Things in Islam I am curious about...

[Keltoi]

What does that mean to you? From where we stand G-D saved Jesus against those plotting against him (Didn't foresake). From where you are standing it is an act of deception. You are welcome to believe the version that appeals to you most!

It isn't about what I believe, as this thread is about the beliefs of Islam. I do understand what you believe, and I will assume this is the proper understanding in the Quran.

 

[Grace Seeker]

"Shouting" ? I didn't hear a thing! Simply found your repeated rhetoric a little on the dense side!
why can't you infer what is plain for you to see? hammering the same nail in each and every one of your posts as if you had stumbled upon Pandora's box and about to unleash-- alas hope; that G-D according to Muslims is but a deceiver! We answer you from the left you don't like it.. from the right you don't like it.
Did G-D Deceive...... NO!.... Plain and simple... that is what you conceive in your own mind to be true! To deceive would have been to forsake your messenger on the cross ...not save him from those plotting against him!If you don't want a detailed answer then I suggest you not partake in this subject and just skip it all together!

I understand typing in big bold letters to be the equivalent of "shouting" when using the internet. In my experience, others do as well. As you were posting in that style of type, it came across to me as if you were shouting.


This is no pandora's box. No secrets and no evils have been released. Hope still exists. There is nothing that we (or at least I) am trying to put back in a box.

I have said repeatedly that these are things I am trying to understand. I am trying to see them from the Muslim point of view. Indeed, I might be dense on a few of these things, maybe all of these things. After all, I was not raised Muslim. I am not presently Muslim. I look at the world through a different lense, but I AM TRYING to understand Islam not by reading books about it written by Christians, but by interacting peacably with Muslims. If I chew on smaller bites than you desire to feed me, that is just the way it is. I will continue to ask that which I am curious about. If you don't like me consuming the information in these small bites, then perhaps you should let someone else feed me.

Now, back to the topic at hand...



So, you are saying that my summary of the events is correct, but you do not see a deception in it. You also add that to have let Jesus die on the cross would have been a deception.

They strike me as two related, but, nonetheless, separate issues. Yet I do not understand either of those two points.

Maybe the problem is with our understanding of what it means to deceive?

de·cep·tion
n.
The use of deceit.
The fact or state of being deceived.
A ruse; a trick.

de·ceive
–verb (used with object)
1. to mislead by a false appearance or statement; delude: They deceived the enemy by disguising the destroyer as a freighter.
2. to be unfaithful to (one's spouse or lover).
3. Archaic. to while away (time).
–verb (used without object)
4. to mislead or falsely persuade others; practice deceit: an engaging manner that easily deceives.
5. to give a false impression: appearances can deceive.

I don't see how Jesus dying on the Cross would fit this definition of a deception? I can see it as a travesty. I can see it as a tragic waste. I can see it as an attack against God. I can see it as a lot of things, but not as a deception. What would be false in Jesus dying on the cross if that is what appeared to have happened. If the issue is that it was Allah's desire to save Jesus, then why was it necessary substitute another in Jesus' place. Surely God could have saved Jesus without having to sacrifice another in Jesus' place. And even more to the point, if another was to be sacrificed, why make it appear as if it were Jesus that was being sacrficed?

It is not the saving of Jesus that has the appearance of being a deception to me. But you are right, I think a deception was involved. What appears as a deception is that another was substituted in Jesus' place and then made to appear as if it were Jesus when it was not. That seems to fit the definitions given above:

• A ruse; a trick
• 1. to mislead by a false appearance or statement; delude: They deceived the enemy by disguising the destroyer as a freighter.
• 5. to give a false impression: appearances can deceive.

It seems you take offense at this question. Yet I ask it not to offend, not to call God a deciever. I ask it because I do not believe God to be a deciever, nor to I understand Muslims to believe God to be a deciever. Yet in this accounting of the event God has clearly caused those who witnessed the crucifixion of this young man to be under a false impression that it was Jesus -- which is the definition of creating a deception. So, how does one reconcile the dicohotomy? Knowing that Muslims do not consider it a deception, what is it?

