Subhanallah how a christian reveals themselves to be false!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Azad
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 54
  • Views Views 8K
Muslim Woman said:
Salaam/Peace



hi glo ; I read a convert story long ago . A Christian lady lost her newborn baby and she was told baby will be in hell as died before baptism. It means babies are sinners. It led her to became frustrated about her religion and studied Islam.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing, Muslim Woman.
I can understand that that would lead somebody to lose faith. I think it is a Catholic belief - personally I don't believe it to be case that babies have to be baptised to be saved and enter heaven.

Although Jesus instructed us to be baptised, there is also Biblical evidence of people being forgiven and promised entry into heaven without having been baptised. The example which springs to mind is one of the criminals who died alongside Jesus on the cross. He was never a follower of Jesus, nor had he been baptised - and yet when he asked forgiveness Jesus promised that he would be in paradise with him!
 
gmcbroom said:
Yahya Sulaiman,
Sounds like your having with the concept of Original Sin when it's effects are all to apparent even today. For Christians Baptism removes Original Sin thus restoring us. It helps bridge the gap so we can once again reach God.
Click to expand...

Ypu dont need any baptism or any other ""free pass" to be saved , all you needed to do was repent from your Sins as your Lord said

{18:20} The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the
son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him,and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

{18:21} But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which
is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

{18:22} All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that
he hath done he shall live.

{18:23} Have I any pleasure atall that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: [and] not that he should return from his ways, and live? [and] not that he should return from his ways, and live?

Allah has sealed the hearts of these Kuffar i

Allah (swt) mentions in Surah Al Baqarah chapter 2 verses 6 and 7

"As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them Whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe.

Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur)." [Al-Qur’an 2:6-7]

These verses do not refer to those who are bent on rejecting the truth. It will not make any difference to such people whether you warn them or not, they will not believe. Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing and on their eyes is a veil. It is not because Allah has set a seal on their hearts that these kuffar do not understand and believe, but it is the vice-versa. It is because these kuffar are bent on rejecting the truth and whether you warn them or not they will not believe, that Allah has set a seal on their hearts. Therefore Allah is not to blame, but these kuffaar who are bent on rejecting the faith are responsible.

An Example of teacher predicting a student will fail

Suppose an experienced teacher, before the final examinations, predicts that a particular student will fail in the exams, since the student is very mischievous, not attentive in class and does not do his homework. If after the student appears for the examination, he fails, who is to be blamed for the student failing: the teacher or the student? Just because the teacher predicted, it does not mean that the teacher is to be blamed but the student himself is responsible for his failure.

Similarly Allah (swt) knows in advance that there are some people who are bent on rejecting the faith and Allah has put a seal on their hearts. Thus these non-Muslims themselves are responsible for rejecting the faith and not Allah (swt).
 
Yahya Sulaiman said:
The difference being that the only reason such people--or anyone--gets punished for what other people did in this world is that the people who are doing it to them (like the mother in your analogy) are not being fair, whereas God is always fair and therefore would never make anyone suffer for what another person did. According to you God is like a gym teacher who grades said child lower for inevitably performing worse than par at gym class due to his birth defects, unless someone is willing to swap their own A with his F (like that's fair).
Click to expand...

God immediately arranged for a way that any of Adam's offspring could be redeemed despite inherited imperfection (Genesis 3:15).
 
Muslim Woman said:
Salaam/Peace



hi glo ; I read a convert story long ago . A Christian lady lost her newborn baby and she was told baby will be in hell as died before baptism. It means babies are sinners. It led her to became frustrated about her religion and studied Islam.
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear this story. Infant baptism was not practiced by Christians in the beginning. It is wrong and has nothing to do with hell. The woman's baby has died but will be resurrected from death into life in paradise.
 
gmcbroom said:
Hiroshi that is an excellent analogy. I can go one further and say that because of the ancestral sin of Adam, death entered the world. We're all bound by it regardless of ones station or wealth. Whether your a pagan, orthodox jew, christen, muslim, buddist, or atheist. All men die.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Romans 5:12 is a good scripture to show this.
 
Muslim Woman said:
Salaam/Peace



since when it started ?
Click to expand...
Muslim Woman, I don't know when exactly people started to baptise infants, but we have had discussions around christening (the baptism of infants) in my church recently (which is an Anglican church).
I was asking the same question, because in my mind somebody can only truly enter into a faith, when s/he is old enough to make an informed and educated choice (which small children aren't).

Our vicar explained that the early church started out as adult converts to Christianity (just like in Muhammad's days people became adult reverts to Islam).
As the Christian movement grew and people married within the faith and had children, the issue raised itself as to how to welcome children into the faith.
So a decision was made to baptise children when they were little.

How and when the idea developed that non-baptised children were doomed to hell I don't really know. As I explained earlier I personally don't believe that to be the case, and I see Biblical evidence of Jesus saying otherwise.

