Muslims converting to Christianity

[Draco]

I've just watched an interesting documentary broadcast by the BBC about Muslims (resident in the UK) converting to Christianity (did any body else happen to see it?). Some of the converts have been subject to violent attacks by other Muslims who disapprove with the conversion. I wonder what people thought about this given that many widely available Islamic texts actively encourage violent acts to those who apostatise.

[islamirama]

What was the name of the documentary?

when was it aired?

who was the narrator?

what is the publish date?

can you provide any links from their website?

[bewildred]

I don't know if there's worse than Ridda. Those are just bewildred lambs who lost their faith. allah yahdihoum ila assirat al moustakim.

Bewildred

[wilberhum]

I've just watched an interesting documentary broadcast by the BBC about Muslims (resident in the UK) converting to Christianity (did any body else happen to see it?). Some of the converts have been subject to violent attacks by other Muslims who disapprove with the conversion. I wonder what people thought about this given that many widely available Islamic texts actively encourage violent acts to those who apostatise.

I didn't see the documentary, but I have seen several write ups on it.

In fact I posted one. Wish I could remember where I posted it.

Oh sigh, the problems of short term memory loss. :-\

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[amille40]

I wonder if this has anything to do with missionaries that seem to tie food and education along with conversion to christianity (although this happens mostly in africa and south america.)

[Kittygyal]

Humm.. God knows but erm all i can say is best for them i guess..

Don't think im going to go back to Christianity (Catholic)

[ummAbdillah]

edit

[Draco]

What was the name of the documentary?

when was it aired?

who was the narrator?

what is the publish date?

can you provide any links from their website?

I was mistaken, it was not broadcast by the BBC. It was shown just an hour or so ago (UK time).

Show: Dispatches
Date: Monday 17 September
Time: 8:00pm - 9:00pm
Channel: Channel 4
Title: Unholy War

Here's a link:

http://www.channel4.com/news/article...oly+war/802852

[farhan2]

i havnt had a chance to watch it but i got my mum to record it..

[The_Prince]

when these apostates come out calling the prophet Muhammad a criminal, and that Islam= violence, nazism and produces backward ppl and so on what do they expect but a harsh response? these ppl attack and insult and purposely provoke, and when they get attacked they cry foul play? they are asking for it.

perhaps if apostates would stop insulting all muslims, and Islam 24-7 then maybe they will start being treated normally by muslims, until then, dont count on it.

[The_Prince]

say americans in america called america cr@p, criminal, backward, facist, etc, they would get a good beating for sure, especially in the south! and would be looked on as evil traitors etc etc

why anything different with apostates of Islam? they are essentially the same thing, but since the world is anti-Islamic as usual they twist and turn things to make it seem that muslims are the bad evil ones. muslims have feelings too you know, when you say Islam is nazism and all wrong and Muhammad is a criminal and you say this on and on day after day 24-7 you will eventually get violence, this is natural, but no muslims are always supposed to keep calm, turn the cheek bla bla bla heck were even not supposed to verbally speak out or we will be frowned upon and labelled as extremists!

for the sake of world peace i really call on you westerners to control the apostates, not the other way round that we should control the muslims, because apostates are simply asking for it.

[Isambard]

say americans in america called america cr@p, criminal, backward, facist, etc, they would get a good beating for sure, especially in the south! and would be looked on as evil traitors etc etc

why anything different with apostates of Islam? they are essentially the same thing, but since the world is anti-Islamic as usual they twist and turn things to make it seem that muslims are the bad evil ones. muslims have feelings too you know, when you say Islam is nazism and all wrong and Muhammad is a criminal and you say this on and on day after day 24-7 you will eventually get violence, this is natural, but no muslims are always supposed to keep calm, turn the cheek bla bla bla heck were even not supposed to verbally speak out or we will be frowned upon and labelled as extremists!

for the sake of world peace i really call on you westerners to control the apostates, not the other way round that we should control the muslims, because apostates are simply asking for it.

Except you do have Americans critisizing the status quo...daily. There are a number of groups who do this and guess what, ppl who touch them go to jail for violating the first amedment. Why isnt there such a thing in islam?

That said, not all apostates attack Islam, yet quite a few passive ones have received death threats or have been shuned. Care to comment?

[جوري]

Actually traitors in the U.S get the death sentence ( not mere teasing and tormenting).. check out ethyl and julius Rosenberg...
this topic of apostasy has been discussed here ad nauseam.. if anyone is unclear of ruling use the search feature--easy way to get a scholarly view along with some random opinions, without rousing a heated topic in the outset of Ramadan!

regards

[Woodrow]

Except you do have Americans critisizing the status quo...daily. There are a number of groups who do this and guess what, ppl who touch them go to jail for violating the first amedment. Why isnt there such a thing in islam?

That said, not all apostates attack Islam, yet quite a few passive ones have received death threats or have been shuned. Care to comment?

That said, not all apostates attack Islam, yet quite a few passive ones have received death threats or have been shuned.

I can see that shunning probably does happen. That will occur to some extent when a person leaves any religion. If you read the threads here you will see that fairly common threads to start are ones started by recent reverts and how they were disowned by friends and relatives.

Now for passive apostates, I tend to believe any death threads are rare. I do not know of any quiet apostate receiving them. I can not say it does not happen. but, I do not know of any cases where it did happen.

[Woodrow]

Actually traitors in the U.S get the death sentence ( not mere teasing and tormenting).. check out ethyl and julius Rosenberg...
this topic of apostasy has been discussed here ad nauseam.. if anyone is unclear of ruling use the search feature--easy way to get a scholarly view along with some random opinions, without rousing a heated topic in the outset of Ramadan!

regards

Thank You for reminding me. This discussion can continue after Ramadan.

[Grace Seeker]

Well, here it is after Ramadan, and I don't want to start a bunch of name calling, but I do think that there is an error in logic made in the analysis and suggestion which follows:

say americans in america called america cr@p, criminal, backward, facist, etc, they would get a good beating for sure, especially in the south! and would be looked on as evil traitors etc etc

why anything different with apostates of Islam? they are essentially the same thing, but since the world is anti-Islamic as usual they twist and turn things to make it seem that muslims are the bad evil ones. muslims have feelings too you know, when you say Islam is nazism and all wrong and Muhammad is a criminal and you say this on and on day after day 24-7 you will eventually get violence, this is natural, but no muslims are always supposed to keep calm, turn the cheek bla bla bla heck were even not supposed to verbally speak out or we will be frowned upon and labelled as extremists!

for the sake of world peace i really call on you westerners to control the apostates, not the other way round that we should control the muslims, because apostates are simply asking for it.

Yes, most certainly you will find elements within the USA who would be upset and even become violent toward a person that badmouthed the USA. However, if all they did was speak their mind and inflicted no violence on other people, though they may have to put up with hooligans that might attack them, the law would actually be on their side. And even people who disagreed with them would defend their right to speak their mind and have their own opinion. There would be no legal organized effort to stop them. Indeed it would be just the opposite, the ACLU would probably come to their defense.

People like the Rosenbergs who were found guilty of actually betraying their country and threatening its security by their volitional actions would on the other hand be dealt with by the law. The Rosenbergs were executed, as would be the case in many other countries around the world, but not every traitor is executed.

People who wished to simply give up their citizenship and become citizens of another country have complete freedom to do so without interference of any kind. And while legally living/visiting in the USA would still be entitled to all of the same legal protections they had when citizens of it.

I think the better parrallel for how apostate Muslim should be treated is this last scenario. On what grounds would beating them up or trying them as traitors to Islam be justified? I thought that it was a principle of Islam that there is no compulsion in Islam. Am I wrong regarding that principle?

[wilberhum]

Some how I don’t see a correlation with Ethyl and Julius Rosenberg and apostasy.
I just can’t equate selling atomic weapons secrets to an enemy that wants to destroy you and saying Mohammad wasn’t a prophet.

IMHO it is like equating a fish and a bicycle.

[جوري]

Some how I don’t see a correlation with Ethyl and Julius Rosenberg and apostasy.
I just can’t equate selling atomic weapons secrets to an enemy that wants to destroy you and saying Mohammad wasn’t a prophet.

IMHO it is like equating a fish and a bicycle.

Apostacy punishable by death ONLY under an Islamic state (when meeting with certain conditions), since it is treason to the state. Islam isn't just a religion. I understand you see it reduced to a religion no different than the others, but it is also state law. And Just like treason in the united states is punishable by death as it is state law, treason against Islam is punishable by death when it is state law.
This is the very distilled explanation. and I'll reference to threads written by Br. Ansar on the matter for a more comprehensive look!



cheers!

[Woodrow]

Some how I don’t see a correlation with Ethyl and Julius Rosenberg and apostasy.
I just can’t equate selling atomic weapons secrets to an enemy that wants to destroy you and saying Mohammad wasn’t a prophet.

IMHO it is like equating a fish and a bicycle.

Here apostosy would not be treason to the country. However, in a true Islamic country, it could easily be treason. there is more involved than simply not believing Muhammad(BBUH) is a Prophet(PBUH).

While Sharia law does permit capital punishment, it is only under specific conditions that it can be applied. The normal quiet apostate who is not trying to undermine the country is not in danger of the death penalty, but chances are his family and friends are not going to be very nice to him.

[Amadeus85]

Here apostosy would not be treason to the country. However, in a true Islamic country, it could easily be treason. there is more involved than simply not believing Muhammad(BBUH) is a Prophet(PBUH).

While Sharia law does permit capital punishment, it is only under specific conditions that it can be applied. The normal quiet apostate who is not trying to undermine the country is not in danger of the death penalty, but chances are his family and friends are not going to be very nice to him.

Forgive me this offtopic, but what about situations of muslim apostates in non muslim countries, e.g Europe or USA? Do muslims have right to chase them and assasinate or they should be left alone?

[snakelegs]

muslims must obey the laws of the countries that they live in so long as they do not force them to do something forbidden in islam, in which case they are supposed to emigrate.

[Woodrow]

Forgive me this offtopic, but what about situations of muslim apostates in non muslim countries, e.g Europe or USA? Do muslims have right to chase them and assasinate or they should be left alone?

Simple answer, no.

However if they are immigrants to the US or Europe and are doing something that is considered treacherous to their home country, there may be efforts to have them extradited to their home country for trial.

[MadeenJibreel]

Peace,

just a simple question, no need to answer:
Why would a sound man, who believes in one True God, abandon his belief by starting believing in God's servant?

PS I'm referring to the passages in the Bible where Jesus (peace upon him) is described (with the utmost clarity) as God's servant?

[Grace Seeker]

What does not make sense to me, is that a religious system that claimed no person was compelled to worship other than their conscience would have the sort of laws implied here:

in a true Islamic country, it [apostacy from Islam] could easily be treason. there is more involved than simply not believing Muhammad(BBUH) is a Prophet(PBUH).

While Sharia law does permit capital punishment, it is only under specific conditions that it can be applied. The normal quiet apostate who is not trying to undermine the country is not in danger of the death penalty, but chances are his family and friends are not going to be very nice to him.

Of course, a person practicing Christianity is going to be compelled by those very beliefs to share his faith with others in order that he might do as Jesus has commanded and make disciples of all nations.

[NoName55]

Note: (to brother ubaidullah)
I only replied in response to graceseeker claim otherwise I would have left it alone

Peace,

just a simple question, no need to answer:
Why would a sound man, who believes in one True God, abandon his belief by starting believing in God's servant?

PS I'm referring to the passages in the Bible where Jesus (peace upon him) is described (with the utmost clarity) as God's servant?

:sl:

answer is just as simple (btw. good riddance to bad rubbish)

I have seen some layabout lazy kids, fromm so so muslim families who converted in exchange for free council housing and shown ways to sponge off the taxpayer

I have seen refugees convert in exchange for getting help from church in tricking the home office to grant them leave to remain in U.K +free housing and training to sponge off the state.

rather than finding God in Jesus they found a way to live of others and not have to suffer any hardships in finding halal methods of earning a living.

[Woodrow]

:sl:

answer is just as simple (btw. good riddance to bad rubbish)

I have seen some layabout lazy kids, fromm so so muslim families who converted in exchange for free council housing and shown ways to sponge off the taxpayer

I have seen refugees convert in exchange for getting help from church in tricking the home office to grant them leave to remain in U.K +free housing and training to sponge off the state.

rather than finding God in Jesus they found a way to live of others and not have to suffer any hardships in obtaining halal methods of earning a living.

Very good answer. Now that I think of it, I have met a few like that.

It was a situation like this:

I have seen refugees convert in exchange for getting help from church in tricking the home office to grant them leave to remain in U.K +free housing and training to sponge off the state.

However, it was here in the USA. the man claimed to be Muslim, probably still does. but he has/had some questionable habits involving alcohol and drugs. Last I saw him he was converting to a different church almost weekly, usually getting some groceries, and some spending money.



I agree good riddance to bad rubbish.

[Grace Seeker]

Very good answer. Now that I think of it, I have met a few like that.

It was a situation like this:



However, it was here in the USA. the man claimed to be Muslim, probably still does. but he has/had some questionable habits involving alcohol and drugs. Last I saw him he was converting to a different church almost weekly, usually getting some groceries, and some spending money.



I agree good riddance to bad rubbish.

Indeed people can convert for all sorts of reasons. But among them may also be an awareness that Jesus actually is all that the Gospels declare him to be. Then it would also make sense for a person so convicted by that truth to leave behind a faith that denies these things about Jesus and become part of one that affirms them. Not only would this be sound, it would be completely ludicrous to remain a part of a religion which taught that something you believe to be true was a lie.


So, just as one may convert from Christianity to Islam if one becomes convinced that the claims of Christianity are false and Islam true with respect to Jesus. So, one may convert the from Islam to Christianity if one becomes convinced that the opposite it true with respect to Jesus.

[MadeenJibreel]

Note: (to brother ubaidullah)
I only replied in response to graceseeker claim otherwise I would have left it alone :sl:

answer is just as simple (btw. good riddance to bad rubbish)

I have seen some layabout lazy kids, fromm so so muslim families who converted in exchange for free council housing and shown ways to sponge off the taxpayer

I have seen refugees convert in exchange for getting help from church in tricking the home office to grant them leave to remain in U.K +free housing and training to sponge off the state.

rather than finding God in Jesus they found a way to live of others and not have to suffer any hardships in finding halal methods of earning a living.

:w:

I think you didn't get my question akhi - I'm not talking about folks who "convert to the outside world", I'm talking about what they really believe in. So how, in Allah's Name, can a man leave the Truth of Islam for a religion (Christianity), which is so messed up nowadays, that not even the Christians know any more what's real and what's unreal or fake or fabrication or delusion or just a bad dream.

[MadeenJibreel]

PS If one says that "they converted for some worldly reason", then I say they never truly believed in the first place. Then at least to say - they were munafeequun.

[Woodrow]

So, just as one may convert from Christianity to Islam if one becomes convinced that the claims of Christianity are false and Islam true with respect to Jesus. So, one may convert the from Islam to Christianity if one becomes convinced that the opposite it true with respect to Jesus.

I agree with that. I believe both of our faiths, consider hypocrisy as a very grave sin.

If a person sincerely believes in another faith than the one he is practicing, his first duty should be to try to reconcile with his current faith and then if he sincerely believes his religion is false, he has left his religion in his intent and heart already.

[Grace Seeker]

:So how, in Allah's Name, can a man leave the Truth of Islam for a religion (Christianity), which is so messed up nowadays, that not even the Christians know any more what's real and what's unreal or fake or fabrication or delusion or just a bad dream.

Might it be, that we don't see it to be as messed up as you do?

Since I was never a Muslim, I can't tell you precisely the points that a person who once was might have in converting, but I can assure you that what I see as the Muslim understanding of Islam here rather corresponds with my understanding of it. Should one learn have an open heart to actually hearing and learning about Christianity rather (and pardon the gross over-simplification) than just refuting it, one might find it not only not messed up, but actually reasonable.

[MadeenJibreel]

Might it be, that we don't see it to be as messed up as you do?

Since I was never a Muslim, I can't tell you precisely the points that a person who once was might have in converting, but I can assure you that what I see as the Muslim understanding of Islam here rather corresponds with my understanding of it. Should one learn have an open heart to actually hearing and learning about Christianity rather (and pardon the gross over-simplification) than just refuting it, one might find it not only not messed up, but actually reasonable.

I'll give you just one example for "messed up":

Jesus, peace upon him, is referred to as "servant of God" in the Bible (I'll give a the verse if you want me to, inshaAllah), so I ask you: how can a "god" be servant to himself?

[Grace Seeker]

I'll give you just one example for "messed up":

Jesus, peace upon him, is referred to as "servant of God" in the Bible (I'll give a the verse if you want me to, inshaAllah), so I ask you: how can a "god" be servant to himself?

First, I know of no place in the Bible where that exact phrase is used to refer to Jesus. But, perhaps you are referring to this passage:

Matthew 12
15Aware of this, Jesus withdrew from that place. Many followed him, and he healed all their sick, 16warning them not to tell who he was. 17This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah:
18"Here is my servant whom I have chosen,
the one I love, in whom I delight;
I will put my Spirit on him,
and he will proclaim justice to the nations.
19He will not quarrel or cry out;
no one will hear his voice in the streets.
20A bruised reed he will not break,
and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out,
till he leads justice to victory.
21In his name the nations will put their hope."

I suspect you will consider the answer just as "messed up", but it makes perfect sense to me. (So, maybe I am messed up to, though that would be no news to my wife.)

Anyway, you must recall that Jesus is both fully God and fully man. 100% of each, possessing two natures in his one person. In his time on earth, Jesus lives a very ordinary human life. Scripture tells us in Philippians 2 that he gave up his divine perogative, the Greek behind it basically says that he "emptied himself" of his divine attributes and took on human form, humbling himself, "taking the very nature of a servant" (Phil. 2:7). This is part of what I already mentioned regarding Jesus having two natures. He didn't lose his divine nature in doing this, but he operated strictly as a human being. All the power of God that we see in Jesus' life to do miracles comes, not from his divine nature, but from the fact that he is living completely in the Father's will and is blessed by the Spirit's presence in his life. So, he prays to the Father. This is not Jesus praying to himself. Also we see that he does not have knowledge of the end times, because this is not something known to him, but is knowledge held only by the Father. I would go so far as to say that as a human being, Jesus had no special knowledge about science, history, or geography beyond that of any other 1st century Palestinian carpenter. What he did know was that he knew God. And I don't mean that he knew about God either, I mean that he knew God, had an intimate connection because he himself is part of the God-head. And that, as Muslims often misconstrue, is not an associating of partners with God. It is recognizing that, though only one being, God is a uniquely a plural-singular being.

[Isambard]

MadeenJibreel that believing Islam to be the correct religion is a subjective opinion?

In the eyes of another religion, believing in Allah and Muhammed over their deity/spiritual leader is seen as crazy to them.

[MadeenJibreel]

Anyway, you must recall that Jesus is both fully God and fully man.

Prove this claim. I'll give you a proof which says the opposite:

Let's use only 1 fact to disprove your claim:

1. Jesus did not know (some/many) things

Now let's present a common-sense fact:
2. The Creator of this universe is the All-Knowing

Now let's try to put these 2 assertions together:
Jesus doesn't know everything (according to 1) AND Jesus knows everything (according to 2 or should I say - according to some Christians?).
Since the statement above is not true, as it can never be true, then we can clearly say that Jesus cannot be God.
The Bible clearly shows that Jesus didn't know some things. And 1 thing is enough to prove that he cannot be the All-Knowing God.

A primitive tool of logic is powerful enough to show that Jesus is not God.

[MadeenJibreel]

MadeenJibreel that believing Islam to be the correct religion is a subjective opinion?

In the eyes of another religion, believing in Allah and Muhammed over their deity/spiritual leader is seen as crazy to them.

Isambard, pls read my previous post. How does that sound (to ANY living persona)?
How can people base their belief on something which falls into pieces right away? :?

[Grace Seeker]

Prove this claim. I'll give you a proof which says the opposite:

Let's use only 1 fact to disprove your claim:

1. Jesus did not know (some/many) things

Now let's present a common-sense fact:
2. The Creator of this universe is the All-Knowing

Now let's try to put these 2 assertions together:
Jesus doesn't know everything (according to 1) AND Jesus knows everything (according to 2 or should I say - according to some Christians?).
Since the statement above is not true, as it can never be true, then we can clearly say that Jesus cannot be God.
The Bible clearly shows that Jesus didn't know some things. And 1 thing is enough to prove that he cannot be the All-Knowing God.

A primitive tool of logic is powerful enough to show that Jesus is not God.

You completely missed what I said about Jesus emptying himself of those divine attributes. There is no absence of logic whatsoever. What is absent is your ability to imagine that God might actually divest himself in such a way. But that absence arises not from logic, but apriori assumptions that are embedded in your belief system.

[MadeenJibreel]

You completely missed what I said about Jesus emptying himself of those divine attributes. There is no absence of logic whatsoever. What is absent is your ability to imagine that God might actually divest himself in such a way. But that absence arises not from logic, but apriori assumptions that are embedded in your belief system.

