Discussion with a Christian about the Crucifixion

[Les_Nubian]

My dear islamicfajr,
in Quran you will also find verses that at first sight are contradicting each other, are calling people to kill others, allow wife beating...(i bet you know this list). And then you turn to history of text, to Arabic dictionaries or simply to commentaries.
Could you be so nice and apply the same rules, you use yourself (and probably ask others to use when speaking about Quran) to speaking about Bible???:?

I believe that Jesus had a moment of doubt and was mocked. I have no problems with it. I don't know why it's so strange to you?



This unsound fabrication about this fable is important to me. i don't ask you to believe it, or stop your tries to prove me wrong. But i think it would be nice, if you could respect my faith.:?

I'm here ....let me check it...since June. Something like 5 months :uuh: . And today i'm tired.
I'm also tried both physically and mentally, what probably also plays it role..but right now I'm tried of being Christian on LI
As much as like LI and you all, I'm tired of being "called to blackboard" and being "proved" what an idiot i must be believing in Christ.
So i'm taking holidays from forum.

All the best to you all! you are really a great bunch of people! I hope i will be back sometime in the future.

Till then!
natalia

You're not an idiot for believing in Christ. We as Muslims believe in Christ too. We just don't worship him as God. We don't believe in the concept of a man-God.

 

[Grace Seeker]

It's strange because you believe he is God! God- the All Knowing! The All Powerful! What does He have to doubt in? Is He to be overcome by His creations?? :heated:

If there is room for God Himself to have doubts, what does that leave for us humans?ffended:

It is ok that you don't understand this, and so I welcome your questions. But you must understand the Christian view of this if you are to understand why it would not bother a Christian for Jesus to have doubts.

First, much of the New Testament (and we are only talking about the New Testament now, not the whole Bible) was written specifically for Christians, and not to convert non-Christians. It addressed issues they were dealing with in their faith. Thus it assumes a certain amount of belief is already present in the reader. We welcome non-Christians to read our book, just like you welcome people outside of Islam to read the Qur'an. But, both books are more fully understood by the faithful than those outside the faith.

Second, when one remembers that Jesus was not just God, but also human -- 100% human, 100% divine -- then one can see how it is that in his humanity Jesus had to deal with issues just as we do. He got hungry. He mourned the death of his friends Lazarus, even though he intentionally arrived late so that he could demonstrate the power of the resurrection. And as his own death was before him he knew it would be a real death. He prayed that if it were possible for this cup to be taken from him. I think it is easy to understand how simply the act of facing one's own death would be difficult enough to face.

Third, but for Jesus meant more than just his physical death. There was also to be a spiritual death that would be beyond our experience or comprehension. His death on the cross also meant the taking on of all the sins of the world. Here he was, the righteous, Almighty, and sinless creator of the universe taking all the sins of all humankind upon himself. I think the thought of that had to be overwhelming.


As to your question: "If there is room for God Himself to have doubts, what does that leave for us humans?" I don't know why you should find that offensive. It speaks of just how much God identifies with us, his creation, and how much we can identify with him. If there is room for God to have doubts, then it should not surprise us that we also have them from time to time. But remember, that what Jesus did on earth, though he was divine, he did as a human being, a human who depended on his unique relationship with the Father for power and strength to follow God's will fully. (Or as you would say, Jesus depended on God to walk the path of Islam -- I concur wholeheartedly with that.) And that same power by which Jesus was able to walk 100% in God's will is available to us all today, that is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. So, we too, though merely human and not at all divine, may also walk the walk that Jesus walk and submit our lives fully to God's will.

I know you may struggle over this divine/human concept I speak of, but understanding it is essential to understand the answer to your question from a Christian perspective. The answers are found in other writings that I fear many of my Muslim brothers think are just further corruption of Jesus' message, but we do not. I will cite only one:

Philippians 2:5-8
5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

Christians understand these verses to refer to Jesus emptying himself of divine perogative in coming to earth. It even has a fancy name -- the Kenosis theory -- so that although he was indeed fully God, he lived life as a human being in every way.

Now, for a moment, put aside the fact that these verses and the Qur'an are diametrically in opposition to each other. One cannot reconcile the idea that one says that Jesus became obedient to death and the other that he did not die. At that point it is likely that one simply chooses one's preferred authority and the discussion is effectively closed. But, you were asking how it might be that Jesus could be both God and still have doubts, do you see that this emptying of himself (which Christians believe in and you probably would not) allows for exactly that?