To return back to the christening of children, I personally see it more as an opportunity for the parents to dedicate their child to God and for the parents, the Godparents and the whole Christian congregation to make a commitment to teach the child about the Christian faith.
A proper commitment to the faith can only be made by the person him/herself, once s/he is old enough to chose.

Personally, I'm in favour of adult baptisms.
I was christened when I was a baby, but when I made a deliberate and willing commitment to follow Christ I chose to have an adult baptism as a symbol of my decision. I found that much more meaningful.

(I use the term 'personally' a lot in this post, because I am aware that other Christians may have slightly different views.)
 
Hiroshi said:
God immediately arranged for a way that any of Adam's offspring could be redeemed despite inherited imperfection (Genesis 3:15).
Click to expand...

But said way is totally unnecessary. Watch how easy it is to forgive someone: "I forgive you." POOF! No crucifixion necessary. And I'm not even omnipotent.
 
Yahya Sulaiman,
As usual your wit impresses me. However, In this case from the Christian view at least forgiving someone verbally,is a good first step but only God can forgive sins. For you that God is Allah alone. For Christians it's The Father and the Son Jesus.

Muslim Woman,
I'm sorry that she suffered such a loss. Now for some rather interesting information.
Infant Baptism has been around since the Beginning of the Church. For those with a Bible please read the following. Luke 18:15-16, Acts 2:38-39, Acts 16:33, 1 Cor 1:16.
In the Catholic Church there are Eastern Churches and the Western Church. 22 distinct ritualistic churches which united together are Catholic. Infant Baptism is still practiced in the Catholic Church the only difference between the Eastern and Western Churches lies in what it entails. If your a baby and baptized in the Eatsern Church you receive the baptism, and your confirmed so you can start to receive the Holy Eucharist. However, in the Western Church while they are baptized they are not confirmed until around the age of reason so they don't receive the Eucharist until their confirmation.
Regrettably, when the Reformation ocurred and the Protestant Churches came into being, some did not have, or even outright rejected some of these Early Catholic teachings. That's why there is so much confusion on the issue of Infant Baptism and others.
Peace be with you
gmcbroom
 
Of course only God can forgive sins. That's not the issue. The question is whether His forgiveness is actual forgiveness, instead of just finding another party but ourselves to take His anger out on and calling that forgiveness.
 
Its absurd that Christians believe that everyone is born a sinner. Everyone is born condemned and the only way to redeem yourself is that you believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. Is that really fair? I mean you are born condemned from the beginning. So even a poor innocent baby that is newly born is a sinner. If that baby does not redeem itself by putting its faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and dies then the poor baby is condemned to hell. How can you expect a baby that cannot comprehend or think to accept Jesus as its Lord? What if the poor baby dies before it grows up to become able to rationalize and accept a religion. What about a mentally retarded person that cannot think for him self? He is a sinner by nature and will be doomed to Hell for not recognizing Jesus as Lord and Savior simply because his mind cannot!
Unlike Islam, which is a just religion does not teach original sin. Islam teaches that everyone is born pure and it is us who corrupt our selves. Islam gives the Muslims time to grow up and be able to use our rationality and reason in order to choose a religion.
This time is the age of puberty.
Puberty is the age when people begin to use their reason and distinguish between what is right and wrong.
10-12 years of age marks the phase of reasoning (ratiocination) with a sense of critic to the instinctive activities and reflexive activities.
What about the madman? Is he also a sinner? According to original sin he is. How can God condemn a madman who cannot use his reason and be able to make a rational decision? Truly this is unjust. Islam does not hold these kind of people accountable.
　
Where does the Bible say that the sole or main purpose of Jesus was to undo what Adam had done?
John 1:29
The next day John sees Jesus coming unto him, and says, Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world.
Prophets are sent by God to be examples of the message they have brought. Prophets are sent to bring mankind on the right path and to lead them away from a sinful life. Therefore, Jesus takes away the sins of the people by guiding them and showing them the right path. Secondly, Jesus never says such a thing, it is John who does so.
Rom. 5:12
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"
Rom. 5:19
"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,..."
These verses say that due to the sin of Adam, death arises. Not eternal death but death in the world. This is the appropriate interpretation; otherwise, there is a contradiction with the following verses:
Jer. 31:29-30
"In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge."
Ezek 18:4
Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Ezek 18:20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die.
(Deuteronomy 24:16)
"The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin."
The death being talked about is the death in this world and not punishment in hell.
Prov.20:9
"Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?"
The way to cleanse oneself from sin to clean one’s heart and not to believe in crucifixion or Trinity.
　
It is surprising that such a huge concept of Christians, 'Original Sin' has no mention in the bible.
　
　​
Islam does not teach that we are born condemned sinners and It does not place the blame on Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were the first humans to sin. We are supposed to learn that it is human nature to sin and that the devil is going to try and trick us into committing sin just like how he did with our fore parents. Then after we sin we do like our fore parents did and then turn to God in sincere repentance. So this is a lesson of original forgiveness and not original sin. If we sin, then it is our fault and not our fore parents fault. God does not create us as sinners. He creates us pure and then it is us who sin and make our selves impure.
 