Not true, you gotta prove this:
[quote: Jesus emptying himself of those divine attributes.]

You are only assuming this with no proof whatsoever. How can you base your belief on (false) assumptions? Pls give me one, one single verse from the Bible where it talks about this supposed "emptying thing"...

[Isambard]

Isambard, pls read my previous post. How does that sound (to ANY living persona)?
How can people base their belief on something which falls into pieces right away? :?

You guys are discussing matters of faith which by definition denies logic using religious texts that talks about magic and miracles.

Honestly now, both 'fall to pieces' if taken outside the context of the religion:?

[MadeenJibreel]

Honestly now, both 'fall to pieces' if taken outside the context of the religion:?

Try and prove it (about Islam).

[Grace Seeker]

Not true, you gotta prove this:
[quote: Jesus emptying himself of those divine attributes.]

You are only assuming this with no proof whatsoever. How can you base your belief on (false) assumptions? Pls give me one, one single verse from the Bible where it talks about this supposed "emptying thing"...

I did already. But here it is again:

Philippians 2
5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

(New International Version)

The Greek for this passage is:

5τουτο φρονειτε εν υμιν ο και εν χριστω ιησου

6ος εν μορφη θεου υπαρχων ουχ αρπαγμον ηγησατο το ειναι ισα θεω

7αλλα εαυτον εκενωσεν μορφην δουλου λαβων εν ομοιωματι ανθρωπων γενομενος και σχηματι ευρεθεις ως ανθρωπος

8εταπεινωσεν εαυτον γενομενος υπηκοος μεχρι θανατου θανατου δε σταυρου

Pay particular attention to verse 7, "αλλα εαυτον εκενωσεν" (alla eauton ekenosen). The last word is just a construction of kenosis, which is a verb meaning "to empty". Thus, a more literal reading of that passage is:

5For, let this mind be in you that [is] also in Christ Jesus,

6who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God,

7but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made,

8and in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death -- death even of a cross,

(Young's Literal Translation)

[snakelegs]

off topic - grace, do you know greek? i mean, can you read and understand the NT in greek?

[Grace Seeker]

off topic - grace, do you know greek? i mean, can you read and understand the NT in greek?

Not like I used to when I first studied it. But, yes. Though it helps to have all of my Greek helps (interlinear, commentaries, lexicons, theological dictionaries, linguistic keys, and Greek concordances) handy. With them, I rarely just sit and read the NT in Greek devotionally anymore. It's nearly always for serious study that I get into it now days.

[snakelegs]

still, that's pretty cool. :thumbs_up

[Grace Seeker]

still, that's pretty cool. :thumbs_up

But it's not enough Greek to order baklava at a restaurant in modern day Athens I'm afraid. The Koine Greek of the NT and modern day Greek are even less alike than Beowolf is like modern day English. About the only thing they have in common is the shape of the letters.

[snakelegs]

;D good enough for holy book, but not good enough for greek restaurant!
did you learn hebrew and aramaic too?

[ummzayd]

I've just watched an interesting documentary broadcast by the BBC about Muslims (resident in the UK) converting to Christianity (did any body else happen to see it?). Some of the converts have been subject to violent attacks by other Muslims who disapprove with the conversion. I wonder what people thought about this given that many widely available Islamic texts actively encourage violent acts to those who apostatise.

I did not see the documentary, however I would comment on your post as follows:

1. those who violently attack converts are wrong, Islamically speaking.

2. Islamic texts do not actively encourage individuals to violently attack other individuals. Where the death penalty is called for under Islamic law this is for the state to implement, and any Muslim who thinks otherwise is ignorant indeed.

I could mention that when it comes to Christians converting to Islam the ppl are mostly highly educated/professional and often studied Christianity intensely (I belong to a revert support group with hundreds of members and that is my experience of reverts).

Whereas 'Muslims' converting to other religions are usually very ignorant about Islam and often have other agendas. and yes I do have some people in mind when I say that. also I have seen stories of converts from Islam to Christianity on Christian sites and their knowledge of Islam varied between non-existent to extremely limited. I would hardly have considered them to be Muslims in the first place.

peace

[khairullah]

The Bible also commands to kill apostates if they worship other gods.

"And he should go and worship other gods and bow down to them or to the sun or the moon or all the army of the heavens, and you must stone such one with stones and such one must die. (Deuteronomy 17:3-5)"

the holy Quran and the Bible are the same because the source is the same( ONE GOD).

[NoName55]

MadeenJibreel that believing Islam to be the correct religion is a subjective opinion?

In the eyes of another religion, believing in Allah and Muhammed over their deity/spiritual leader is seen as crazy to them.

What does a kafir troll have to do with either Islam or Christianity?
who the hell made you a referee? wait till there is thread about kafir versus Muslim before you butt-in

:w:

I think you didn't get my question akhi - I'm not talking about folks who "convert to the outside world", I'm talking about what they really believe in. So how, in Allah's Name, can a man leave the Truth of Islam for a religion (Christianity), which is so messed up nowadays, that not even the Christians know any more what's real and what's unreal or fake or fabrication or delusion or just a bad dream.

:sl:

No misunderstanding there, the reply was implied that None in their right state of Eemaan and mind will leave Tawhid for shirk, that is why I said "good riddance to bad rubbish" (and greedy trash)

how, in Allah's Name, can a man leave the Truth of Islam

since when having a Muslim name qualified one to be a Muslim.

A Muslim needs to be educated in Islaam unlike Pauline creed wherein you magically get transformed in to seeing man was god

besides that anything is better than man-made versions of Islam, as the illiterate is/will be fed and educated to read and write by the church, they will eventually come back

[guyabano]

The Bible also commands to kill apostates if they worship other gods.

"And he should go and worship other gods and bow down to them or to the sun or the moon or all the army of the heavens, and you must stone such one with stones and such one must die. (Deuteronomy 17:3-5)"

the holy Quran and the Bible are the same because the source is the same( ONE GOD).

Ohhhhhh, such wise words, but all Christians and Muslims seems to be blind of hatred for each other. The world could be such a peaceful place if we would only have one religion.

Could ONE worldreligion bring peace to earth. Would muslims as well as christians make both some sacrifices to join one common religion based upon Bible and Quaran ? I really wonder ?

[Ourra-Tul-'Ain]

I did not see the documentary, however I would comment on your post as follows:

1. those who violently attack converts are wrong, Islamically speaking.

2. Islamic texts do not actively encourage individuals to violently attack other individuals. Where the death penalty is called for under Islamic law this is for the state to implement, and any Muslim who thinks otherwise is ignorant indeed.

I could mention that when it comes to Christians converting to Islam the ppl are mostly highly educated/professional and often studied Christianity intensely (I belong to a revert support group with hundreds of members and that is my experience of reverts).

Whereas 'Muslims' converting to other religions are usually very ignorant about Islam and often have other agendas. and yes I do have some people in mind when I say that. also I have seen stories of converts from Islam to Christianity on Christian sites and their knowledge of Islam varied between non-existent to extremely limited. I would hardly have considered them to be Muslims in the first place.

peace

totally agree with you sis:sunny: its funny these non-Muslims see people come to Islam in groups as Allah swa said in the Quran, so when they see one lost soul convert to Christianity they make a laaa looo about it. its too funny;D

[Ourra-Tul-'Ain]

Ohhhhhh, such wise words, but all Christians and Muslims seems to be blind of hatred for each other. The world could be such a peaceful place if we would only have one religion.

Could ONE worldreligion bring peace to earth. Would muslims as well as christians make both some sacrifices to join one common religion based upon Bible and Quaran ? I really wonder ?

i see what your saying............you see ISLAM is peace:thumbs_up

[MadeenJibreel]

Ohhhhhh, such wise words, but all Christians and Muslims seems to be blind of hatred for each other. The world could be such a peaceful place if we would only have one religion.

Could ONE worldreligion bring peace to earth. Would muslims as well as christians make both some sacrifices to join one common religion based upon Bible and Quaran ? I really wonder ?

Religion is not the problem, it's the people who tend to hate.

And no is the answer to your question - Islam and Christianity are incompatible. They do have some parallels, but the main belief is incompatible (One True God vs. 3-in-1 god for instance, etc.)

And PS: If Muslims do "some sacrifices", i.e. make compromises in their belief (change their belief toward the Christian view), then this would make them unbelievers - they wouldn't be Muslims any more, but deviant unbelievers.

[guyabano]

Religion is not the problem, it's the people who tend to hate.

And no is the answer to your question - Islam and Christianity are incompatible. They do have some parallels, but the main belief is incompatible (One True God vs. 3-in-1 god for instance, etc.)

People make a religion, so people can also change it. Where is a will, there is also a way !

[Ourra-Tul-'Ain]

Religion is not the problem, it's the people who tend to hate.

And no is the answer to your question - Islam and Christianity are incompatible. They do have some parallels, but the main belief is incompatible (One True God vs. 3-in-1 god for instance, etc.)

And PS: If Muslims do "some sacrifices", i.e. make compromises in their belief (change their belief toward the Christian view), then this would make them unbelievers - they wouldn't be Muslims any more, but deviant unbelievers.

u tel'em bro:D

[Ourra-Tul-'Ain]

People make a religion, so people can also change it. Where is a will, there is also a way !

u see that’s where u are BLIND, lol@ people make religion.....at least u admit that what u believe is made up, or has been changed with time by man:hiding:

[MadeenJibreel]

People make a religion, so people can also change it. Where is a will, there is also a way !

Sure they do, they changed what Allah the One and Only Creator has sent to them as a Mercy, i.e. they changed the original teachings of Jesus, upon whom be peace, Islam (yes, he was a Muslim!), and this is how you got Christianity, or should I say Paulianity and it's countless variations, combinations and permutations?

Islam, on the other hand, was never changed. There are some sects who mutated in their (originally Islamic) belief and went straight out of Islam, but they can't be called Muslims any more nor what they follow now can be called Islam, Islam as revealed by Allah (swt).

And this will not be accepted from them on the Judgment Day. And Allah know best.

[kh@led]

People make a religion, so people can also change it. Where is a will, there is also a way !

:? ;D

[Isambard]

Try and prove it (about Islam).

Well simply, try and justify Muhammed is a prophet under a hindu philosophy, or Allah's actions under a utilitarian ethical model.

In both cases, it would be wrong because Islam is an ideology onto itself which contains its own its own idea on values, justice, ethics etc. Comparing it to another religion or ideology is like using French to correct Japanese ;D

Gotta stick with internal validity using its own logic to determine how sound an ideology maybe.:D

[Grace Seeker]

Whereas 'Muslims' converting to other religions are usually very ignorant about Islam and often have other agendas. and yes I do have some people in mind when I say that. also I have seen stories of converts from Islam to Christianity on Christian sites and their knowledge of Islam varied between non-existent to extremely limited. I would hardly have considered them to be Muslims in the first place.

peace

With respect to some of my friends here who converted from Christianity to Islam, I too find that those who convert, even those who were once priests, have some of the more unusual understandings of what Christianity is all about. Understandings not akin to my understandings of Christianity at all. Perhaps that is the nature of a person who grows up in one faith and then still leaves it -- though they may have learned it from infancy, they had a questioning mind and were not willing to accept the teachings of it, they begin by searching for a different way to understand the faith they were raised in, and if unable to do so, then adopt a completely different faith. But in reality, the faith they are leaving is NOT the faith they were raised in but one they created in their own mind that was a parallel to the one they were raised in.

[Grace Seeker]

People make a religion, so people can also change it. Where is a will, there is also a way !

This assumes something to be true about Islam and Christianity (and Judaism, too, for that matter) that no one who practices them would accept as true. Namely it assumes that they are creations of humans, rather than responses to God who has made himself known to us. Unless our concept of who God is were to change, none of us can meld with the other. And if our concept of God were to change, then the religion itself would cease to exist in becoming something different. From a secular humanist perspective that sees religion as nothing more than a social construct this might make some sense. But for those of us who still actually believe there is indeed a real God, and that his presence demands our worship of him in ways appropriate to who he is, a purely social construct religion would be a false religion.

People can grow in their knowledge of God, and they can change in what they think with regard to God, but the essence of God does not change because of that. You suggest a syncretic religion. More likely would be for us all to come to a better and fuller understanding of God, which if we all did would result in us having similar understandings of God. Then the only remaining question would not be about who is God, but how does he wish for us to worship. That I am sure could be worked out over time. (Though Catholics, Orthodox, Coptic, and Protestant Christians haven't seemed to pulled that off yet, and they are all of the same faith.) But the idea of changing our concept of God to please another human being, that is anathema to all religions.

[ummzayd]

But in reality, the faith they are leaving is NOT the faith they were raised in but one they created in their own mind that was a parallel to the one they were raised in.

sorry you have completely lost me there. the person certainly must have 'left the faith they were raised in' even if they then moved on to another Christian sect with different interpretations of scripture and so on (or their own personal interpretation) before accepting Islam as the truth. or are you saying that they had an incomplete understanding of 'the faith they were raised in' and were therefore never really a member/follower of that faith?

peace

[Bittersteel]

I have seen some Muslims converting to Christianity or simply leaving the religion.I don't care as long as they don't stop us from practising our religion or acting against our interests.

[Grace Seeker]

sorry you have completely lost me there. the person certainly must have 'left the faith they were raised in' even if they then moved on to another Christian sect with different interpretations of scripture and so on (or their own personal interpretation) before accepting Islam as the truth. or are you saying that they had an incomplete understanding of 'the faith they were raised in' and were therefore never really a member/follower of that faith?

peace

The second.

[wilberhum]

Apostacy punishable by death ONLY under an Islamic state (when meeting with certain conditions), since it is treason to the state. Islam isn't just a religion. I understand you see it reduced to a religion no different than the others, but it is also state law. And Just like treason in the united states is punishable by death as it is state law, treason against Islam is punishable by death when it is state law.
This is the very distilled explanation. and I'll reference to threads written by Br. Ansar on the matter for a more comprehensive look!
cheers!

If you think saying Mohammad is not a prophet is aiding an enemy, then I suggest that someone driving a high polluting car is guilty of murder.

And as far as “State laws”, don’t forget the “Blood Laws” of Germany.
Just because it is a law doesn’t make it just.

[islamicboard]

I've just watched an interesting documentary broadcast by the BBC about Muslims (resident in the UK) converting to Christianity (did any body else happen to see it?). Some of the converts have been subject to violent attacks by other Muslims who disapprove with the conversion. I wonder what people thought about this given that many widely available Islamic texts actively encourage violent acts to those who apostatise.

we don't owe a right to those who are not muslims.

[Grace Seeker]

we don't owe a right to those who are not muslims.

Can I infer from your statement that you feel you do own a right to those who are Muslim? Would that go so far as giving you a right to punish Muslims who decide to leave the faith?

[جوري]

If you think saying Mohammad is not a prophet is aiding an enemy, then I suggest that someone driving a high polluting car is guilty of murder.

I am sorry, I am lost as to what that means?

And as far as “State laws”, don’t forget the “Blood Laws” of Germany.
Just because it is a law doesn’t make it just.

Islamic laws are made to be just, I don't know what Germany et al. has to do with Islamic law. Islam gave Jews and christians 800 yrs of enlightenment and a safe haven. I don't think comprable to even modern day. it wasn't fifty yrs ago that a white man asked a black woman to get up to the back of the bus or even ten yrs ago that a man was dragged to his death by white supremacists. Islam protects the rights of all its citizens, as is decreed by God, even the refractory ungrateful type. You thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history.
I think what it comes down to, is people desperately wanting to commit lewed acts in public, engaging in orgies and being in frank bad taste, otherwise I don't see how you'd consider the law unjust.
Seriousely have you studied juriprudence to make such a declaration?


cheers!

[NoName55]

Can I infer from your statement that you feel you do own a right to those who are Muslim? Would that go so far as giving you a right to punish Muslims who decide to leave the faith?

Are you implying that this person is spoksman for Islam?

[NoName55]

I asked islamicboard via rep message to explain his post (before I reported it or replied to it)

[wilberhum]

I am sorry, I am lost as to what that means?
I thought it was obvious. I guess not. I think it falls under the catagory of "If you don't get it, it ain't worth explaining.
Islamic laws are made to be just,
Most laws in most countries are made to be just. That doesn't mean all are.
I don't know what Germany et al. has to do with Islamic law.
Just an example of unjust laws.
Islam gave Jews and christians 800 yrs of enlightenment and a safe haven. I don't think comprable to even modern day.
I would be interested to know how many non-Muslims think that is true. I surly have never heard anyone say anything like that.
it wasn't fifty yrs ago that a white man asked a black woman to get up to the back of the bus or even ten yrs ago that a man was dragged to his death by white supremacists.
I know, I remember, but how this relate to killing an Apostate?
Islam protects the rights of all its citizens,
True, too bad many those rights are definded by religion and gender.
as is decreed by God,
Based on your religious beliefs, not mine.
even the refractory ungrateful type.
I'm sure there were many.
You thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history.
And your thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history. So it depends if you read "History as written by the victors" or "History as written by the defeted".
I think what it comes down to, is people desperately wanting to commit lewed acts in public, engaging in orgies and being in frank bad taste, otherwise I don't see how you'd consider the law unjust.
Lewed acts in public Etc. equates to saying Allah isn't god how?
Seriousely have you studied juriprudence to make such a declaration?
Yes you would.

cheers!
Peace

Wilber

[Grace Seeker]

Islamic laws are made to be just, I don't know what Germany et al. has to do with Islamic law. Islam gave Jews and christians 800 yrs of enlightenment and a safe haven. I don't think comprable to even modern day. it wasn't fifty yrs ago that a white man asked a black woman to get up to the back of the bus or even ten yrs ago that a man was dragged to his death by white supremacists. Islam protects the rights of all its citizens, as is decreed by God, even the refractory ungrateful type. You thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history.
I think what it comes down to, is people desperately wanting to commit lewed acts in public, engaging in orgies and being in frank bad taste, otherwise I don't see how you'd consider the law unjust.
Seriousely have you studied juriprudence to make such a declaration?


cheers!

PurestAmbrosia, aside from the realities that different people may have different views with regard to what is and what is not just -- such as some might think that the limitations on freedom of speech that prohibit protesting at a funeral are unjust and others might think that subjecting a grieving family to the types of protests done by the Westboro Baptist Church are more unjust (read story here) -- aside from differing views of what exactly is just, which, in an Islamic state, you would let Allah decide, are you suggesting that Muslims and non-Muslims living in an Islamic state would all have equal protection under the law? Would that go so far as to permit that in an Islamic state a person could not only freely choose to convert from some other religion TO Islam, but also that a person would be just as free to convert FROM Isalm to some other religion different than Islam?

[Grace Seeker]

we don't owe a right to those who are not muslims.

Can I infer from your statement that you feel you do own a right to those who are Muslim? Would that go so far as giving you a right to punish Muslims who decide to leave the faith?

Are you implying that this person [look here for original post by Islamicboard] is spoksman for Islam?

No. I view him only as a spokesperson for himself. But he does identify himself as a Muslim, and I do wonder to what degree his view is held by other Muslims?

I also wonder to what degree if his view is held by many that it might produce actions which would put a face on Islam to the non-Muslim world? And if they did not truly represent Islam, would the Muslim world (given its vigorous protest of things such as Dutch cartoons that were seen as insulting to Isalm) also vigorously protest such actions as not being Islamic. And, on the other hand, if they were silent in the face of the actions of others who said and did things in the name of Islam, by their silence they would condone them as being, if not representative of Islam, at least tolerated within Islam.

[جوري]

I am sorry, I am lost as to what that means?
I thought it was obvious. I guess not. I think it falls under the catagory of "If you don't get it, it ain't worth explaining.

What is the point of this exchange then?

Islamic laws are made to be just,
Most laws in most countries are made to be just. That doesn't mean all are.

There is always a law that is bound to bug you, that actually goes for all people in all soceities including the 'free world'-- I find that criminals benefit most from secularism.

I don't know what Germany et al. has to do with Islamic law.
Just an example of unjust laws.

And again, I fail to see how it related to Islamic law. We didn't throw loads of people in the incinerator and we shouldn't be the one to pay the price now at the expense of making our own folks refugees in their home! Perhaps a chunk of Germany would be more suitable? after all they are the culprit, not the Muslim world..

Islam gave Jews and christians 800 yrs of enlightenment and a safe haven. I don't think comprable to even modern day.
I would be interested to know how many non-Muslims think that is true. I surly have never heard anyone say anything like that.

I think history holds its record straight!

it wasn't fifty yrs ago that a white man asked a black woman to get up to the back of the bus or even ten yrs ago that a man was dragged to his death by white supremacists.
I know, I remember, but how this relate to killing an Apostate?

has nothing to do with apostacy, the same I didn't think Germany had anything to do with apostacy. It has to do with unjst laws of your free world as recent as 50 yrs ago, and as recorded by history. I certainly didn't read of such absurdities happening to women of color under Islamic law!

Islam protects the rights of all its citizens,
True, too bad many those rights are definded by religion and gender.

