Muslims converting to Christianity

[Grace Seeker]

There couldn't have been two Jesus. Only one.

I agree. I am just pointing out that we have two vastly different images of Jesus in mind when we talk about him.

And there's no contradiction in what I've said: we Muslims can't say that the whole Bible is corrupted/altered, the problem is that we don't know which verses, chapters of even books have been altered. But what we do know is a fact, that based on our knowledge that Jesus was not only a Muslim but also Allah's one-before-the-final Messenger, peace upon him, that Jesus simply could not have said such words, as a Messenger of Allah cannot be a non-Muslim.

I didn't say there was a contradition in what you have said. What I was pointing out was that not only do you have your own understanding of who Jesus is, but when you refer to the Bible you on the one hand claim not to trust it, but cherry pick verses that you can agree with and then try to read them in the context of Islam rather than reading them in the context of the faith in which they were written, i.e. the rest of the material that is also written along with them which you choose to reject. If there is a contradiction it is not in what you have said, rather it is in what you have read and treat as reliable and what you have read and treat as unreliable, though they come from the very same source material.

 

[MadeenJibreel]

I agree. I am just pointing out that we have two vastly different images of Jesus in mind when we talk about him.

I didn't say there was a contradition in what you have said. What I was pointing out was that not only do you have your own understanding of who Jesus is, but when you refer to the Bible you on the one hand claim not to trust it, but cherry pick verses that you can agree with and then try to read them in the context of Islam rather than reading them in the context of the faith in which they were written, i.e. the rest of the material that is also written along with them which you choose to reject. If there is a contradiction it is not in what you have said, rather it is in what you have read and treat as reliable and what you have read and treat as unreliable, though they come from the very same source material.

I love Jesus, peace upon him, as described in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. I however do not agree with same statements in the Bible - allegedly said by Jesus. I say allegedly, because they are in contradiction with teachings of Islam, so we cannot acept those statements nor we can attribute them to Jesus, peace upon him.

Surah/Chapter 004 - An-Nisâ. Verse 171.

English Translation (The Noble Qur'an)
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 God. 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.

Surah/Chapter 005 - Al-Mâ'idah. Verse 116.

English Translation (The Noble Qur'an)
And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou art the Knower of Things Hidden.

 

[MustafaMc]

Truly, I did answer. God exists in God's own plane of existence. He existed before time as he created time. That means that he exists outside of the dimension that you and I experience as time. Similary God exists outside of the dimensions that you and I call space and matter for he created these things as well. Once you understand that God does not exist in space, matter, or time, to speak of God existing in any dimension that we as space and time trapped beings might comprehend is ludicrous.

First I must say this post is among the most significant that I have read on this forum. I, personally, agree with most of it as being consistent with Islam according to my limited understanding.

This very concept of Allah (swt) existing in another "plane of existence" or another dimension is why I can't accept Jesus (as) being God. How can the Eternal (As-Samad) exist in a temporal form? We believe that it does not behove the dignity of the Majestic (Al-Mutakabbir) and the Most High (Al-'Aliyy) to have the attributes of or to resemble a created human being. I also can't accept the Holy (Al-Quddoos) and the Vast, All-Embracing (Al-Wasi') as residing within less-than-holy and limited, finite humans as the "in-dwelling Holy Spirit".

God is a spiritual being. God is an eternal being. God enters into our world, but is not a part of our world (except, Christians hold, in the person of Jesus Christ). As I understand it, this is also how Muslims speak of Allah. And though you may not be familiar with thinking along the lines I have described here, I do not think it is foreign to Muslim thought or theology. However, there are some differences because Muslims, though not thinking of God as being like humans, tend to think of God as actually having hands and eyes and other body parts mentioned in the Qu'ran, whereas Christians generally understand these to be figures of speech.

Muslims don't define the attributes of Allah beyond the 99 Names of Allah of which I listed a few above. It is incorrect to say that Muslims believe that Allah has hands and eyes in the sense that we understand them as being comparable to the creation. Yet at the same time we don't say the references in the Quran are merely "figures of speech". Let's just say this is one of the mysteries that we can't comprehend this side of Judgement Day.

So, yes, God is everywhere. But not with a physical body. I guess that means it is more metaphysical. But even that is a poor understanding, like a single one-dimensional point trying to understand the concept of a thee-dimensional sphere.

Yes, our understanding is very limited. We believe that Allah is not "every where at once" except in His Knowledge.

