Things in Islam I am curious about...

[Grace Seeker]

this was a very interesting thread and it's good to see that there can be discussion of differences of opinion without bad feeling, alhamdulillah.

Grace Seeker, I can understand that the Muslim view of the crucifixion might seem unsatisfactory to a Christian. It might seem that from the Islamic point of view a new (false) religion of Christianity was brought about by a deception practised by God, who made it look like Jesus (a.s.) was crucified. (if that is not what you meant please correct me).

My understanding is that those who sought to kill Jesus a.s. were deceived, not his true followers. From a biblical point of view it would certainly seem that Christianity was instituted by those who never even met Jesus a.s., and it seems to be generally accepted that the new testament was mainly written by people other than the disciples of Jesus a.s.

Certainly the resurrection (of the person crucified) is not supported by the qur'an and we (Muslims) therefore believe that it didn't happen. So those who spread this false story (sorry that is what we believe) of a resurrection are responsible for that.

does any of that make sense?

Ummzayd

I understand your point. We just disagree with one another regarding that which is to be accepted as fact.

 

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

.... according to Muslim teaching, the person on the cross appeared to be Jesus. .

well , those who wanted to kill Jesus (p) , it appeared to them that they killed Jesus (p). As Muslims have no confusion over the matter , no question of ''it might confuse Muslims more

I said that 1X1X1=1.

this math is comparitively easy to understand

1+1+1=1 math is really very complicated & goes over head hew

but the question is if we already got 1 , why we need to multiply it ?

When we already believe in 1 God & Christians also believe that worshipping other dieties besides one true God is not allowed , then why waste time on unnecessary risky math ?

 

[Grace Seeker]

Salaam/peace;



well , those who wanted to kill Jesus (p) , it appeared to them that they killed Jesus (p). As Muslims have no confusion over the matter , no question of ''it might confuse Muslims more

This discussion began in reference to some good-natured jesting Eesa was doing with me and to which I responded in kind. It no longer makes sense taken away from that context.

this math is comparitively easy to understand

1+1+1=1 math is really very complicated & goes over head hew

but the question is if we already got 1 , why we need to multiply it ?

When we already believe in 1 God & Christians also believe that worshipping other dieties besides one true God is not allowed , then why waste time on unnecessary risky math ?

This began with some more more jesting, but it does deal with a serious topic that we have repeatedly on this forum. However, it belongs more appropriately in a different thread, because it is not something in Islam I am curious about. I pretty much already know Islam's views on it. Plus, I and many other Christians have expressed ourselves to it repeatedly and, therefore, I doubt that many Muslims here are curious about it either. So I'll address the one part of this question that is new and leave the rest to other threads.

That new part is "why we need to multiply it?"


Christians understand that there is just one God. We add nothing to God (I know that Muslims think we add partners, but we really do not). What we do is we look at God one time and see the Father. We look at God a second time and see the son. We look at God a third time and see the Holy Spirit. One God, looked at 3 times. But when we do this we are not talking about 3 different Gods. It is all the same God who manifests himself to us in three exponentially different ways. But if one takes 1 to the 3rd power, that is the same as 1X1X1. The result of that is still one, not three. And this is what Christians understand happens with regard to God when we speak of the Trinity. Of course, if you're not ready for higher order math, then it is perfectly permissable to simply say we believe in one God and leave it done with that. Just don't make the mistake of think we are talking about adding anything to God when we speak of the Trinity. That would produced 1+1+1, which equals 3 and Christians don't believe in adding anything to God anymore than Muslims do. And that's why I promote multiplication rather than addition if you want to try to talk about the Trinity by referring to math.


I hope that helps.

Now, lets get back to asking questions of things in Islam I am curious about rather than the other way around.

 

[Kashnowe]

Christians understand that there is just one God. We add nothing to God (I know that Muslims think we add partners, but we really do not). What we do is we look at God one time and see the Father. We look at God a second time and see the son. We look at God a third time and see the Holy Spirit. One God, looked at 3 times. But when we do this we are not talking about 3 different Gods. It is all the same God who manifests himself to us in three exponentially different ways. But if one takes 1 to the 3rd power, that is the same as 1X1X1. The result of that is still one, not three. And this is what Christians understand happens with regard to God when we speak of the Trinity. Of course, if you're not ready for higher order math, then it is perfectly permissable to simply say we believe in one God and leave it done with that. Just don't make the mistake of think we are talking about adding anything to God when we speak of the Trinity. That would produced 1+1+1, which equals 3 and Christians don't believe in adding anything to God anymore than Muslims do. And that's why I promote multiplication rather than addition if you want to try to talk about the Trinity by referring to math.