 

[Keltoi]

I understand typing in big bold letters to be the equivalent of "shouting" when using the internet. In my experience, others do as well. As you were posting in that style of type, it came across to me as if you were shouting.


This is no pandora's box. No secrets and no evils have been released. Hope still exists. There is nothing that we (or at least I) am trying to put back in a box.

I have said repeatedly that these are things I am trying to understand. I am trying to see them from the Muslim point of view. Indeed, I might be dense on a few of these things, maybe all of these things. After all, I was not raised Muslim. I am not presently Muslim. I look at the world through a different lense, but I AM TRYING to understand Islam not by reading books about it written by Christians, but by interacting peacably with Muslims. If I chew on smaller bites than you desire to feed me, that is just the way it is. I will continue to ask that which I am curious about. If you don't like me consuming the information in these small bites, then perhaps you should let someone else feed me.

Now, back to the topic at hand...



So, you are saying that my summary of the events is correct, but you do not see a deception in it. You also add that to have let Jesus die on the cross would have been a deception.

They strike me as two related, but, nonetheless, separate issues. Yet I do not understand either of those two points.

Maybe the problem is with our understanding of what it means to deceive?



I don't see how Jesus dying on the Cross would fit this definition of a deception? I can see it as a travesty. I can see it as a tragic waste. I can see it as an attack against God. I can see it as a lot of things, but not as a deception. What would be false in Jesus dying on the cross if that is what appeared to have happened. If the issue is that it was Allah's desire to save Jesus, then why was it necessary substitute another in Jesus' place. Surely God could have saved Jesus without having to sacrifice another in Jesus' place. And even more to the point, if another was to be sacrificed, why make it appear as if it were Jesus that was being sacrficed?

It is not the saving of Jesus that has the appearance of being a deception to me. But you are right, I think a deception was involved. What appears as a deception is that another was substituted in Jesus' place and then made to appear as if it were Jesus when it was not. That seems to fit the definitions given above:

• A ruse; a trick
• 1. to mislead by a false appearance or statement; delude: They deceived the enemy by disguising the destroyer as a freighter.
• 5. to give a false impression: appearances can deceive.

It seems you take offense at this question. Yet I ask it not to offend, not to call God a deciever. I ask it because I do not believe God to be a deciever, nor to I understand Muslims to believe God to be a deciever. Yet in this accounting of the event God has clearly caused those who witnessed the crucifixion of this young man to be under a false impression that it was Jesus -- which is the definition of creating a deception. So, how does one reconcile the dicohotomy? Knowing that Muslims do not consider it a deception, what is it?

Thanks for summing up the question in better terms than I seem to be able to do today. Yes, this isn't about attacking anyone's faith, I'm just interested about this issue because of my obvious beliefs about Christ, but also because it is something in the Quran that I've always been curious about.

 

[ABWAN]

Originally Posted by ABWAN
how can we interpret the word "appear" literally? I have no clue what happened that time, but I feel its not worth exploring what "appear" means.

From what Purest Ambrosia provided: "the resemblance of `Isa was cast over that man ".

Hmm..I am no scholar, but i have never come across anything (from the Quran) that says someone was made to appear as Jesus. Perhaps its possible, if so, I would like to see the proof myself.

Although I know I am drifting away from the topic of Jesus here, I hope this little story would help us here. During the time of prophet Muhammed(saw), he was once chased by the people of Qurayish (his enemies). He (saw) and his closest companion Abu Bakr(ra) hid themselves in a cave. The enemies came close to the entrance of the cave and were about to enter the cave. They noticed a spider web at the entrance of the cave. So they assumed no one could have entered the cave as the spider web was intact and so they went looking for the prophet in other places.

Had they seen the prophet that day, that would have been the end of the story of Islam and I doubt if I would have been a muslim today.

Now I can certainly relate this story to the verse in question about Jesus. Were the people of Qurayish made to assume Muhammed(saw) was not in the cave? Most certainly. Did God decieve them? I dont think so, everything seems to have a strong scientific basis here. Dont you think?