Since we're talking Abraham.

John 8:39-44 ," They answered and said to him," Our father is Abraham." Jesus said to them," If your were Abraham's children, you would be doing the works of Abraham." But, now you are trying to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God; Abraham did not do this. You are doing the works of your father!" [So] they said to him we are not illegitimate. We have one Father, God." If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and am here; I did not come from my own, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I am saying? Because you cannot bear to hear my word. You belong to your father the devil and you willingly carry out your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in truth, because there is no truth in him.

He was speaking to the Jews in this instance. If he was this harsh towards those jews who didn't follow him. How much harder will he be with those that deny his message. So does Islam deny the message of Jesus Christ. If not, then why make the people of the book feel subjegated and forced to pay a tax?

Peace be with you
gmcbroom
 
Airforce said:
So even a poor innocent baby that is newly born is a sinner. If that baby does not redeem itself by putting its faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and dies then the poor baby is condemned to hell. How can you expect a baby that cannot comprehend or think to accept Jesus as its Lord? What if the poor baby dies before it grows up to become able to rationalize and accept a religion. What about a mentally retarded person that cannot think for him self? He is a sinner by nature and will be doomed to Hell for not recognizing Jesus as Lord and Savior simply because his mind cannot!
Click to expand...
Acts 24:15 says that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous. The "unrighteous" ones here would be those who never had the opportunity to learn or comprehend and appreciate God's means of salvation.
 
Hiroshi said:
The Bible does not teach that you have an immortal soul that can burn in hell forever. It teaches that the dead may receive a resurrection.
Click to expand...
If that be so, how do you explain Luke 16:19-31 which is the story of the rich man and the beggar named Lazarus?
 
Mustafa,
It's a parable in essence a story meant to illustrate a point. It is meant to remind people of the reversal of fortunes of those that do nothing for those around them. In this case the rich for the poor.
Peace be with you
gmcbroom
 
MustafaMc said:
If that be so, how do you explain Luke 16:19-31 which is the story of the rich man and the beggar named Lazarus?
Click to expand...

The account does not say that Lazarus went to Gehenna/Jahannam. It says that he went to Hades. Hades means simply the grave as at 1 Corinthians 15:55.

There is a similar narrative in Isaiah 14:8-11. There the king of Babylon is pictured decending into Sheol or Hades (Greek Septuagint) i.e. the grave, where there are worms and maggots (verse 11). Then all of the dead kings and rulers in the grave come and ask the king of Babylon: "Have you yourself also been made weak like us? Is it to us that you have been made comparable?"

Obviously, such an account is not to be understood literally. The corpses of dead kings covered in maggots do not really stand up in their graves and start speaking. Verse 8 even depicts trees as talking saying: "Ever since you have lain down no wood cutter comes up against us?" The whole account is a poetical allegory to show the disgrace of this oppressive tyrant's downfall.

In the story of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus' disciples are represented by Lazarus while the rich man pictures the unbelieving Pharisees. As Jews, they are under the Law of Moses. But when Jesus died as a ransom sacrifice they "died" to the Law as explained in Romans 7:4 (compare Romans 7:1-3 with Luke 16:18). This is what is meant by the deaths of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:22).

After this there was a dramatic change in circumstances. The disciples of Jesus began to be comforted by the holy spirit particularly after Pentecost when God's spirit gave them zeal and miraculous gifts. But the unbelieving Pharisees began to be terribly tormented by the unstoppable preaching of the Christians (Acts 7:54). The Bible likens such anguish to torment in a fire (Jeremiah 5:14; Revelation 11:5; Revelation 11:10).

This explains all of the details of the account of Lazarus and the rich man. It is a prediction of the conflict between the early Christianity and orthodox Judaism. The conclusion at the end is that the unbelieving Jews have refused to believe the obvious testimony to Jesus as foretold in scripture (Luke 16:29) and will also fail to be impressed by his resurrection: "neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead" (Luke 16:31).
 
Last edited:
Hiroshi said:
This explains all of the details of the account of Lazarus and the rich man. It is a prediction of the conflict between the early Christianity and orthodox Judaism.
Click to expand...
So you interpret this passage as not referring to a physical torment of the rich man in the Hereafter, but rather as a parable for an earthly struggle. It seems rather convenient to twist a passage away from an apparent meaning that doesn't fit your dogma to something completely 'out in left field' that does fit.

There is repeated reference in the NT about a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth. An example is the parable of the good and bad fish caught in a net Matthew 13:49-51 "This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous and throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. “Have you understood all these things?” Jesus asked. "Yes" they replied. Another is the parable of the wheat and tares (weeds) in Matthew 13:36.43.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top