I can't think of a better definition, although I am not sure what gender has to do with it? I think it is a the sort of statement you can get away with on an non-islamic forum. the women here will just emasculate you!

as is decreed by God,
Based on your religious beliefs, not mine.

Justice is universal, and religion based. No society of atheists sat down and made a consensus on what is appropriate but Abrahamic religions did!

even the refractory ungrateful type.
I'm sure there were many.

As are here in the good old US of A can't please everyone I guess!

You thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history.
And your thinking otherwise won't change the facts of the matter as documented by history. So it depends if you read "History as written by the victors" or "History as written by the defeted".

History written by historians who have no stake in the matter!

I think what it comes down to, is people desperately wanting to commit lewed acts in public, engaging in orgies and being in frank bad taste, otherwise I don't see how you'd consider the law unjust.
Lewed acts in public Etc. equates to saying Allah isn't god how?

What does Allah isn't god have to do with jurisprudence. You want to be a christian, jew or whatever no one is holding you back. You want to be a kaffir also no one is holding you back so long as you keep it to yourself, If you want to make a defiant public declaration of it, either go live some where else where they will foster your espionage or deal with consequences. There is no point in being heroic. Further I find it humorous that the lot of you, always have to bring everything down to apostacy, or paying jizya. Get real please so the rest of us can take this seriousely too!

Seriousely have you studied juriprudence to make such a declaration?
Yes you would.

huh?

cheers!

[جوري]

PurestAmbrosia, aside from the realities that different people may have different views with regard to what is and what is not just -- such as some might think that the limitations on freedom of speech that prohibit protesting at a funeral are unjust and others might think that subjecting a grieving family to the types of protests done by the Westboro Baptist Church are more unjust (read story here) -- aside from differing views of what exactly is just, which, in an Islamic state, you would let Allah decide, are you suggesting that Muslims and non-Muslims living in an Islamic state would all have equal protection under the law? Would that go so far as to permit that in an Islamic state a person could not only freely choose to convert from some other religion TO Islam, but also that a person would be just as free to convert FROM Isalm to some other religion different than Islam?

sometimes kaffirs had better rights under Islamic state than the Muslims. You should check out what happened with the Jew stole the sword of 3ali ibn abbi talib(RA), or when a woman declared that seeing omar ibn ilkhtab caused her to have a spontanous abortion. Either way.. and with all due respect to your belief and you do know that I have trmendous respect for you. If a person really belived thier God is the man Jesus, they are to practice that silently at home. There are many non-practicing Muslims who get away with it. But to publically be defiant as to cause fitnah deserves the same punishment as the U.S decrees for its private citizens who end up loving Russia more. It is that simple.

I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can give up Islam for anything else. But I believe not all people spend a life time dedicated to studying theology, if they are truly convinced they are better suited for zoroasternism, they can go visit a spot of the world where zoroasterians reign supreme and live amidst men who will at least make them understand their new found faith a bit better. What is the point of being a zoroasterian amongst Muslims? surely if you hate the state and the state law and everything to do with Islam you can either move else where or keep it to yourself don't you think?

it is like the felon who has committed a crime and instead of shutting up about it, wants to declare it to the world. Be happy with your stolen good and go either live amongst your kind or shut up about it!

peace!

[wilberhum]

go either live amongst your kind or shut up about it!

Excellent advise.

[Grace Seeker]

PurestAmbrosia, aside from the realities that different people may have different views with regard to what is and what is not just -- such as some might think that the limitations on freedom of speech that prohibit protesting at a funeral are unjust and others might think that subjecting a grieving family to the types of protests done by the Westboro Baptist Church are more unjust (read story here) -- aside from differing views of what exactly is just, which, in an Islamic state, you would let Allah decide, are you suggesting that Muslims and non-Muslims living in an Islamic state would all have equal protection under the law? Would that go so far as to permit that in an Islamic state a person could not only freely choose to convert from some other religion TO Islam, but also that a person would be just as free to convert FROM Isalm to some other religion different than Islam?

sometimes kaffirs had better rights under Islamic state than the Muslims. You should check out what happened with the Jew stole the sword of 3ali ibn abbi talib(RA), or when a woman declared that seeing omar ibn ilkhtab caused her to have a spontanous abortion. Either way.. and with all due respect to your belief and you do know that I have trmendous respect for you. If a person really belived thier God is the man Jesus, they are to practice that silently at home. There are many non-practicing Muslims who get away with it. But to publically be defiant as to cause fitnah deserves the same punishment as the U.S decrees for its private citizens who end up loving Russia more. It is that simple.

I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can give up Islam for anything else. But I believe not all people spend a life time dedicated to studying theology, if they are truly convinced they are better suited for zoroasternism, they can go visit a spot of the world where zoroasterians reign supreme and live amidst men who will at least make them understand their new found faith a bit better. What is the point of being a zoroasterian amongst Muslims? surely if you hate the state and the state law and everything to do with Islam you can either move else where or keep it to yourself don't you think?

it is like the felon who has committed a crime and instead of shutting up about it, wants to declare it to the world. Be happy with your stolen good and go either live amongst your kind or shut up about it!

peace!

So, I take it from your reply, that the answer is "No". That, in fact, freedoms given to Muslim and to non-Muslims in an Islamic state are indeed different. Though, humanly speaking, it does not seem quite so just in mine, perhaps this is still seen as just in Allah's eyes?

[wilberhum]

Grace Seeker

in fact, freedoms given to Muslim and to non-Muslims in an Islamic state are indeed different.

Of course they were. You would find the following link interesting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religi.../spain_3.shtml

[جوري]

So, I take it from your reply, that the answer is "No". That, in fact, freedoms given to Muslim and to non-Muslims in an Islamic state are indeed different. Though, humanly speaking, it does not seem quite so just in mine, perhaps this is still seen as just in Allah's eyes?

Dear Grace Seeker. You'd need to live in an Islamic state to understand it. I doubt very much that any reply will be satisfactory or to any non-muslim's liking on this forum. And I highly doubt as well, that all the news paper articles, all the daily doses of hatred peddled on TV will do anything to subdue or I should say nip in the bud Muslim dreams to establish what they have lost.

What is just, is what is mentioned in the Quran, and fulfilled by the righteous..

لَّيْسَ الْبِرَّ أَن تُوَلُّواْ وُجُوهَكُمْ قِبَلَ الْمَشْرِقِ وَالْمَغْرِبِ وَلَـكِنَّ الْبِرَّ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَالْمَلآئِكَةِ وَالْكِتَابِ وَالنَّبِيِّينَ وَآتَى الْمَالَ عَلَى حُبِّهِ ذَوِي الْقُرْبَى وَالْيَتَامَى وَالْمَسَاكِينَ وَابْنَ السَّبِيلِ وَالسَّآئِلِينَ وَفِي الرِّقَابِ وَأَقَامَ الصَّلاةَ وَآتَى الزَّكَاةَ وَالْمُوفُونَ بِعَهْدِهِمْ إِذَا عَاهَدُواْ وَالصَّابِرِينَ فِي الْبَأْسَاء والضَّرَّاء وَحِينَ الْبَأْسِ أُولَـئِكَ الَّذِينَ صَدَقُوا وَأُولَـئِكَ هُمُ الْمُتَّقُونَ {177}

[Pickthal 2:177] It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces to the East and the West; but righteous is he who believeth in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Scripture and the prophets; and giveth wealth, for love of Him, to kinsfolk and to orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and to those who ask, and to set slaves free; and observeth proper worship and payeth the poor-due. And those who keep their treaty when they make one, and the patient in tribulation and adversity and time of stress. Such are they who are sincere.

I have nothing to say beyond that. I don't think any constitution established even 300 yrs ago had that in it!

peace!

[wilberhum]

You'd need to live in an Islamic state to understand it

Then no one alive understands it because there is no Islamic State.

[جوري]

Then no one alive understands it because there is no Islamic State.

indeed-- which confounds me as to your complaints. an empire dismantled way before your time... yes even you aren't that old.. yet you have a million objection.

I have a million objection living here to, I keep 'em to myself, pay my freaking taxes, and most of the time just shrug my shoulders at the incessant absurdities on the ten o'clock news!

chers

[wilberhum]

indeed-- which confounds me as to your complaints. an empire dismantled way before your time... yes even you aren't that old.. yet you have a million objection.

I have a million objection living here to, I keep 'em to myself, pay my freaking taxes, and most of the time just shrug my shoulders at the incessant absurdities on the ten o'clock news!

chers

indeed-- which confounds me as to your praise.

[Grace Seeker]

Righteousness is wonderful. And righteousness and justice together are even better.

I am not questioning the righteousness of Islam. But there is more to life than sharing wealth and setting slaves free. A rich man denied freedom to worship as he sees fit might feel every bit as oppressed as a poor man made the slave of another.

I am not saying that there is any perfect government in this world today either. I don't think there is. But I also don't think that what I understand to be the rules of Sharia Law would be so wonderful either.

This thread has to do with Muslims converting to Christianity. Some people wonder why anyone of sound mind would choose to do that. Well it seems to me that we have to realize that people do choose to make that change. We have only a few choices:
1) Decide that since we don't understand how any person of sound mind could do this, that the person must therefore be of unsound mind.
2) Allow people to think/believe as they wish as long as their actual behavior causes no harm to another.

Now in the first option, what I see happening is a viewpoint which takes the basic attitude that if people don't think as I think that they aren't thinking correctly, and if they aren't thinking correctly, they might think wrongly and out of my great love for them, I shall stop them and do their thinking for them. Many people hold to this way of thinking. It is common among parents with teenagers for instance. And certainly many various dictatorships have been established along these lines. I have a son from Vietnam, and he can tell you exactly what a re-education camp is all about. But though I expect Muslims to object to the comparison, this is what I see happening with regard to Islam's treatment of people who wish to leave Islam.

The second option has its share of problems as well. Because of the baseness of humanity, people can come up with an awful lot (and I do mean awful in every respect of the word) of concepts that they think are true, that will turn out to not be true. No doubt, Islam projects that Christianity, because of its views with regard to Jesus and God is actually an awful theology. Similarly, I think that Nazism, Mormonism, atheism, rooting for the Chicago Cubs are also awful things to believe in. But rather than passing laws that one cannot believe such things, I counter them in the arena of free expression of ideas. Yes, some will end up choosing (in my opinion) badly. But I grant that it is their choice, not mine to make. Jesus said build your house on the rock, not the sand. But that doesn't mean that a person is forbidden to build on the sand, just unwise to do so.


Which society is more just? The one where people are prevented from thinking, believing anything other than that which is proscribed for them, or one in which they may come up with and build their lives around false beliefs? Certainly, if the community is based on the truth the first would be more righteous, but I am not sure that it is more just. I see the second as more just, but I am well aware it is also likely to be less righteous. What we need is a society that is both righteous and just. I don't think we have found one yet, and that includes Sharia Law for it does not grant equal justice to all persons.

[al-muslimah]

All I have to say is Allah guides whom he wills and leads astray whomever he wills.I really don't care if these people really did apostasize inshallah in the hereafter they will see their " reward ". What a bad reputation.LA howla wala qowata ila billah.

[Grace Seeker]

All I have to say is Allah guides whom he wills and leads astray whomever he wills.I really don't care if these people really did apostasize inshallah in the hereafter they will see their " reward ". What a bad reputation.LA howla wala qowata ila billah.

I believe you have just given the best reason yet why there should be no law respecting people converting one way or the other. If it is Allah who leads them, then why should we humans stand in their way?

[MadeenJibreel]

I believe you have just given the best reason yet why there should be no law respecting people converting one way or the other. If it is Allah who leads them, then why should we humans stand in their way?

People have been given free will to choose what they want. Injustice is done to nobody.

[Grace Seeker]

People have been given free will to choose what they want. Injustice is done to nobody.

If no one stands in the way of the exercise of that free will and if no government seeks to punish those who do exercise it, then you are correct. But is that what is actually happening?

[MadeenJibreel]

If no one stands in the way of the exercise of that free will and if no government seeks to punish those who do exercise it, then you are correct. But is that what is actually happening?

Government is not religion.

[Pygoscelis]

Righteousness is wonderful. And righteousness and justice together are even better.

Both of those words, righteousness and justice have incredibly elastic definitions. What do you mean when you use them? When some people say righteousness they mean intolerance and when some people say justice they mean vengeance.

A rich man denied freedom to worship as he sees fit might feel every bit as oppressed as a poor man made the slave of another.

Is this just literary flair or do you really believe that denying worship practices is on par with slavery?

1) Decide that since we don't understand how any person of sound mind could do this, that the person must therefore be of unsound mind.
2) Allow people to think/believe as they wish as long as their actual behavior causes no harm to another.

These are not conflicting. We allow many people of unsound mind to do and believe what they wish.

Similarly, I think that Nazism, Mormonism, atheism, rooting for the Chicago Cubs are also awful things to believe in.

I agree with the first two. The third isn't a belief. The fourth is too horrid for me to imagine.

What we need is a society that is both righteous and just.

Again, those terms are too elastic for such a society to ever exist in the eyes of all.

[Grace Seeker]

Government is not religion.

Government is not religion. But some governments try to promote a particular religion. Just as some religions try to promote a partiuclar government.

But more impotantly, any one who exercises their will over another human being is in some way trying to govern their behavior and therefore is a type of governing authority. Be it a national government, a religious authority, or the government of an individual household, I believe we have to be a respector of persons, and that includes the individual's right to one's own self-identity. Part of that self-identity is, in my opinion, the freedom to believe as one chooses so long as the exercise of that freedom does not result in hurting any one else in the process.

For me to treat people violently because they reject the religion that I hold, would not be respecting them. For any religion to even condone, let alone to promote, violence toward someone simply for turning their backs on that faith is also to not respect that individual's God-given free will. Additionally, it would seem to me, that for a Muslim is to condone violence toward a person who rejects Islam is to be disrespectful to Allah who "guides whom he wills and leads astray whomever he wills", for if it was Allah himself who gave them the freedom to make whatever choice they would in this life, and it is he who determines their "reward" (or punishment) in the hereafter. What place is that for us humans to be punishing one another? That is best left to Allah, not an individual, not a government, not a church, not the Ummah.

[MadeenJibreel]

... for if they turn astray, that must be the will of Allah.

I think you're quite a bit confused there. Nothing happens without Allah's Will. Nothing escapes His control over His creations. But the bit you're confused about is that Allah gave free will to every human, including you. Now your choice in religion (as you declared it here on the forum) is Christianity. Your choice is your choice but the ability to have it is given by Allah, as nothing moves without His Will. So if you make up your mind to do good, Allah Will give it the power to do so in a way He Wills, and if you choose to do good, the ability will be provided for you, until your prescribed day of moving in the hereafter comes.

[Grace Seeker]

I think you're quite a bit confused there. Nothing happens without Allah's Will. Nothing escapes His control over His creations. But the bit you're confused about is that Allah gave free will to every human, including you. Now your choice in religion (as you declared it here on the forum) is Christianity. Your choice is your choice but the ability to have it is given by Allah, as nothing moves without His Will. So if you make up your mind to do good, Allah Will give it the power to do so in a way He Wills, and if you choose to do good, the ability will be provided for you, until your prescribed day of moving in the hereafter comes.

Thank-you for clarifying your meaning. I did not think that Islam was deterministic, but that is how I read your post. I'll edit my last post to reflect the correction you have provided.

[glo]

I wonder just how many people here have watched the full programme of 'Dispatches - Unholy War'?

I just have ... and I feel like crying, hearing about the persecution some of the 3000 Muslim converts to Christianity in Britain suffer. (This programme does not deal with Muslim apostates to other religions or atheism ...)

NOBODY should experience any suffering on account of their faith!

I wonder how those members here, who have experienced difficulties in their own families when they converted to Islam, feel about seeing the same happening (and, if I may say so, in seemingly stronger and more extreme ways!) to Muslims who have chosen to convert to Christianity??

BTW, I thought the Dispatches programme was very well balanced, and by no menas just 'pointing the finger of blame'.
It is worth watching!

Peace

[NoName55]

I wonder just how many people here have watched the full programme of 'Dispatches - Unholy War'?

I just have ... and I feel like crying, hearing about the persecution some of the 3000 Muslim converts to Christianity in Britain suffer. (This programme does not deal with Muslim apostates to other religions or atheism ...)

NOBODY should experience any suffering on account of their faith!

I wonder how those members here, who have experienced difficulties in their own families when they converted to Islam, feel about seeing the same happening (and, if I may say so, in seemingly stronger and more extreme ways!) to Muslims who have chosen to convert to Christianity??

BTW, I thought the Dispatches programme was very well balanced, and by no menas just 'pointing the finger of blame'.
It is worth watching!

Peace

I have seen real life unholy war where these nuevo Christians make persecution claims

I know of one woman whose husband was sickly looking man always at work (12 hrs x 7 days), she had 4 kids who were constantly abused by neighbouring white kids, there was daily ritual of posting crap thru the letter box stoning egg throwing car damage + cars stolen every time they replaced it (over 11 years).

police put it all down to (unknown) kids with high spirit just having fun and joy riding, instead of theft, burglary, racial harassment, robbery etc.

so the woman hatched a plot against the husband, and started to tell her doctor about how she was thinking of becoming a Christian and was being prevented and abused by her fundamentalist Muslim husband.

In December 2000, an army of police and social workers came to the house, while the husband was away, took the family to a "safe house" security cameras were installed around the house, permanent social worker (a Muslim hating Sikh girl) was assigned, as well as home helpers and school escorts for the children.

The husband is now a tramp who sleeps rough in Leeds and can be seen foraging for food in bins and trying to get himself arrested on winter nights for vagrancy. when seen by police they pick him up drop him off about 3/4 miles away from Leeds City.

If you are being harassed for any reason and are not getting any help from authorities, just claim to be a new Christian/potential christian and see what a difference that makes (I only know of cases in Leeds)

[Malaikah]

:sl:

As far as I know, the most we can do, living in non-Muslim countries, is boycott apostates.

Does anyone have any information about who we should treat them? Violence and taking the law into ones own hands aren't allowed. We can only boycott, is that right?

[ummzayd]

If you think saying Mohammad is not a prophet is aiding an enemy, then I suggest that someone driving a high polluting car is guilty of murder.

not believing that Rasoolullah pbuh was a prophet is not in itself an act of treason, and in the lifetime of the Prophet pbuh those who quietly left the community of believers and no longer lived as Muslims were not pursued and killed. But this is very different from taking a pledge of allegiance, and then going over to the enemy which is determined to crush the community to whom you gave your pledge, and helping that enemy achieve his objective. that is treason.

peace

[NoName55]

:sl:

As far as I know, the most we can do, living in non-Muslim countries, is boycott apostates.

Does anyone have any information about how we should treat them? Violence and taking the law into ones own hands aren't allowed. We can only boycott, is that right?

wa alaikum salaam
well, I would not boycott them but we should keep trying to bring them back but we cannot bribe them or help them as much as the church is able to (shunning is my last resort)

those motivated by economic benefits or promiscuity are impossible to advice so good choice to shun them.

those motivated by fear and desire to be liked by neighbours are easier to deal with as long as you can give them some backbone and self-respect

wa salaam alaikum

[Malaikah]

BTW, I thought the Dispatches programme was very well balanced, and by no menas just 'pointing the finger of blame'.

I don't think it is not well-balanced at all. If they wanted well balanced they would have highlighted the suffering of people from many different faiths who convert to many other religions. Not only from the religion that gets the most negative publicity (Islam) to the religion of most of the countries citizens (Christianity).

[guyabano]

Sure they do, they changed what Allah the One and Only Creator has sent to them as a Mercy, i.e. they changed the original teachings of Jesus, upon whom be peace, Islam (yes, he was a Muslim!), and this is how you got Christianity, or should I say Paulianity and it's countless variations, combinations and permutations?

Islam, on the other hand, was never changed. There are some sects who mutated in their (originally Islamic) belief and went straight out of Islam, but they can't be called Muslims any more nor what they follow now can be called Islam, Islam as revealed by Allah (swt).

And this will not be accepted from them on the Judgment Day. And Allah know best.

Well , that Allah-and-only-creator stuff is not my believings, thus, a religion is a cult is a sect is manmade. Now, all the rest is for me irrelevant. People are humans, and people can change things, if they only want.

[Amadeus85]

wa alaikum salaam
well, I don't boycott them but keep trying to bring them back but cannot bribe them or help them as much as th church is able to (shunning is my last resort)

those motivated by economic benefits or promiscuity are impossible to advice so good choice to shun them.

those motivated by fear and desire to be liked by neighbours are easier to deal with as long as you can give them some backbone and self-repect

wa salaam alaikum

And what about those motivated by personal choice and after long studying of both religions? You think that those ind of people dont exist?

[NoName55]

And what about those motivated by personal choice and after long studying of both religions? You think that those ind of people dont exist?