 

[جوري]

I understand typing in big bold letters to be the equivalent of "shouting" when using the internet. In my experience, others do as well. As you were posting in that style of type, it came across to me as if you were shouting.


This is no pandora's box. No secrets and no evils have been released. Hope still exists. There is nothing that we (or at least I) am trying to put back in a box.

I have said repeatedly that these are things I am trying to understand. I am trying to see them from the Muslim point of view. Indeed, I might be dense on a few of these things, maybe all of these things. After all, I was not raised Muslim. I am not presently Muslim. I look at the world through a different lense, but I AM TRYING to understand Islam not by reading books about it written by Christians, but by interacting peacably with Muslims. If I chew on smaller bites than you desire to feed me, that is just the way it is. I will continue to ask that which I am curious about. If you don't like me consuming the information in these small bites, then perhaps you should let someone else feed me.

Now, back to the topic at hand...



So, you are saying that my summary of the events is correct, but you do not see a deception in it. You also add that to have let Jesus die on the cross would have been a deception.

They strike me as two related, but, nonetheless, separate issues. Yet I do not understand either of those two points.

Maybe the problem is with our understanding of what it means to deceive?



I don't see how Jesus dying on the Cross would fit this definition of a deception? I can see it as a travesty. I can see it as a tragic waste. I can see it as an attack against God. I can see it as a lot of things, but not as a deception. What would be false in Jesus dying on the cross if that is what appeared to have happened. If the issue is that it was Allah's desire to save Jesus, then why was it necessary substitute another in Jesus' place. Surely God could have saved Jesus without having to sacrifice another in Jesus' place. And even more to the point, if another was to be sacrificed, why make it appear as if it were Jesus that was being sacrficed?

It is not the saving of Jesus that has the appearance of being a deception to me. But you are right, I think a deception was involved. What appears as a deception is that another was substituted in Jesus' place and then made to appear as if it were Jesus when it was not. That seems to fit the definitions given above:

• A ruse; a trick
• 1. to mislead by a false appearance or statement; delude: They deceived the enemy by disguising the destroyer as a freighter.
• 5. to give a false impression: appearances can deceive.

It seems you take offense at this question. Yet I ask it not to offend, not to call God a deciever. I ask it because I do not believe God to be a deciever, nor to I understand Muslims to believe God to be a deciever. Yet in this accounting of the event God has clearly caused those who witnessed the crucifixion of this young man to be under a false impression that it was Jesus -- which is the definition of creating a deception. So, how does one reconcile the dicohotomy? Knowing that Muslims do not consider it a deception, what is it?

My understanding of big bold letters is you don't have to look for a needle in a haystack.. considering those are the very words you seem to have been searching for post after post?

You call it a deception and I call your words a disambiguation.
You want to look at this elephant from the rear instead of all angels!

I am not taking offense and I certainly don't appreciate this Jungian approach to my psyche... please don't feign to analyze what it is I am feeling.

Maybe it is something that is rudimentary to me to believe that G-D wouldn't forsake but in fact save his messenger or in your case his "son". What would be illogical and in fact down right deceptive to me is to break your covenant with one you hold so dear. Also why did G-D do this or not do that is beyond me, It is far beyond me to begin to remotly explain how G-D works.. All I know is that he is just... and I am but human!

There is more to one explanation to what happened that day... Some Muslims in fact believe that it was Judas who appeared to them as Jesus and they crucified him, others believe that it was someone who volunteered himself with the promise of being Jesus' companion in the paradise. There is NO consensus. To be quite honest it doesn't matter from where I am standing which one of these possibilities took place. Could have very well been Judas who was crucified in Jesus' stead!
You want to call that deception and post definitions from dictionaries, that is your prerogative. And I am certainly not here to challenge your understanding...

 

[Keltoi]

My understanding of big bold letters is you don't have to look for a needle in a haystack.. considering those are the very words you seem to have been searching for post after post?

You call it a deception and I call your words a disambiguation.
You want to look at this elephant from the rear instead of all angels!

I am not taking offense and I certainly don't appreciate this Jungian approach to my psyche... please don't feign to analyze what it is I am feeling.