yes grace seeker you are an excellent communicator. this is very well put and i, a christian, agree completely.

and i'd like to add when a christian prays to Jesus we are praying to God. Oh Jesus...=Oh God...=Ay Dios...=O Easa...=Oh (insert a word for God in another language here).

we do not pray to Moses or Elijah or Isaiah

 

[Woodrow]

yes grace seeker you are an excellent communicator. this is very well put and i, a christian, agree completely.

and i'd like to add when a christian prays to Jesus we are praying to God. Oh Jesus...=Oh God...=Ay Dios...=O Easa...=Oh (insert a word for God in another language here).

we do not pray to Moses or Elijah or Isaiah

Except that Jesus(as) is a very specific name and is actually a very common Spanish name. the name Jesus(as) Does not come from either Hebrew, Aramaic or Arabic. It was of Greek origin and later latinized into Jesus(as)

The word Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek Iesous, which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew Jeshua, or Joshua, or again Jehoshua, meaning "Jehovah is salvation." Though the name in one form or another occurs frequently in the Old Testament, it was not borne by a person of prominence between the time of Josue, the son of Nun and Josue, the high priest in the days of Zorobabel. It was also the name of the author of Ecclesiaticus, of one of Christ's ancestors mentioned in the genealogy, found in the Third Gospel (Luke 3:29), and one of the St. Paul's companions (Colossians 4:11). During the Hellenizing period, Jason, a purely Greek analogon of Jesus, appears to have been adopted by many

Source:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374x.htm

Today many Christians and others assume that the Greek name Jesus was the original name of the Savior who was Hebrew. If one does the research, one finds out that it is impossible for the Savior’s name to be Jesus.

Source: http://www.plim.org/JesusOrigin.htm

From Greek, Ἰησοῦς [Iēsous] moved into Latin at least by the time of the Vetus Latina. The morphological jump this time was not as large as previous changes between language families. Ἰησοῦς [Iēsous] was transliterated to Latin IESVS, where it stood for many centuries. The Latin name has an irregular declension, with a genitive, dative, ablative, and vocative of Jesu, accusative of Jesum, and nominative of Jesus. Minuscule (lower case) letters were developed around 800 and some time later the U was invented to distinquish the vowel sound from the consonantal sound and the J to distinguish the consonant from I. Similarly, Greek minuscules were invented about the same time, prior to that the name was written in Capital letters: ΙΗCΟΥC or abbreviated as: ΙΗC with a line over the top, see also Christogram.

Near the end of Middle English, the vowels changed during the Great Vowel Shift in the 15th century, and the letter J was first distinguished from 'I' by the Frenchman Pierre Ramus in the 16th, but did not become common in Modern English until the 17th century. As such we can see that such works as the first edition of the King James Version of the Bible in 1611 continued to print the name with an I. [9]

Finally, after thousands of years and several languages later, the name finally came to rest as the Modern English "Jesus" [ˈdʒi.zəs].

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_and_titles_of_Jesus_in_the_New_Testament

Jesus(as) as a Name is a corrupt mispronunciation of Joshua, which was a very common name and is not a title or name of God(swt)

 

[Trumble]

Except that Jesus(as) is a very specific name and is actually a very common Spanish name. the name Jesus(as) Does not come from either Hebrew, Aramaic or Arabic. It was of Greek origin and later latinized into Jesus(as)

It comes from the Hebrew/Aramaic (the same in both) via the Greek transliteration (not 'origin').

Jesus(as) as a Name is a corrupt mispronunciation of Joshua, which was a very common name and is not a title or name of God(swt)

'Joshua' is almost as 'corrupt' as Ἰησοῦς', if not 'Jesus'. A better transliteration into English is (one of - 'Ἰησοῦς' was the Greek form of both) Yahushua or Yeshua. That's pretty close, especially as with Greek the word ending is a purely grammatical construction (the 'ς', 's', is only used in the nominative). There is no reason to believe 'Ἰησοῦ('ς') isn't as close to the original pronunciation (remembering that ending would be dropped) as they could get... you cannot transliterate 'Yahushua' accurately into Greek (no 'y', no 'h').

The 'J' is certainly a medieval corruption, but is pretty much restricted to English. It's of little importance, IMHO.