And, no, God does not exist in things. As I've already said, things exist in God. He is the creator of all things, and their being holds together in him. In one sense, God is always in the act of creating. I don't mean creating in the sense of making one thing today and another thing tomorrow. I mean that God is always in the process of creating and holding all things together at all times, so that if God were to quit doing so, all things would cease to exist except for God who would still be because God always is. If God were to cease his act of continuous creation nothing that now is would continue to be. We would simply be gone, and there wouldn't even be dust left to give evidence that we ever were nor a place to view the emptiness of the universe from, for the universe would be no more as well. And yet, God would still be. And would be then, as now, the totality of all that is.

This is also consistent with my understanding of the Cherisher and Sustainer of the universe (Rabb-il 'Alameen).

 

[barney]

we Muslims can't say that the whole Bible is corrupted/altered, the problem is that we don't know which verses, chapters of even books have been altered. .

So is it Possible, IE that there is a possibility, that the Bible has been corrupted in one place only, lets say Matt 28:Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.

Perhaps this was corrupted, and the rest of it is fine! Or is a passage only considered corrupt if it causes friction with the Quran or Hadiths?

 

[MadeenJibreel]

So is it Possible, IE that there is a possibility, that the Bible has been corrupted in one place only, lets say Matt 28:Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.

Perhaps this was corrupted, and the rest of it is fine! Or is a passage only considered corrupt if it causes friction with the Quran or Hadiths?

No, not possible I would say...

 

[Grace Seeker]

First I must say this post is among the most significant that I have read on this forum. I, personally, agree with most of it as being consistent with Islam according to my limited understanding.

I consider that truly high praise. Thanks, sincerely, for the affirmation.

This very concept of Allah (swt) existing in another "plane of existence" or another dimension is why I can't accept Jesus (as) being God. How can the Eternal (As-Samad) exist in a temporal form? We believe that it does not behove the dignity of the Majestic (Al-Mutakabbir) and the Most High (Al-'Aliyy) to have the attributes of or to resemble a created human being. I also can't accept the Holy (Al-Quddoos) and the Vast, All-Embracing (Al-Wasi') as residing within less-than-holy and limited, finite humans as the "in-dwelling Holy Spirit".

I admit that it is a radical idea. And not one that I expect any person to accept based on logic. Indeed, the only reason that I can see to accept it is if, even against all logic, it were to actually happen. The testimony of those who were Jesus' disciples is that it did. And I accept their testimony. Certainly others are equally free to reject it. But I believe them to have been faithful men, not liars, and I believe that the Church has faithfully recorded and passed on to us what it received from them. So, I accept the proclamation that they made as well, that indeed Jesus Christ is God, the Son, Savior or ιχθυσ (ichthus) a Greek acronym used by the early church for Jesus.

 

[MustafaMc]

I admit that it is a radical idea. And not one that I expect any person to accept based on logic. Indeed, the only reason that I can see to accept it is if, even against all logic, it were to actually happen.

Yes, it is a matter of faith and what we choose to believe as true.

The testimony of those who were Jesus' disciples is that it did. And I accept their testimony. Certainly others are equally free to reject it. But I believe them to have been faithful men, not liars, and I believe that the Church has faithfully recorded and passed on to us what it received from them. So, I accept the proclamation that they made as well, that indeed Jesus Christ is God, the Son, Savior or ιχθυσ (ichthus) a Greek acronym used by the early church for Jesus.

This difference, of course, is fundamental to what makes you a Christian and me a Muslim. From my point of view, you see me as wrong (if I may presume) for the rejection and I see you as wrong (according to the Quran) for the affirmation of this very statement, but each of us will be accountable on Judgement Day for our own decisions.

Peace be upon you.

 

[barney]

No, not possible I would say...

For it to be not possible, the scholars must have a list of which passages were corrupted and indeed how they are corrupted. If they dont know which passages are corrupt, then they cannot say that there is corruption.

 

[MadeenJibreel]

For it to be not possible, the scholars must have a list of which passages were corrupted and indeed how they are corrupted. If they dont know which passages are corrupt, then they cannot say that there is corruption.

U sure about this? All the passages which with no doubt claim something else than what the Qur'an claims are corrupted/changed by man. Very simple example is the Oneness of God. Or that He has no sons. Explicit in the Qur'an.
But in the Bible, there are so many (alleged) son of God...so all those verses are not only the changed ones, but also a unimaginably big lie upon Almighty Allah.

How those passages got corrupted, it doesn't really matter.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Yes, it is a matter of faith and what we choose to believe as true. This difference, of course, is fundamental to what makes you a Christian and me a Muslim. From my point of view, you see me as wrong (if I may presume) for the rejection and I see you as wrong (according to the Quran) for the affirmation of this very statement, but each of us will be accountable on Judgement Day for our own decisions.

Peace be upon you.