I have not met any except 3 (rich) men in UK.

one is faithless, works as a TV commentator self styled scholar, 2nd one cant make up his mind, when married to a white girl he was christian after divorce he was Muslim, and finally took up with a hindu girl and is hindu 3rd one is now a bishop. they all are alive so cant comment much on them due to libel laws

[glo]

I don't think it is not well-balanced at all. If they wanted well balanced they would have highlighted the suffering of people from many different faiths who convert to many other religions. Not only from the religion that gets the most negative publicity (Islam) to the religion of most of the countries citizens (Christianity).

Well, you have to bear in mind that the aim of the programme was to investigate the situation of Islamic apostates in the UK ...

I felt it was balanced in the sense that the programme also looked critically at how the behaviour of certain Christian groups may add to the already existing tensions.

Peace

[glo]

What struck me is how many ex-Muslims in the programme would not appear publically on TV, apparently for fear of potential consequences and repercussions.

Recently the 'Council of ex-Muslims in Britain' was formed, and apparently only very few of the members were willing to have their faces and names made public - again for fear of repercussions.

I leaves me to wonder, if so many ex-Muslims are fearful to declare their change in faith/beliefs/lifestyle ... are there many others out there, who just daren't to say???

Should people not be free to leave their religion, if in their heart of hearts they do not believe it?
Is there any point to being affiliated to Islam (or any other religion for that matter), when you actually don't believe???
Does God not know best?

Salaam

[ummzayd]

I don't think it is not well-balanced at all. If they wanted well balanced they would have highlighted the suffering of people from many different faiths who convert to many other religions. Not only from the religion that gets the most negative publicity (Islam) to the religion of most of the countries citizens (Christianity).

:sl:

that's a good point, the prog didn't sound at all well-balanced to me. 'despatches' keeps making these programmes criticising Muslims and they were recently rapped on the knuckles for their biased editing, in that documentary about the preaching in masjids. not much balance from them at all.

peace

[aamirsaab]

:sl:
Sometimes dispatches makes a decent show, sometimes it don't. I did not see the dispatches show in question, but I have seen several before, which is what I base my judgement on.

As for the topic; Muslims who convert to other religions do so because they do not fully understand Islam and/or Islamic teachings. Reasons are numerous: noone told them; they themesleves did not seek out the truth; they themselves are just ignorant/stupid; they themselves had no one to turn to.

2 of those cases are their faults and 2 of them are not their fault. Solution? More muslims practicing their religion properly and people in general should seek out answers from the right people i.e if I want to learn something about Christianity, I'll ask a Christian - not an anti-christian or a Jew.

That pretty much covers everything I have to say on this matter. For those of you who think I may be a rebel for having an opinion, since I am a mod, I have two words and a smiley for you: Up yours. :sunny:

[NoName55]

:sl:
Sometimes dispatches makes a decent show, sometimes it don't.

As for the topic; Muslims who convert to other religions do so because they do not fully understand Islam and/or Islamic teachings. Reasons are numerous: noone told them; they themesleves did not seek out the truth; they themselves are just ignorant/stupid; they themselves had no one to turn to.

2 of those cases are their faults and 2 of them are not their fault. Solution? More muslims practicing their religion properly and people in general should seek out answers from the right people i.e if I want to learn something about Christianity, I'll ask a Christian - not an anti-christian or a Jew.

That pretty much covers everything I have to say on this matter. For those of you who think I may be a rebel for having an opinion, since I am a mod, I have two words and a smiley for you: Up yours. :sunny:

:sl:

I liked the unedited version better. ah well! (but I still like it!)

anyways I wish these anti-Islam B.S posters were stopped but maybe that won't happen as it could be injurious to some one's wallet?

[InToTheRain]

I have only known in my life one such person to convert from Islam to Christianity and that person did not know anything about Islam. Infact she loved to Drink, club, get high...etc etc sex, drugs and rock&roll basically even before she became a christian. I didn't know much about Islam during that time to advice her so :/
It wasn't about truth but more about enjoying life and fitting in with the majority.

I mean when you get Non-muslims reverting to Islam you can be sure 99.9% of them revert after researching Islam and try their best to be Muslims (and the 0.1% are undercover dodgey dudes in Mosques trying to earn a quick buck making documentaries :x ) but you have those that leave Islam, IMHO, without fully researching Islam to begin with. (Stats TO BE CONFIRMED!)

If we think about it how the present political climate is bashing Muslims and trying to devour it it makes sense to say only those who are absoloutely convinced of Islam's truth, regardless of what the world around them says, convert to Islam which stands as a testimony to its truth. And those that are having a difficult time being Muslims will convert/apostate to ease the burden which comes with Truth IMHO.

I have also seen the lengths to which some people go to convince people to follow Christianity. After the Tsunami incident there was a Mosque which remained intact whilst the Tsunami wrought with destruction everything else within miles of that Mosque. There is a documentary? which says that the Christians went inside that Mosque and asked Jesus(AS) to save them hence the Mosque remained standing :hmm:
Why would SOME Chrisitians need to go to such an extent to convince others of Christianity? :hmm:

[Grace Seeker]

In your opening sentence you state:

I have only known in my life one such person to convert from Islam to Christianity...

Yet, in the very next paragraph you are willing to make a claim like:

when you get Non-muslims reverting to Islam you can be sure 99.9% of them revert after researching Islam and try their best to be Muslims

How many persons do you know who have reverted to Islam from something else? To make the claim you have, you would have to be able to account for more than 1000, of which 999 you also knew well enough to say that they became good practicing Muslims.

[InToTheRain]

In your opening sentence you state:



Yet, in the very next paragraph you are willing to make a claim like:

How many persons do you know who have reverted to Islam from something else? To make the claim you have, you would have to be able to account for more than 1000, of which 999 you also knew well enough to say that they became good practicing Muslims.

Greetings,

It's not about the quantity and everything about why they choose to convert.

peace.

[abu-abderrahman]

The Evangelists are active around the world, and even in Islamic lands like in Algeria, Morocco, Nigeria..., some stupid boyish Algerians turn to this fake religion "Evangelism" just because they were Muslim by inheritance and they ignore a lot of things in Islam, they were disorientated and consequently easy prey to hunt by the evangelists. And as it was said in a previous post here, they are manipulated by "charity acts" : money, medicine, ...

But one day, the earth quaked in Algeria and those 'converts' hurry out of their home (turned in a church) saying loudly : THERE IS NO GOD BUT ALLAH AND MUHAMAD IS HIS MESSENGER !

Subahana Allah, No Religion can stand over ISLAM.

I think that those who leave Islam are not good

[Grace Seeker]

Greetings,

It's not about the quantity and everything about why they choose to convert.

peace.

Then I suggest you make those points rather than giving numbers and percentages in your next post.

[Grace Seeker]

The Evangelists are active around the world, and even in Islamic lands like in Algeria, Morocco, Nigeria..., some stupid boyish Algerians turn to this fake religion "Evangelism" just because they were Muslim by inheritance and they ignore a lot of things in Islam, they were disorientated and consequently easy prey to hunt by the evangelists. And as it was said in a previous post here, they are manipulated by "charity acts" : money, medicine, ...

But one day, the earth quaked in Algeria and those 'converts' hurry out of their home (turned in a church) saying loudly : THERE IS NO GOD BUT ALLAH AND MUHAMAD IS HIS MESSENGER !

Subahana Allah, No Religion can stand over ISLAM.

I think that those who leave Islam are not good

So, do you begrudge acts of charity by Christians?

I am sorry to hear that some Christians appear to be misguided and use these things as tools of evangelism. That is not what Christ taught. Rather, he taught us to go out and do them simply because they needed being done. Of course we have a greater responsibilty to be sure that we do not neglect those who belong to the church, but in trying to do things for others it should be done only out of compassion for the needs we see, not to win them for Christ. Though of course, that doesn't mean that we will turn away those who come seeking us out, wanting to know why we perform such acts or seeking to know more about the God we worship. I would think that Muslims would tell anyone who asked them about Allah. Likewise I will not apologize for Christians telling people about Jesus, even if it be in the city of Mecca.

[InToTheRain]

Then I suggest you make those points rather than giving numbers and percentages in your next post.

SIR YES SIR! I have modified the post :hiding:

Main point is, what incentive do people have from coming to Islam, something which is unfavaroble to them considering the Political Climate and how those that follow it are portrayed by the media around the world? something to think about.

peace :D

[abu-abderrahman]

It's not acceptable to manipulate people by charity aids, at least, it's not honest.. and I guess you won't approve it either...

But, If you were really convinced about your religion, you won't make use of these indirect tools to turn people from their true religion.

Be honest and answer this question by yourself. You won't find any Muslim believing really in other religion than Islam, the example of those 'converts' in Algeria is expressive...

[MadeenJibreel]

I have seen real life unholy war where these nuevo Christians make persecution claims

I know of one woman whose husband was sickly looking man always at work (12 hrs x 7 days), she had 4 kids who were constantly abused by neighbouring white kids, there was daily ritual of posting crap thru the letter box stoning egg throwing car damage + cars stolen every time they replaced it (over 11 years).

police put it all down to (unknown) kids with high spirit just having fun and joy riding, instead of theft, burglary, racial harassment, robbery etc.

so the woman hatched a plot against the husband, and started to tell her doctor about how she was thinking of becoming a Christian and was being prevented and abused by her fundamentalist Muslim husband.

In December 2000, an army of police and social workers came to the house, while the husband was away, took the family to a "safe house" security cameras were installed around the house, permanent social worker (a Muslim hating Sikh girl) was assigned, as well as home helpers and school escorts for the children.

The husband is now a tramp who sleeps rough in Leeds and can be seen foraging for food in bins and trying to get himself arrested on winter nights for vagrancy. when seen by police they pick him up drop him off about 3/4 miles away from Leeds City.

If you are being harassed for any reason and are not getting any help from authorities, just claim to be a new Christian/potential christian and see what a difference that makes (I only know of cases in Leeds)

After I had read a few lines of this story, I though it happened in dumb america, but then I saw it happened in dumber england, no comment :heated:

[Grace Seeker]

It's not acceptable to manipulate people by charity aids, at least, it's not honest.. and I guess you won't approve it either...

You are corrrect. I don't believe in manipulation or bribery as a tool to convert people. Nor do I believe in threats as a tool to keep people from converting.

But, If you were really convinced about your religion, you won't make use of these indirect tools to turn people from their true religion.

The use of indirect tools is harder to both control and measure. Christians should not, as I said above, be trying to manipulate people. On the other hand, in my own church, we throw parties and have celebrations for the children who attend here. We don't tell them that they cannot bring their friends. We support the needs of members who may be haivng a hard time financially or dealing with other personal crisis. Doing these things might make us seem more attractive to people, but we don't do them to make ourselves attractive, we do them to meet the real needs of our members. Beyond that, we also respond to emergency situations around the world. We are presently responding to wildfires in our own country that burned thousands of people out of their homes. We responded when Katrina devestated a different large portion of our country. We are responding to needs in other countries for things like mosquito nets to help combat malaria. And we have responded to famines, floods, and earthquakes in many places around the globe. These things are not sent with strings attached. I know this because, through a curious bit of irony, my own daughter was a recipient of such aid when her hometown was struck by a terrible earthquake.

My daughter is a Muslim, living in a Muslim country. The supplies that helped her get through the winter came in crates with the initials UMCOR stamped on them. Those who delivered them did nothing more than deliver the aid and assist them in distributing it. My daughter and her whole family continued to practice their faith undisturbed. She didn't know anything about who or what UMCOR was, only that they were somehow connected with churches back in the USA, and she knew that because her father is mayor of the town and things were coordinated through him to make sure the aid got where it was most needed. (I probably need to explain, that I am not referring to my biological daughter, but an exchange student who has become my daughter. She is native Turkish girl who came to live with me later as an international exchange student for a short time about a year after these earthquakes. Because of the closeness of our continued relationship, though back with her own family now, she still calls us Mom and Dad, and we still consider her to be our daughter -- as we do with all of the students who have lived with us over the years.) It was only after she came to live with us that in conversation about those quakes she showed me some pictures and I noticed the UMCOR logo that was stamped on a few crates. I asked about it and that's when she told me about them. She said that she wished she could express her gratitude to those who had given them, and I was able to inform her that it was in fact our church and hundreds others that had joined together to make them available. But not once at the time that she received the aid, or later when living with me did anyone suggest to her that we sent it for any other purpose than simply to meet human need. She was a Muslim before she came to live with me; I did nothing to try to convert her while she lived with me (a promise I made to both myself and her, for while I believe in sharing the gospel, I do not believe that anyone should feel compelled against their will and living with me, a pastor, for a full year might be difficult enough for her, so I did not want that to be hanging over her head as well), and she remains a practicing Muslim today.

Be honest and answer this question by yourself. You won't find any Muslim believing really in other religion than Islam, the example of those 'converts' in Algeria is expressive...

I'm afraid I don't see a question, just a statement. So, I really can't answer any question to myself or anyone else. But of course no Muslim believes in anything other than Islam. Someone who believed in something different would not be a Muslim, they would be an ex-Muslim.

[Qurratul Ayn]

Peace

In my opinion, I think it's terrible that Muslims convert to Christianity or any other religion.

Do they not know that this life is a test? And that everything we do we will have to face it on the Last Day?

Only Allaah Ta'ala can help them and make them better and see their sins and wrong actions.

Everyone, just pray to Allaah Ta'ala for the better, Insha'Allaah Ta'ala.

Peace to all

[guyabano]

which says that the Christians went inside that Mosque and asked Jesus(AS) to save them hence the Mosque remained standing :hmm:
Why would SOME Chrisitians need to go to such an extent to convince others of Christianity? :hmm:

From my angle of view, I would say, that Christians are more openminded, say, we worship the same God, and a house of worship is a house of worship, no matter if bells and whistles in a tower or minarets.
It's not like muslims, they come to a chruch and say: 'eeeewwwwwww, here I will not enter !!'

my 2 cents only

[NoName55]

In my opinion, I think it's terrible that Muslims convert to Christianity or any other religion.

In my opinion, It is as "terrible" as it is when sick/weak/elderly wildebeest are picked off by lions hyenas and alligators/crocs etc.

oh wait a a minute does that not make the remainder healthy and strong by removing the danger of mass infection?

[Qurratul Ayn]

In my opinion, It is as "terrible" as it is when sick/weak/elderly

wildebeest

are picked off by lions hyenas and alligators/

crocs

etc.

oh wait a a minute does that not make the remainder healthy and strong by removing the danger of mass infection?

Peace

Brother what are you on about?

It is my opinion. Are you trying to be sarcastic?

Obviously I can't express my disgust and anger and sadness by writing it, it'll be too much.

Peace to all

P.S. Forgive me, if I have said anything to offend you. Please forgive me.

[NoName55]

Peace

Brother what are you on about?

good riddance to bad rubbish, I'll willingly exchange 100 of certain types of them for every estes, Philips I can find!!!!

Are you trying to be sarcastic?

yes

Obviously I can't express my disgust and anger and sadness by writing it, it'll be too much.

I am not angry or disgusted by any of them (perhaps somewhat saddened by some of them)

Peace to all

ditto

P.S. Forgive me, if I have said anything to offend you. .....

no need, I am not offended

wa salam

[InToTheRain]

From my angle of view, I would say, that Christians are more openminded, say, we worship the same God, and a house of worship is a house of worship, no matter if bells and whistles in a tower or minarets.
It's not like muslims, they come to a chruch and say: 'eeeewwwwwww, here I will not enter !!'

my 2 cents only

I agree that Christianity is a lot more flexible as they have little or no protocol to follow in how they pray according my insiginificant knowledge.

FYI these are the Videos, enjoy:

Christian version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhh9crU0Bhw

Islamic Version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlFyWIsU04M

[MadeenJibreel]

From my angle of view, I would say, that Christians are more openminded, say, we worship the same God, and a house of worship is a house of worship, no matter if bells and whistles in a tower or minarets.
It's not like muslims, they come to a chruch and say: 'eeeewwwwwww, here I will not enter !!'

my 2 cents only

Exactly - why would a Muslim enter a polytheistic place where partners are constantly being ascribed to Allah the Most High??

[MadeenJibreel]

I agree that Christianity is a lot more flexible as they have little or no protocol to follow in how they pray according my insiginificant knowledge.

FYI these are the Videos, enjoy:

Christian version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhh9crU0Bhw

Islamic Version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlFyWIsU04M

The Christian version is like a dirty Hollywood trick, and if Christians think Jesus saved them there, then how come Jesus (the Paulian version of Jesus they invented in their sick minds) couldn't/didn't save himself from the cross??

I repeat - we Muslims believe Jesus is but a messenger of Allah, and that he didn't die on the cross, peace upon him. Elhamdulillah, the day is coming where all Christians will have to realise that Jesus is merely a man, when Allah sends him back to Earth.

[Pygoscelis]

From my angle of view, I would say, that Christians are more openminded, say, we worship the same God, and a house of worship is a house of worship, no matter if bells and whistles in a tower or minarets.
It's not like muslims, they come to a chruch and say: 'eeeewwwwwww, here I will not enter !!'

my 2 cents only

Doesn't that entirely depend on the breed of Christian in question? The religion is so fractured into subgroups that its hard to even call it all one religion anymore. You've got Catholics, a million kinds of protestants, mormons, jehova's witnesses, quakers, baptists, the list goes on and on. Many of them will NOT go into each others' churches.

I've visited all of these churches. They vary wildly. So much so that the only truly common feature seems to be the cross symbol.

[Amadeus85]

Doesn't that entirely depend on the breed of Christian in question? The religion is so fractured into subgroups that its hard to even call it all one religion anymore. You've got Catholics, a million kinds of protestants, mormons, jehova's witnesses, quakers, baptists, the list goes on and on. Many of them will NOT go into each others' churches.

I've visited all of these churches. They vary wildly. So much so that the only truly common feature seems to be the cross symbol.

To clarify Pygoscelis, mormons and jehova's witnesses are not christians neither they call themselves christians. Just to clarify.

[Grace Seeker]

The Christian version is like a dirty Hollywood trick, and if Christians think Jesus saved them there, then how come Jesus (the Paulian version of Jesus they invented in their sick minds) couldn't/didn't save himself from the cross??

I will answer, but neither your question nor my answer would have anything to do with this thread. So, first tell me, will you actually take the time to hear what I have to say, or are you already trying to articulate another response as an attack on Christianity?

[Amadeus85]

Exactly - why would a Muslim enter a polytheistic place where partners are constantly being ascribed to Allah the Most High??

Polytheistic? So muslims also believe in polytheistic deities? because as far as i know your Quaran tells that muslims believe in the same God as Christians and Jews do. :?

[NoName55]

I will answer, but neither your question nor my answer would have anything to do with this thread. So, first tell me, will you actually take the time to hear what I have to say, or are you already trying to articulate another response as an attack on Christianity?

hello, I hope you wont take this person as my or Islam's spokesperson.

I tried to get his post deleted as I saw it as sabotaging my efforts to try to get you to notice me and to distract attention from your excellent posts on behalf of christians thus making us look like illiterate monkeys but was told to ignore him.

I give up for now as these fakers or illiterates are no match for you, as if that was not enough a whole gang of trolls is let loose in almost every thread too. so Adiós until I can get my thoughts together and am able to understand what is going on here [(it looks to me as if everyone is working to a script) and the same drama is enacted again and agian so much that most often I can guess the replies before they are posted]

[Grace Seeker]

In my opinion, It is as "terrible" as it is when sick/weak/elderly wildebeest are picked off by lions hyenas and alligators/crocs etc.

oh wait a a minute does that not make the remainder healthy and strong by removing the danger of mass infection?

Peace

Brother what are you on about?

It is my opinion. Are you trying to be sarcastic?

Obviously I can't express my disgust and anger and sadness by writing it, it'll be too much.

Peace to all

P.S. Forgive me, if I have said anything to offend you. Please forgive me.

I actually think that NoName was being quite serious, and not at all demeaning. He has simply made an analogy to the herd of wildebeast on the Serengheti plains. Occassionally the herd will lose one if its weaker members. This loss is tragic for the individual (and though I hesitate to speak for No Name, I think he would see the conversion of any Muslim to something else as disastrous for that individual), but for the herd it actually serves to strengthen it by culling from the midst those who are weak. As only the truly strong wildebeast survive, those unable to contribute good traits to the herd are now longer present to bring it down in the future. So, too, a Muslim who has not the character to remain faithful to Allah is not one that would make stronger the Ummah.

While I might not have said, good riddance to bad rubbish, I can understand this. I too want the Church to be stronger by being filled with those who are able to stand firm when assailed by the darts of Satan. I don't want to lose a single Christian to hedonism or any other set of beliefs, but I also know that those who fall as easy prey to the empty philosophies of this world never really knew Jesus, and we should not pretend that they did.

[Malaikah]

From my angle of view, I would say, that Christians are more openminded, say, we worship the same God, and a house of worship is a house of worship, no matter if bells and whistles in a tower or minarets.
It's not like muslims, they come to a chruch and say: 'eeeewwwwwww, here I will not enter !!'

... but then they say that everyone else is going to spend eternity in hell. That ruins the image of open mindedness don't you think.