 

[glo]

Second, when one remembers that Jesus was not just God, but also human -- 100% human, 100% divine -- then one can see how it is that in his humanity Jesus had to deal with issues just as we do. He got hungry. He mourned the death of his friends Lazarus, even though he intentionally arrived late so that he could demonstrate the power of the resurrection. And as his own death was before him he knew it would be a real death. He prayed that if it were possible for this cup to be taken from him. I think it is easy to understand how simply the act of facing one's own death would be difficult enough to face.

Third, but for Jesus meant more than just his physical death. There was also to be a spiritual death that would be beyond our experience or comprehension. His death on the cross also meant the taking on of all the sins of the world. Here he was, the righteous, Almighty, and sinless creator of the universe taking all the sins of all humankind upon himself. I think the thought of that had to be overwhelming.

Thank you for your post, Grace Seeker. I continue to be amazed at the clarify of your thoughts and explanations!

I just wanted to add that the above is the reason why I can relate to Jesus so well - not only did he humble himself to put away his divinity and become a humble human, he also experienced human life just like we all do:
He felt hunger and thirst, sadness and joy, love and anger, the need for fellowship and solitude, he even suffered temptation, humiliation , fear and physical pain.

Whatever we suffer in our earthly life, Jesus suffered it too!
That gives Christians a tremendous hope, and hopefully the strength to persevere.

Peace

 

[snakelegs]

Now, for a moment, put aside the fact that these verses and the Qur'an are diametrically in opposition to each other. One cannot reconcile the idea that one says that Jesus became obedient to death and the other that he did not die. At that point it is likely that one simply chooses one's preferred authority and the discussion is effectively closed.

wow - this was the clearest explanation i've read yet. i must admit that i do not really understand christianity, but i found your post very interesting.
the paragraph above i couldn't agree with more! there will never be agreement on this issue and at some point, christians and muslims are going to have to accept that, while still respecting each other. with matters of religion, there is no need (at least in my opinion) for one to be right and the other wrong. don't know if it's possible, but i think it's a reasonable goal.
in my opinion, in matters of religion, there is no need (at least in my opinion) for one to be right and the other wrong.
dialogue between christians and muslim is exceedingly challenging because both religions believe that they are The One True Religion and it easily deteriorates in to a contest - but i think it can be done if both sides recognize that they are not going to change each other, but they can still learn.
can this be done? i don't know.
i am neither christian or muslim, but i think there is good in both religions - and no doubt, other religions as well.
thanks. (and reps!)

 

[- Qatada -]

Muslims believe that Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon them) will return to the world to slay the anti-christ, and he will approve of the fact that he is the servant of Allaah, and not God himself. The christians also believe that Jesus son of Mary will be in the eternal kingdom whereas we believe he will rule in this world at that time, but thats a totally different subject.


Anyway God does not have the traits of a human - i.e. He doesn't get thirsty, or need water to drink, or food to eat etc. Because if God is in need of these requirements, then He isn't actually God because He is dependant on something else, and this goes against the whole concept of God. The reason why God is God is because He is self-sufficient, and because he doesn't get harmed by the creation, nor does he become tempted by these worldly lusts and desires etc.


If any person was to reflect on that, they would realise that these are basic human characteristics (i.e. to eat, drink, have desire etc.) If God was to humiliate himself by the creation in this world, or to be abused by people in this world - then that totally goes against the idea of a Perfect God.


Jesus (peace be upon him) is a messenger of Allaah, and other messengers have also come with the same message - worship your Creator, Allaah Almighty alone. No soul will bear the burden of another, and every soul is responsible for its own actions. This has been the same message with all the prophets, even in the scriptures of Moses and Abraham (peace be upon them.)



Allaah Almighty knows best.



Peace.​

 

[glo]

Greetings Fi-Sabilillah

If you have read Grace Seeker's explanation you will realise that Christians believe that Jesus only had these human traits during his human life on earth - because for that duration he was indeed fully human.

Now he has returned to his fully divine state, he does not feel hunger, thirst or any other physical desires anymore ...

It pains me to know that the thought of God reducing himself to human form is offensive to Muslims - but it is and remains to be the central belief of Christians.

