How much Christians know about Bible? What about Muslims?

[Sunnih]

Let me change the verse reference:

Now after this verse you could have said, just as you said before, But what I am saying, is how does it show the (in this case) the Son of Man and God are two different entities? It does it by saying that they are visible. Problem: God is Spirit and therefore is not visible. So in order to make the connection that it proves two entities, one must also accept that one can visibily see God. Unless one can visibly see God, one cannot use this verse to prove two entities because it is on the basis of a visual clue that one makes the observation.

So also, in the passage we are discussing,"No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known." (John 1:18), to say that this proves two entities, requires that we see a distinction between the Father and God. How is this achieved if not by saying that because he is literally at the side of the Father he cannot also be the Father. Whereas if this is understood metaphorically, we could still have a distinction of persons without having to have a distinction of beings?

Not neccessary. Just because the verse mentions side by side it does not mean that it has to be visible as this is information and in your view by God Himself. Being told about something true does not require neccessary vision of that thing. A bling man can be side by side with a seeing one and although he does not see this does not mean that he can not diffrentiate between the two. So what I am saying is that confirmation of vision is not neccessary in and of itself to prove difference in entities.

Remember that one of the things that Jesus said after his resurrection (according to the bible) was that he said to his desciples: Handle me and see for a spirit hath no flesh and bones. Now according to the bible understanding, resurrection is only in the spirit form. So do we understand by this that since they were able to see him and even touch him and give him to eat that he was not resurrected? Or this was metaphoric?

So all the talk about spiritual form and literal and metaphorical is vast in the bible and affirming one meaning of one verse means denying another verse with the same meaning. Of course if you look for consistencies. The other way is to subject every meaning to the doctrinal belief one follows. In this case although there will be no apparent contradiction, the danger of such is that whoever does not agree with you can prove exactly the same and even using the same verses. So I guess it comes back at your beliefs again.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Remember that one of the things that Jesus said after his resurrection (according to the bible) was that he said to his desciples: Handle me and see for a spirit hath no flesh and bones. Now according to the bible understanding, resurrection is only in the spirit form. So do we understand by this that since they were able to see him and even touch him and give him to eat that he was not resurrected? Or this was metaphoric?

I moved this up, because I want to correct a misunderstanding. It is not true that according to the Bible that resurrection is only in the spirit form. Paul says that we are raised with a spiritual body. But that is not the same as saying "only in the spirit form". In fact he takes great pains in 1 Corinthians 15 to say that he doesn't really know exactly what that will be like for any of us. And Jesus is making the point with his disciples that he is not just a phantom, that he can be touched and handled (even as he strangely appears to be able to enter and leave locked rooms without opening the door). He eats with them and does all the other physical things. So it is that Christians believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. And in the last days, we also believe in a physical resurrection of us humans, though the nature of that body has yet to be disclosed to us.

Not neccessary. Just because the verse mentions side by side it does not mean that it has to be visible as this is information and in your view by God Himself. Being told about something true does not require neccessary vision of that thing. A bling man can be side by side with a seeing one and although he does not see this does not mean that he can not diffrentiate between the two. So what I am saying is that confirmation of vision is not neccessary in and of itself to prove difference in entities.

OK. That is my point, you are saying that there are two entities. And again, your blind man does the same. How? Not by sight, but by physical observation. So, if you are making a parallel with God in this instance in order to establish that there are two entities, it would seem that you are also saying that God has a physical body to be observed?

Now, I know that Muslims don't believe that to be true. And if that is not true, then your interpretation of the passage is not true. The interpretation must allow for it to be a metaphor. Once the passage is a metaphor, we can no longer assert from it that we actually have two completely separate beings, only that we have separate persons. And, yes, I draw a distinction between the two concepts.