Polytheistic? So muslims also believe in polytheistic deities? because as far as i know your Quaran tells that muslims believe in the same God as Christians and Jews do. :?

Yeh, but you kinda stuffed up when you added Jesus and the Spirit to the picture...

[Grace Seeker]

... but then they say that everyone else is going to spend eternity in hell. That ruins the image of open mindedness don't you think.

We're open-minded about who can get to heaven, we think everyone is offered the chance. But most of us are rather arrogant when we consider who actually does get in. BTW, just exactly where does Islam teach that us Christians and other non-Muslims will spend eternity?

Yeh, but you kinda stuffed up when you added Jesus and the Spirit to the picture...

We didn't add Jesus or the Holy Spirit to the picture, they were always there from the very beginnig.

[Malaikah]

We're open-minded about who can get to heaven, we think everyone is offered the chance. But most of us are rather arrogant when we consider who actually does get in. BTW, just exactly where does Islam teach that us Christians and other non-Muslims will spend eternity?

Hell too. I just find it weird that someone (who I assume is not Christian) calls Christians open minded because they can pray in a place of worship other than their own, and calling Muslims close minded because won't pray in a church, but at the same time ignore that Christians say everyone else will go to hell.. which doesn't make for much open-mindedness by his line of thinking.

I hope I was able to explain myself.

We didn't add Jesus or the Holy Spirit to the picture, they were always there from the very beginnig.

Not in the OT they weren't... anyway... no point discussing this.

[abu-abderrahman]

I'm afraid I don't see a question, just a statement. So, I really can't answer any question to myself or anyone else. But of course no Muslim believes in anything other than Islam. Someone who believed in something different would not be a Muslim, they would be an ex-Muslim.

Oh yes, he would be sadly an ex-Muslim but with no real satisfaction because when you get the Truth of Islam you can't find other truth in any other belief than Islam, all made by humans..

There is just One God, so there's just One Religion and Islam is the religion of all the Prophets Noah, David, Solomon, Jesus, and Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon all of them).

[------]

We didn't add Jesus or the Holy Spirit to the picture, they were always there from the very beginnig.

If that is so, then show me one place in the bible where the word 'Trinity' is mentioned? Not there! I wonder why... :-\

Whereas 'Trinity' is mentioned in the Qur'an, as a refutation:

O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His
word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" –
Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the
earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.

Qur'an, Chapter 4, Verse 171

[InToTheRain]

We didn't add Jesus or the Holy Spirit to the picture, they were always there from the very beginnig.

Shouldn't we all be praying the way Jesus(AS) prayed?

[PIE]The Bible Says that Jesus Recognized, Prayed, & Worshipped the Only True God

Jesus prayed to God with the words:

John 17:3 “…that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.”

Jesus prayed to God all night:

Luke 6:12 “he continued all night in prayer to God.”

…because:

Matthew 20:28: Just as the son of man did not come to be served, but to serve.

How did Jesus pray to God?

Matthew 26:39 ‘…he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, ‘My Father…”

Even Paul said:

Hebrews 5:7 “During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission.”

Who was Jesus praying to when he fell on his face with loud cries and petitions? Was it himself? Was Jesus crying in tears to himself pleading to be saved from death? No man, sane or insane, prays to himself! Surely the answer must be a resounding ‘No.’ Jesus was praying to “the only true God.” Jesus was the servant of the One Who sent him. Can there be a clearer proof that Jesus was not God?

The Quran confirms that Jesus called for the worship of the Only True God:

“Truly, God is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him (alone). This is the straight path.” (Quran 3:51)

http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/35/[/PIE]

[ummzayd]

but I also know that those who fall as easy prey to the empty philosophies of this world never really knew Jesus, and we should not pretend that they did.

never really 'knew' Jesus pbuh in his capacity as 'God the Son'? sure. Since that God/person doesn't exist, only God himself.

I hope you are not being so patronising as to tell us we don't 'know' or have any spiritual connection to God. Since to you, Jesus IS God, that sounds like what you're saying.

I have prayed to God all my life and felt His presence, His strength, His comfort and His love, but never so strongly as I do now as a Muslim alhamdulillah.

peace

[Grace Seeker]

If that is so, then show me one place in the bible where the word 'Trinity' is mentioned? Not there! I wonder why... :-\

Whereas 'Trinity' is mentioned in the Qur'an, as a refutation:

I didn't know that this was to be a refutation thread. But since some seem intent to discuss their views of the nature and character of God/Allah rather than how Muslims converting to Christianity should be treated, I will respond, but only this last time. Anything else you wish to debate with me should, out of respect for the original poster, more appropriately be shared in another thread.

The argument that the term "Trinity" does not appear in the Bible and therefore must be false is specious and shows that you don't understand the language of the Bible, nor what we speak of when we speak of the Trinity. That's OK, you're not a Christian I don't expect you to. But surely you understand that there are lots of things not mentioned in the Bible that we know are true. Brown, orange, grey are not mentioned in the Bible, does that mean that these colors don't exist? I'm sure that the fall leaves were just as orange then as they are now, that the earth was brown, that hair turned grey. They just spoke of them, describing them in different ways and today we use these names to describe colors though they never used them in the Bible. Likewise today we use the term "Trinity" to describe what people saw with regard to God who wrote about him in the Bible. Though they didn't use that term, they still knew the same God, and when later people read the Bible looking to understand God they came up with the term Trinity to describe what they saw was true of the God revealed to them in the Bible.

The folly of the argument that something is not mentioned n the Bible therefore it must be false can be quickly seen in something as simple as a word search for the term "Islam". That word is never mentioned in the Bible either. So shall we say that Islam is false becuase it is never mentioned by name in the Bible? No, because the concept of submission is there. And all those ancient prophets you revere were not followers of Islam, that name did not exist yet, but they were submitters to God. So, you see, it is the same thing. Trinity just descirbes what people see when looking back, just as Islam is what you see looking back.

Today, when Christians pray, we are not praying to a different God than Jesus prayed. So, I don't see the problem. Most certainly Jesus and the Holy Spirit were there from the beginning. I have previously shown how John 1 refers to Jesus as the Word which was in the beginning both with God and which was God. Colossians 1 speaks of Christ as the agent of all creation. This understanding is one of the reasons (not the only) that Christians understand Jesus to be God, because he is the creator of all things; there is not anything made that was not made by him.

And indeed, ummzayd, I would agree that when Muslims pray to Allah they are connecting to this very same being that Christian are when we pray to him as Father, Son, or Spirit. My reference to empty philosophies are the empty philosophies of pagan religions and secular humanism. I saw a pyschologist on TV recently telling us the importance of loving one another because it creates a good feeling. Well the type of love she spoke of has no depth to it. It is based on me feeling good enough to love you in order that I might feel better from it. God's love is without unconditions. It doesn't require that he "feel" anything for us nor that we feel anything for those he commands us to love. Rather it just is, it is a part of our nature. It finds its source in God's love for us, and we express it toward others out of our own experience of it, not because those we love have done something to earn it. When love has to be earned, it is rather hollow and empty -- empty philosophies of the world in which we live.

[MadeenJibreel]

The argument that the term "Trinity" does not appear in the Bible and therefore must be false ...

WHAT language of the Bible? The Bible has countless number of copies, original doesn't exist. Or maybe by the language you mean the exegesis of the Bible? Fair enough, but how are you gonna put them all together to make sense since:

1. There's n number of the Bible translations
2. For each translation we have m different views

which gives us n x m combinations. Say trinity for example: it went so far that when some folks tried to explained the trinity, they compared it to an egg. But then again, some folks realized that an egg can go off and when it does then the smell ain't nice at all. The same is with the fabrications and lies. Especially when people lie on God. To gain personal interests - in this life. And to deserve dust and fire - in the afterlife - for eternity.

[MadeenJibreel]

Today, when Christians pray, we are not praying to a different God than Jesus prayed. So, I don't see the problem. Most certainly Jesus and the Holy Spirit were there from the beginning. I have previously shown how John 1 refers to Jesus as the Word which was in the beginning both with God and which was God.

About this "which was God".
That's what you read in the englinazed Bible, I read somwehre that the true translation of the ancient text reads as "which was God's".

The Word was God's. Not God. God's.
Completely changes the meaning. Obviously somebody wanted to change the meaning of that verse and did exactly that.

[Grace Seeker]

WHAT language of the Bible? The Bible has countless number of copies, original doesn't exist. Or maybe by the language you mean the exegesis of the Bible? Fair enough, but how are you gonna put them all together to make sense since:

1. There's n number of the Bible translations
2. For each translation we have m different views

which gives us n x m combinations. Say trinity for example: it went so far that when some folks tried to explained the trinity, they compared it to an egg. But then again, some folks realized that an egg can go off and when it does then the smell ain't nice at all. The same is with the fabrications and lies. Especially when people lie on God. To gain personal interests - in this life. And to deserve dust and fire - in the afterlife - for eternity.

About this "which was God".
That's what you read in the englinazed Bible, I read somwehre that the true translation of the ancient text reads as "which was God's".

The Word was God's. Not God. God's.
Completely changes the meaning. Obviously somebody wanted to change the meaning of that verse and did exactly that.

I've never said this about any other person on any internet forum, but your comments take the cake in pure nonsense. I say that not because I disagree with you, but because you simply don't know what you are talking about. Plus these comments, they don't belong in this thread. If you want to have a meangingful discussion about such things let's take them elsewhere. If you don't wish to have a meaningful discussion, please, at least quit making a fool of yourself.

[MadeenJibreel]

I've never said this about any other person on any internet forum, but your comments take the cake in pure nonsense. I say that not because I disagree with you, but because you simply don't know what you are talking about. Plus these comments, they don't belong in this thread. If you want to have a meangingful discussion about such things let's take them elsewhere. If you don't wish to have a meaningful discussion, please, at least quit making a fool of yourself.

Nope, they're not meaningless, it's just that whatever the real Truth you hear, you don't care, but that's your choice. It's a pity that people who have some intelligence and don't want to accept all kinds of things though logic reasoning fail to accept (read: don't want because of their sick desires) that there cannot be two, three or more Gods. The One True God does not need you nor me, nor anything. We need Him.

A man who places his head on the ground to pray to His Creator cannot be God.
A man who feels fear cannot be God.
A man who doesn't know everything cannot be God.
A man who cried unto God cannot be God.
A man who (supposedly) asked God why He had betrayed him, cannot be God.
A man whose name wasn't written anywhere before the OT cannot be God, cos God doesn't change His Names.
A man who had needs like every other human cannot be God.
A man cannot be God. You cannot slice God in pieces. You cannot divide God. You cannot claim that God occupies a place. That's a nasty lie upon God. The Creator does not occupy His creation, nor is He like His creation. Whoever says so is a liar. God is not a ghost, nor the Holy Ghost for that matter. A ghost is a created thing, or should I say 'a soul'. God is not hungry nor thirsty. God does not give birth nor begets nor is begotten. God cannot be born. That's another nasty lie. One man's (supposed) death (on the cross) cannot save humanity. This is not Justice. And God is not unjust, we are unjust to ourselves. God does not get humiliated, He is the One Who can humiliate anybody. Jesus, peace upon him, is not equal to God, he said that himself (if he did, I'm just quoting the Bible). Jesus did not know everything, again - he said it himself. God most certainly does not forget, nothing escapes His Knowledge. What kind of God Christians then believe in? In a god whose knowledge is imperfect and incomplete? Does that sound like God to you? No, of course not. So why are you still sticking with that belief?

I wish I had decades of free time to write down all the illogics (read: ill-logics) that are so highly treasured by many Christians today.

May Allah, the One and Only True Lord and Creator guide you. But you gotta open your heart. You have nothing to loose. Ameen.

[ummzayd]

Today, when Christians pray, we are not praying to a different God than Jesus prayed.

I can say for sure that when Muslims pray it is to the same God that Jesus pbuh prayed to. but can the same really be said for Christians? don't they pray to Jesus pbuh (in his 'God the Son' guise of course).

And indeed, ummzayd, I would agree that when Muslims pray to Allah they are connecting to this very same being that Christian are when we pray to him as Father, Son, or Spirit

can you clarify this - you said 'or'. do you pray to these 3 individually (as it kind of sounds when you put it like that)? or to the 3 of them together as if they are all wrapped up in one deity? if the latter then how can you say it is the same God that Jesus pbuh prayed to - as he certainly didn't pray to himself. logically speaking (I mean according to christian beliefs) he must have prayed to God of only 2 aspects - the father and the spirit.

I'm not sure if I put that quite right. hope it's clear.

btw of course it's my insertion in bold.

peace

[wilberhum]

MadeenJibreel
I thought the thread was about:

Muslims converting to Christianity

Not how ignorant and stupid every Christian has to be to believe that garbage when it is so obvious your beliefs make total sence.

Let this agnostic assure you I find totally unbelievable suff in every realigion.

[MadeenJibreel]

MadeenJibreel
I thought the thread was about:

Not how ignorant and stupid every Christian has to be to believe that garbage when it is so obvious your beliefs make total sence.

Let this agnostic assure you I find totally unbelievable suff in every realigion.

So? I mean, a conversation or a debate is a floating thing, you can't box it.
And it's about the real Truth, not that much about illogic or things we don't understand. I certainly am not claiming I do understand all things, but the "baby stuff" was explained to me pretty well.

[Grace Seeker]

can you clarify this - you said 'or'. do you pray to these 3 individually (as it kind of sounds when you put it like that)? or to the 3 of them together as if they are all wrapped up in one deity? if the latter then how can you say it is the same God that Jesus pbuh prayed to - as he certainly didn't pray to himself. logically speaking (I mean according to christian beliefs) he must have prayed to God of only 2 aspects - the father and the spirit.

I'm not sure if I put that quite right. hope it's clear.

btw of course it's my insertion in bold.

peace

You ask a couple of very good questions. Rather than leading this thread farther afield, may I suggest that we take it to one of these other threads, where it seems to fit the topic more, and continue the discussion there:

Who is the Trinity to Christians & Muslims?

Questions about Christians. Requesting answers from Christians.

Who invented the trinity??!!

You might even recognize one of them. :D

[ummzayd]

You ask a couple of very good questions. Rather than leading this thread farther afield, may I suggest that we take it to one of these other threads, where it seems to fit the topic more, and continue the discussion there:
:D

and if I do that do you have a brief answer for me?

[guyabano]

And it's about the real Truth, not that much about illogic or things we don't understand.

Now I guess, you know this real truth right? These 2 words 'real truth' are often used here in a forum. But how can you know it is the real truth? Since you didn't meet God 'in person' neither Jesus, but you base your knowledge just on books and then you think to know what is the real truth?? ...just upon a book ?

Oh boy..... :?

[NoName55]

I am wondering whether it is worth it to bring the 'wrath' of mod like your pal fattah, upon myself by putting you in your place? (all the infractions you got me last time for crime 'stalking' the troll have only just expired but the stain of his name from my profile is not going away. eek!)

[MadeenJibreel]

Now I guess, you know this real truth right? These 2 words 'real truth' are often used here in a forum. But how can you know it is the real truth? Since you didn't meet God 'in person' neither Jesus, but you base your knowledge just on books and then you think to know what is the real truth?? ...just upon a book ?

Oh boy..... :?

Yeah, right, like you never saw "Love" or "Mercy" and similar, yet you firmly know they exist, rite? Coz you can see/feel/hear/... their manifestations. :shade:

[jouju]

May Allah guide us all
We don know where we wll b later on in life

Giv more info pls

[guyabano]

Yeah, right, like you never saw "Love" or "Mercy" and similar, yet you firmly know they exist, rite? Coz you can see/feel/hear/... their manifestations. :shade:

Of course I know what 'Love' is. I love my wife and my 2 children, and I also know why love is manifesting. But I cannot feel any love for a character I just know out of a book. That is something I keep for the nights, when I read fairy tales to my children.

I'm out here

[MadeenJibreel]

Of course I know what 'Love' is. I love my wife and my 2 children, and I also know why love is manifesting. But I cannot feel any love for a character I just know out of a book. That is something I keep for the nights, when I read fairy tales to my children.

I'm out here

Talking about love, mercy, things like that. Do you think they were created? They exist, no doubt about that. They were not only created, they were shaped out, designed to suit the needs of the living creatures. Somebody must have created them in the first place.

As a father, what do you think about why is that children love their mum and dad? Why they don't love their neighbours or somebody else, at a stage when they are still not aware of themselves? The same is with animals. All this love, trust, feeling safe in their arms, etc. There's a pattern to it. Somebody must have designed that too. Things don't come up on their own, I don't remember "placing myself in mama's womb"..

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Talking about love, mercy, things like that. Do you think they were created? They exist, no doubt about that. They were not only created, they were shaped out, designed to suit the needs of the living creatures. Somebody must have created them in the first place.

Love and mercy are human concepts, invented by humans to denote certain emotional states. They have no external reality.

Just like god, in fact, from my point of view.

There's a pattern to it. Somebody must have designed that too. Things don't come up on their own,

You believe god did, though, don't you?

Peace

[Woodrow]

Greetings,


Love and mercy are human concepts, invented by humans to denote certain emotional states. They have no external reality.

Just like god, in fact, from my point of view.

Peace CZ,

Actually we do not think that much different from each other. I could explain emotions in terms of stimulation of the limbic system and cognitive association of that being made by the frontal lobes.

To use an analogy: Let us think in terms of a human as being an automobile. we can explain in terms of physics and mechanics as to how the automobile gets from Dallas to Hartford. It is all true, we can explain how the engine runs: the spark plugs spark, the carberator carbs, the muffler muffs and the pistons they work too.

All of that can explain how the car gets from Dallas to Hartford, but it does not explain the role of the driver. so it is with us humans, we can physically explain the function of how the body functions, but physics can not explain the role of the driver.

You believe god did, though, don't you?

Peace

Yes

[MadeenJibreel]

Greetings,


Love and mercy are human concepts, invented by humans to denote certain emotional states. They have no external reality.

Just like god, in fact, from my point of view.

I'm not talking about actual dictionary words like love, mercy, etc. You should know I meant feelings. Not even the nonbelievers can deny them, rite?

You believe god did, though, don't you?

Peace

Well, you or I surely haven't created them, agree?

[Amadeus85]

Geez, actually i think that it is very strange and amazing that in nowadays godless Europe there are some muslims (even a handful) who want to embrace the religion of those who almost dont practice it at all.

[NoName55]

^^ Its profitable innit! and a way to gain approval too

[Fishman]

:sl:
In some parts of West Africa it has become almost a custom to 'convert' to Christianity for the good education given by the missionaries, then go back to Islam when you leave school. This may help account for the high conversion rates of both religions there.
:w:

[جوري]

^^ true,my dad was on a mission in Tanzania for a number of years, and the missionaries there were constantly hovering around the school bribing the children, this I swear as Allah is my witness.

one of the children asked my dad what he'd give him if he doesn't turn christian since the missionaries were offering bicycles. He told him, we offer you nothing material at all, if you want to attend the Islamic classes you are welconme to, if you want to become christian it is your prerogative. The kid took the bike, crashed it and got another one.
I think the whole thing is hilarious.. and rather shameful.. almost riddled with as much shame as all the pederast priests who sodomize boys and are granted reprieve by papl order.
if they are happy totting up the count through bribery then good riddance to them and those fickle enough to follow them for a bike or whatever other gains.

you want to see how sneaky they are, you should see their plan for the island of maldives.
Honestly if it weren't out of respect for some of my christian friends I'd be repulsed to frank retching by how sickening and creepy some of these christians are with their cloak-and-dagger ways.
What will they convert to christianity to do? I suppose in some regions it is good to be backwards all around. steeped in superstition and worshipping a man god whose picture they keep next to their bed.

How sad that everything has to be so contracted in their lives!

7asbona Allah wa'ni3ma alwakeel

:w:

[MadeenJibreel]

Geez, actually i think that it is very strange and amazing that in nowadays godless Europe there are some muslims (even a handful) who want to embrace the religion of those who almost dont practice it at all.

U talkin' 'bout america? :?

[Whatsthepoint]

Geez, actually i think that it is very strange and amazing that in nowadays godless Europe there are some muslims (even a handful) who want to embrace the religion of those who almost dont practice it at all.

U talkin' 'bout america? :?

...

[Whatsthepoint]

^^ Its profitable innit! and a way to gain approval too

As far as Europe is concerned converting/reverting to atheism/agnosticism/secularism is a better way to gain approval than becoming a christian. You don't get a free bike, however...

[MadeenJibreel]

As far as Europe is concerned converting/reverting to atheism/agnosticism/secularism is a better way to gain approval than becoming a christian. You don't get a free bike, however...

In old europa many are "converting" to mc-dirt ... :uuh:

[NoName55]

As far as Europe is concerned converting/reverting to atheism/agnosticism/secularism is a better way to gain approval than becoming a christian. You don't get a free bike, however...

In England you don't get bikes but priority council housing + learn to scrounge off social security too and extra police protection if you can lie good enough to convince them that you are in danger from Muslims. read more >> http://www.islamicboard.com/search.p...threadid=50226

[NoName55]

In old europa many are "converting" to mc-dirt ... :uuh:

can you translate it so I can understand it too?