Perhaps it is wisest to rest the debate there ...
As Grace Seeker so eloquently put it:

One cannot reconcile the idea that one says that Jesus became obedient to death and the other that he did not die. At that point it is likely that one simply chooses one's preferred authority and the discussion is effectively closed.

As did snakelegs:

but i think it can be done if both sides recognize that they are not going to change each other, but they can still learn.

Peace, brother

 

[Trumble]

If God was to humiliate himself by the creation in this world, or to be abused by people in this world - then that totally goes against the idea of a Perfect God.

In saying that you are judging God by human standards; something which if He is indeed perfect (let alone beyond our comprehension) it is totally inappropriate to do.

'Humiliation' is an ego concept; to be humiliated you require a sense of pride. Pride is something I assume a perfect being would not have... the moment God even concieved the concept of humiliation as applied to Himself he could no longer be perfect!

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

What we mean Glo is that God doesn't need to reduce Himself to human form to understand how we feel. He already knows what is good, bad, right, and wrong for us because He created us all. Which is why God has sent down for us scriptures and Messengers for each generation. I dont know why it pains you, but be assured you don't need to be. Another reason we don't believe it is because it would mean God was unable to set us straight, so He had to become human to convince us. God has given us His signs, His books, so that we may reflect on them. If you truly have faith in your religion, anothers belief will not pain you because you trust the path on which your on. Something you should realize. Well I hope that explains it a bit.

Peace

 

[- Qatada -]

Hi trumble.


I used the word 'humiliation' and 'fear' etc. because i was using the words that glo mentioned earlier. Therefore i can use those words in reference to the christian perspective due to the fact that glo described jesus (peace be upon him) that way.

Your second paragraph i think should be aimed at christians, not me.



Peace.

 

[glo]

I understand what Muslims believe, Tayyaba.
Only, my beliefs differ from yours.

There is not much left to debate about - just to accept that our beliefs differ, and to respect each other.



Peace

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

I am quite aware of your belief, thanx

 

[Umar001]

I hate these types of thread, I totally dislike them, because you can never get the mix right,

For example, there are people you can be totally upfront with, and they see it as an academical study as such, then there are others who might be more emotional, im not saying either is wrong, I just think that these threads tend to on a whole only aim at one type of person, which then leads to the other type being upset or fastruated.

'Humiliation' is an ego concept; to be humiliated you require a sense of pride. Pride is something I assume a perfect being would not have... the moment God even concieved the concept of humiliation as applied to Himself he could no longer be perfect!

Actually there is a sense of pride which is good, so no, a perfect being would have pride, but the type of pride is what is different. A pride in which one puts himself out of his own place and so forth is wrong, but a pride of being who you are and being happy as such is not wrong, if you read the Bible you will see G-d as a Powerful, Proud Character, it is only because the most of the pride we see is the sinful type that most people assume all pride is wrong.

Akhi Fi_Sabilillah, the Idea that most people have of a perfect G-d is different for some. Although everyone tends to agree at the basis of it.

Some people cheris the tought that G-d loved them so much that he had to come, and be beaten up and then take all their wrongdoing and then die with it and then come back to life and then go to heaven and then return all his powers, some people see that as a great show of love and so on. It doesn't occour that G-d had to 'humiliate' himself and so on, and if you explain it to some, it makes them think '****, wow, my G-d humilated himself for me! So I could be saved! That is true love!"

 

[Woodrow]

This is one of those cases where there does not appear to be a mutualy acceptable source for verification of fact.

As a Muslim, I do not accept the Bible as being an authentic source of information. Trying to convince me with Biblical ohrases makes as much sense as trying to Teach me about religious beliefs and using a telephone book as the authoritative document.

Understandably, Christians will feel exactly the same about the Holy Qur'an. Unless a Christian can accept the Qur'an as being Devine truth, he will not accept it as proof. But, if a person accepts the Qur'an as Truth, he would be Muslim and this discussion would not be taking place.

I believe this topic has run it's course and as Glo already stated, We have different beliefs and the best we can do is to accept each others right to believe as we do.

I won't close this thread for a few hours, in the event somebody may have a final comment.

 

[Umar001]

I have one,


Final Comment


Oh..there you go

 

[Trumble]

Actually there is a sense of pride which is good, so no, a perfect being would have pride, but the type of pride is what is different. A pride in which one puts himself out of his own place and so forth is wrong, but a pride of being who you are and being happy as such is not wrong, if you read the Bible you will see G-d as a Powerful, Proud Character, it is only because the most of the pride we see is the sinful type that most people assume all pride is wrong.

I disagree. There is only an element of pride if you percieve that what you are, or what you have done, is better than at least some possible alternatives. For example, you may be proud you are a successful family man with fine, successful children, or perhaps that you have completed a particularly difficult task that will benefit your community, both of which I assume you would consider "good" pride? In both cases it only makes sense compared to the alternatives; that, perhaps, you were a hopeless drug addict and criminal, or that you failed to complete the task, whatever it may have been. Whatever you take pride in must be better than something else.

That concept makes no sense in the context of a perfect being. By definition you both are perfect, and everything you do is perfect. There are no possible alternatives, and therefore no possible sources of pride, "good" or otherwise. How could God be proud in having done something perfectly if, by definition, He couldn't do it any other way? How can God take pride in being perfect if, by definition, He can't be anything else?

I wouldn't disagree with the idea that there are both "good" and "sinful" types of pride in this context (actually, as a Buddhist I think even "good" pride is undesirable, but that's a totally different argument). But neither could apply to a perfect being.

 

[Malaikah]

Third, but for Jesus meant more than just his physical death. There was also to be a spiritual death that would be beyond our experience or comprehension. His death on the cross also meant the taking on of all the sins of the world. Here he was, the righteous, Almighty, and sinless creator of the universe taking all the sins of all humankind upon himself. I think the thought of that had to be overwhelming.

I would have thought the sins of mankind- no matter what their magnitude, are nothing in comparision to the the creator of the whole universe! If He is truely Almightly then there is nothing that could be overwhelming for Him! He is God!!

If there is room for God to have doubts, then it should not surprise us that we also have them from time to time.

God by definition cannot have doubt- HE is the ALL-KNOWING. If there is room for God to have doubts- then its time to start doubting our understanding of God...

But remember, that what Jesus did on earth, though he was divine, he did as a human being, a human who depended on his unique relationship with the Father for power and strength to follow God's will fully.

So, what you are saying is that one-third of God choose to give up His "Godness" so He can become a human. :? So God has reduced a third of Himself to some kind of almost powerless being? And that its outside of His power to allow himself to re-gain His "Godly" powers, and yet He is still God? This sounds like a paradox to me...:?

(Or as you would say, Jesus depended on God to walk the path of Islam -- I concur wholeheartedly with that.)

Er yeh we would say that but keep in mind to us, Jesus (peace be upon him) was a human! All humans need God. But why does one redundant third of God need to rely on the more powerful other third of a God?

But, you were asking how it might be that Jesus could be both God and still have doubts, do you see that this emptying of himself (which Christians believe in and you probably would not) allows for exactly that?

I can see why you would believe that it would be 'normal' for this God of yours to have have doubts- but that is itself the problem, this strange understandng of the nature of God that you have. You believe Him to be the All-mighty and yet He can reduce Himself to the level of His creations. To me, that is nothing short of offensive and totally against the nature of God that He should reduce Him in such a manner.

He felt hunger and thirst, sadness and joy, love and anger, the need for fellowship and solitude, he even suffered temptation, humiliation , fear and physical pain.

But He is God!ffended: Thats what prophets are for! God is not so low that He can suffer at the hands of His creations! He is perfect, He is above anything we can attribute to Him! How can we hurt Him? We just cant! He doesnt need us at all! We need Him!

That gives Christians a tremendous hope, and hopefully the strength to persevere.

Well look at this way. Jesus has a divine part to him (according to your belief), so it should have been easier for him to deal with everything the humans put him through. He is almighy and all else, and we humans are not, so it is easier for a 'god-human' to deal with the ups and downs of life than a normal human. So perhaps its not the best source of inspiration.

On the other hand, the prophets were 100% human. They suffered as any other human would suffer. They were not divine in anyway. And yet they managed to survive all that the evil humans of thier time put them through. Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) was not God. He never even meet God. And yet it was his faith in God that carried Him through all the hardship that he suffered. In comparision, Jesus not only meet 'God', He was God (or so you claim)!! So who is a better role model for us? The prophets, who went true sooo much as humans? Or this 'man-god' who made it through life because of his 'divinity'?