So all the talk about spiritual form and literal and metaphorical is vast in the bible and affirming one meaning of one verse means denying another verse with the same meaning. Of course if you look for consistencies. The other way is to subject every meaning to the doctrinal belief one follows. In this case although there will be no apparent contradiction, the danger of such is that whoever does not agree with you can prove exactly the same and even using the same verses. So I guess it comes back at your beliefs again.

As happens frequently when having discussions with regard to religion.

 

[Redeemed]

Heb 1.8 is quite interesting. Heb 1 itself is interesting. In fact the entire book of Hebrews is interesting.

Who wrote it?

Who decided it should be part of the NT?


Just my opinion it bears a very strong resemblance to the Book of Psalms in the OT. I personaly believe that it is made up of quotes from the Book of Psalms that have been taken out of context and paraphrased to support modern Christian believes I do not find any evidence that either Jesus(as) or any of His apostles ever saw the Book of Hebrews. I have never heard a logical explanation as to how and when it became part of the NT.

I wasn't really expecting to get a response about this verse. I was asked to back up my statement and I did. I even mentioned what his response would probably be to it, but you answered this post with what I expected. I accept Heb 1:8 because there are many verses in the BIBLE that allude to Jesus' deity including himself. I understand your denial of this too. If you didn't, you would be compel to return home.
you are loved
aj

 

[Sunnih]

I moved this up, because I want to correct a misunderstanding. It is not true that according to the Bible that resurrection is only in the spirit form. Paul says that we are raised with a spiritual body. But that is not the same as saying "only in the spirit form". In fact he takes great pains in 1 Corinthians 15 to say that he doesn't really know exactly what that will be like for any of us. And Jesus is making the point with his disciples that he is not just a phantom, that he can be touched and handled (even as he strangely appears to be able to enter and leave locked rooms without opening the door). He eats with them and does all the other physical things. So it is that Christians believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. And in the last days, we also believe in a physical resurrection of us humans, though the nature of that body has yet to be disclosed to us.



OK. That is my point, you are saying that there are two entities. And again, your blind man does the same. How? Not by sight, but by physical observation. So, if you are making a parallel with God in this instance in order to establish that there are two entities, it would seem that you are also saying that God has a physical body to be observed?

Now, I know that Muslims don't believe that to be true. And if that is not true, then your interpretation of the passage is not true. The interpretation must allow for it to be a metaphor. Once the passage is a metaphor, we can no longer assert from it that we actually have two completely separate beings, only that we have separate persons. And, yes, I draw a distinction between the two concepts.


As happens frequently when having discussions with regard to religion.

As for the spiritual bodies, Jesus himself stated in his answer about the woman who had 7 husbands and dies and which of them she would marry in the afterlife and the answer was that there they will be "like angels" and that they do not marry..... So it states that they will be like angels, also as you mention will be spiritual bodies. With this in mind, angels do not eat or drink and Jesus did eat and drink.

As for the blind man, can you explain how does he do it by physical observation?! The verse does not mean that they are close and touching. Your argument before was that what I hinted at was vision and that is why I said what I said about the blind man. We too (in this world) do not see God or are not near God yet we do know that we and God are not one and the same. So the distinction is clear and not in need of visual or physical confirmation. As for the text of the verse, it should be seen also from the language prospective as it was revealed in the language of people to make clear things to people and not confuse as God does not confuse but makes clear. Much more so in matters of creed.

As for saying that God has a physical body to be observed that you mention, this does not come from my words at all. This is only what you are assuming and rather this is what you raise when you mention vision and physical observance. Remember that we are talking about a verse in the bible and all my refutation is taking place by me only quoting from the bible so what I believe as a muslim does not enter at all into this discussion. If I was to mention what I believe, I would quote from the Qur'an but you will not find me in doing so in any biblical discussion with you or any other Christian.