[glo]

As far as Europe is concerned converting/reverting to atheism/agnosticism/secularism is a better way to gain approval than becoming a christian. You don't get a free bike, however...

Sadly, I have to agree.

Being a Christian (at least here in the UK) is perceived as being somewhat 'uncool'.
Whe I became a Christian I remember a friend (who is into new-agey stuff) saying to me 'What do you want to believe in that for??? It's sooo old-fashioned!' :giggling:

I receive a certain amount of disapproval on account of my faith - ranging from gentle mocking to open hostile criticism ... although most people will just politely not mention my faith.

Peace

[MadeenJibreel]

can you translate it so I can understand it too?

OK, I guess I gotta explain this. A guy I know, he's orthodox Christian said something like this: nowadays people changed their church, their sunday activities, they left the church to find another one: mcdonald's shopping centres, etc. Basically he's thinking that shopping centres are new churches. I kinda have to agree with him, it's only that people don't have intention of worshiping when they visit all those wow-give-me-ur-money shops.

Not so long ago, Christians in my country used to have their family sunday lunch together in their homes, now they do that (some of them, perhaps most of them?) in mcdonald's and similar.

[ummzayd]

Sadly, I have to agree.

Being a Christian (at least here in the UK) is perceived as being somewhat 'uncool'.
Whe I became a Christian I remember a friend (who is into new-agey stuff) saying to me 'What do you want to believe in that for??? It's sooo old-fashioned!' :giggling:=
Peace

yup I can relate to that....I remember 20 years ago when I came to UK from Ireland - it was quite normal for me to talk about God a lot but I quickly learned it was a no-no. People would be like :eek: she's talkin about GOD help she is a NUTTER lol. and now of course in my hijab they think I'm a double nutter with bells on....

peace

[KAding]

Did the show mention any statistic on conversions?

[NoName55]

Are you a Christian/Muslim if you "convert" but then don't abide by that religions beliefs/rules?

Many people, for social or security reasons (among others) convert but their lifestyle or beliefs aren't in the least bit affected and since religion is beliefs how would you count such conversions:confused:

:giggling:

[Malaikah]

Did the show mention any statistic on conversions?

The estimate was 3000 Christians former Muslims are living in the UK at the moment.

[Amadeus85]

The estimate was 3000 Christians former Muslims are living in the UK at the moment.

If we consider such poor condition of brittish christianity, i must say that it is a very good number.

[Grace Seeker]

and if I do that do you have a brief answer for me?

No, not brief; I've never been accused of giving to "brief" of an answer. But I did say "we" take the discussion, so I wil join you.

Ummzayd, you strike me as one who asks questions seeking to be informed, so I don't mind that you presently and may always disagree with me and with all of Christianity. But if you do, I just want you to disagree with the things we really believe and teach, rather than the things that people sometimes erroneously believe are true of about Christianity. So for those who are seeking the truth, I will spend all the time that it takes to share it as I see it, even though you may never agree with me as to what we see.

[Grace Seeker]

Talking about love, mercy, things like that. Do you think they were created? They exist, no doubt about that. They were not only created, they were shaped out, designed to suit the needs of the living creatures. Somebody must have created them in the first place.

Greetings,

Love and mercy are human concepts, invented by humans to denote certain emotional states. They have no external reality.

Just like god, in fact, from my point of view.

There's a pattern to it. Somebody must have designed that too. Things don't come up on their own,

You believe god did, though, don't you?

Peace

I find it interesting that so many speak of love merely as an emotion. When that is the case, love is really just a descriptor for what one feels, it is an adjective like blue or green, it describes what we perceive and then we put a name to it. So, it is a good point that they exist, but that they exist doesn't really prove anything, the question still remains about where did they come from. Do they have to be created, or can they be self existing?

I do think the observance of a pattern, or design, speaks to the idea that there is intent, even purpose behind the bringing of something into being. And that speaks of a creator. I'm not sure that it is enough to "prove", a creator, but it surely broadly hints at the idea.

As for the question that would then be just a appropriately put to me:

There's a pattern to it. Somebody must have designed that too. Things don't come up on their own,

You believe god did, though, don't you?

No. I don't believe that God "came up on his own", or created himself. Rather, I believe a much more difficult concept to accept, that God has always been. That there never was a time when God was not. So, he is has no beginning. (He also has no end, but that is not relevant to the present discussion.) He is eternal and as such has no creator at all, not even himself. God is simply that which is in a state of "being". All other things that are, whatever they may be, flow out of his being. The means of their creation is not as important as the realization that there is no being without it being found ultimately in his being. So love is real because God is love. Mercy exists because God is merciful. And we experience them, not as emotions, but as choices.

And what of things such as sin, evil, etc., did God then create these things as well. Do they have their source of being in him. Actually quite the opposite. Paradoxically, it is sin and evil that do not really exist. As all things have their being in the one who always IS. So if we perceive something as existing (such as evil) that is not a part of who or what God is, it is not actually something that exists, but merely the absence of the experience of God's presence. In the same way that heat is real and cold does not exist except as the absence of heat. So good is real, as it has its origins in God, and evil is merely the experience of the absence of good.

For reasons that I will probably never fully understand, God has given a degree of freedom to some parts of his creation that they might not just exist (as a rock or water exists), but that these special aspects of creation might actually exercise some degree of self-will, even apart from his own divine will). With the freedom to chose, God's creation can either submit their will to his and experience their freedom to choose within the very nature and character of God and those add even more joy to their lives, or they may exercise their self-will apart from God, though in doing so they experience the loss of joy (i.e. pain and sorrow) in their lives. Again, joy is real, and pain and sorrw are not, they are only the absence of joy and other good gifts from God that we deny ourselves.

[Grace Seeker]

yup I can relate to that....I remember 20 years ago when I came to UK from Ireland - it was quite normal for me to talk about God a lot but I quickly learned it was a no-no. People would be like :eek: she's talkin about GOD help she is a NUTTER lol. and now of course in my hijab they think I'm a double nutter with bells on....

peace

The state of Christiainity is so bad in some places that it is little more than a name in a book with no faith attached to it. If 3000 Muslims convert to Christianity in a place like this and then start practicing "that" type of Christianity, I'm sorry to say but they were probably neither Muslims before nor Christians afterward.

Though of course I want to win the whole world for Christ, at the same time, I would rather see a person a sincere and practicing Muslim than a lazy non-practicing Christian.

[Woodrow]

The state of Christiainity is so bad in some places that it is little more than a name in a book with no faith attached to it. If 3000 Muslims convert to Christianity in a place like this and then start practicing "that" type of Christianity, I'm sorry to say but they were probably neither Muslims before nor Christians afterward.

Though of course I want to win the whole world for Christ, at the same time, I would rather see a person a sincere and practicing Muslim than a lazy non-practicing Christian.

Peace Gene,

You are quite right. we both have a common enemy that is far worse than either you or I could ever be to each other.

That enemy is Shaytan(Satan) operating under the names of apathy, greed, prejudice, sloth etc. That enemy is out to find any and all who are cold or luke warm in their beliefs and direct them towards the false worship of acceptance, comradship and insincere worship.

[MadeenJibreel]

what's the point

[Woodrow]

what's the point

The point being that those who called themselves Muslim, may not have been following Islam and they may have converted to a form of Christianity that is not Christian. Simply secularists becoming more secular, but using a convenient name change.

[MadeenJibreel]

The point being that those who called themselves Muslim, may not have been following Islam and they may have converted to a form of Christianity that is not Christian. Simply secularists becoming more secular, but using a convenient name change.

Technically, we Muslims never really know are we (still) Muslims or not (i.e. a Muslim can commit a hidden shirk without even knowing it!), we should say insha'Allah we are, but only Allahu ta'ala knows that. Insha'Allah all of us will die with the best of Imaan. Ameen.

[Woodrow]

Technically, we Muslims never really know are we (still) Muslims or not (i.e. a Muslim can commit a hidden shirk without even knowing it!), we should say insha'Allah we are, but only Allahu ta'ala knows that. Insha'Allah all of us will die with the best of Imaan. Ameen.

Ameen, Ameen, Ameen

[ummzayd]

No, not brief; I've never been accused of giving to "brief" of an answer. But I did say "we" take the discussion, so I wil join you.

Ummzayd, you strike me as one who asks questions seeking to be informed, so I don't mind that you presently and may always disagree with me and with all of Christianity. But if you do, I just want you to disagree with the things we really believe and teach, rather than the things that people sometimes erroneously believe are true of about Christianity. So for those who are seeking the truth, I will spend all the time that it takes to share it as I see it, even though you may never agree with me as to what we see.

I suppose you can come up with some kind of explanation as to how Jesus pbuh is God and yet Jesus pbuh also prayed to God. I have been over the same ground with others and never yet had a satisfactory answer. If you want to pm me a link or something you're welcome but I don't want to get into any long complicated discussions, I think it's been discussed a lot already on this forum.

peace

[Grace Seeker]

No problem. The same ground does get covered repeatedly in this forum. I touched on the idea in posts #33 & #41 in this very thread.

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

I've just watched an interesting documentary broadcast by the BBC about Muslims (resident in the UK) converting to Christianity .....

an interesting observation :) & a good article :okay:


Muslim Converts vs. Muslim Apostates





I was thinking about the Muslim converts/reverts I know and thinking about the Muslims who became non-Muslims.


Almost 99% of all the converts to Islam always study the deen and try to be the best Muslim.


.......I haven’t seen any reverted Christians become great speakers though like how we have Shaykh Hamza Yusuf, Imam Zaid Shakir, Dr. Abdul Hakim Jackson, Imam Suhaib Webb, Shaykh Bilal Philips, Shaykh Khalid Yasin, Dr. Ingrid Mattson, Dr. Umar Faruq Abdullah and so many others who are widely renowned in the entire world amongst Muslims.


Alhamdulillah ( praise be to God only)


more info:


http://www.mujahideenryder.net/2006/...slim-apostates

I wonder what people thought about this given that many widely available Islamic texts actively encourage violent acts to those who apostatise.

I read in many revert stories where Church members harrased new Muslims . An ex priest who married an ex nun came under bomb attack ...their kid died.


Sometimes parent call police when they find that children became Muslims etc etc.

I guess , no one puts blame on Bible for what misdeeds some or many Christians do....so why put blame on Quran ???


Verses we need for this life & hereafter


"Verily, you (O Muhammad) guide not whom you like, but Allah guides whom He wills. And He knows best those who are the guided."

(28:56)

[Grace Seeker]

I read in many revert stories where Church members harrased new Muslims . An ex priest who married an ex nun came under bomb attack ...their kid died.


Sometimes parent call police when they find that children became Muslims etc etc.

I guess , no one puts blame on Bible for what misdeeds some or many Christians do....so why put blame on Quran ???


Verses we need for this life & hereafter


"Verily, you (O Muhammad) guide not whom you like, but Allah guides whom He wills. And He knows best those who are the guided."

(28:56)

Easy. We don't put blame on the Bible, because the Bible doesn't tell us to do those things. And in general, I hope you find the Christian community saying that these types of actions are repugnant to God, and that those who commit them are taking action into their own hands that belongs to God alone to dispense either mercy or justice as he sees fit, not as we do.

Christians who commit such horrible deeds are acting outside or the standards of Christianity. Would that more Muslims were willing to say the same thing publicly about Muslims who commit such deeds?

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

Easy. We don't put blame on the Bible, because the Bible doesn't tell us to do those things.

ummm, i read in an article that apostates must be killed regarding Bible .

If this is not true , then is there any punishment prescribed in Bible who left the religion ??

[Grace Seeker]

Salaam/peace;



ummm, i read in an article that apostates must be killed regarding Bible .

If this is not true , then is there any punishment prescribed in Bible who left the religion ??

Some might interpret a few portions of the Old Testament that way, but no Christians practice it (nor do any Jews I know). There is nothing in the New Testament regarding this. The worst a church can do is to shun a person, and this would be an unusual practice.

[ummzayd]

Easy. We don't put blame on the Bible, because the Bible doesn't tell us to do those things. And in general, I hope you find the Christian community saying that these types of actions are repugnant to God, and that those who commit them are taking action into their own hands that belongs to God alone to dispense either mercy or justice as he sees fit, not as we do.

Christians who commit such horrible deeds are acting outside or the standards of Christianity. Would that more Muslims were willing to say the same thing publicly about Muslims who commit such deeds?

I am always a bit bemused at the way Christians disown those parts of the OT which call for the death penalty and other punishments. Either they believe the OT is the word of God or not. There can be no doubt that the harsh punishments enshrined in the OT were carried out on many individuals according to the command of God. And yet these punishments are repugnant to God. Strange.

peace

[Grace Seeker]

I am always a bit bemused at the way Christians disown those parts of the OT which call for the death penalty and other punishments. Either they believe the OT is the word of God or not. There can be no doubt that the harsh punishments enshrined in the OT were carried out on many individuals according to the command of God. And yet these punishments are repugnant to God. Strange.

peace

We don't disown any part of the OT, but we do not think that we are under the same covenant, and thus the expectations as to how we are to live are not the same.

Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet and yet don't practice the covenant God made with people through him. If Christians should, shouldn't Muslims also?

[islamirama]

A learned Christian Scientist who had converted to Islam had once said that it is mostly the most knowledgeable among Christians who convert to Islam while it is the most ignorant Muslims with no knowledge of their own religion who convert to Christianity.

We don't disown any part of the OT, but we do not think that we are under the same covenant, and thus the expectations as to how we are to live are not the same.

Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet and yet don't practice the covenant God made with people through him. If Christians should, shouldn't Muslims also?

Moses came for the Israelite. And when Jesus a.s. came, he was also sent for the same nation. They had become rigid in their practices and Jesus a.s. was sent to them as a heart softener, but they rejected him. So in essence, Christianity isn't suppose to be a new religion but rather was part 2 message for the Israelites.

Muslims believe in the revelation of the following and to deny them is to be not Muslim:

1. Torah (1st testament)
2. Psalms
3. Bible (2nd testament)
4. Quran (3rd and final testament)

We believe in the first as revelations from Allah but for those nations only, where as the 4th is a message not for one nation but rather whole of mankind. And since 4th is the latest message, it nullifies previous ones and takes precedence in being followed. Why use old versions when the new and final release has been sent to you?

[NoName55]

We believe in the first as revelations from Allah but for those nations only, where as the 4th is a message not for one nation but rather whole of mankind. And since 4th is the latest message, it nullifies previous ones and takes precedence in being followed. Why use old versions when the new and final release has been sent to you?

So if in times of Hazrat Musa Alahi Salaam, a hindu wanted to stop worshipping animals and demons etc. to become a Muslim and follow Hazrat Musa Alahi Salam, he would have been told NO, Islam is only for Israel? Likewise with Hazrat Eesa alahi Salam?

WHY WAS THE MESSAGE not FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME?

[Grace Seeker]

A learned Christian Scientist who had converted to Islam had once said that it is mostly the most knowledgeable among Christians who convert to Islam while it is the most ignorant Muslims with no knowledge of their own religion who convert to Christianity.

Well, I would not categorize a Christian Scientist, learned or othewise, as a Christian, but he might still be right about his observation.

Moses came for the Israelite. And when Jesus a.s. came, he was also sent for the same nation. They had become rigid in their practices and Jesus a.s. was sent to them as a heart softener, but they rejected him. So in essence, Christianity isn't suppose to be a new religion but rather was part 2 message for the Israelites.

This is a Muslim understand of what Christianity is to be, not a Christian understanding. Christians believe that Jesus inaugurated a new covenant with God that was not just for the Jews, but for all who would come to believe in him, the Gentile as well as the Jew.

For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. (Hebrews 9:15)

I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. (Romans 1:16)

Muslims believe in the revelation of the following and to deny them is to be not Muslim:

1. Torah (1st testament)
2. Psalms
3. Bible (2nd testament)
4. Quran (3rd and final testament)

We believe in the first as revelations from Allah but for those nations only, where as the 4th is a message not for one nation but rather whole of mankind. And since 4th is the latest message, it nullifies previous ones and takes precedence in being followed. Why use old versions when the new and final release has been sent to you?

You list the Bible as #3. In reality, there is a Hebrew Bible that you call the Tanakah, it is more than just the Torah, but includes the Torah and the writings of the Psalms and Prophets as well. Then there is the Christians Bible that is composed of both the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) and the New Testament (the Christian scriptures of the Gospels, Acts, Paul's writings, other letters, and the book of Revelation). Catholics and Orthodox Christians consider 7 books known collectively as the Dueterocanon to also be part of the Old Testament that neither Jews nor protestant Christians accept. But in any contect the Bible is more than just the second testament. If all you mean is a second testament, then I think you just mean to list the New Testament for #3. You numbers 1,2, 3, plus the prophets of the Tanakah would be what is generally called the Bible by Christians.

On your comment, "why use old verision when the new and final release has been sent to you?" this is exactly what Paul was expressing here:

Romans 3
21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,[i] through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
27Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.

And that is why Christians don't keep all the commands of the Tanakah any more than a Muslim does. But believing that we already have the final version in Jesus Christ, we could very well accept the Qu'ran as a "new" revelation, for a new revelation is total unneeded and unmerited from a Christian way of understanding God's self-disclosure of himself.

[islamirama]

So if in times of Hazrat Musa Alahi Salaam, a hindu wanted to stop worshipping animals and demons etc. to become a Muslim and follow Hazrat Musa Alahi Salam, he would have been told NO, Islam is only for Israel? Likewise with Hazrat Eesa alahi Salam?

WHY WAS THE MESSAGE not FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME?

What was meant by that statement was that Allah sent His Messengers for those nations as He sent them to different nations in the past. Musa a.s. was a Muslim (submitting to the will of Allah) as was Esa a.s. And no one was prohibited from following them, however they were sent specifically for a certain nation rather then all of mankind where has Mohammad (pbuh) was sent to all of mankind. If you have further confusions then please check with your local imaam for detailed explanation.

[Jayda]

So if in times of Hazrat Musa Alahi Salaam, a hindu wanted to stop worshipping animals and demons etc. to become a Muslim and follow Hazrat Musa Alahi Salam, he would have been told NO, Islam is only for Israel? Likewise with Hazrat Eesa alahi Salam?

WHY WAS THE MESSAGE not FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME?

hola,

according to our beliefs God established a covenant with all of mankind after the great flood, which required men to live by seven laws (no idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, sexual immorality, dietary restrictions & establish courts), this (according to our beliefs) was reiterated at the Council of Jerusalem which was a response to jews insisting the New Covenant meant gentiles basically had to follow the old.

we believe that the covenant established with the Jews was exclusive for the Jews because they were to become a nation of priests.

que Dios te bendiga

[Grace Seeker]

hola,

according to our beliefs God established a covenant with all of mankind after the great flood, which required men to live by seven laws (no idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, sexual immorality, dietary restrictions & establish courts), this (according to our beliefs) was reiterated at the Council of Jerusalem which was a response to jews insisting the New Covenant meant gentiles basically had to follow the old.

we believe that the covenant established with the Jews was exclusive for the Jews because they were to become a nation of priests.

que Dios te bendiga

Thanks for adding that Jayda. I did not know that little tidbit you provided about the 7 laws (I thought that was just a Jewish point of view). Good to have a Catholic around to fill-in some of the blanks in my protestant knowledge of things in our shared history.

[NoName55]

What was meant by that statement was that Allah sent His Messengers for those nations as He sent them to different nations in the past. Musa a.s. was a Muslim (submitting to the will of Allah) as was Esa a.s. And no one was prohibited from following them, however they were sent specifically for a certain nation rather then all of mankind where has Mohammad (pbuh) was sent to all of mankind. If you have further confusions then please check with your local imaam for detailed explanation.

So hindus and other pagans could follow Islam if they so wished but Israeli Prophets were only meant for their own Nation?

or was It the case that Kufaar in other nations were already on sirat al mustaqeem? or God only cared about Israel at the time?

one more and final time:

WHY WAS THE MESSAGE NOT FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME?

and how do you know it was not?

If you have further confusions then please check with your local imaam for detailed explanation

I prefer it if you were to clear my confusion

You list the Bible as #3. In reality, there is a Hebrew Bible that you call the Tanakah, it is more than just the Torah, but includes the Torah and the writings of the Psalms and Prophets as well. Then there is the Christians Bible that is composed of both the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) and the New Testament (the Christian scriptures of the Gospels, Acts, Paul's writings, other letters, and the book of Revelation).

That should tell you something about the fellow(it is dang difficult to sort books just by looking at google results)!