That pretty accurately describes the dilemna/opportunity facing each and every one of us. But I want you to know that I still recognize you as my brother and love you as one whom I believe God also loves. You don't have to concur with me on that, it is simply a unilateral declaration on my part. And though I don't expect you to return to the Christian faith which you once held, I will never cease beseeching the one who is God over us all that he may still, in that last judgment you speak of, lift you up and claim you as his own for following and honoring him as best you know how.

 

[barney]

U sure about this? All the passages which with no doubt claim something else than what the Qur'an claims are corrupted/changed by man. Very simple example is the Oneness of God. Or that He has no sons. Explicit in the Qur'an.
But in the Bible, there are so many (alleged) son of God...so all those verses are not only the changed ones, but also a unimaginably big lie upon Almighty Allah.

How those passages got corrupted, it doesn't really matter.

Thats fantastic. But it assumes the Korans correct. :sunny:

 

[Woodrow]

Just my own personal feelings, but I believe it would be wonderful if more truly Islamic Muslims became officers in the USA military. There is no conflict in being a US officer and a devout Muslim. The US Officer's code of conduct, if followed, is not in conflict with Islam.

The role of an officer, if properly followed is to be responsible for the welfare, safety and behavior of not only the men under his command, but also to be certain that any combatants engaged with are not needlessly harmed, and are treated with respect, dignity and seen as soldiers and not as subhumans or criminals.

The role of a Muslim Officer would be to follow lawful, morally acceptable orders, not to improvise and fight for illegal dominance or wrongful treatment of innocents.

I believe the proper usage for Muslim Officers, would be in situations such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Not to fight other Muslims but to, work to remove the need for fighting and to assure that the issues of combat are carried out in the intent of preventing needless death, damage or injuries and that any combat engagements are limited to only necessary means to prevent unjust aggression from either side. This would help ensure that any engagement is limited to justified reasons and not the result of religious differences.

A Muslim Officer who places Islam first and follows the Officer's code of conduct in a manner befitting of a Muslim, would save many lives on both sides and greatly reduce any combat engagements that are the result of mutual fear and/or misunderstandings.

If a US officer is properly following his training, his goal is to be a military man but not a martial man and to place the safety of all as his duty. First the safety of innocent bystanders, the safety of the men under his command and to use all means possible to prevent needless harm to the enemy combatants.

 

[snakelegs]

can there be "lawful, morally acceptable orders" in the context of an immoral, illegal war?

 

[Grace Seeker]

can there be "lawful, morally acceptable orders" in the context of an immoral, illegal war?

Sure. Most wars are immoral. Most wars are lawful only in the eyes of one side. Yet, there are many lawful and morally acceptable orders given on both sides. That's what's so sad and indefensible about war -- good people trying to do their best to do the right thing, still end up killing each other because someone got it started for the wrong reasons and the rest are not smart enough to either see the need or know how to put a stop to it.

 

[MadeenJibreel]

Thats fantastic. But it assumes the Korans correct. :sunny:

Assumption is yours whilst the facts are ours.

 

[snakelegs]

Sure. Most wars are immoral. Most wars are lawful only in the eyes of one side. Yet, there are many lawful and morally acceptable orders given on both sides. That's what's so sad and indefensible about war -- good people trying to do their best to do the right thing, still end up killing each other because someone got it started for the wrong reasons and the rest are not smart enough to either see the need or know how to put a stop to it.

if a country declares war on the basis of a lie, are any of the orders given to officers lawful and moral?
i myself do not know the answer, but it is something to think about.

 

[Muslim Knight]

if a country declares war on the basis of a lie, are any of the orders given to officers lawful and moral?
i myself do not know the answer, but it is something to think about.

While I may not be in total disagreement with that, I think if war is inevitable, then lessening the damage & making it more humane are the better options.

 

[Woodrow]

if a country declares war on the basis of a lie, are any of the orders given to officers lawful and moral?
i myself do not know the answer, but it is something to think about.

I say no. However, the larger the organization, Army, Government, whatever, the more ignorant and/or corrupt members it needs to stay in power. An influx of decent, leaders with intelligence and high concept of moral values will destroy a corrupt organization.For that reason it is essential that people with high moral values be encouraged to become our government and military leaders.

 

[snakelegs]

While I may not be in total disagreement with that, I think if war is inevitable, then lessening the damage & making it more humane are the better options.

you, woodrow and graceseeker make good points. it is almost always possible to make a horrible situation better on a person-to-person level. and on this level, you can make a real difference.

 

[snakelegs]

I say no. However, the larger the organization, Army, Government, whatever, the more ignorant and/or corrupt members it needs to stay in power. An influx of decent, leaders with intelligence and high concept of moral values will destroy a corrupt organization.For that reason it is essential that people with high moral values be encouraged to become our government and military leaders.

this is true. you've given me something to think about - thanks.