Array
I am a Christian and I would like to participate. Since most of the arguments posted above are not real arguments at all and only pretend to be funny (number 21 for example) why don't we focus on the real arguments? Number 2 for instance is a good argument that most Christians agree with. Muhammad killed and killed many people. Jesus certainly didn't, not even to save his life. Who looks closer to our idea of a merciful God?
Greetings and peace Moss,
Do you think that God's greatest purpose for creating the universe and life was to make all people follow Islam?
When it comes to our life after death, Will Islam still be the greatest purpose for God in heaven?
God bless
Eric
We must first analyze the meaning of the word "Islam". I'm sure you've heard someone explain this to you before, but what the hay ... why not?format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
In the religious sense of the word, Islam means submission to the will of God and obedience to His law... the meaning of life right there, eric. Submission. Is it crazy to believe that God put people on earth to actually worship him? Praying 5 times a day is a pindrop of what God deserves. If you were to count all the favors that God has bestowed on you alone, you can fill the ocean and then some.
format_quote Originally Posted by sumay28
SO TRUE sister....so little is asked of us. Allah's slaves....very good post....so well said...
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
As sister Sumayah has said you have to understand what islam is. Islam is worshipping God alone without partners, according to the way he wants us to worship him and not woshipping him incorrectly
So yes i believe God wants us to be muslims, ie follow his way to live and woirship him correctly. That's not necessary the reason God created the universe, God knows best but why,but we believe it was to test us-the righteous and evildoers among us, who will accept the true path, who will practice it. Not everyone was going to be a muslim, God knew that
So yes Islam will still be greatest purpose in heaven, because we will still need to worship God won't we, the right way
We don't believe i christianty is what God, or even Jesus PBUH himself taught. If you look at the bible and how Jesus PBUH lived, if he came back today who would he be more familiar with, majority of Christians today,or majority of practicing muslims today, that is muslims who prayed just like he did, who fast just like he did, who don't eat pork just like he didn't, who don't drink alcohol just like he didn't. Look at the statues Of Jesus PBUH, (even though in the Bible he warned against creating statues but still people did), but look at the statues, look at how he's dressed, look at his beard, does he look more like a muslim, or like a christian? Look at statues of his Mother, Mary AS, covered like muslim women with hijab and islamic dress
jesus PBUH preached Islam, and was a muslim, that is although he may not have said "I'm a Muslim" but by definition, by what muslim means, he was a muslim, as were his early devout disciples, they worshipped God according to the way God wanted them to worship him
Last edited by Mohsin; 02-26-2006 at 04:08 PM.
Moss,
I was originally planning to answer to a previous post you wrote but then I discovered this last one. You are giving me a lot of work...
You say "jesus PBUH preached Islam". I have heard that of course said many times before, but I want to analyze it a little bit. If by that you mean Jesus preached the oneness of God and the brotherhood of men, you are right. Those are things that Jesus and Islam have in common.
But you know very well that Islam preached a lot of other things. It authorized men to have four wives. It ordered the hand of the thief to be cut off. When did Jesus preached all that? If Jesus NEVER said anything like that and actually his teachings can be understood to be in complete opposition to those regulations, how can you say that Jesus preached Islam?
No, Jesus didn't preach Islam. Focus on his teachings and not on his beard.
Those are all a matter of shariah, the islamic law at the time. It was different for different prophets designated to specific nations for a specific amount of time, so obviously his rules were differentformat_quote Originally Posted by Turin TurambarMoss,
I was originally planning to answer to a previous post you wrote but then I discovered this last one. You are giving me a lot of work...
You say "jesus PBUH preached Islam". I have heard that of course said many times before, but I want to analyze it a little bit. If by that you mean Jesus preached the oneness of God and the brotherhood of men, you are right. Those are things that Jesus and Islam have in common.
But you know very well that Islam preached a lot of other things. It authorized men to have four wives. It ordered the hand of the thief to be cut off. When did Jesus preached all that? If Jesus NEVER said anything like that and actually his teachings can be understood to be in complete opposition to those regulations, how can you say that Jesus preached Islam?
No, Jesus didn't preach Islam. Focus on his teachings and not on his beard.