Take care.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Cheese, you have shown me great respect by the way you engaged and questioned my thoughts. Thank-you. I am humbled by it.

Many of your questions are very insightful. They come to the heart of the Christian faith and thus some of the differences that exist between us. I do not know if I can address them all, certainly not to everyone's satisfaction, but if you will allow, I will try.

As I do, please know that I do not do so to convince anyone to change his/her beliefs, but simply to increase the level of understanding the exists between us.

I would have thought the sins of mankind- no matter what their magnitude, are nothing in comparision to the the creator of the whole universe! If He is truely Almightly then there is nothing that could be overwhelming for Him! He is God!!

Here I need your help for a minute. It is my understanding of Islamic thought, that not only is Allah (swt) Almighty, but Allah (swt) is also sinless. What I am not sure of is the degree to which Allah (swt) can be associated with that which is sinful. Can a sinful person join Allah (swt) in Paradise? My understand is that one must be cleansed of the sins we have committed in this life before one can be admitted to Paradise. (Please correct me on this if I am wrong.) If this is true, one might ask the same question then of Islam that you have asked of Christianity. If All is truly Almighty, then there is nothing that would necessitate the ridding one's self of sin before being admitted to Paradise -- except of course the very nature of Allah (swt) and Paradise being that they are exclusive of sin. As far as it goes, this is identical to Christian beliefs. The difference is that in Christianity we also have God exposing himself to the sins of the world. Yes, God is big enough to take all sins of any magnitude upon himself and they would not overwhelm him (perhaps I mis-spoke in using that term). Yet sin is something that is foreign to God. In the Christian understanding, sin brings with it the curse of death, spiritual death. Jesus (pbuh) who never knew anything but a holy, righteous and sinless life, would be exposing himself to sin and its curse when he went to the cross. Christians see this ultimately in Jesus (pbuh) cry from the cross, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me." You mentioned that there was a paradox in Christians beliefs; I think there in fact many. And here is one, how could God cry out to God that he was forsaken by God. I don't have a definitive answer for you. But remember what I talked about in the Kenosis theory, namely that Jesus (pbuh) experienced life just like every other human being (only he was sinless). The miracles he did, he did not on his own authority, but by the authority of (in his own words) his Father in heaven. He had the experience of the divine Holy Spirit living within him, and perhaps it is that on the cross, when all of the sins of the world came upon him, perhaps at that point in time God abandoned Jesus to spiritual death and felt the loss of that divine connection of the Holy Spirit living within him and this prompted him to cry out. As I said, I don't have a definitive answer to that question, and just submit that as a supposition.

God by definition cannot have doubt- HE is the ALL-KNOWING. If there is room for God to have doubts- then its time to start doubting our understanding of God...

Again, remember according to the Kenosis theory (which I don't expect you to accept for your understanding of either God nor Jesus (pbuh), but which Christians do and so I have to answer from that perspective when you ask questions relative to what Christians believe) Jesus (pbuh) would have experienced every human emotion, including doubts. Jesus (pbuh), in his human experience of life, was NOT personally All-Knowing. What he knew, would have been only that which the Father would have revealed to him.

So, what you are saying is that one-third of God choose to give up His "Godness" so He can become a human. :? So God has reduced a third of Himself to some kind of almost powerless being? And that its outside of His power to allow himself to re-gain His "Godly" powers, and yet He is still God? This sounds like a paradox to me...:?

Well, yes and no. First, Christians would not see Jesus (pbuh) as one-third of God. God is one. God is not a pie that one divides up. But we are saying God does humble himself to the state of a human being. And yes, he still is God. Is it a paradox? Yes, and a mystery too.

Er yeh we would say that but keep in mind to us, Jesus (peace be upon him) was a human! All humans need God. But why does one redundant third of God need to rely on the more powerful other third of a God?