[Jayda]

Thanks for adding that Jayda. I did not know that little tidbit you provided about the 7 laws (I thought that was just a Jewish point of view). Good to have a Catholic around to fill-in some of the blanks in my protestant knowledge of things in our shared history.

hola Grace Seeker,

i do not know whether protestants retain the apostolic traditions of 'catechisms' or 'ecumenical councils.' for us and the orthodox the first ecumenical council was the Council of Jerusalem in the first century, it is discussed in the book of Acts, the question was which 'law' the gentile converts needed to follow. Paul taught that gentiles need only follow the laws of the Noahide covenant, St. Peter taught that they needed to follow the Jewish covenant... as if becoming Christian made them Jewish.

the Council decided that, in continuing the traditional Jewish practice, gentiles needed only to practice the noahide covenant, this is why they did not need to be circumcised. this and other decisions were preserved in our first catechism, which is called the didache and was produced in the first century.

que Dios te bendiga

[NoName55]

Well, I would not categorize a Christian Scientist, learned or othewise, as a Christian, but he might still be right about his observation.

what if it is not the member of relgion "Christian Scientist" but a Christian who also happened to be a scientist (i.e a man of knowledge)

[Jayda]

what if it is not the member of relgion "Christian Scientist" but a Christian who also happened to be a scientist (i.e a man of knowledge)

then it would be credentialism


i'm a baroness, a countess, a scientist and a christian. there are poor, uneducated schizophrenics that are christians too... it is all the same in the eyes of God. with everything i learned in school about biological chemistry i could still burn in hell, while the poor beggar with a 5th grade education spends eternity serving God.

[NoName55]

then it would be credentialism


i'm a baroness, a countess, a scientist and a christian. there are poor, uneducated schizophrenics that are christians too... it is all the same in the eyes of God. with everything i learned in school about biological chemistry i could still burn in hell, while the poor beggar with a 5th grade education spends eternity serving God.

I am afraid in you zeal to impress people, you seem to have lost the plot and taken my post out of context.

I was trying to tell Br.Seeker that the other person was not talking about the new religion called Christian Science but may have actually been talking about a real life prof. who is a Scientist, was a Christian and is a Muslim now.

Please, I beg you not to reply to me anymore as you can see that I am busy with another person in the thread and want to devote my full attention to him or I will get confused. thanx in advance of any co-operation

[Jayda]

I am afraid in you zeal to impress people, you seem to have lost the plot and taken my post out of context.

I was trying to tell Br.Seeker that the other person was not talking about the new religion called Christian Science but may have actually been talking about a real life prof. who is a Scientist, was a Christian and is a Muslim now.

Please, I beg you not to reply to me anymore as you can see that I am busy with another person in the thread and want to devote my full attention to him or I will get confused. thanx in advance of any co-operation

hola NoName55

i mistakenly quoted your post instead of islamirama. their argument uses the credentials associated with the ubiquitous term 'scientist' to lend credence to the completely unverified claim that intelligent christians become muslims and ignorant muslims become christians. by that same token they should give greater weight to any argument i make because of my credentials.

it's called appeal to authority, look it up.

also, buy this, there is no reason to insinuate things about me or demand that i stop talking. if you don't have the time to have two conversations then do not engage in two conversations. adab and sabr, as you say.

que Dios te bendiga

[ummzayd]

hola Grace Seeker,

i do not know whether protestants retain the apostolic traditions of 'catechisms' or 'ecumenical councils.' for us and the orthodox the first ecumenical council was the Council of Jerusalem in the first century, it is discussed in the book of Acts, the question was which 'law' the gentile converts needed to follow. Paul taught that gentiles need only follow the laws of the Noahide covenant, St. Peter taught that they needed to follow the Jewish covenant... as if becoming Christian made them Jewish.

the Council decided that, in continuing the traditional Jewish practice, gentiles needed only to practice the noahide covenant, this is why they did not need to be circumcised. this and other decisions were preserved in our first catechism, which is called the didache and was produced in the first century.

que Dios te bendiga

Greetings

I am glad you pointed out that this was in fact already a Jewish practice - proselytes (sp?) to the Jewish faith were not required to follow all the laws in order to share in the covenant between God and the Jews, only the laws of Noah.

According to some scholars of first century Christianity/Judaism, this first council of Jerusalem is a strong indication that the early followers of Jesus pbuh were Jews, who were carrying on the Jewish tradition, and intended only to live and die as believing, practising Jews according to their understanding of the teachings of Jesus pbuh. They did not in fact intend that a whole new religion of Christianity should be instituted.

peace

[Jayda]

Greetings

I am glad you pointed out that this was in fact already a Jewish practice - proselytes (sp?) to the Jewish faith were not required to follow all the laws in order to share in the covenant between God and the Jews, only the laws of Noah.

According to some scholars of first century Christianity/Judaism, this first council of Jerusalem is a strong indication that the early followers of Jesus pbuh were Jews, who were carrying on the Jewish tradition, and intended only to live and die as believing, practising Jews according to their understanding of the teachings of Jesus pbuh. They did not in fact intend that a whole new religion of Christianity should be instituted.

peace

hola ummzayd,

from what we understand you are right, the early jewish christians considered themselves the fulfillment of the promise of israel... through Jesus they would go out into the world of gentiles and be priests for God. for this reason they were called christians and therefore differenciated (beginning in antioch) from other jews who did not consider this promise fulfilled, but still jewish nonetheless. the council of jamnia declared them apostates from judaism and signified the (from the jewish perspective) split between christianity and judaism.

que Dios te bendiga

[NoName55]

hola NoName55

i mistakenly quoted your post instead of islamirama. their argument uses the credentials associated with the ubiquitous term 'scientist' to lend credence to the completely unverified claim that intelligent christians become muslims and ignorant muslims become christians. by that same token they should give greater weight to any argument i make because of my credentials.

it's called appeal to authority, look it up.

also, buy this, there is no reason to insinuate things about me or demand that i stop talking. if you don't have the time to have two conversations then do not engage in two conversations. adab and sabr, as you say.

que Dios te bendiga

I have time but not the patience to take on more than I can handle, especially since I am not as cunning and crafty as you are, I do know that you are adept at misquoting and distorting but all I can do is to put you on my list of "to deal with later" members. I would not want to do as you claim you did

i mistakenly quoted your post instead of islamirama

taking on one of your and his kind at a time is, my sabr and patience and example of my adab was

Please, I beg you not to reply to me anymore as you can see that I am busy with another person in the thread and want to devote my full attention to him or I will get confused. thanx in advance of any co-operation

pity, in your haste to score cheap points, you did not see or understand that, yet you teaching me adab, when it is you who butted in, when my reply was clearly addressed to graceseeker as demonstrated by me quoting his post.

and peace to all

[thydavidcome]

So hindus and other pagans could follow Islam if they so wished but Israeli Prophets were only meant for their own Nation?

or was It the case that Kufaar in other nations were already on sirat al mustaqeem? or God only cared about Israel at the time?

one more and final time:

WHY WAS THE MESSAGE NOT FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME?

and how do you know it was not?
I prefer it if you were to clear my confusion

God sent a prophet to every nation. God cared about the Jew's because they were the most oppressed people at the time. So God gave the Jews Israel to make them happy.

I hope this answered your question

[NoName55]

I have just been reminded that I should not argue here for next week because the Mod who usually protects me from other mods (deleting my posts, giving infractions) is away. see you all on his return!!!

[Jayda]

I have time but not the patience to take on more than I can handle, especially since I am not as cunning and crafty as you are, I do know that you are adept at misquoting and distorting but all I can do is to put you on my list of "to deal with later" members. I would not want to do as you claim you did taking on one of your kind at a time is, my sabr and patience and example of my adab was pity, in your haste to score cheap points, you did not see or understand that, yet you teaching me adab, when it is you who butted in, when my reply was clearly addressed to graceseeker as demonstrated by me quoting his post.

and peace to all

you'll like me eventually :)

[InToTheRain]

So hindus and other pagans could follow Islam if they so wished but Israeli Prophets were only meant for their own Nation?

or was It the case that Kufaar in other nations were already on sirat al mustaqeem? or God only cared about Israel at the time?

one more and final time:

WHY WAS THE MESSAGE NOT FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME?

and how do you know it was not?
I prefer it if you were to clear my confusion

:sl:

Hope this clarifies it Insha'Allah:


Volume 1, Book 8, Number 429:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any amongst the Prophets before me. These are:

1. Allah made me victorious by awe (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey.

2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum. Therefore my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due.

3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me (and was not made so for anyone else).

4. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation exclusively but I have been sent to all mankind.

5. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection.)

i'm a baroness, a countess, a scientist and a christian. there are poor, uneducated schizophrenics that are christians too... it is all the same in the eyes of God. with everything i learned in school about biological chemistry i could still burn in hell, while the poor beggar with a 5th grade education spends eternity serving God.

true.

The Noble Qur'an - Al-Hujurat 49:13
O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).

Hadith - Al-Tirmidhi #5198, Narrated AbuDharr [Ahmad transmitted it]
Allah's Messenger said to him, "You are not better than people with red or black skins unless you excel them in piety."

[NoName55]

did any fabrications or mistranslations ever make it to Sahih collections on the web or printed forms?

P.S why did you people not leave this question between me and Islamirama?

[InToTheRain]

did any fabrications or mistranslations ever make it to Sahih collections on the web or printed forms??

Not that I know of Bro.

P.S why can you people not leave it between me and Islamirama?

Thought I would help since he ain't replied :O


BROTHER ISLAMIRAMA PLEASE RESPOND TO NONAME55 ALSO! Jazak Allah.

:w:

[NoName55]

no, he need not bother anymore as the surprise that I was planning for him is in tatters (it was going to be a pay back for calling me munafiq, fasiq and accusing me of talking like kufar etc.) and I am logging off

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace

There is nothing in the New Testament regarding this.

may be , some Christians think the following verse does tell them to kill disbelievers ??


But those mine enemies who will not that I reign unto them bring them hither and SLAY them before me" Luke 19-27

G S: Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet and yet don't practice the covenant God made with people through him. If Christians should, shouldn't Muslims also?

--hehe nuh :p

God sent the last Prophet (p) with the last testament ...so all believers must follow the final instructions till the last day.

:smile: :D


Verses we need for this life & hereafter



.... This Book, there is no doubt in it, is a guide to those who guard (against evil).


Those who believe in the unseen and keep up prayer and spend out of what We have given them.

And who believe in that which has been revealed to you and that which was revealed before you and they are sure of the hereafter.

These are on a right course from their Lord and these it is that shall be successful.


Surely those who disbelieve, it being alike to them whether you warn them, or do not warn them, will not believe

(holy Quran ; 2:2-6)

[Grace Seeker]

Salaam/peace

may be , some Christians think the following verse does tell them to kill disbelievers ??


But those mine enemies who will not that I reign unto them bring them hither and SLAY them before me" Luke 19-27

I would tell any Christian who thought that this verse gave them such authority or direction that they were grossly misinterpreting this verse. It means no such thing. First it is a parable. It is not something that Jesus is commanding anyone to do, nor is he saying that God commands it. He is saying that in this story, a person behaved that way. Such a story is in complete harmony with the everyday life experience of people in Jesus' day. The parable follows the reality of ancient politics. Refusing the rule of the one in power often meant paying with one's life. So, in this parable we learn about the judgment of God.

originally by Grace Seeker: Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet and yet don't practice the covenant God made with people through him. If Christians should, shouldn't Muslims also?

--hehe nuh :p

God sent the last Prophet (p) with the last testament ...so all believers must follow the final instructions till the last day.

Yes, I understand that is your point of view. I was simply suggestion to ummzayd, that if I used the logic she had presented to me that Christians should keep all of the commands of God in the Old Testament because we believed that they were God's word, that Muslims also believe that God spoke through those prophets and should be keeping those commands as well. Muslims don't because, though they think it was God speaking through Moses, they don't think that those commands apply to them. I'm just saying that no Muslim should be surprised if we say the same thing as they do, that they don't apply to Christians, even though we view them as the word of God. They don't apply, because they were never meant to apply to non-Jews. Only that part which Jayda pointed out was part of the Noahide laws for all people are relevant to Christians today.

[ummzayd]

We don't disown any part of the OT, but we do not think that we are under the same covenant, and thus the expectations as to how we are to live are not the same.

Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet and yet don't practice the covenant God made with people through him. If Christians should, shouldn't Muslims also?

I'm sorry you missed my point completely. Regardless of whether you think those laws of stoning to death adulterers and blasphemers are now abrogated, they were certainly part of life in OT times and many people were stoned to death according to the command of God. and yet Christians say the death penalty for adultery and apostasy is barbaric.

as for the second part of your post, as you know Muslims believe that the qur'an is the final message from God and it contains all the guidance and knowledge necessary for anyone who wants to live according to His will.

It is up to us to judge the veracity and reliability of qur'an vs NT. I have made my choice :D and I guess so have you.

peace

[ummzayd]

I was simply suggestion to ummzayd, that if I used the logic she had presented to me that Christians should keep all of the commands of God in the Old Testament because we believed that they were God's word, that Muslims also believe that God spoke through those prophets and should be keeping those commands as well. Muslims don't because, though they think it was God speaking through Moses, they don't think that those commands apply to them. I'm just saying that no Muslim should be surprised if we say the same thing as they do, that they don't apply to Christians, even though we view them as the word of God. They don't apply, because they were never meant to apply to non-Jews. Only that part which Jayda pointed out was part of the Noahide laws for all people are relevant to Christians today.

just to clarify, Muslims don't believe the OT as it is today is the protected word of God. christians certainly do believe the OT is from God, and yet they call its laws barbaric. that was my point.

re the council of Jerusalem: I am a bit lost at the moment as I am away from home for a few weeks and don't have my books with me. I studied first century Christianity about 10 years ago and it is an absolutely gripping subject. The council of Jerusalem is evidence of how Paul was totally out on a limb by creating a new religion called Christianity, when the other followers of Jesus pbuh - the ones who actually knew him and lived with him and travelled with him - believed in the continuation of Judaism and its practice of making proselytes of non-Jews, by means of which they could have a share in the covenant without actually having to follow all the laws that Jews did.

the council of Jerusalem does not say that Jews henceforth no longer have to follow the laws of the OT. It was Paul who did that. Paul, the one who was summoned back to Jerusalem by his elders and betters. Paul, whose boastful, whinging, hysterical voice dominates the NT, while those elders at Jerusalem hardly get a look in.

peace

[Grace Seeker]

I'm sorry you missed my point completely. Regardless of whether you think those laws of stoning to death adulterers and blasphemers are now abrogated, they were certainly part of life in OT times and many people were stoned to death according to the command of God. and yet Christians say the death penalty for adultery and apostasy is barbaric.

Yes, I did miss your point, but I think I get it now. And I agree, you are right that there is some disingenuousness in Christians who uphold the OT as a wonderful guide for any given people of God and then say that those same actions are horrendous in another group of people, especially if they claim that those practices are also guidelines that they received from the same God.

And while I know where the death penalty for adultery and several other things can be found, including simply talking back to one's parents, I don't remember seeing a death penalty for apostasy. I'm afraid you'll have to refresh my memory.

For myself, I am glad that we see in Jesus that rather than agreeing with those who sought to punish guilty people, that he sought to bring them freedom from guilt producing behaviors. So, he is my model today, and I think that his gospel applies to all people, not just 1st century Jews but even to me and you.

re: the council of Jerusalem: I am a bit lost at the moment as I am away from home for a few weeks and don't have my books with me. I studied first century Christianity about 10 years ago and it is an absolutely gripping subject. The council of Jerusalem is evidence of how Paul was totally out on a limb by creating a new religion called Christianity, when the other followers of Jesus pbuh - the ones who actually knew him and lived with him and travelled with him - believed in the continuation of Judaism and its practice of making proselytes of non-Jews, by means of which they could have a share in the covenant without actually having to follow all the laws that Jews did.

the council of Jerusalem does not say that Jews henceforth no longer have to follow the laws of the OT. It was Paul who did that. Paul, the one who was summoned back to Jerusalem by his elders and betters. Paul, whose boastful, whinging, hysterical voice dominates the NT, while those elders at Jerusalem hardly get a look in.

peace

I'll attach the passage which describes the Council of Jerusalem below so that you can have a closer look at it if you wish.

Acts 15

The Council at Jerusalem

1Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." 2This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the brothers very glad. 4When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.
5Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses."

6The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."

12The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13When they finished, James spoke up: "Brothers, listen to me. 14Simon [i.e. Peter] has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. 15The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16" 'After this I will return
and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17that the remnant of men may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things'
18that have been known for ages.

19"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."

The Council's Letter to Gentile Believers

22Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. 23With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. 24We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.
30The men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. 31The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. 32Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers. 33After spending some time there, they were sent off by the brothers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. 35But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.

Now when I read this I do NOT see Paul out on a limb creating a new Christianity. Rather, I see Paul conferencing with the other leaders of the church regarding how to handle a point of disagreement that has been raised as some are insisting that Gentiles must become Jews in order to be Christians and Paul doesn't agree with that. So, the question is put not to Paul to decide but the rest of the church's leadership.

In that setting:
First Peter makes a speech in support of Paul as he tells about his own experience with Gentiles that took place completely independent of Paul and before Paul had begun any of his missionary efforts.
Second Paul and Barnabas relate their experiences of seeing God working in the lives of Gentiles.
Third James pronounces a judgment that does NOT require a Gentile to become a Jew in order to be a Christian.
Given the process and involvement of so many others, I don't see how you can say that it was Paul that created a new religion called Christianity. It seems that it was more Peter and James to me than Paul. Paul just became its greatest champion, but certainly not its creator. There is a difference.

As far as what rules Jews have to live by, I guess you will have to talk to the Jews. I am not one.

[Muslim Woman]

salaam/peace;

i think , we are going off topic :(


anyway , anybody personally knows any ex-Muslim ? What's his/her reason for leaving Islam ?

I met a young man long ago who bacame Christian because he was told ---on the Last Day , no Christian will get any punishment for Jesus (p). Jesus (p) died to make all Christians sinless.

PS. where is the thread --Questions...answered by Christians ???

[ummzayd]

As far as what rules Jews have to live by, I guess you will have to talk to the Jews. I am not one.

peace

your last comment is somewhat disingenuous, since the council of Jerusalem by no means said that Jews (which they were) must stop obeying the laws of Judaism.

as for the rest of your post, well no doubt that the Pauline version of Christianity triumphed over all others - only books that showed Paul and his followers in a good light could possibly be allowed to remain, all others were suppressed and then destroyed after the Council of Nicea (which was called together by the Pagan Constantine).

However if we look at the bare facts of the matter:

There was a group of Jewish elders in Jerusalem, followers of Jesus pbuh who had known him, lived with him, travelled with him, listened to him.

They were Jews who followed the law.

It came to their attention that Gentiles were being urged to be circumsized and otherwise follow the Judaic laws.

They got together to discuss the matter and decide whether or not this was correct.

It was decided that the Gentiles would be advised to follow the universal laws, the laws of Noah, in keeping with Jewish teaching about proselytes.

A letter was sent. For some reason (despite the flowery rhetoric praising them) Paul and Barbabas were not entrusted to deliver this letter themselves, but two others were chosen to accompany them and make sure the message was delivered.

These are the bare facts, the rest is typical Pauline padding.

If anyone Christian is capable of reading the epistles of Paul without the reverence they feel is due to a semi-prophet from whom they take their religion, they will find them an eye opener. the personality of Paul comes through so clearly.

peace

[Grace Seeker]

peace

your last comment is somewhat disingenuous, since the council of Jerusalem by no means said that Jews (which they were) must stop obeying the laws of Judaism.

I am confused by your statement. I never implied that the Council of Jerusalem said anything with regard to how Jews should live. When the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses," they were speaking of what Gentiles should do, not Jews. So the discussion at the Council of Jerusalem was entirely about Gentile Christians, not Jewish Christians.

You had previously said, "the council of Jerusalem does not say that Jews henceforth no longer have to follow the laws of the OT." That's true. That was not even under discussion at the Council of Jerusalem. What was under discussion was whether a Gentile that was becoming a Christian had to become a Jew to become a Christian. All Jews at that time, whether they were Christians or not, practiced all the Jewish laws. The Council made not comment on that. But in saying that Gentiles did not have to become Jews to be Christians, it was the Council that drew a distinction between Christianity and Judaism. It was the council that said Christianity is not simply a subset within Judaism, but rather something unique in its own right, quite apart from Judaism.

So, when you ask about how Jews should behave, what they should eat, wear, etc... I simply say that I don't know. I am not a Jew. I am a Christian, a gentile Christian. I am one of those that the Council of Jerusalem made a decisions about saying that I should abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. These things I do. I have a friend who, by her self description, is a Jew and also a Christian. She keeps more than these rules that the Council of Jerusalem decided. She still keeps Friday night to Saturday night Sabbath, does not eat pork (though it appears that Peter may have felt free to), and other Jewish laws as a part of who she is as a Jew even as she worships Jesus as the promised Messiah and God incarnate.

as for the rest of your post, well no doubt that the Pauline version of Christianity triumphed over all others - only books that showed Paul and his followers in a good light could possibly be allowed to remain, all others were suppressed and then destroyed after the Council of Nicea (which was called together by the Pagan Constantine).

Personally, I think that interpretation of history is just as distorted as the history you have implied that has been passed on through the Church.

However if we look at the bare facts of the matter:

There was a group of Jewish elders in Jerusalem, followers of Jesus pbuh who had known him, lived with him, travelled with him, listened to him.