As you say, not the name of a God but a name in common use.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Except that Jesus(as) is a very specific name and is actually a very common Spanish name. the name Jesus(as) Does not come from either Hebrew, Aramaic or Arabic. It was of Greek origin and later latinized into Jesus(as)



Source:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374x.htm




Source: http://www.plim.org/JesusOrigin.htm



Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_and_titles_of_Jesus_in_the_New_Testament

Jesus(as) as a Name is a corrupt mispronunciation of Joshua, which was a very common name and is not a title or name of God(swt)

Yes, yes, and again yes to each of your points.

However, I don't see what this has to do with the price of tea in China.

 

[Kashnowe]

Today many Christians and others assume that the Greek name Jesus was the original name of the Savior who was Hebrew. If one does the research, one finds out that it is impossible for the Savior’s name to be Jesus.

i'm insulted by this. i understand that Jesus was not called Jesus. i also don't pray in aramaic but i know He understands me.

come on now!

 

[Kashnowe]

after my rathr lengthly post in questions for christians thread i began to wonder.

did Mohammed read the Bible?

how did he know about Jesus and all the prophets before him?

if he read the Bible what language was it in?

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

^^Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) was illiterate. He could read nor write.

did Mohammed read the Bible?

how did he know about Jesus and all the prophets before him?

^^Now take my answer and think about that for a sec If you know some what about Islam, you can figure it out

 

[Grace Seeker]

^^Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) was illiterate. He could read nor write.



^^Now take my answer and think about that for a sec If you know some what about Islam, you can figure it out

But Muhammad was also a trader and had contact with many people from all over the region. Some would have been Jews, some Christians, some pagans. Who knows all the vast array of stories he may have heard? Including, no doubt, some from people who were Jews or Christians, but didn't know their own faith very well and probably messed up on some of the stories.

 

[Muslim Knight]

But Muhammad was also a trader and had contact with many people from all over the region. Some would have been Jews, some Christians, some pagans. Who knows all the vast array of stories he may have heard? Including, no doubt, some from people who were Jews or Christians, but didn't know their own faith very well and probably messed up on some of the stories.

Messed up stories can only produce a messed up religion. However, Islam isn't. The way Islamic jurisprudence derive Shariah laws from Quran and Sunnah, and also the way Hadith are scrutinized for authenticity shows it is a very organized and rational religion.

 

[Joe98]

Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) was illiterate. He could read nor write.

Just about everybody in those days was illiterate. Somebody must have told him about the bible.

 

[Muslim Knight]

Just about everybody in those days was illiterate. Somebody must have told him about the bible.

Other than God, no Bible scholar or Christian monk from his time has gone to put forward that claim, not even one person has come forward claiming to be that Somebody, especially when everything is at stake.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Messed up stories can only produce a messed up religion. However, Islam isn't. The way Islamic jurisprudence derive Shariah laws from Quran and Sunnah, and also the way Hadith are scrutinized for authenticity shows it is a very organized and rational religion.

No one is saying that Muhammad was ignorant. With his brillian intellect and wisdom, he might well have been able to come up with a jurisprudence that worked well for his community and still has value for many today. I'm not so sure it was a great as you consider it to have been.

And I do think that those parts which refer to events found in the Bible are indeed a little messed up.

What I see is a book written to deal wth issues as they arose in the community's life. Notice the change in view toward Jews from some of the earlier received passages to some of the latter received ones. I can't help but wonder if the difference might have been a result of Muhammad's experience with Jews that did not remain loyal and broke some of the promises they made to him.

I understand the Hadith to be a record created apart from the Quran itself. And not as revelation, but interpretations of revelation based on the prophet's life. Do I misunderstand its origin?

 

[Muslim Knight]

No one is saying that Muhammad was ignorant. With his brillian intellect and wisdom, he might well have been able to come up with a jurisprudence that worked well for his community and still has value for many today. I'm not so sure it was a great as you consider it to have been.

Considering that he managed to change a barbaric backwater society that thrives on killing babies, treating women as chattels, constantly warring rival tribes, drinking and slothering into a society of gleaming morality, ideals and mighty civilization cum empire... yes, I consider that as great achievement par excellence, and of divine providence.

What I see is a book written to deal wth issues as they arose in the community's life. Notice the change in view toward Jews from some of the earlier received passages to some of the latter received ones. I can't help but wonder if the difference might have been a result of Muhammad's experience with Jews that did not remain loyal and broke some of the promises they made to him.