Maybe it is something that is rudimentary to me to believe that G-D wouldn't forsake but in fact save his messenger or in your case his "son". What would be illogical and in fact down right deceptive to me is to break your covenant with one you hold so dear. Also why did G-D do this or not do that is beyond me, It is far beyond me to begin to remotly explain how G-D works.. All I know is that he is just... and I am but human!

There is more to one explanation to what happened that day... Some Muslims in fact believe that it was Judas who appeared to them as Jesus and they crucified him, others believe that it was someone who volunteered himself with the promise of being Jesus' companion in the paradise. There is NO consensus. To be quite honest it doesn't matter from where I am standing which one of these possibilities took place. Could have very well been Judas who was crucified in Jesus' stead!
You want to call that deception and post definitions from dictionaries, that is your prerogative. And I am certainly not here to challenge your understanding...

So now I think I understand better. There is no agreement on the issue. So there is nothing in the Quran that states God made the face of another person appear to be that of Jesus? I'm slightly confused on whether the passage exists or not...

 

[جوري]

This is the verse from the Quran with two transliteration-- as to whom was on that cross? I have already stated more than one opinion.

وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا {157}​

[Yusufali 4:157] That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
[Pickthal 4:157] And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.

 

[Grace Seeker]

I can understand why it seems rudimentary to you that God would not forsake his messenger. That is not what I question. It is that which you have quoted from the Qu'ran with which I struggle:

they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them

To me it appears to be deceptive to those to whom it appeared that it was Jesus.
To you it does not.


So, we have must have different view of what it means to be deceptive, which I why I turned to a dictionary for a definition.

Whatever you want to call it, like with the spider, God tricked the people who were looking for Muhammad to kill him. I don't have a problem with that. But with regard to this substitution of another for Jesus' place at the crucifixion, suffice it to say that if this is the way of Allah, by whatever means you call it, or label you give to it, that I do not understand it. Of course, there are things within Christianity that I do not understand about the way God works also. Thank-you for your efforts to educate me, I guess this is just one point where my denseness prevents me from learning.

 

[جوري]

In child like charm Grace seeker-- those who plotted ( were the bad guys) ... seems almost like you are rooting for the bad guys to crucify him?...... but then again I think that is what you already believe. This late in the game I think there is no more a point for this discussion..
peace!

 

[Grace Seeker]

In child like charm Grace seeker-- those who plotted ( were the bad guys) ...

Then God deceived the bad guys!! Yeah God!! I don't see what would be so wrong in saying that if that is what you believe.

But what I see is that it is what you believe, but not the word you want to use, because you don't want to label God a deceiver. Something sounds wrong about that. But maybe, the reality is that God did deceive people and there is nothing wrong with the fact that he did?

Still searching, but understand if you want to move on to something else. Again, thanks for trying.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Would u call me a deciever if i had to trick some bad people to save a good person? Or would u call me a hero? How can anyone have the audacity to call God a deciever?

 

[Grace Seeker]

Would u call me a deciever if i had to trick some bad people to save a good person? Or would u call me a hero? How can anyone have the audacity to call God a deciever?

I would say that you used deception, and used it well. As I just posted, perhaps we need to be careful about the term "deceiver". I don't want to apply it to God either, it has such negative connotations. But maybe the problem is with connotations. I need not apply those connotations to what God did, perhaps like in your example, the deception should be seen as heroic.

 

[جوري]

Then God deceived the bad guys!! Yeah God!! I don't see what would be so wrong in saying that if that is what you believe.

But what I see is that it is what you believe, but not the word you want to use, because you don't want to label God a deceiver. Something sounds wrong about that. But maybe, the reality is that God did deceive people and there is nothing wrong with the fact that he did?

Still searching, but understand if you want to move on to something else. Again, thanks for trying.

lol... it is almost as if you enjoy drawing satisfaction out of simplistic conclusions? Deception is your own word!... as you conceive in your own mind! I will not attempt to explain an entire doctrine to you in a paragraph, and I understand that this gnaws at the very citadel of Christianity. Deception in this case and visible to the naked eye would be forsaking the one with whom you have a covenant. not saving him from plotters! This is becoming a very circular argument and to be honest I need to let it go!
Thank you for your time and I hope there are no hard feelings!
peace!