POINTS TO BE CONSIDEREDAfter reading this presentation a believing Christian might say "This is what the Muslims, whom we always considered as heathens or infidels, say about Jesus." But the point of view which the Qur'an presents deserves serious consideration, to say the least, by those who are really concerned about God, faith and even Christianity itself for the following reasons:
- The Qur’an is the last version of God’s revelation and what it says is the ultimate truth. This might not mean much for those who do not believe in the Qur'an as such. However, the history of the Qur'an, modern textual criticism and scientific research of the content of this scripture leave no doubt about the truth it contains. The frequently made statements that the Qur'an is the word of Muhammad who copied his information from Jewish and Christian sources is made by people who do not know the history of the world, the Qur'an or Muhammad. The first Arabic translation of the Bible appeared two centuries after Muhammad's mission. If we add to this Muhammad's illiteracy and the scarcity of religious books in any language outside churches and temples in the sixth century we can understand the absurdity of this allegation.
- The oneness and universality of God's message requires that people accept all the messengers of God. Rejecting one of them amounts to rejecting them all. The Jews reject Jesus's mission and Muhammad's mission; the Christians reject Muhammad's mission; whereas the Muslims accept them all, but reject incorrect historical interpretations and human elements in these missions.
- Because of the Qur'an, Muslims love and respect Jesus as they love and respect the Prophet Muhammad. Moreover, the Qur'an reports some of Jesus's miracles which are not reported in the present gospel. For example, the Qur’an tells that Jesus spoke in the cradle and was able to tell people what they ate or treasured in their houses, to mention just a few.
- It is common knowledge that the divinity of Jesus was introduced by Saint Paul and his followers and was established on the dead bodies of millions of Christians through history which evoked the Castillo's well-known remark "To burn a man is not to prove a doctrine."
- The choice of the present four gospels was imposed in the conference of Nicea 325 C.E. under the auspices of the pagan Emperor Constantine for political purposes. Literally, hundreds of gospels and religious writings were considered apocrypha, i.e. books of doubtful authenticity. Some of those books were written by Jesus's disciples. If they were not more authentic than the four gospels they were of equal authenticity. Some of them still are available such as the Gospel of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas which agree with the Qur’an.
- The Unitarian concept and the humanness of Jesus is not only held by Muslims but also by Jews and by some early groups of Christianity such as the Ebionites, the Cerinthians, the Basilidians, the Capocratians and the Hypisistarians to name several early sects. The Arians, Paulicians and Goths also accepted Jesus as a prophet of God. Even in the modern age there are churches in Asia, in Africa, the Unitarian church, and Jehova Witnesses who do not worship Jesus as God.
- Most serious studies of the Bible have shown that it contains a large portion of additions which neither Jesus nor the writers of the gospels said. The church, as Heinz Zahrnt said, "put words into the mouth of Jesus which he never spoke and attributed actions to him which he never performed." Those conclusions were arrived at by some members of the church. However, they are kept secret or available only to the specialists. One of those, who has shown that most of what the church says about Jesus is baseless is Rudolf Augustein in his book Jesus Son of Man, (published in Germany 1972 and translated into English 1977).
- The problem with present Christianity is the personality of Jesus which is completely misunderstood. Jesus' nature, mission and claimed death and resurrection, are all challenged by studies in the field. One of those is a book entitled The Myth of God Incarnate which appeared 1977 (edited by John Hick) and written by seven theologian scholars in England. Their conclusion is that Jesus was "a man approved by God, for special role within the divine purpose, and … the later conception of him as God incarnate … is a mythological or poetic way of expressing his significance for us." The best George Carey could say in his attempt to refute the findings of those theologians is that unless one takes Jesus as God Incarnate one won't be able to understand Jesus' mission or explain its impact on people. This definitely is a very weak argument because all great prophets such as Abraham, Moses, and Muhammad have had a tremendous impact on people and none of them claimed that he was God or a son of God.
- The concept of the Trinity is not, of course, available even in the present Bible. There are statements which negate it such as "The Lord our God is one Lord (Math. 12:29) and many others.
- It is worth noting that Jesus never claims divinity even in the present text of the Bible. The expression "Son of God" cannot be said to have come from Jesus himself. Hasting in The Dictionary of the Bible says "Whether Jesus used it of himself is doubtful." In my reading of the Bible, I found only two instances in John Chapter 5 and 11 where Jesus uses "son of God" to refer to himself. Other instances were used by others. Even those are very limited. However, even if the title "son of God" was used by Jesus himself one should remember the following points:
- As a biblical scholar said, "Semitic usage would never have allowed literal sense even though such an expression would be interpreted literally in the Hellenistic world of Jesus followers".
- The New Testament Greek words used for "son" are pias and paida, which means 'servant' or 'son in the sense of servant, are translated son in reference to Jesus and servant in reference to others in some translations of the Bible (Mufassir, P. 15).
- The title "son of man" which is a self-designation of Jesus and occurs 81 times in the gospels is the clearest description and emphasis by Jesus on his humanity. The classical interpretation given to this title is that it is used to emphasize the human side of Jesus. Now the question which suggests itself is: Do contemporary Christians emphasize this aspect of Jesus?
Moss,
You say "It was different for different prophets designated to specific nations for a specific amount of time". But then you make an exception for Muhammad, because according to you his rules are still binding, even today. So what Jesus said was only valid back then, but what Muhammad said has to be applied even now.
Why? if they are all prophets, why is it that the laws of one have preeminence over the laws of another? You will say "because Jesus was sent only for his nation and Muhammad was sent for all people". But everything Jesus said points to a universal message for all mankind. Why aren't his laws universal?
Why don't we focus instead on whether the rules are fair or not. Is it fair to have four wives? Is it fair to cut off hands?
format_quote Originally Posted by Turin Turambar
Regarding 4 wives, yes it is totally fine, in fact in some cases needed. Think of situations after war when men have died, think off all the homosexual men in the world, this leaves so few men for so many women. Think of all the widows? Whats gonna happen to these women? Do you want them to become prostitues and work in brothels? Or do you want them to seduce maried men into illegal relationshops ecause they can't find men themselves. maybe this is why society is like this, women are always in competition in the west, and also even in some islamic countries to get men, and lose their honour and dignity by selling their bodies in this purpose.
Remember a woman can ask in her mariage contract that she don't want her husband to be married to another woman, so if there is no such stipulation in the contract, why are you complaining if the woman herself is ok with it?
Finally it must be noted Islam put a limit on polygamy, before men would married to several women, much more than just 4.
it's interesting to see that even prophets in the Bible have more than 4 wives, these are prophets. You believe Jesus PBUH is God, so he must have allowed these prophets to have so many wives,If Jesus NEVER said anything like that and actually his teachings can be understood to be in complete opposition to those regulations, how can you say that Jesus preached Islam?
according to that he was Preaching Islam
Regarding cutting off of hands, there is already a discussion about this http://www.islamicboard.com/basics-i...ht=shariah+law , is it fair to cut off hands you ask? What about the original sin, of stealing? Such a law would stop people from stealing in futre
Funny how you've ignored Cool_Jannah's post
Well you have to pick and choose among your textual critics. After all there are a lot of textual analysists in the West who do not accept this.format_quote Originally Posted by cool_jannah
Really? What is your evidence for that? And this is a serious question - How do you reconcile that belief with the Hadith, such as,The frequently made statements that the Qur'an is the word of Muhammad who copied his information from Jewish and Christian sources is made by people who do not know the history of the world, the Qur'an or Muhammad. The first Arabic translation of the Bible appeared two centuries after Muhammad's mission.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 1, Number 3:
Narrated 'Aisha:
(the mother of the faithful believers) The commencement of the Divine Inspiration to Allah's Apostle was in the form of good dreams which came true like bright day light, and then the love of seclusion was bestowed upon him.
>deletions<
Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605:
Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), "What do you see?" When he told him, Waraqa said, "That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."
It has always looked to me as if there was a Bible in Arabic around at the time. Muhammed's cousin by marriage wrote one. It just has not survived. Which is not to say Muhammed studied it. Just that there was one around. Or of course Bukhari is wrong.
Assuming that Muhammed was illiterate. I wonder when that idea arose and if it had anything to do with Christians accusing Muhammed of copying their scriptures and making it all up. Does anyone have any idea when the first reference to his illiteracy was?If we add to this Muhammad's illiteracy and the scarcity of religious books in any language outside churches and temples in the sixth century we can understand the absurdity of this allegation.
Come on now. Common knowledge? Millions? Pull the other one.It is common knowledge that the divinity of Jesus was introduced by Saint Paul and his followers and was established on the dead bodies of millions of Christians through history which evoked the Castillo's well-known remark "To burn a man is not to prove a doctrine."
Well self-evidently the Christians do not think they were written by Jesus's disciplies, nor is there any obvious political purpose to the Christians choosing the ones they chose. Nor is there the slightest reason to think that they are even of equal authenticity. You may think so, and you are welcome to, but your claim is both baseless and insulting to Christians. They do not agree with the Quran. Bits of them, used selectively, might.Some of those books were written by Jesus's disciples. If they were not more authentic than the four gospels they were of equal authenticity. Some of them still are available such as the Gospel of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas which agree with the Qur’an.
Which is to say minorities of utter insignificance. You are also doubling up some of your references. Goths, an ethnic group, were Arians, a religious sect.]The Unitarian concept and the humanness of Jesus is not only held by Muslims but also by Jews and by some early groups of Christianity such as the Ebionites, the Cerinthians, the Basilidians, the Capocratians and the Hypisistarians to name several early sects. The Arians, Paulicians and Goths also accepted Jesus as a prophet of God. Even in the modern age there are churches in Asia, in Africa, the Unitarian church, and Jehova Witnesses who do not worship Jesus as God.
Actually it goes to the heart of Christian doctrine. Either Jesus is God incarnate or there is no reason to be a Christian.The best George Carey could say in his attempt to refute the findings of those theologians is that unless one takes Jesus as God Incarnate one won't be able to understand Jesus' mission or explain its impact on people. This definitely is a very weak argument because all great prophets such as Abraham, Moses, and Muhammad have had a tremendous impact on people and none of them claimed that he was God or a son of God.
Please refer to this article:format_quote Originally Posted by Turin Turambar
http://voiceforislam.com/JesusTheMuslim.html
Your confusing a number of things. These are the laws brought by Prophet Muhammad pbuh. Jesus didn't bring any laws, he said he came to fufill the previousl laws, i.e. the mosaic laws. Now we can have a comparative discussion on the Mosaic laws and the Qur'anic laws, if you think the latter is more harsh, you certainly have not read your bible carefully!But you know very well that Islam preached a lot of other things.
If you want to educate yourself and find out the truth about Shari'ah law, beyond the stereotypes and fictitious material you see on TV (which you admit is your primary source), then I suggest you read the discussion here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/basics-i...ariah-law.html
Btw, when am I going to get a response to my previous post?
Except either you have to accept the Christian idea of succession (ie Jesus came and abrogated some of the Mosaic laws) or that Jesus had an odd idea of what "fulfilling" the Mosaic laws meant. For example,format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
He is clearly not fulfilling the Mosaic laws in a normal sense. Christians would, perhaps, argue that he "fulfilled" the Law in the sense that he transcended it. But that goes with the whole "sacrifice for mankind" argument.John.8
[1] Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
[2] And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
[3] And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
[4] They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
[5] Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
[6] This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
[7] So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
[8] And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
[9] And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
[10] When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
[11] She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
Or you've forgotten that I don't accept something automatically because it appears in the New Testament. I agree that the New Testament attributes a number of sins to Jesus, contrary to the claim of sinlessness.format_quote Originally Posted by HeiGou
But my point remains the same that Jesus did not come to legislate.
I have not forgotten. You think not stoning a woman taken in sin is itself a sin? Wow. That is a surprise. Mercy is usually a good thing.format_quote Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
Then you and most Christians would agree that Jesus did not come to legislate. But then you have just added a third option - either Jesus was God and could transcend Mosaic law, or he was confused about many things or the NT lies about what he did and said.
I wasn't referring to the specific example you cited, but a great number of examples, such as those listed by some Jewish writers here:format_quote Originally Posted by HeiGou
http://www.messiahtruth.com/sinless.html
The last option is closer to the truth - the account of Jesus in the gospels is not reliable.Then you and most Christians would agree that Jesus did not come to legislate. But then you have just added a third option - either Jesus was God and could transcend Mosaic law, or he was confused about many things or the NT lies about what he did and said.
True as other posts mentioned Jesus (PBUH) was not a Law Prophet. Of all the Prophets only two were to establish the Laws. Moses and Muhammed (Peace be upon them). Jesus (PBUH) was fulfilling the Mosiac laws. No previous books name Christianty or Islam. All Prophets taught Islam by preaching oneness with GOD and brotherhood of man. Religion was not completed until GOD annouced Islam to Mankind in the Qur'an.format_quote Originally Posted by Turin TurambarMoss,
I was originally planning to answer to a previous post you wrote but then I discovered this last one. You are giving me a lot of work...
You say "jesus PBUH preached Islam". I have heard that of course said many times before, but I want to analyze it a little bit. If by that you mean Jesus preached the oneness of God and the brotherhood of men, you are right. Those are things that Jesus and Islam have in common.
With regards to the 4 wives. In those days they had hundreds of wives so making them limit it to 4 was a blessing to stop this practice. But, the Qur'an basically tells you to have one wife.format_quote Originally Posted by Turin Turambar
The rules are so complicated for more than one wife that man would have a 99% chance not to be able to do it. The reason for it is if man would follow all rules, then the women would agree as well and there would be nothing wrong. Reason for it is if half the men of the world are gone what would the women do? Islamically they would be helping the women and vice versa and all has to be fair and equal.
Honestly, 99% of man couldn't follow all the rules so it says it is better off with one only. But in the old days they had to adjust from 100 to 4 which was drastic and helped them to learn and be closer to Allah SWT.
The cut of the hand rule sounds better than our rules of rape someone get 3 years in jail and 5 years probation. The criminals adapt to jail time and they get frr room and board and oh, wait, if they get murder live 40 years in jail and then be put to sleep.
If I knew my hand would be cut off, I wouldn't do the crime in the first place.
Jesus prayed to GOD, and so do I. I no longer pray to Jesus like I used to as a Christian because he is a teacher/Prophet. We should ONLY pray to GOD.
Jesus bowed in prayer as in Islam.
Since Jesus was removed from the Earth, everything went haywire over the 600 years before Muhammed showed up. All the Pagans took over Abrahams Kaaba and all important historical sites.
GOD knew the world was so messed up and was only gonna get worse by 2006 and needed to help mankind. So, we did not get new rules, rather we are redirected to do what Abraham was told to do.
In my 20 years of Christianty I know and feel and see GOD working more than ever in my 5 months as a Muslimah ALHAMDULLIAH!
I have had supernatural infuences of GOD help me in ways you would think are wierd. The more I am connected with GOD, the more he helps me in a pyhsical state with proof I can see. And you intuition works in overdrive ALHAMDULLIAH!
Salaam,
SisterKhadija
Greetings and peace,
Jesus gave us a new commandment at the last supper, ‘love one another as I have loved you, by this all men will know that you are my disciples’
Muslims and Christians seem to compete against each other, but what is getting in the way of Muslims and Christians loving each other, we both recognise Jesus.
In the spirit of seeking greater interfaith friendships
Eric
format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
Peace be with you Eric,
This is becasue there is a Triology going on here, Book of Moses, Gospel of Jesus, and The Qur'an.
Christians have not finished the Trilogy.
When you watch a 3-part movie, you do not stop after the 2nd one do you?
Salaam,
Sister Khadija
Sister Khadija,
Your example is good but flawed. You say "Book of Moses, Gospel of Jesus, and The Qur'an" and that is the Trilogy you want me to follow.
The problem is that the equivalent Trilogy would be "The Lord of the Rings I, The Lord of the Rings II and Friday the 13th"
It is not a Trilogy, you see? The first and the second part match but the third has nothing to do with the previous two.
I will stick to the movies I like.
Hello, peace on everyone:
I just have to say this "the only religion that makes sense which is Islam. " which was quoted by a christian guy that was talking to my brother. That doesn't really help, but after reading this thread it just made me. Sorry again , you all can contiune on with your debate.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks