Christian worship of Jesus..

[Danah]

You said that you aren't looking for debate. So, I just want to clariy that I didn't say that it wasn't confusing. Nor can I explain how it was that God was able to make himself incarnate, other than that scripture also says that with God all things are possible. That it is the most humbling event imaginable, actually even beyond human imagination, I completely agree. All I can say is that it is the Christian understanding that it is what was so with respect to Jesus.


The_Prince's post not withstanding, the following are all cases of people recorded as worshipping Jesus: Matthew 2:2, Matthew 14:33, Matthew 28:9, Matthew 28:17 and John 9:38 during his lifetime. And in John 20:28 his own disciple directly addresses Jesus as nothing less than God. As a Muslim I don't expect you to accept that they were speaking the truth with regard to Jesus. But please don't accept as factual those who can't even take the time to verify a statement such as "nobody believed Jesus was God or worshipped him, this was during his lifte time" without double checking it for themselves. Running a simple word search on www.biblegateway.com was all that was needed to verify or contradict such a statement.

Well, that has nothing to do with me being believe it or not, but I was curious of how Christians themselves view that issue for a being to hold two totally opposite features at the same time. Thanks for the other part of your reply, I shall go through all verses you mentioned when I get sometime soon

 

[Khaldun]

Say: If the Beneficent God has a son, then I would be the first one to worship him. [Surah Zukhruf verse 81]

The very fact that God made Himself into a human would cease His fact of being a God, since God is above His creation not part of it. God created His creation and is the Lord above it, He is not a part of His creation. This is in fact only repeating the beliefs of the ancient greeks who believed that Zues had children etc.

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]

 

[Grace Seeker]

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]

Where in their scriptures do Jews actually say that Ezra is the son of God? I've heard this referred to by Muslims many times, but never have I heard a Jew say this, nor found it in any Bible used by either Jew or Christian. Maybe I'm just not looking in the right place. Since the Qur'an said it, it must be so. So, where exactly is this statement to be found?


As to the other part of your statement:

The very fact that God made Himself into a human would cease His fact of being a God, since God is above His creation not part of it.

To me this sounds like a human dictating to God what God can and cannot do. While God entering into a human body might seem demeaning, and humbling when we think that we have to preserve God's glory. But even among men, I notice that truly great men don't have a problem stooping down to help others and that only the vain refuse to do so. For myself, I don't see how it necessarily makes God less than God to enter into humanity, unless it is your contention that God would become despoiled by such an act. My view is that to so say that God cannot do something is to put God into a smaller box, made by our own limited understanding of his nature, than the act in and of itself would do.

 

[Khaldun]

Yes you are right because the Qur'aan said it it is right.

There is no clear verse neither in the Torah nor Bible that says Jesus was son of God nor God himself so the issue is not about the scriptures it is about what people want to believe.

And it was the Jews of the arabian peninsula that in particular believed that Uzair was the son of God, read up on Arabic History before Islaam and you will find it there.

We are not putting limits on our Lord, it is rather you that are. All we are saying is that our Lord is above His creation not part of it. Jesus [according to you] died, our Lord is ever-Living and never dies. Perfection belongs only to Allah, and thus human beings are imperfect and if Allah became human it would make Him imperfect unless you want to say He was a human but not imperfect?

 

[anatolian]

Jesus [according to you] died..

This is another question, I think. What does it mean "Jesus died"? If it is the death of Jesus whom christians consider fully God along with fully human, then God died. Otherwise they mean only Jesus the human died.

 

[anatolian]

...When we worship him we are worshipping God, yet I never feel any need to do any mental gymastics to somehow separate his humanity from his divinity.

I don't deny that if the man Jesus were to be standing in front of me that I would indeed worship him. But I woud not worship him for his human acts, even as meritorious as I understand them to be, I would only worship him because I also believe him to be the God of all the universe, even when he is incarnate in human form.

So God does not care whether you seperate these two natures of Jesus when you worship him?

The Avatar idea spoken of by Karl I don't quite get. But then it is not a word I am familiar with outside of their use on computer screens.

Avatars are the incarnations of God in hinduism.

 

[mkh4JC]

Yes you are right because the Qur'aan said it it is right.

There is no clear verse neither in the Torah nor Bible that says Jesus was son of God nor God himself so the issue is not about the scriptures it is about what people want to believe.

And it was the Jews of the arabian peninsula that in particular believed that Uzair was the son of God, read up on Arabic History before Islaam and you will find it there.

We are not putting limits on our Lord, it is rather you that are. All we are saying is that our Lord is above His creation not part of it. Jesus [according to you] died, our Lord is ever-Living and never dies. Perfection belongs only to Allah, and thus human beings are imperfect and if Allah became human it would make Him imperfect unless you want to say He was a human but not imperfect?

Those verses I quoted above are strong evidence that the Jesus of the New Testament is who he says he is.

 

[Khaldun]

I am sorry but I do not see the relievant passage.

 

[OurIslamic]

Interesting question. Whenever I think about Christians worshipping Jesus, I think that if a god was in human form, the form would disintegrate from the power of the god.