You've almost got what Christians are saying. Jesus (pbuh) was human. And all humans need God. But we would not characterize Jesus (pbuh) as either one-third of God nor as a redundancy. You have 99 names for Allah (swt) (I have actually counted more), but there is no redundancy there because each is a true expression of the nature, character, attributes of Allah (swt). Christians see each manifestation of God to be a true manifestation, and not redundant. Indeed you might even think of God the Father as the Everlasting, the Provider, the Self-Sufficient, the Source of All Goodness; God the Son as the Light, the Propitous, the First, the Last; and God the Holy Spirit as the Guide, the Sustainer, the Witness. All of these are of course true for all of aspects of God, but we humans experience their manifestation in ways that vary depending on whether we are presently encountering God manifest in the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit. During Jesus' (pbuh) time on earth, each of them was still true of him and his character, but the manifestation of God's power was through the Father.

(I apologize for my poor explanation of this. But I can't explain covalent bonding very well either, and still except it to be true.)

I can see why you would believe that it would be 'normal' for this God of yours to have have doubts- but that is itself the problem, this strange understandng of the nature of God that you have. You believe Him to be the All-mighty and yet He can reduce Himself to the level of His creations. To me, that is nothing short of offensive and totally against the nature of God that He should reduce Him in such a manner.

But He is God!ffended: Thats what prophets are for! God is not so low that He can suffer at the hands of His creations! He is perfect, He is above anything we can attribute to Him! How can we hurt Him? We just cant! He doesnt need us at all! We need Him!

And I can understand why you might find that offensive. Can you see why I (coming from a different place) might find it to be wonderful?

What love God has for us, that though he does not need us, as an expression of this great love he "reduces" (your word, not mine) himself to the level of his creation in order to relate to us. And not just relate, for as you point out a prophet could give instructions. Jesus (pbuh) is about more than just providing a message from God. Jesus (pbuh) is about God actually connecting with us, his creation.

Well look at this way. Jesus has a divine part to him (according to your belief), so it should have been easier for him to deal with everything the humans put him through. He is almighy and all else, and we humans are not, so it is easier for a 'god-human' to deal with the ups and downs of life than a normal human. So perhaps its not the best source of inspiration.

On the other hand, the prophets were 100% human. They suffered as any other human would suffer. They were not divine in anyway. And yet they managed to survive all that the evil humans of thier time put them through. Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) was not God. He never even meet God. And yet it was his faith in God that carried Him through all the hardship that he suffered. In comparision, Jesus not only meet 'God', He was God (or so you claim)!! So who is a better role model for us? The prophets, who went true sooo much as humans? Or this 'man-god' who made it through life because of his 'divinity'?

Several things here. First Jesus (pbuh) is not a man/god. Jesus (pbuh) is both 100% man and 100% God, but he is not a hybrid. You would be right if we viewed Jesus (pbuh) as some sort of hybrid for everything to have been easier for him. Like some sort of amphibious divine/human being he could call on whatever part he needed at the time. But that is NOT who Jesus (pbuh) is.

Second, with Islam we believe that God did in fact send many prophets to show us the way to God. But even with these prophets people have strayed, and continue to stay from God. In essence, the prophets were successful only in pointing out how imperfect we are in following the way of Islam. Is it the belief of Islam that there was ever anyone who was 100% a true follower of Islam over the entire course of one's life? (Again corret me if I am wrong...) I don't even think that it is claimed that the Prophet Muhammed (peace be upon him) lived totally a sinless life, even though he did live a life of Islam, in submission to Allah (swt). Thus it is that Christianity thinks we need more than a prophet, more even than an example, we need a redeemer. Now humans can't redeem other humans from their sins, we can't even redeem ourselves -- Christians hold that that which is imperfect cannot become perfect under its own power. Christians believe we need something greater than ourselves to redeem us for God, and only Allah Al-Mughni, The Enricher, The One who satisfies the necessities of the creatures, is capable of doing that. I understand that to you it seems offensive, and I do not say this to offend, but only to help in our understanding of each other's beliefs. We have an unmet need. No perfect book, no perfect message, no perfect model can satisfy that need. And no one can satisfy it for himself or herself, and if that is all there is then we are lost. However, Christians believe that is not all there is. Christians believe that God created another way, that way is the connection God establishes with all of humankind through the person of Jesus (pbuh). What we could not do for ourselves, Jesus (pbuh) stands in for us to do. Like a scapegoat, He takes our sins upon himself and dies in our place. I think that this idea of anyone dying in another's place probably sounds like heresey to both Muslims and Jews, but again I am not trying to convince anyone, just to explain why the concept of the crucifixion is so important within Christianity. There is a cost to sin and that is spiritual death. But in Christ's self-giving sacrifice in our place; our sins are "paid for"; we are redeemed from sin, and we can be joined (in God's eyes without sin) to God in fellowship again.