 

[Grace Seeker]

This is becoming a very circular argument and to be honest I need to let it go!
Thank you for your time and I hope there are no hard feelings!
peace!

No. No hard feelings at all.

It will probably do me good to ruminate on it over night. And thank-you for all your patience, I know it is trying when someone just doesn't get what you are trying to say.

Peace to you as well.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

I would say that you used deception, and used it well. As I just posted, perhaps we need to be careful about the term "deceiver". I don't want to apply it to God either, it has such negative connotations. But maybe the problem is with connotations. I need not apply those connotations to what God did, perhaps like in your example, the deception should be seen as heroic.

So if u were to save someone because their life was in danger and u had too lie, would it be sane to call it deception? Comeon bro...thats silly. So basically anyone who has saved anyone else is a deciever.

 

[Keltoi]

So if u were to save someone because their life was in danger and u had too lie, would it be sane to call it deception? Comeon bro...thats silly. So basically anyone who has saved anyone else is a deciever.

Speaking of human beings using deception to save someone's life is something a little different than the proposition that God Himself used deception in order to save someone. Perhaps as Grace Seeker suggested, it is the negative understanding of the word "deception" that is causing this confusion. I suppose the idea of God using "deception", for lack of a better word, in order to stop the death of individual, Jesus Christ, seems odd to me as a Christian. I think I understand the stance of the Quran on this issue, and that is all I was looking for.

 

[Grace Seeker]

So if u were to save someone because their life was in danger and u had too lie, would it be sane to call it deception? Comeon bro...thats silly.

If you lie, of course it is deception. What else would you call it? I can't call it forthrightness just because I consider the end good.

So basically anyone who has saved anyone else is a deciever.

No. That doesn't follow.
Not all people who save others have to lie or use deception to accomplish it. There are those who save people by simple extracting them from life threatening situations. The lifeguard who jumps in the pool to save a potential drowning victim, the firefighter who pulls you from a burning building, the parent who grabs a child's hand so he can't run into the busy street -- all instances of saving a person's life without deception.

But one of the things that I am realizing in this discussion is that we shouldn't jump to a conclusion that all deceptions are necessarily bad. Allah created many animals to use deception as part of their very nature -- the cameleon that changes its appearance to blend in to its surroundings for example, the snapping turtle that sticks out a tongue that looks like a worm to lure fish within range for it to grab and eat -- these are aspects of how Allah created them and I don't think that such deception is wrong. Of course, some deception is bad -- a lie is bad -- and yet I've told my wife "no that dress doesn't make you look fat" or "yes, that haircut looks nice". Should I label myself a deceiver? Well, maybe. But perhaps not all deception is bad? In my own country there was something called the Underground Railway that was operated to help slaves escape to freedom, and it certainly worked by deception, convincing those who were looking for any runaway slaves that they would have better luck looking elsewhere, all the while actually hiding them under a floor or in a hiden closet.

I still can't come up with another name for what is reported that Allah did -- he fooled people into thinking something that wasn't true by changing the appearance of the one they crucified to make it appear to them as if it were Jesus when it wasn't it. But, for the moment at least, I'll try not to sit in judgment as to whether that was a good or bad thing.

 

[Malaikah]

I don't see why punishing the evil people with 'deception' is any worse than God punishing them with, say, hell fire? Both are something not allow for us humans to do (it is haram to punish/kill anyone with fire), yet it is perfectly okay for God to punish with fire...

Just a point of interest...

 

[Keltoi]

I don't see why punishing the evil people with 'deception' is any worse than God punishing them with, say, hell fire? Both are something not allow for us humans to do (it is haram to punish/kill anyone with fire), yet it is perfectly okay for God to punish with fire...

Just a point of interest...

I don't think anyone was confused about God's "right" to do anything. I was just slightly confused on what position the Quran took on the issue, and I believe I understand now.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Grace, I was referring to people saving others in this scenario. i should have been more clear.