The rule of metaphore and what is and what is not such, can not be such a loose one as in this case many verses you uphold as true in meaning and letter can easily be claimed to be metaphorical too. But as I said, if you say this must be metaphorical because if it was not it would be in contradiction with the Christian beliefs, I would be fine with that and that would be the end of the discussion. I am not here to attack or offend but to raise awareness from the other prospective and whether you take it or leave it this is up to you and your right to choose. In our case, you have chosen Christianity and I have chosen Islam. Again we agree that we do disagree.

 

[Sunnih]

====

 

[Grace Seeker]

As for the spiritual bodies, Jesus himself stated in his answer about the woman who had 7 husbands and dies and which of them she would marry in the afterlife and the answer was that there they will be "like angels" and that they do not marry..... So it states that they will be like angels, also as you mention will be spiritual bodies. With this in mind, angels do not eat or drink and Jesus did eat and drink.

As for the blind man, can you explain how does he do it by physical observation?! The verse does not mean that they are close and touching. Your argument before was that what I hinted at was vision and that is why I said what I said about the blind man. We too (in this world) do not see God or are not near God yet we do know that we and God are not one and the same. So the distinction is clear and not in need of visual or physical confirmation. As for the text of the verse, it should be seen also from the language prospective as it was revealed in the language of people to make clear things to people and not confuse as God does not confuse but makes clear. Much more so in matters of creed.

As for saying that God has a physical body to be observed that you mention, this does not come from my words at all. This is only what you are assuming and rather this is what you raise when you mention vision and physical observance. Remember that we are talking about a verse in the bible and all my refutation is taking place by me only quoting from the bible so what I believe as a muslim does not enter at all into this discussion. If I was to mention what I believe, I would quote from the Qur'an but you will not find me in doing so in any biblical discussion with you or any other Christian.

The rule of metaphore and what is and what is not such, can not be such a loose one as in this case many verses you uphold as true in meaning and letter can easily be claimed to be metaphorical too. But as I said, if you say this must be metaphorical because if it was not it would be in contradiction with the Christian beliefs, I would be fine with that and that would be the end of the discussion. I am not here to attack or offend but to raise awareness from the other prospective and whether you take it or leave it this is up to you and your right to choose. In our case, you have chosen Christianity and I have chosen Islam. Again we agree that we do disagree.

ARGGHHH!!

I am saying that if you conclude that this passage is to be taken as two entities, then to me it seems that YOU are interpreting this literally rather than as a metaphor. Are you not?

 

[Sunnih]

ARGGHHH!!

I am saying that if you conclude that this passage is to be taken as two entities, then to me it seems that YOU are interpreting this literally rather than as a metaphor. Are you not?

I am reading it in conjunction with the same verse in psalms. If I see this as a metaphor then I see the whole verse as such including the insinuation of Jesus as "God", just like the meaning of Moses like a "God" to pharaoh.

 

[tears4husain]

I honestly believe it, I mean its just christians who are not profound with their belief and it hurts to say it, there was this "muslimah" who was born into islam and couldn't resite the Fatiha something repeated no less then 17 times a day and it hurt because ahe was suppose to marry my friend, but come on the Al-Fatiha?:-[

 

[Grace Seeker]

I am reading it in conjunction with the same verse in psalms. If I see this as a metaphor then I see the whole verse as such including the insinuation of Jesus as "God", just like the meaning of Moses like a "God" to pharaoh.

You'll have to educate me on how you see John 1:18 to have any connection to Exodus 7:1.

 

[Grace Seeker]

I honestly believe it, I mean its just christians who are not profound with their belief and it hurts to say it, there was this "muslimah" who was born into islam and couldn't resite the Fatiha something repeated no less then 17 times a day and it hurt because ahe was suppose to marry my friend, but come on the Al-Fatiha?:-[

"its just christians"?????

Is that what your really meant to say?
Or did you mean to say: It is not just Christians who are not profound...?
I'm guessing the second from the rest of your post, but not wanting to assume things, so asking to be sure.

 

[Sunnih]

You'll have to educate me on how you see John 1:18 to have any connection to Exodus 7:1.

Consistency. You know what I look for.