You presented to me two different versions of translation of Mat 15:24, but it
still shows that Jesus (PBUH) was sent exclusively for the lost sheep of Israel.
To prove this claim further, we should refer to the context of the verse
21 Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon.
22 A _*Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of
David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.”*_
23 _*Jesus did not answer a word. *_So his disciples came to him and urged him,
“Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”
24 He answered, “_*I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”*_
If Jesus (PBUH) was sent to mankind, why ignore the woman just because she was
from Canaan?
Thanks. I see your reference.
The disciples lacked understanding at that time. The same as when several wanted
Jesus to bring fire from the sky to consume the unbelievers (Luke 51-56). They
also lacked understanding to believe his message of his death too.
But if you look at verses 25-28 in Matthew 15, the woman's persistent faith
resulted in Jesus acknowledging her. He praised her faith and healed her daughter.
"Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and
said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast [it] to dogs. And
she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters'
table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great [is] thy faith: be it
unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour".
On a similar thing, also see Christ's interaction with the Samaritan woman and
her village (John 4:7-30).
There are many verses in the Qur'an where Allah (swt) talks to the children of
Israel, the Arabs and also Mankind.
Here's one verse which proves our Prophet (PBUH) was sent for all the worlds (not
just mankind, but also the jin-kind)
And We have not sent you, [O Muhammad], except as a mercy to the worlds. [21:107]
Also, there is a Hadith where the Prophet (PBUH) himself states he was sent to
mankind and not just the Arabs.
*Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only _but I have been sent to all
*mankind_.*' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Rubbing hands and feet with dust
*(Tayammum), Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331)"
The same expression (words)) I use for Jesus (which you deny me) is the same you
use of Muhammad (and you wish me to accept you).
Even though the Quran/Hadith states that Muhammad was sent FOR the worlds, I hope
we can agree that he was not sent TO the worlds.
What is meant by the phrase "to the worlds?"
As I wrote before, Jesus was only sent TO the children of Israel, but his
message is FOR all mankind. That is why he told his disciples, "But ye shall receive
power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto
me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost
part of the earth".
I know that Muslims accept Jesus as a only a prophet of God but I don't know
any Muslim who would say his message was only for the children of Israel during his
lifetime and that this spreading of the gospel ceased with Muhammad. As the words
of Jesus mention, his message was to be spread around the world - and
this message is that he came to seek and to save the lost.
I think we can all agree that Jesus and his disciples were all practicing Jews and that Paul was the person most responsible for the initial outreach to the non-Jew. Why did Paul have to receive a special revelation for the 'gospel' he preached instead of going straight to the disciples to learn from them what Jesus said and did? The answer is because the 'gospel' is not at all about what Jesus said and did while he walked on earth, rather the 'gospel' that Paul preached is what Jesus did on the cross. Paul was the "Jew's Jew" before his vision and then afterwards he stood opposed to the Jewish Law and preached to the Gentiles a message that was not on the lips of Jesus.
I was referring specifically to Galatians 1 & 2, but you are not able to see the connection between "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed." and "Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed".
This was about eating certain foods when the Gentiles were present and then changing
when the Jews appeared. This has nothing to do with the gospel (the death, burial,
and resurrection of Christ).
Maybe you have a different understanding of what the gospel is?
Paul spoke frequently about salvation through faith while James (and presumably the other disciples as well though not recorded) countered with "faith without works is dead". You are unable to see what I see because you are blinded by the bias of your faith that there was harmony between Paul and the disciples.
It would help if you understand the proper context of what they said. Paul is approaching it
from works of the law. James is approaching it from works of faith. Don't compare apples to
oranges.
Paul and the disciples are in perfect harmony on what the gospel is - like I said before, its
the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Read the chapters that has Paul telling them
what he preached. They are in harmony my friend.
Both Sunni and Shi'a accept Prophet Muhammad (saaws) as the last prophet and messenger of Allah. They differ primarily on the leadership after he died, but this is due to differences in interpreting and acceptance of different hadith (sayings of Muhammad distinct from Qur'an) not the Qur'an. I had a Shi'a room mate in college and the Qur'an he loaned me was the Yusuf Ali translation that is widely accepted by Sunni Muslims. There is only one version of the Qur'an in Arabic for all who are considered to be Muslims. There are various translations of the meaning into English that do have some differences, but basically they all say the same thing with small differences in specific English wording.