If it didn't disintegrate, that would mean that humans have the power to sustain god's power within themselves. Allah (SWT) has already mentioned that humans are limited creatures, so it is impossible for us (our human 'form') to sustain god's limitless power.

The thought that Jesus was a god is paradoxical.

 

[mkh4JC]

I am sorry but I do not see the relievant passage.

These are the three passages I quoted:

1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb,

8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied:. by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities

12Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
Isaiah 53

The entirety of the chapter is talking about what the Messiah--that is, Jesus Christ--would have to do to redeem man. Just read over it and compare it to what you know of the Christian understanding of Jesus (ie dying on the cross to bring fallen man to holy God). And this is in the Old Testament.

Also here, Psalm 110: 1:

'The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.' Here is Jesus referencing this verse to the Phariesees in the New Testament:

'Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he?> They say unto him, the son of David.

He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.' Matthew 22: 42-46.

So here we have the Psalmist--David--saying that 'The Lord (God the Father) said unto my Lord (God the Son) sit thou at my right hand, til I make thine enemies thy footstool.' Now, David didn't understand what this meant when he wrote it, he was just writing under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Interesting question. Whenever I think about Christians worshipping Jesus, I think that if a god was in human form, the form would disintegrate from the power of the god.

If it didn't disintegrate, that would mean that humans have the power to sustain god's power within themselves. Allah (SWT) has already mentioned that humans are limited creatures, so it is impossible for us (our human 'form') to sustain god's limitless power.

The thought that Jesus was a god is paradoxical.

This is just one more reason why there can never be a syncretistic religion that involves both Christianity and Islam. We Christians would indeed hold that God is capable of having his infinite presence and power residing in a finite human being, for that is exactly what we mean when we speak of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in one's life. That you can't imagine that we would see as telling God that he is incapable of something. I know you don't see it that way. Just as I don't see the idea of Jesus as God as being paradoxical in a way that would prohibit it from being true.

 

[Khaldun]

aha I see, so people are saying Jesus is son of God in the bible? But he himself does not say anything to that effect?

Makes sense I guess if people claim a person to be something he himself does not say he is then obviously the claim of the People must be true.

And when Allah will say: O Jesus son of Mary! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah, he will say: Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things.

I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: That serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me away, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things. [Chapter The Dinner Table verses 116-117]

 

[mkh4JC]

aha I see, so people are saying Jesus is son of God in the bible? But he himself does not say anything to that effect?

Makes sense I guess if people claim a person to be something he himself does not say he is then obviously the claim of the People must be true.

And when Allah will say: O Jesus son of Mary! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah, he will say: Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things.

I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: That serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me away, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things. [Chapter The Dinner Table verses 116-117]

Actually, Jesus did say as much:

'The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemeth, because I said, I am the Son of God?

If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.

But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.' St John 10: 33-38.

 

[Grace Seeker]

aha I see, so people are saying Jesus is son of God in the bible? But he himself does not say anything to that effect?

It seems to me that he did:

They all asked, "Are you then the Son of God?" He [Jesus] replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

John 1
49Then Nathanael declared, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel."

50Jesus said, "You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that."

On top of that, it is reported that an angel also said that Jesus would be called the Son of God:

The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.

The real debate is not whether this was a title used to describe and accepted by Jesus, but what the title means.

 

[جوري]

Do you not find an inherent difference between:

22:70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.

and your previous quoted:

They all asked, "Are you then the Son of God?" He [Jesus] replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

one is an affirmation and the other is an evasion, that is if I am to take the translation to denote what you desire for it to say anyway..

the take home message for someone who isn't entrenched in this mess, is a fearful god (prays to himself before he is crucified in the garden of Gethsemane, yet forsakes himself the next day, inept at choosing his apostles, given that he told Peter he'd denounce him three times and Peter did, so a dying god leaving the world to folks who can't at all shoulder the responsibility while god is alive in their midst let alone after his death, and last for our purposes here a god that can't actually come out and say yes I am your god or I am the son of your god, rather, YOU say that I am....:hmm:

all the best

 

[Khaldun]

I thin sister Gossamer Skye made an important point.

Also Grace Seeker I think you nailed the issue. Many people before jesus said they were sons of God, in particular the jews. Based on your understanding these people are the sons of God too. Or perhaps it is a figure of speech rather then a literal meaning?

And the Jews and the Christians say: We are the sons of Allah and His beloved ones. Say: Why does He then chastise you for your faults? Nay, you are mortals from among those whom He has created, He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He pleases; and Allah's is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is between them, and to Him is the eventual coming. [Chapter The Dinner table verse 18]

 

[mkh4JC]

the take home message for someone who isn't entrenched in this mess, is a fearful god (prays to himself before he is crucified in the garden of Gethsemane, yet forsakes himself the next day, inept at choosing his apostles, given that he told Peter he'd denounce him three times and Peter did, so a dying god leaving the world to folks who can't at all shoulder the responsibility while god is alive in their midst let alone after his death, and last for our purposes here a god that can't actually come out and say yes I am your god or I am the son of your god, rather, YOU say that I am....:hmm:

all the best

In Peter's case, he just didn't fully understand what the Messiah would have to do. He was focusing on the restoration of Israel, which the Messiah was prophesied to do, but he didn't grasp that Jesus had to first come as a suffering servant, to save man from his sins. Here in Matthew we find this:

'From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not (don't understand) the things that be of God, but those that be of men.' Matthew 16: 21-23.