Christians have a big fancy term for this too -- justification. It basically means that we are made right with God. I like the way it was explained on another thread on these boards. In explaining Islam, a writer wrote that in Islam atonement was God being at one with men. Such a statement sounds like it could have been taken from one of my books on Christian theology. Where I think Christians and Muslims differ is that Christians believe that only by Christ's redeeming work on the cross can that atonement be made, but once it is done it puts us right with God. From that point on, depending no longer on our own power, but on God's Holy Spirit bringing divine power into our lives we are called and now enabled to live lives in submission to the will of God. All of that is possible only because of the cross.



Again, Cheese, thank-you for providing me an opportunity to address these questions. I know that it is hard to understand someone else's faith. You asked good questions. Even those raised within a faith often find themselves not understanding it fully and getting confused (the idea of Jesus as a hybrid god/man thing often comes up), so it is good that you care to ask. I just wish I knew how to give shorter answers.

May, peace be upon you, also.

 

[islamicfajr]

Re: My final comment

As a Muslim, I do not accept the Bible as being an authentic source of information.
.

ur right..the Gospel that was revealed from the Lord of the Worlds to the Prophet of Allaah ‘Eesa (peace be upon him). Belief that Allaah revealed a Book to His Prophet ‘Eesa and that the name of this book was the Gospel (Injeel), are basic principles of faith that we must believe in.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messenger (Muhammad) believes in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers. Each one believes in Allaah, His Angels, His Books, and His Messengers. (They say,) ‘We make no distinction between one another of His Messengers’ — and they say, ‘We hear, and we obey. (We seek) Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the return (of all)’”

[al-Baqarah 2:285]

The Prophet

(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to Jibreel, when he asked him about faith, as mentioned in the well-known hadeeth: “Faith means to believe in Allaah, His angels, His books, His messengers, the Last Day, and to believe in His divine will and decree, both good and bad.” (Agreed upon).

Disbelieving in that or doubting it is misguidance and kufr or disbelief in Allaah.
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Believe in Allaah, and His Messenger (Muhammad), and the Book (the Qur’aan) which He has sent down to His Messenger, and the Scripture which He sent down to those before (him); and whosoever disbelieves in Allaah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Last Day, then indeed he has strayed far away.

137. Verily, those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe (again), and (again) disbelieve, and go on increasing in disbelief; Allaah will not forgive them, nor guide them on the (right) way”

[al-Nisa’ 4:136-137]

“Verily, those who disbelieve in Allaah and His Messengers and wish to make distinction between Allaah and His Messengers (by believing in Allaah and disbelieving in His Messengers) saying, “We believe in some but reject others,” and wish to adopt a way in between.

151. They are in truth disbelievers. And We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating torment”

[al-Nisa’ 4:150-151]

The second issue is the Gospel or, more precisely, the Gospels that the Christians have today. Although one of the basic principles of our faith is to believe in the Gospel that was revealed to ‘Eesa, we also believe that there is no longer any book that remained as it was revealed by Allaah, neither the Gospel nor anything else, apart from the Qur’aan. Even the Christians themselves do not believe that the books that they have before them were revealed in that form from God, nor do they claim that the Messiah wrote the Gospel or at least that it was written during his lifetime.
Imam Ibn Hazm (may Allaah have mercy on him) says in al-Fasl fi’l-Milal (2/2):