They were Jews who followed the law.

It came to their attention that Gentiles were being urged to be circumsized and otherwise follow the Judaic laws.

They got together to discuss the matter and decide whether or not this was correct.

It was decided that the Gentiles would be advised to follow the universal laws, the laws of Noah, in keeping with Jewish teaching about proselytes.

A letter was sent. For some reason (despite the flowery rhetoric praising them) Paul and Barbabas were not entrusted to deliver this letter themselves, but two others were chosen to accompany them and make sure the message was delivered.

These are the bare facts, the rest is typical Pauline padding.[quote] Proselytes who became Jews had to keep the commands of Moses just as if they had been born Jewish. There was no difference. That was the whole point of the party of the Pharisees. That Peter should of the Gentile believers that God "made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith" is an incredible statement that Peter was not concerned about a person's Jewishness. But rather there is no difference between a Jew and an Gentile if both are in Christ. Again, you can't put that on Paul.

If anyone Christian is capable of reading the epistles of Paul without the reverence they feel is due to a semi-prophet from whom they take their religion, they will find them an eye opener. the personality of Paul comes through so clearly.

Agreed. Paul is an arrogant, strong-willed, driven person, absorbed with the role that he understands God has set him in. He had that character before he became a Christian, and that aspect of his character didn't change afterward. Rather, I see that God used that in Paul to find for himself one who could spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ to all nations just as he sends all of us, his disciples, to do.

[Talha777]

History bears witness to the fact that the true followers of Jesus (alaihi salam) were the "ebionites", but they were supressed and destroyed thanks to the false prophet and deceiver paul and his paganized gospel, and also constantine and the council of nicea. The ebionites knew that Jesus's message was only for the Israelites and not gentiles, which accounts for some passages in the "new testament" where Jesus tells his disciples to avoid preaching to the samaritan towns, and his famous statement "I have not come except for the lost sheep of Israel".

[islamirama]

:sl:

Hope this clarifies it Insha'Allah:


Volume 1, Book 8, Number 429:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any amongst the Prophets before me. These are:

1. Allah made me victorious by awe (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey.

2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum. Therefore my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due.

3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me (and was not made so for anyone else).

4. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation exclusively but I have been sent to all mankind.

5. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection.)

:w:

jazakallahu khair akhi for the knowledge and reply. I was not interested in replying and wanted to give someone else the opportunity and share knowledge :)

[InToTheRain]

:w:

jazakallahu khair akhi for the knowledge and reply. I was not interested in replying and wanted to give someone else the opportunity and share knowledge :)

Barak Allah Fik Akhi :happy:....Mash'Allah :thumbs_up

Walaikum Assalam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu

[snakelegs]

just a couple of notes.
it was said earlier that the 7 noahide laws are for proselytes to judaism - this is not true. they are for non-jews.
converts to judaism are the same as jews and are bound by 613 laws! :scared:
also, the punishments in the tanakh. i don't know that there is a death penalty for apostasy specifically, but i'm almost positive that there is a death penalty for idolatry - which would be the same as apostasy, wouldn't it?
the laws in the tanakh, which are very similar to islamic laws, ceased to be in effect with the destruction of the temple. like the qur'an and the hadith, the tanakh doesn't stand alone, but is accompanied by the oral law, later written down in the talmud which explained, elucidated and expounded on when and how the punishments were to be applied. for example, certain death penalties were in effect rarely carried out because there were so many conditions.
oh where oh where is rav?

[Jayda]

salaam/peace;

i think , we are going off topic :(


anyway , anybody personally knows any ex-Muslim ? What's his/her reason for leaving Islam ?

I met a young man long ago who bacame Christian because he was told ---on the Last Day , no Christian will get any punishment for Jesus (p). Jesus (p) died to make all Christians sinless.

PS. where is the thread --Questions...answered by Christians ???

hola Muslim Woman,

not personally, but i have met some former muslims through internet forums. the one in particular that i am thinking of is now orthodox. while he does not often talk about what specific events came together to bring him to Christianity, i vaguely recall him talking about leaving the middle east and reading a bible for himself instead of listening from others about what it says, which convinced him. he seems to know a great deal about the history of the Church and Christianity, so he rejects a lot of the things muslims say about corrupted scriptures and the apostle st. paul, perhaps that weighed into his decision.

que Dios te bendiga

[ummzayd]

Proselytes who became Jews had to keep the commands of Moses just as if they had been born Jewish. There was no difference. That was the whole point of the party of the Pharisees. That Peter should of the Gentile believers that God "made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith" is an incredible statement that Peter was not concerned about a person's Jewishness. But rather there is no difference between a Jew and an Gentile if both are in Christ. Again, you can't put that on Paul

there were 2 kinds of proselytes, those who became as full Jews and were bound to follow the laws, and those who, while adhering to monotheism and Jewish moral guidelines were not required to follow the law, only the universal laws already mentioned. Clearly the gentiles to whom the council sent a letter had been alarmed and despondant at the idea of having to follow Jewish laws! therefore the council decided that they could be the other kind of proselyte.

My point is, that Jesus pbuh had no intention of abolishing the laws of Judaism and establishing a new religion (he says as much in the gospels). And the decision of the council of Jerusalem certainly bears witness to the fact that those early Jewish followers of Jesus had no intention of giving up Judaism or requiring anyone to give up Judaism, then or later.

Since I am of the opinion that a pro-Pauline spin was put on everything in the NT, naturally it is no surprise that extravagant praise of Paul is put in the mouths of others, and Paul's point of view is expressed by characters other than he.

peace

[Jayda]

Let's try this another way... which strictly (not noahide) jewish traditions do Christians today follow?

[Talha777]

There's no question Paul is the man behind this worldwide deception which has made billions into ignorant victims of the poisonous theology of a "triune God" (God forbid).

The Book of Revelation warns about a 666, this has been proven to refer to Paul of Tarsus:

The Hebrew letter taw = 400
the letter resh = 200
Samek = 60
waw = 6

taw-resh-samek-waw (Tarsaw) = 666 (!)

[ummzayd]

just a couple of notes.
it was said earlier that the 7 noahide laws are for proselytes to judaism - this is not true. they are for non-jews.
converts to judaism are the same as jews and are bound by 613 laws! :scared:

yes that was me, sorry for the confusion. according to the jewish encyclopaedia (sp?) there are (were) 2 types of proselytes to Judaism, those who became full Jews and were bound by the law; and those who gave up polytheism and believed in One God, but didn't have to follow all the laws - only the Noahide laws. and they were called proselytes at the gate or something. So there was certainly a precedent in Judaism for the decision of the council of Jerusalem.

peace

[ummzayd]

Let's try this another way... which strictly (not noahide) jewish traditions do Christians today follow?

ok, how about this: Christians today do not follow Jewish law because Paul declared that the law was abrogated.

I think we can all agree on that.

peace

[Talha777]

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets
-Jesus Christ (alaihi salam)
Matthew 5.17

by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace
-Paul the liar
Ephesians 2.1

Paul clearly wanted to justify getting rid of the Law in order to attract gentile converts. Paul's twisted theology is the origin of christianity as we know it today.

[snakelegs]

Let's try this another way... which strictly (not noahide) jewish traditions do Christians today follow?

i don't know that much about christianity. to my knowledge, they do not follow any of them.

[snakelegs]

yes that was me, sorry for the confusion. according to the jewish encyclopaedia (sp?) there are (were) 2 types of proselytes to Judaism, those who became full Jews and were bound by the law; and those who gave up polytheism and believed in One God, but didn't have to follow all the laws - only the Noahide laws. and they were called proselytes at the gate or something. So there was certainly a precedent in Judaism for the decision of the council of Jerusalem.

peace

i've never heard that! - 2 types of proselytes. i guess it was a temporary thing? do you have a link?
all i know is that if you become a jew, you have to deal with 613, not 7 - the 7 are for non jews.
quote:
While Jews are commanded to observe hundreds of laws, non-Jews are expected to follow seven that are presumed to date from the time of Noah. Judaism regards any non-Jew who keeps these laws as a righteous person who is guaranteed a place in the world to come.


1. Not to deny God.
2. Not to blaspheme God.

3. Not to murder.

4. Not to engage in incestuous, adulterous, bestial or homosexual relationships.

5. Not to steal.

6. Not to eat a limb torn from a living animal.

7. To set up courts to ensure obedience to the other six laws.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...hide_Laws.html

[Keltoi]

As Christianity spread far beyond the middle east, the question arose whether to become a Christian one had to convert to Judaism first. The early church leaders felt that it wasn't necessary, so the rather large list of dietary laws which applied to Jews did not apply to non-Jews.

This isn't a matter of Paul or any other church leader purposely giving up God's laws which applied to the people of Israel. Gentiles are not Jews, and it seemed rather pointless to force them to convert to Judaism before accepting Jesus Christ as their Savior.

[snakelegs]

i don't think they would have gotten very many converts if they had obligated them to follow 613 laws!

[Keltoi]

i don't think they would have gotten very many converts if they had obligated them to follow 613 laws!

I'm not so sure when one takes into account the number of Christians being fed to lions for the joy of the Roman crowd. When one has that level of faith, the number of laws would probably be a minor annoyance.

[snakelegs]

when you look at it that way - you definitely have a point. :giggling:

[ummzayd]

i've never heard that! - 2 types of proselytes. i guess it was a temporary thing? do you have a link?

here is an extract from a rather dry article on jewishencyclopediaonline

"......In order to find a precedent the Rabbis went so far as to assume that proselytes of this order were recognized in Biblical law, applying to them the term "toshab" ("sojourner," "aborigine," referring to the Canaanites; see Maimonides' explanation in "Yad," Issure Biah, xiv. 7; see Grätz, l.c. p. 15), in connection with "ger" (see Ex. xxv. 47, where the better reading would be "we-toshab"). Another name for one of this class was "proselyte of the gate" ("ger ha-sha'ar," that is, one under Jewish civil jurisdiction; comp. Deut. v. 14, xiv. 21, referring to the stranger who had legal claims upon the generosity and protection of his Jewish neighbors). In order to be recognized as one of these the neophyte had publicly to assume, before three "ḥaberim," or men of authority, the solemn obligation not to worship idols, an obligation which involved the recognition of the seven Noachian injunctions as binding ('Ab. Zarah 64b; "Yad," Issure Biah, xiv. 7).The application to half-converts of all the laws obligatory upon the sons of Jacob, including those that refer to the taking of interest, or to retaining their hire overnight, or to drinking wine made by non-Jews, seems to have led to discussion and dissension among the rabbinical authorities.

The more rigorous seem to have been inclined to insist upon such converts observing the entire Law, with the exception of the reservations and modifications explicitly made in their behalf. The more lenient were ready to accord them full equality with Jews as soon as they had solemnly forsworn idolatry. The "via media" was taken by those that regarded public adherence to the seven Noachian precepts as the indispensable prerequisite (Gerim iii.; 'Ab. Zarah 64b; Yer. Yeb. 8d; Grätz, l.c. pp. 19-20). The outward sign of this adherence to Judaism was the observance of the Sabbath (Grätz, l.c. pp. 20 et seq.; but comp. Ker. 8b).

[NoName55]

when you look at it that way - you definitely have a point. :giggling:

did they not stop feeding them to lions after blending Paulism and Roman Paganism (Perhaps Romans were running out of Christians who followed mosaic laws)?:confused::hiding:

[Whatsthepoint]

There's no question Paul is the man behind this worldwide deception which has made billions into ignorant victims of the poisonous theology of a "triune God" (God forbid).

The Book of Revelation warns about a 666, this has been proven to refer to Paul of Tarsus:

The Hebrew letter taw = 400
the letter resh = 200
Samek = 60
waw = 6

taw-resh-samek-waw (Tarsaw) = 666 (!)

Oh please...
___________

טרסוס
The first letter is a teth, not a waw. and even if it were vaw, it would not necessarily mean Paul is the antichrist. You cannot imagine how many people, organisation or churches have a gematrical value of 666.

[Whatsthepoint]

It seems that the number 666 plays an important role in Islam. So Paul must have been a good guy.:okay:

http://www.universalunity.org/6.html

It could also mean that Islam is the beast the book of Revelation speaks of...

Or it can mean anything else...depending on your religious affiliation.

[MadeenJibreel]

The whole thing around Islam, Christianity and Judaism is very simple. These are the facts and no-, I mean nobody can deny them:

1. Jews before and at the time of Jesus (peace upon him):
They followed what was given to Moses (peace upon him), but when Allah (swt) sent Jesus (peace upon him) and gave him the Revelation, which would restore the distortions Jews had made to the Revelation given to Moses (peace upon him), some followed Jesus (peace upon him) and some didn't.

2. Christians before and at the time of Muhammed (blessings and peace be upon him):
They followed what was given to Jesus (peace upon him), but when Allah (swt) sent Muhammed (blessings and peace be upon him) and gave him the Revelation, which would be the Final Revelation and for all mankind, some followed him (blessings and peace be upon him) and some didn't. Same goes for Jews in that time. And same goes for those (a)theists, poly/multi-theists, etc.

Some Jews were too proud to accept the Revelation given to Jesus (peace upon him), and some (Jews, Christians, Kuffaar, etc.) were/are too proud to accept the Revelation given to Muhammed (blessings and peace be upon him).

The same stands even today. Those who hear the Message of Islam and don't accept it, are - generally speaking - arroganters.

[Whatsthepoint]

Some Jews were too proud to accept the Revelation given to Jesus (peace upon him), and some (Jews, Christians, Kuffaar, etc.) were/are too proud to accept the Revelation given to Muhammed (blessings and peace be upon him).

The same stands even today. Those who hear the Message of Islam and don't accept it, are - generally speaking - arroganters.

Some muslims were/are too proud to accept the revelation given to Bahá'u'lláh.
The same stands even today. Those who hear the Message of Bahá'í and don't accept it, are - generally speaking - arroganters.

:peace:

[MadeenJibreel]

Some muslims were/are too proud to accept the revelation given to Bahá'u'lláh.
The same stands even today. Those who hear the Message of Bahá'í and don't accept it, are - generally speaking - arroganters.

:peace:

No, not true, as Baha'i have completely different belief system than original followers of Moses, Jesus and now people who follow the Final Messenger of Allah (swt).

BTW, the Qur'an denies any other faith except Islam. Baha'i is not Islam. End of story. There are no Revelations after the Qur'an.

Now, why are you trying to take definitions of Islam or the Qur'an using some bad web sites, or better to say, a non-Muslim? If you want to read true explanations of the Qur'an, then take it from the Scholars of Islam, not from auto mechanics or similar, is that not fair?

[Keltoi]

did they not stop feeding them to lions after blending Paulism and Roman Paganism (Perhaps Romans were running out of Christians who followed mosaic laws)?:confused::hiding:

Romans didn't mind those Jews who followed Mosaic laws, they were actually welcome in Rome and had their own places of worship free from persecution.

The persecution of Christians began with Nero from 64-69 A.D. and would continue to the worst persecutions under Emperors Diocletian and Galerius from 303-313 A.D. Then Constantine would come to power and legalize the practice of Christianity within the Roman Empire. It wouldn't be until the rein of Theodosius in the latter 4th century that Christianity would become the official religion of the Roman Empire.

[Whatsthepoint]

The persecution of Christians began with Nero from 64-69 A.D.

Whose name also happens to have a gematrical value of 666. A coincidence or God's warning?:eek::D

[Keltoi]

Whose name also happens to have a gematrical value of 666. A coincidence or God's warning?:eek::D

Well, he did fiddle or something while Rome burned right? :D

[Whatsthepoint]

No, not true, as Baha'i have completely different belief system than original followers of Moses, Jesus and now people who follow the Final Messenger of Allah (swt).

BTW, the Qur'an denies any other faith except Islam. Baha'i is not Islam. End of story. There are no Revelations after the Qur'an.

The Baha'i believe Mohammad was not God's final prophet. They consider their faith to be a continuation of Islam, Christianity etc.

Look, what I'm trying to say that Christians and most other religions (not Baha'i though) also believe their revelation is the final one.

-You said:
BTW, the Qur'an denies any other faith except Islam. Baha'i is not Islam. End of story. There are no Revelations after the Qur'an.
-which can be changed to:
BTW, the bible denies any other faith except christianity. Islam is not Christianity. End of story. There are no Revelations after the Bible.
-Is there a difference to meaning? Not really.

Now, why are you trying to take definitions of Islam or the Qur'an using some bad web sites, or better to say, a non-Muslim? If you want to read true explanations of the Qur'an, then take it from the Scholars of Islam, not from auto mechanics or similar, is that not fair?

I wasn't talking about Islam at least not in a way that requires knowledge of it.
Hehe, I wonder if you get your explenations of christianity and the bible from christian theologians.:D

[MadeenJibreel]

The Baha'i believe Mohammad was not God's final prophet. They consider their faith to be a continuation of Islam, Christianity etc.

Look, what I'm trying to say that Christians and most other religions (not Baha'i though) also believe their revelation is the final one.

-You said:
BTW, the Qur'an denies any other faith except Islam. Baha'i is not Islam. End of story. There are no Revelations after the Qur'an.
-which can be changed to:
BTW, the bible denies any other faith except christianity. Islam is not Christianity. End of story. There are no Revelations after the Bible.
-Is there a difference to meaning? Not really.


I wasn't talking about Islam at least not in a way that requires knowledge of it.

The Bible is distorted, even the pope knows that, yet he still follows it (not sure if he really does up to a letter). Nobody can prove that the Bible as people read it today is God's word. Whoever says so is a big-time liar. BTW, not even the original text exists, so how can somebody says that translations of the Bible are God's Word? Obviously, what a man translates is not God's Word any more, but merely an interpretation. Additionally, how many translations of the Bible there are today? 50? Will somebody say that God authored all of them? No, of course not.

BTW, does a word Christianity exist in the Bible?

Hehe, I wonder if you take your explenations of christianity from christian theologians.:D

The Bible scholars cannot agree on what the Bible really is. I do not need to produce anything on my own, it's enough to cite the Bible scholars, even though some of them might be auto mechanics at the same time, no offense.

[Whatsthepoint]

The Bible is distorted, even the pope knows that, yet he still follows it (not sure if he really does up to a letter). Nobody can prove that the Bible as people read it today is God's word. Whoever says so is a big-time liar. BTW, not even the original text exists, so how can somebody says that translations of the Bible are God's Word? Obviously, what a man translates is not God's Word any more, but merely an interpretation. Additionally, how many translations of the Bible there are today? 50? Will somebody say that God authored all of them? No, of course not.
BTW, does a word Christianity exist in the Bible?

The same goes for the Quran. Nobody acn prove that it is the Word of God. You can make fancy sites about its perfection and dubious miracles but, hey, christians do the same. As I have already told you once (and Grace Seeker demonstrated on many occasions), christianity is also perfect. All so called contradictions are explained, justified. All arguments for the bible being alterted have been answered...of course, it depends on how much you believe them but it goes the same for the Quran.
Christianity? Don't think so.

In my opinion neither christianity neither silam are from God. However, all muslims and all christians "know" their religions are from God and have "lots of stuff" to prove it.

The Bible scholars cannot agree on what the Bible really is. I do not need to produce anything on my own, it's enough to cite the Bible scholars, even though some of them might be auto mechanics at the same time, no offense.

True, christianity is divided in some areas, however all christians agree on the basics.
You shouldn't apologize to me, you should apologize to Bible scholars, none of whom, I am sure, is automechanic. And if some happen to be automechanics they also hold a degree in theology (and often a second degree in phylosophy, history etc).

[Keltoi]

The Bible is distorted, even the pope knows that, yet he still follows it (not sure if he really does up to a letter). Nobody can prove that the Bible as people read it today is God's word. Whoever says so is a big-time liar. BTW, not even the original text exists, so how can somebody says that translations of the Bible are God's Word? Obviously, what a man translates is not God's Word any more, but merely an interpretation. Additionally, how many translations of the Bible there are today? 50? Will somebody say that God authored all of them? No, of course not.

BTW, does a word Christianity exist in the Bible?



The Bible scholars cannot agree on what the Bible really is. I do not need to produce anything on my own, it's enough to cite the Bible scholars, even though some of them might be auto mechanics at the same time, no offense.

Why would the word Christianity appear in the Bible? That was the title accepted by the followers of Jesus Christ.

As for the Pope "knowing" the Bible is distorted, how did you come by that little gem of knowledge? No offense, but it seems that many people on this forum like to make statements with no basis in reality. Would you like to supply some documentation of the Pope accepting this so-called distortion? I would be interested in reading it. I'm not even Catholic, but I do prefer to work with truth when possible.

As for the translations, it doesn't matter how many languages the Bible is translated into, it is still the Bible. Of course all are encouraged to read the Bible in the original Hebrew and the Greek for the NT. Of course that requires one to learn different languages, which is why translations are needed in the first place. I suppose you would say any Qu'ran translated into English is distorted and should be ignored?, and that all converts to Islam must read the Qu'ran in Arabic before truly reading God's word? Does God only speak Arabic?