And also we have this in Acts 1: 6-7.

'When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom of Israel?

And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.'

So it's understandable why Peter would deny him, he didn't have the complete picture of the Messiah. Peter had a very limited view of what the Messiah had to ultimately do. Jesus didn't come just to restore the nation of Israel, or to liberate the Jews (and he will do this) but God also had a plan to remedy the sin problem, and how he--being completely holy--could fellowship with that which was fallen.

And I quoted a scripture where Jesus does come out and say that he is the Son of God.

 

[جوري]

In Peter's case, he just didn't fully understand what the Messiah would have to do. He was focusing on the restoration of Israel, which the Messiah was prophesied to do, but he didn't grasp that Jesus had to first come as a suffering servant, to save man from his sins. Here in Matthew we find this:

'From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest (don't understand) the things that be of God, but those that be of men.' Matthew 16: 21-23.

And also we have this in Acts 1: 6-7.

'When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom of Israel?

And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.'

So it's understandable why Peter would deny him, he didn't have the complete picture of the Messiah. Peter had a very limited view of what the Messiah had to ultimately do. Jesus didn't come just to restore the nation of Israel, or to liberate the Jews (and he will do this) but he was also had a plan to remedy the sin problem, and how he--being completely holy--could fellowship with that which was fallen.

And I quoted a scripture where Jesus does come out and say that he is the Son of God.

ah but peter was chosen by Jesus he is an apostle.. Paul wasn't chosen by jesus, he is self-proclaimed ... doesn't that make god ineffectual on multiple levels?
god can't pick out an apostle who will carry out the message upon his death, almost similar to god cursing the earth he allegedly created for not bearing him fruit..
How does this ineffectual god reconcile with an all knowing god who created everything with such great detail and intricacies from the smallest cell to the grandest planet in the cosmos and all that is in between?

Personally I can't wrap my mind around why god would descend and show up in Nazareth or beyt lahm to be discussing silly little passages by a man whose identity we don't actually know (know) and scrutinize further already questionable details in a foreign tongue than that of your god to claim his deification.

all the best

 

[Grace Seeker]

Do you not find an inherent difference between:

22:70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.

and your previous quoted:

They all asked, "Are you then the Son of God?" He [Jesus] replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

one is an affirmation and the other is an evasion, that is if I am to take the translation to denote what you desire for it to say anyway..

M you're absolutely right, those two translations carry significantly different connotative baggage with them. And though I generally prefer the NIV, I will attest that looking in the Greek the idea of it being an affirmation is not stated as concretely as the NIV makes it appear. The better translation of his response is "You say that I am."

Only Luke has this question (v. 70). Standing independent of and subsequent to the question about messiahship, it servs to emphasize that Jesus is himself the Son of God and not merely called such as an honorific title because of his role as Messiah. Jesus' reply--lit., "You say that I am" (hymeis legete hoti ego eimi)--while not a direct affirmation, was taken as such, as v. 71 shows. The nature of this reply is understandable in view of Jesus' remarks in vv. 67b-68.


Walter L. Liefeld, Luke, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Vol. 8, Frank E. Gaebelien, ed., Zondervan, c. 1984.

 

[YusufNoor]

Where in their scriptures do Jews actually say that Ezra is the son of God? I've heard this referred to by Muslims many times, but never have I heard a Jew say this, nor found it in any Bible used by either Jew or Christian. Maybe I'm just not looking in the right place. Since the Qur'an said it, it must be so. So, where exactly is this statement to be found?

EXACTLY where in the Qur'an does it say that the Jews "wrote in their Scripture that Ezra is the son of God"

As to the other part of your statement: To me this sounds like a human dictating to God what God can and cannot do. While God entering into a human body might seem demeaning, and humbling when we think that we have to preserve God's glory. But even among men, I notice that truly great men don't have a problem stooping down to help others and that only the vain refuse to do so. For myself, I don't see how it necessarily makes God less than God to enter into humanity, unless it is your contention that God would become despoiled by such an act. My view is that to so say that God cannot do something is to put God into a smaller box, made by our own limited understanding of his nature, than the act in and of itself would do.

This is just one more reason why there can never be a syncretistic religion that involves both Christianity and Islam. We Christians would indeed hold that God is capable of having his infinite presence and power residing in a finite human being, for that is exactly what we mean when we speak of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in one's life. That you can't imagine that we would see as telling God that he is incapable of something. I know you don't see it that way. Just as I don't see the idea of Jesus as God as being paradoxical in a way that would prohibit it from being true.

we know that Allah is capable of doing ANYTHING, yes, but He only does things that befit His Majesty. being an amoeba by splitting into 3 isn't one of them, nor would be defecating or urinating on Himself [Nowuthubillah]. we try to persuade you to stop saying these things about Our Creator for your own good and salvation.