We do not need to try hard to prove that the Gospels and all the books of the Christians did not come from God or from the Messiah (peace be upon him), as we needed to do with regard to the Torah and the books attributed to the Prophets that the Jews have, because the Jews claim that the Torah that they have was revealed from God to Moosa, so we needed to establish proof that this claim of theirs is false. With regard to the Christians, they have taken care of the issue themselves, because they do not believe that the Gospels were revealed from God to the Messiah, or that the Messiah brought them, rather all of them from first to last, peasants and kings, Nestorians, Jacobites, Maronites and Orthodox are all agreed that there are four historical accounts written by four known men at different times. The first of them is the account written by Matthew the Levite who was a disciple of the Messiah, nine years after the Messiah was taken up into heaven. He wrote it in Hebrew in Judaea in Palestine, and it filled approximately twenty-eight pages in a medium-sized script. The next account was written by Mark, a disciple of Simon ben Yuna, who was called Peter, twenty-two years after the Messiah was taken up into heaven. He wrote it in Greek in Antioch in the land of the Byzantines. They say that the Simon mentioned is the one who wrote it, then he erased his name from the beginning of it and attributed it to his disciple Mark. It filled twenty-four pages written in a medium-sized script. This Simon was a disciple of the Messiah. The third account written was that of Luke, a physician of Antioch who was also a disciple of Simon Peter. He wrote it in Greek after Mark had written his account, and is similar in length to the Gospel of Matthew. The fourth account was written by John the son of Zebedee, another disciple of the Messiah, sixty-odd years after the Messiah has been taken up into heaven. He wrote it in Greek, and it filled twenty-four pages in a medium-sized script. End quote.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in al-Jawaab al-Saheeh (3:21):

With regard to the Gospels that the Christians have, there are four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They are agreed that Luke and Mark did not see the Messiah, rather he was seen by Matthew and John. These four accounts which they call the Gospel, and they call each one of them a Gospel, were written by these men after the Messiah had been taken up into heaven. They did not say that they are the word of God or that the Messiah conveyed them from God, rather they narrated some of the words of the Messiah and some of his deeds and miracles. End quote.

Moreover, these books which were written after the time of the Messiah did not remain in their original form. The original versions were lost long ago. Ibn Hazm said:

With regard to the Christians, there is no dispute among them or anyone else that only one hundred and twenty men believed in the Messiah during his lifetime… and all of those who believed in him concealed themselves and were afraid during his lifetime and afterwards; they called people to his religion in secret and none of them disclosed himself or practised his religion openly, because any of them who was caught was executed.

They continued in this manner, not showing themselves at all, and they had no place where they were safe for three hundred years after the Messiah was taken up into heaven.

During this time, the Gospel that had been revealed from Allaah disappeared, apart from a few verses which Allaah preserved as proof against them and as a rebuke to them, as we have mentioned. Then when the Emperor Constantine became a Christian, then the Christians prevailed and started to practise their religion openly and assemble in safety.

If a religion is like this, with its followers practicing it in secret and living in constant fear of the sword, it is impossible for things to be transmitted soundly via a continuous chain of narrators and its followers cannot protect it or prevent it from being distorted.

End quote. Al-Fasl, 2/4-5.

In addition to this huge disruption in the chain of transmission of their books, which lasted for two centuries, these books did not remain in the languages in which they were originally written, rather they were translated, more than once, by people whose level of knowledge and honesty is unknown. The contradictions in these books and their shortcomings are among the strongest evidence that they have been distorted and that they are not the Gospel (Injeel) that Allaah revealed to His slave and Messenger ‘Eesa (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Allaah indeed spoke the truth when He said (interpretation of the meaning):

“Had it been from other than Allaah, they would surely, have found therein many a contradiction”

[al-Nisa’ 4:82].

=============================

I won't close this thread for a few hours, in the event somebody may have a final comment

u wellcome Brother to close it..

and i think i put my final comment Here..

http://www.islamicboard.com/564519-post14.htmlhttp://www.islamicboard.com/563949-post13.html

................
May Allah Direct All us to the right path..Ameen..

and Reward All us paradise and All us meet there..

peace,

islamicfajr

 

[Eric H]

Re: My final comment

Greetings in peace islamicfajr;

If you are to spend any time reading Holy Books of another faith you might gain far more by searching for a greatest good within that book.

Your time might be more fruitful if you spent it studying Islam and striving to give others a greater impression of Islam. Sadly when I read your posts they turn me away from Islam.

In the spirit of striving for a greater understanding of praying to one God.

Eric

 

[YusufNoor]

I believe Joe is refering to the fact that if G-d is all knowing, why did he not forsee all of this happening? A statement, which no one has produced an answer for, and I am curious to see what people may say. My belief, is that everyone was a false prophet and the Torah is sill true, but I respect your beliefs and look foward to your comments on Joe's post.

Shalom Izak,

erm, you must be excluding Moses from the list of false prophets???

and if so, then what about Abraham, Issac, Jacob & Noah???

and if there were four, could there be more???

peace,

Yusuf