "All The Things That Satan Does (Ridiculous Islamic Teachings)"

There are narrations speaking of the effects of revelation, not only on the prophet but on those around him; his camel would sit and sink into the sand, a close companion whose knee happenned to be under that of the prophet almost shattered. When he described it at times coming to him "like" the sound of a bell (meaning something similar but not the same) it was to convey to his addressees in terms they could relate to, what he was personally experiencing.

As a side note, the hadith saying the
"bell is the musical instrument of the Satan"
obviously is speaking of the real, physical thing unlike the similitude the prophet was using in reference to a certain type of revelation, further it isnt speaking of bells used at any occasion but for musical purposes that invite devilish, inappropriate behavior. It is well established in classical Arabic, let alone Semitic languages in general as seen from Jesus' calling Peter "satan" in the NT Matt16:23, that when someone or something is associated with the devil, most of the time it is understood as a metaphor for its evil consequences.

For example in Medina the Muslims are reported to have suggested using bells at first to signal the arrival of the time of prayer, although eventually someone was designated to vocally call the people to prayer.

The Quran never came to correct the prophet's worldviews in terms of knowledge of nature and general causality, neither of his contemporaries but rather guide him and the rest of humanity through him, to the most complete, advanced human spiritual knowledge
"The Messenger of Allah and I passed by some people who were at the top of their date palms. He said: “What are these people doing?” They said: “They are pollinating them, putting the male with the female so that it will be pollinated.” The Messenger of Allah said: “I do not think that it is of any use.” They were told about that, so they stopped doing it. The Messenger of Allah was told about that and he said: “If it benefits them, let them do it. I only expressed what I thought. Do not blame me for what I say based on my own thoughts, but if I narrate something to you from Allah, then follow it, for I will never tell lies about Allah, may He Glorified and Exalted is He.” He continued in another version "You know better about your worldly affairs".
The divine protection  therefore only pertained to the Quran which is the source of that perfect spiritual knowledge. The prophet was "uswa hasana" in his application of the Quran, not how he ate (When he said to eat with the right hand exclusively it was because the left was reserved for cleansing oneself. This is again, far from being a ritualistic obsession, a pragmatic approach to general hygiene), slept or saw the nature around him. This phrase in no way implies that he was a perfect creation.

Many verses urge him and those with him to seek God's forgiveness for shortcomings and the prophet used to implore God daily to be protected from sins. Anyone is free to imitate his lifestyle and adopt his worldviews as found in extra Quranic writings, if one finds any personal benefits in doing so but that isn't a religious requirement nor relevant to it, and that is explicitly stated in the Quran itself.

With that in mind, when the prophet made deductions as related in the ahadith, pertaining to his natural environement, general causality and basic observation of certain phenomenon, it is only expected from him that they would fit what the ancients of his time would find "plausible".

These views however, right or wrong, no matter how extraordinary they might seem in light of our current knowledge, have no bearing on the Quran itself, which is again, pledged to be fully protected.

It would have been interesting to have had written records of how the previous prophets saw the world, as we have with Muhammad, and see who among them held the most "unscientific" personal views. There are many examples to be extracted from the ahadith, most of them inappropriately derided and misunderstood by modern people, although none of them are falsifiable and even if proven wrong, as said above, have no bearing on the Quran itself. Here are a few quotations alluded to by this youtuber.