Everything as according to Allah's Will and Plans.

I understand the Hadith to be a record created apart from the Quran itself. And not as revelation, but interpretations of revelation based on the prophet's life. Do I misunderstand its origin?

Ahadith are traditions, record of the Prophet's speech, actions and advices. Hadith Qudsi is the speech of God through the mouth of the Prophet, and it is usually narrated as, "The Prophet said that Allah says...."

You can learn more about Hadith here

 

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

But Muhammad was also a trader and had contact with many people from all over the region...... probably messed up on some of the stories.

There are many diffrences between Bible & Quran. I m giving only 1 example here.



many people including a Pope thought Prophet Muhammed (p) ' mistakenly ' mentioned the name of Hamam in Quran related to Prophet Musa/Moses (p) when Bible did not mention Haman's name of this period.

Pope appointed a Catholic researcher to prove that Quran is wrong on this issue . U may visit the link to read the rest.


Story Of Qur'anic Haman. A Curious Pope And His Confessor!


-- long but very interesting


http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...quranic-haman-curious-pope-his-confessor.html

 

[Malaikah]

And I do think that those parts which refer to events found in the Bible are indeed a little messed up.

Except that the Islamic version of the stories tend to be morally superior to the biblical ones...

What I see is a book written to deal wth issues as they arose in the community's life. Notice the change in view toward Jews from some of the earlier received passages to some of the latter received ones. I can't help but wonder if the difference might have been a result of Muhammad's experience with Jews that did not remain loyal and broke some of the promises they made to him.

Example?

I understand the Hadith to be a record created apart from the Quran itself. And not as revelation, but interpretations of revelation based on the prophet's life. Do I misunderstand its origin?

No, that isn't quite right... they are saying of the Prophet, and his interpretations weren't based on his life, they are based on what he was taught by God through the angel Gabriel. And they aren't only interpretations, a lot of them a records of historical event, things that God said that weren't part of the Quran... explanations of laws etc.

 

[- Qatada -]

I think it's quite obvious that Muhammad is God's final Messenger since he came with the same message as all the previous prophets, he called to the religion of Prophet Abraham who himself was a Muslim [he submitted himself to God.] He never claimed to be a jew nor a christian, since the Torah and the Gospel came only after him.

All the Prophets said that you're God is only One God, the One who created you, the One who sustains you, the One who causes you to die and the One who you will be ressurected by on the Day of Judgement.


They all called their people to worship God Alone and not to have any 'intercessors' with God, since God is the All-Hearing, All Seeing so He can respond to their prayers directly. It was the way of the misguided people before to say that God has children, and that God has associates etc. When all that is false and complete lies against the Most Compassionate.


All the Prophets said to their people "shun all false deities, worship the One who Sustains you Alone and obey me" - they wouldn't ask for reward off their people since their reward is with Allaah, and none would ever say evil about God and say that you should worship me along with God, rather they would say worship the One who created you and all you have.


This is the exact same message revealed to Muhammad (peace be upon him.) Why wouldn't it be? When all the previous messages were distorted and they can't agree on a common scripture together; where people claimed that a certain race is superior to the rest of humanity? Or that God is in 3 parts? This is pure fabrication and a lie against God when He Himself said that 'I am your Lord, so worship Me Alone.' So don't pray to others, don't bow to others, don't ask anyone to intercede on your behalf to God, rather pray to Him directly, the One who created you, and sustains you, the One who will cause you to die, and the One who will ressurect you once again.

Whosoever obeys God and the final Messenger is successful and will be in the presence of His Lord - in gardens beneath which rivers flow, whereas those who reject faith and associate partners with God - they will be punished severely in the hellfire, since God never said that He has children, nor does He have a spouse, nor is He in 3 or 50 or a million parts - rather you're God is One God, and to Him is our return where He will judge us on what we differed.

 

[Kashnowe]

confused again

I think it's quite obvious that Muhammad is God's final Messenger since he came with the same message as all the previous prophets, he called to the religion of Prophet Abraham who himself was a Muslim [he submitted himself to God.] He never claimed to be a jew nor a christian, since the Torah and the Gospel came only after him.

this says Abraham was a muslim. i read numerous places on this board that to be a muslim one must believe in one God *and* that Mohammed was the last prophet.
How then can Abraham be a muslim if he came before Mohammed?

by the definition above i am a muslim. i submit myself to God.