Why did Paul have to receive a special revelation for the 'gospel' he preached instead of going straight to the disciples to learn from them what Jesus said and did? The answer is because the 'gospel' is not at all about what Jesus said and did while he walked on earth, rather the 'gospel' that Paul preached is what Jesus did on the cross. Paul was the "Jew's Jew" before his vision and then afterwards he stood opposed to the Jewish Law and preached to the Gentiles a message that was not on the lips of Jesus.
Not sure why it took a special vision for Paul but what he preached was told to the
apostles and they accepted him. We have some record of what Jesus said to Paul
when he appeared on the road to Damascus. Barnabas, Timothy, and Titus were other
disciples who co-laboured with Paul in spreading the gospel. The gospel of Jesus
is the fulfilment of the Jewish Law.
I truly believe that it is a never ending thing to seek the truth. As such we must be prepared for the journey. Ready or not, it is a journey we have to take.
We have to start with ourselves, before we question Allah. We have to accept that Allah IS Supreme in everything. HE is the best of planners. Islam has multi dimensions and it all fits in very well if you have the right intentions.
When a specific question like this comes along, we have to accept that it is related to the over all grand scheme of things that Allah, the Greatest of Planners, has devised.
This is my understanding of the 'evolvement' of religion. Correct me if I am wrong. Won't go into too much detail but will keep it brief.
First, as muslim we believe that all the 'kitab' originated from Allah, and Ibrahim (pbuh) as the father of religion due to his personal quest to seek the One True God in a pagan world.
(Fast forward some centuries or millenia)
The Jews during Egyptian times believed in the God of Ibrahim and did not accept Pharaoh's claim to be God. Hence they were the chosen people (then), favoured by Allah for their belief in HIM. However, the arrival of Moses (pbuh) with the Torah was just too much for the Jews to take in after generations of self rule. They rebelled! They went further to alter the Book to suit them.
David (pbuh) brought the Psalms or Zabur, a lighter message to remind people to appreciate, love, be thankful for the blessing bestowed upon them by Allah.
Essentially, the Torah taught 'to do unto others what you expect others to do unto you'. If you don't want to get slapped, don't go slapping other people. It was a guideline how to live your life. The Zabur taught you to praise Allah, give thanks to him (although most of the teachings are now lost).
Over a period of time, when the Jews finally completed their compilation of the Torah, Jesus (pbuh) was sent to correct them, we all know what happened then. What was new in the teachings of Jesus? Essentially, it was forgiveness. The 'eye for an eye' of the Torah script lead to vengence and would never end for those who felt that it is their right as provided by their law. In accepting Jesus' teachings, generational feuds could be put to an end.
Of course when the Romans decided to take Christianity as their official religion, they adopted a particular sect within the faith that reflected their previous belief in multiple gods, so to choose a 3 in 1 fitted the bill ever so perfectly. They also chose the Catholic system as it had the hierarchical system of control well suited to their style of governing. All other books were systematically destroyed.
The arrival of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) brought the Quran. To recap, the Zabur reminds us to glorify, appreciate Allah, the Torah gave us the mechanics of conducting life, the Bible taught to to forgive, and once humanity could grasp these quaint concepts, the Quran guided us on how to live in a community. How can we live in a community without these basic human ingredients? Hence completing the message.
Unfortunately, the Jews rejected Jesus (pbuh), his followers ended up creating a new religion. Likewise, when they rejected Muhammad (pbuh) Islam became a separate religion. So we now have 3 religions that was supposed to be only one.
The 4 canonical gospels were chosen at the Synod of Hippo in 393 from among a multitude of others.
.....the criteria for approval was those most closely aligned with church dogma as established at the Council of Nicea in 323.
No, all the other writings were repetitous. They all said the same thing. Christ works miracles and dies on the cross. Having a multitude of books that all say the same thing is not useful.
Having a multitude of books that all say the same thing is not useful.
Perchance, have you read the book, "Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew" or "Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make it into the New Testament" by Bart Ehrman, Professor and chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill? I think you would be surprised to learn the truth about the actual origin of the NT canon and Christianity as we know them today.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks