Could someone please explain to me how muslims view Jesus on the cross? I heard that muslims do not believe that it was indeed Jesus that died on the cross but I'm not sure how they reconcile that with all that the new testament says.
I'll miss you. There are some good discussions on this board, but I spend too much time on here and am thinking about cutting back as well. I doubt that I will get any reverts to rerevert, but I need to learn others beliefs. By a Quran and study a way, (the read the Bible and study The Way).
Quite true. It is always a good idea to learn all about another belief. It is difficult to discuss matters without a mutualy acceptable basis of communication. Many people approach other beliefs only with the knowledge of their own faith. They do not realise that the source they are using probably is not considered to be a believable source by the other person. Your openess and willingness to discuss through reason and not emotion is appreciated. We may always disagree, but we can disagree with respect.
Thanks again. I'm going to withdraw from this discussion because for some strange reason it's getting too emotional for me. It's not what anyone has said really, but rather I think if I am going to proceed with my looking into the muslim faith, I will need to do it with my fiance since I'm finding I need extra tlc, the more I learn.
Thanks though.
Doodlebug, I have sent you a private message.
Peace.
Peace glo
Here I stand.
I can do no other.
May God help me.
Amen.
Come, let us worship and bow down •
and kneel before the Lord our Maker
[Psalm 95]
We do not know for certain at which point the change took place. I can see the logic that it would make sense for the change to have taken place before the torture. There is no actually verification as to who was crucified, except that it was not I'sa(a.s.). I've heard speculation that it may have been Judas.
I agree that God(swt) will not deceive us. So in my mind it must have been some condition in which the people actually deceived thenselves. I was not there so I can not say how God(swt) did this without it being deceit by him. I can only trust in Allah(swt) and if there is ever any reason I truly have a need to know I will learn it, Inshallah.
Salaam Woodrow. I think the issue is, when does something become "deciet?" -For example, is it deceit for Allah (swt) to help an army of three hundred defeat an army of a thousand? After all the army of 1,000 chose to believe that the army of 300 was not helped by God, and thus decieved themselves into believing that God was not going to help them. (Of course I am referring to the battle of Badr.) But this deciet was only on the part of the Meccans, who chose not to believe in the Qu'ran which promised the Muslims victory. I believe it is the same scenario with Isa (Saas). Because Pharisees and Romans and so on chose not to believe in him as Nabi and Messiah, they only decieved themselves. In choosing not to believe in Isa (saas), they also chose not to believe that Allah (swt) would help him escape their plans. It's kinda like a kid only seeing what he wants to see. If they chose Isa as their Prophet, and Allah (Swt) as their Rabb, this would have ended their self deciet... but the choice they made left them further wandering in the dark, as Al-Qu'ran says. This is my understanding of the situation. Astagfhur Allah.
Salaam Woodrow. I think the issue is, when does something become "deciet?" -For example, is it deceit for Allah (swt) to help an army of three hundred defeat an army of a thousand? After all the army of 1,000 chose to believe that the army of 300 was not helped by God, and thus decieved themselves into believing that God was not going to help them. (Of course I am referring to the battle of Badr.) But this deciet was only on the part of the Meccans, who chose not to believe in the Qu'ran which promised the Muslims victory. I believe it is the same scenario with Isa (Saas). Because Pharisees and Romans and so on chose not to believe in him as Nabi and Messiah, they only decieved themselves. In choosing not to believe in Isa (saas), they also chose not to believe that Allah (swt) would help him escape their plans. It's kinda like a kid only seeing what he wants to see. If they chose Isa as their Prophet, and Allah (Swt) as their Rabb, this would have ended their self deciet... but the choice they made left them further wandering in the dark, as Al-Qu'ran says. This is my understanding of the situation. Astagfhur Allah.
It is an interesting thought. However, I do not believe Allah(swt) is deceitfull. All comes to be the result of our own choices. If it seems Allah(swt) has made a self destructive choice to be the best one and we are destroyed for taking that choice, it was our own inner arrogance that made us see what we wanted to see.
This is a poor analogy: Years back NYC had a big strike by the trash haulers. The people had no means of disposing of their trash with out driving many miles to the dump. Some people took to wrpping their refuse in gift paper and leaving it in the back of the car. It would always be stolen fairly soon. Is that deceit or were the theives deceived by their own wickedness?
I still say it is not possible to deceive oneself. Nevertheless, if Jesus was taken up to protect Him from crucifixion, what would be the necessity of the deception?
One could certainly say that mobs tend to behave in an irrational way and could attack bystanders much like the Rodney King induced riots in LA led to assults on innocent bystanders.
One also has to ask, if the crowd was so mad at Jesus that they wanted to kill Him, what caused it? As a Christian obviously I would say He claimed to be the Son of God and the I AM of Moses. Apparently this message was as unpopular to the Jews then as it is to the Jews and Muslims today.
Entry Word: deceive
Function: verb
Text: to cause to believe what is untrue <he went to great lengths to deceive his younger brother about the nature of his new job at the mall>
Synonyms beguile, bluff, cozen, delude, dupe, fool, gull, have, hoax, hoodwink, humbug, misguide, misinform, mislead, snow, string along, take in, trick
Related Words cheat, chisel, defraud, fleece, gyp, hustle, rook, swindle
I still say it is not possible to deceive oneself. Nevertheless, if Jesus was taken up to protect Him from crucifixion, what would be the necessity of the deception?
One could certainly say that mobs tend to behave in an irrational way and could attack bystanders much like the Rodney King induced riots in LA led to assults on innocent bystanders.
One also has to ask, if the crowd was so mad at Jesus that they wanted to kill Him, what caused it? As a Christian obviously I would say He claimed to be the Son of God and the I AM of Moses. Apparently this message was as unpopular to the Jews then as it is to the Jews and Muslims today.
Entry Word: deceive
Function: verb
Text: to cause to believe what is untrue <he went to great lengths to deceive his younger brother about the nature of his new job at the mall>
Synonyms beguile, bluff, cozen, delude, dupe, fool, gull, have, hoax, hoodwink, humbug, misguide, misinform, mislead, snow, string along, take in, trick
Related Words cheat, chisel, defraud, fleece, gyp, hustle, rook, swindle
Salaam. It is quite possible to decieve oneself. I believe it's called Megalomania and is an actual disorder. (I may have the word wrong but it is a very common disorder.)
Why did the crowd want Jesus (saas) executed? -Because he claimed his mission was from God and that gave him authority. Authority to criticize the corrupt Pharisees. Thus the Pharisees chose not to believe in him and to incite people against him. Thus people wanted him executed.
Salaam. It is quite possible to decieve oneself. I believe it's called Megalomania and is an actual disorder. (I may have the word wrong but it is a very common disorder.)
Why did the crowd want Jesus (saas) executed? -Because he claimed his mission was from God and that gave him authority. Authority to criticize the corrupt Pharisees. Thus the Pharisees chose not to believe in him and to incite people against him. Thus people wanted him executed.
I looked up the word Megalomania.
1. A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.
2. An obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions.
The religious leaders might have applied this word to Christ since He claimed to be the Son of God, to have the power to forgive sins, etc. I would be reluctant to apply it to the crowd though. Psychopathological conditions I would think would be applied to those people who behave outside the norm. It is unlikely that there would have been enough Megalomaniacs in Jerusalem to riot and get the Roman govornment to crucify someone without verifying his identity. In any case, delusional fantasies are not self-deception, unless you are saying a person having them made a choice to do so.
1. A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.
2. An obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions.
The religious leaders might have applied this word to Christ since He claimed to be the Son of God, to have the power to forgive sins, etc. I would be reluctant to apply it to the crowd though. Psychopathological conditions I would think would be applied to those people who behave outside the norm. It is unlikely that there would have been enough Megalomaniacs in Jerusalem to riot and get the Roman govornment to crucify someone without verifying his identity. In any case, delusional fantasies are not self-deception, unless you are saying a person having them made a choice to do so.
It turns out I had the word wrong, it's called mythomania. (I always get those two confused.) There are two types of Mythomania. One is like compulsive lying. The other is a state in which individuals believe their own lies. The psychological reasons this can occur are many, but the most common is when someone cannot accept a certain reality because it is detrimental to them, and so they are in a position where they must either accept that which is detrimental, or deny the truth. When faced with such a difficult situation, a person's psyche often cannot take it and will ultimately believe the easiest thing there is to believe, whether true or not. Thus we arrive at the category of mythomania #2. Mythomania is not an uncommon "mania." -When we think of Mania's we think of people running around in the streets completely mentally disturbed. In fact almost all people have one sort of mania or another that kicks in (and usually goes away) at various points in our lives. So to say that this was mass psychosis on the part of the Jews is of course fantastic... but to say that they were a group of people who would be in a difficult position were they to accept that Jesus (saas) actually had a message from God, and so their stubborn personalities (biblically speaking) found it easier to "believe the lie" (the lie being that Christ did NOT have a message from God) -this is not so fantastic.
...but to say that they were a group of people who would be in a difficult position were they to accept that Jesus (saas) actually had a message from God, and so their stubborn personalities (biblically speaking) found it easier to "believe the lie" (the lie being that Christ did NOT have a message from God)
This of course presumes the Jewish leaders recognized the truth and made a choice to disbelieve it. It could also be just as easily be applied to Christians and Muslims today since we all have to make decisions about what is true and what is false, and failure to change belief could be interpreted as stubborness by one party, and spiritual strength by the other.
As a Christian I believe Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, as a Muslim you believe He did not. As a Muslim you believe Muhammed was a prophet sent by God, and as a Christian I believe he was not. Obviously one or the other is true. From your perspective, my failure to accept Muhammed might convince you that I am stubborn and choosing to believe a lie. From my perspective, the opposite could be true.
This of course presumes the Jewish leaders recognized the truth and made a choice to disbelieve it. It could also be just as easily be applied to Christians and Muslims today since we all have to make decisions about what is true and what is false, and failure to change belief could be interpreted as stubborness by one party, and spiritual strength by the other.
As a Christian I believe Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, as a Muslim you believe He did not. As a Muslim you believe Muhammed was a prophet sent by God, and as a Christian I believe he was not. Obviously one or the other is true. From your perspective, my failure to accept Muhammed might convince you that I am stubborn and choosing to believe a lie. From my perspective, the opposite could be true.
That is very true.It all comes down to which is true. I have seen more then enough proof to convince me that the Qur'an is true. I am totaly convinced the Qur'an is true. some of the proofs I have seen are the satements in the Qur'an just now being proven when at the time of Muhammad there was no physical way a man could know they existed. I also see the anger of people when you tell them the Qur'an is true. It is as if a shield of blindness has been placed over them by shaitan. The fact they can not see the Qur'an is a proof to me that it is true. There are more proofs I have seen.
That is very true.It all comes down to which is true. I have seen more then enough proof to convince me that the Qur'an is true. I am totaly convinced the Qur'an is true. some of the proofs I have seen are the satements in the Qur'an just now being proven when at the time of Muhammad there was no physical way a man could know they existed. I also see the anger of people when you tell them the Qur'an is true. It is as if a shield of blindness has been placed over them by shaitan. The fact they can not see the Qur'an is a proof to me that it is true. There are more proofs I have seen.
If one measure of the truth of scripture is the antagonism it generates in the nonbeliever, then consider the reactions by many Muslims on this message board to Christian questions and postings and on that basis reconsider the Bible.
If one measure of the truth of scripture is the antagonism it generates in the nonbeliever, then consider the reactions by many Muslims on this message board to Christian questions and postings and on that basis reconsider the Bible.
That is my own measure. I will not consider it to be reliable on it's own or applicable in all cases. On here I do not use that as a guideline when Christians get angry at references to the Qur'an.
On forums the biggest problem I see with the anger in either direction is the result of the exurberance of youth and the lack of debating skills. I would not use that as a guideline except in a face to face confrontation and with some knowledge of the person's abilities.
I'm sorry...did someone answer my question on why they wanted to kill Jesus in the first place? And if it was because they thought he said he was God, why didn't he just refute it, if it wasn't true?
I'm sorry...did someone answer my question on why they wanted to kill Jesus in the first place? And if it was because they thought he said he was God, why didn't he just refute it, if it wasn't true?
The reason they wanted to kill I'sa(as) will vary depending on what sources you read. From the Christian sources I have read it will vary with which denomination you belong to.
It seem that a large number of denominations say the Jew's condemned him for Blasphemy by him saying he was the Son of God.
Some denominations say that he was condemned for proclaiming he was the King of the Jews and that he was attempting to overthrow the government.
There are a few other teachings by various denominations but they are similar to those two.
As Muslims we do not believe Jesus ever claimed to be God(swt) or the Son of God(swt) or that he was Crucified.
Personaly I have not yet read enough to say I know why they wanted to kill him.
Thanks. I guess my main concern is that if they accused him of all this, why didn't he refute it if he never said it.
As far as I know that is strictly a Christian belief. It comes from the Christian Bible which we believe conains errors. We do not believe things happened in that manner and that he never said he was God(as) in any event we do not know exactly what did happen except that it was not I'sa who died. Possibly whoever it was that was crucified tried to say that he was not God(swt), if that was what he was charged with. The Christian version was written to support a belief other than what I'sa taught. I have no way to answer what I do not believe happened.
I never saw any writtings from outside the Bible that said he was charged with claiming to be God(swt)
it rots in the grave... it under goes rigor mortus... it decays... if you'd like details on how it rots and what gases are released refer to a science book
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
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
Array
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks