Which religion is closest to Islam?

  • Thread starter Thread starter abdmez
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 376
  • Views Views 60K

Which religion is closer to Islam?

  • Total voters
    0
Whatsthepoint said:
I came here a bit late. Could you post the tafsir again, please.:sunny:

3:164 clearly says Mohammed instructed etc those believers, so one can conclude taht it refers to his companions. 9:30 gives no such specification, neither does the entire surah 9. There's "with their mouths"... I'll wait for the tafsir before I make further comments...
Click to expand...

http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=9&tid=20998
 
Reading it, I found this portion particularly interesting:
Imam Ahmad, At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Jarir At-Tabari recorded a Hadith via several chains of narration, from `Adi bin Hatim, may Allah be pleased with him, who became Christian during the time of Jahiliyyah.

When the call of the Messenger of Allah reached his area, `Adi ran away to Ash-Sham, and his sister and several of his people were captured.

The Messenger of Allah freed his sister and gave her gifts.

So she went to her brother and encouraged him to become Muslim and to go to the Messenger of Allah.

`Adi, who was one of the chiefs of his people (the tribe of Tai') and whose father, Hatim At-Ta'i, was known for his generosity, went to Al-Madinah.

When the people announced his arrival, `Adi went to the Messenger of Allah wearing a silver cross around his neck.

The Messenger of Allah recited this Ayah; (They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah).

`Adi commented, "I said, `They did not worship them.'''

The Prophet said, (Yes they did. They (rabbis and monks) prohibited the allowed for them (Christians and Jews) and allowed the prohibited, and they obeyed them. This is how they worshipped them.)
Click to expand...

So my question is this: Am I to understand from reading this that obedience is the equivalence of worship?
 
- Qatada - said:
The verse is referring to the Jews of Madinah, because they specifically stated it as mentioned in the tafsir earlier. Allah talks many times about the believers in the Qur'an, yet He is not talking about every single believer who dwells on the earth in the future also in them specific verses.


I.e:
Allah did confer a great favour on the believers when He sent among them a messenger from among themselves, rehearsing unto them the Signs of Allah, sanctifying them, and instructing them in Scripture and Wisdom, while, before that, they had been in manifest error. [Qur'an 3: 164]



​
In This verse, the believers are mentioned. However, it is specifically referring to the companions of the Messenger of Allah.

Similarly, that verse is referring to the Jews of Madinah, since it was they who said it. Those who did not say it, it is not referring to them.
Click to expand...

And I brought this up earlier, but of course you guys ignored it.

Earlier, I showed that there are verses in the Qu'ran that say SOME people of the book, or something like that. Meaning not all.

Yet this verse in qu'ran does not say "some." It leaves it out. Therefore how can we know it is speaking about just a few?

also, it says the Christians believe Jesus is the son of god.. Which they do. So why all Christians but just a few Jews?

Sorry, but you can try and twist and turn it all you want(as you have been doing by one time trying to show proof that the Jews did, and another time saying 'oh, only the Jews of medina'" but the fact is clear for me. The qu'ran says Jews think ezra is son of god. It is wrong. End of story.
 
Whatsthepoint - when the Qur'an is revealed in certain situations, you refer to its context by referring to the Sunnah.


thirdwatch, here's some more examples:
They say, "If we return to Medina, surely the more honourable (element) will expel therefrom the meaner." But honour belongs to Allah and His Messenger, and to the Believers; but the Hypocrites know not.

63:8


And behold! The Hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease (even) say: "Allah and His Messenger promised us nothing but delusion!"

33:12
​


Those are just 2 examples, the second one is more apparent. It is mentioned that the hypocrites said... not every single hypocrite in the world has ever said that statement, however - we refer to the Sunnah and Seerah [biography] and figure out that it was the hypocrites who said this at the time of the Prophet, peace be upon him. Similarly, when Jews are mentioned - we look at the Seerah and figure out that it was the Jews of Medinah who said what they said.


Grace Seeker, obedience to someone who gives commandments which oppose the commandments of God can be a form of worship - yes. If someone says that something is permissible, which God has forbidden, then they are legislating against God - they are indirectly stating that what they have legislated is a better alternative to what God has legislated. Therefore the people who obey this legislation, believing that it is acceptable, while knowing that it is opposing what God has commanded may become disbelievers.
 
- Qatada - said:
Grace Seeker, obedience to someone who gives commandments which oppose the commandments of God can be a form of worship - yes. If someone says that something is permissible, which God has forbidden, then they are legislating against God - they are indirectly stating that what they have legislated is a better alternative to what God has legislated. Therefore the people who obey this legislation, believing that it is acceptable, while knowing that it is opposing what God has commanded may become disbelievers.
Click to expand...
GraceSeeker, please, correct me if I am wrong, but I think you were implying that our following the example of Prophet Muhammad (saaws) is a form of worshiping him. The distinction is that we accept Muhammad (saaws) as a Messenger of Allah (swt) and that he merely conveyed the revelation of Allah's (swt) Will to us in the form of the Qur'an and his Sunnah. The likeness is of the People of Israel being led by Moses (as) out of Egypt with the establishment of the worship of One God. And Allah knows best.
 
- Qatada - said:
thirdwatch, here's some more examples:
They say, "If we return to Medina, surely the more honourable (element) will expel therefrom the meaner." But honour belongs to Allah and His Messenger, and to the Believers; but the Hypocrites know not.

63:8
And behold! The Hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease (even) say: "Allah and His Messenger promised us nothing but delusion!"

33:12
​


Those are just 2 examples, the second one is more apparent. It is mentioned that the hypocrites said... not every single hypocrite in the world has ever said that statement, however - we refer to the Sunnah and Seerah [biography] and figure out that it was the hypocrites who said this at the time of the Prophet, peace be upon him. Similarly, when Jews are mentioned - we look at the Seerah and figure out that it was the Jews of Medinah who said what they said.
Click to expand...

We can logiaclly conclude from the verses speak of the hypocrites at the time of Muhammad.
1. The first verse speaks of the people who were discussing the return to Madinah and honorable elements. Then it speaks of honour belonging to Allah, believers and Muhammad, but not the hypocrites. Who are the hypocrites? Those who were discussing honorable elements. the second aprt is a reply to their discussion.
2. The Quran was thought of/revealed at the time of the prophet. The verse speaks of people opposed to Muhammad. Past tense indicates that the they must have lived from the time Mohammed first introduced the first surah to the indroduction of the 33th surah.

Whereas we cannot conclude 9:31 speaks solely of Jews of Madinah by using only the Quran. We have to rely onto historical and other evidence. IMHO, God's book would be different. That's why I never liked the Christian way of explaining inconsistencies and mistakes in the Bible.
 
Whatsthepoint, this then shows the importance of the authentic preserved Sunnah. :)
 
MustafaMc said:
GraceSeeker, please, correct me if I am wrong, but I think you were implying that our following the example of Prophet Muhammad (saaws) is a form of worshiping him. The distinction is that we accept Muhammad (saaws) as a Messenger of Allah (swt) and that he merely conveyed the revelation of Allah's (swt) Will to us in the form of the Qur'an and his Sunnah. The likeness is of the People of Israel being led by Moses (as) out of Egypt with the establishment of the worship of One God. And Allah knows best.
Click to expand...

- Qatada - said:
Whatsthepoint - when the Qur'an is revealed in certain situations, you refer to its context by referring to the Sunnah.


thirdwatch, here's some more examples:
They say, "If we return to Medina, surely the more honourable (element) will expel therefrom the meaner." But honour belongs to Allah and His Messenger, and to the Believers; but the Hypocrites know not.

63:8


And behold! The Hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease (even) say: "Allah and His Messenger promised us nothing but delusion!"

33:12
​


Those are just 2 examples, the second one is more apparent. It is mentioned that the hypocrites said... not every single hypocrite in the world has ever said that statement, however - we refer to the Sunnah and Seerah [biography] and figure out that it was the hypocrites who said this at the time of the Prophet, peace be upon him. Similarly, when Jews are mentioned - we look at the Seerah and figure out that it was the Jews of Medinah who said what they said.


Grace Seeker, obedience to someone who gives commandments which oppose the commandments of God can be a form of worship - yes. If someone says that something is permissible, which God has forbidden, then they are legislating against God - they are indirectly stating that what they have legislated is a better alternative to what God has legislated. Therefore the people who obey this legislation, believing that it is acceptable, while knowing that it is opposing what God has commanded may become disbelievers.
Click to expand...


My question is simple and needs to be taken just at face value. I wasn't implying anything, but seeking understanding. My operating definition of worship is different, it involves a declaration of one as worthy of honor and glory and praise, of devotion. It would be normal to expect that one would also obey persons that were worshipped, but I would not equate them for I see many who are not obedient to the God (gods) they worship in many cultures. And I see people obedient to parents and legal authorities that they do not worship. But in this passage it seemed that the act which was used to determine that folks were worshipping was their obedience. My question was to see if indeed that was a fair reading of the text.




Not that I expect you to remember this, or that you should even try, but my general approach to scripture (and I try to take this same approach to any person's scriptures, not just my own), is to first observe what it is saying. Not to interpret it or apply it, but merely to observe what it is actually saying -- rather than what I think it ought to say or want it to say or have been told by others that it says. I just try to ask basic observational questions of the text and simply observe what is being described there. Second, I then ask why it is so described. Again trying to avoid imposing an interpretation, but trying to see the connections that are inherent within the text itself.

In this case it led me to ask the question about if obedience was what determined that worship was happening? Only after I have these observations do I then begin to look for meaning or interpretation. If obedience is a measure of worship, what does this mean? What are the implications of that? But it doesn't make much sense to ask such questions until one has made constructive observations. Hence, I was still just asking for some help with my observational question.
 
Grace Seeker said:
My question is simple and needs to be taken just at face value. I wasn't implying anything, but seeking understanding. My operating definition of worship is different, it involves a declaration of one as worthy of honor and glory and praise, of devotion. It would be normal to expect that one would also obey persons that were worshipped, but I would not equate them for I see many who are not obedient to the God (gods) they worship in many cultures. And I see people obedient to parents and legal authorities that they do not worship. But in this passage it seemed that the act which was used to determine that folks were worshipping was their obedience. My question was to see if indeed that was a fair reading of the text.




Not that I expect you to remember this, or that you should even try, but my general approach to scripture (and I try to take this same approach to any person's scriptures, not just my own), is to first observe what it is saying. Not to interpret it or apply it, but merely to observe what it is actually saying -- rather than what I think it ought to say or want it to say or have been told by others that it says. I just try to ask basic observational questions of the text and simply observe what is being described there. Second, I then ask why it is so described. Again trying to avoid imposing an interpretation, but trying to see the connections that are inherent within the text itself.

In this case it led me to ask the question about if obedience was what determined that worship was happening? Only after I have these observations do I then begin to look for meaning or interpretation. If obedience is a measure of worship, what does this mean? What are the implications of that? But it doesn't make much sense to ask such questions until one has made constructive observations. Hence, I was still just asking for some help with my observational question.
Click to expand...

Peace Gene,

Our obedience to others should be because it is obedience to God(swt) and not to the person asking for obedience.

I think the difficulty comes from a slight difference of what worship is as opposed to the non-Islamic view. The simplist way to understand it is we view every action or word as worship. so at any given moment if we are not worshiping Allaah(swt) we are giving our worship to somebody else or to an object. That may be overly simplified, but i believe it may give some insight as what we consider worship and worship to other than God(swt)
 
Woodrow said:
Peace Gene,

Our obedience to others should be because it is obedience to God(swt) and not to the person asking for obedience.

I think the difficulty comes from a slight difference of what worship is as opposed to the non-Islamic view. The simplist way to understand it is we view every action or word as worship. so at any given moment if we are not worshiping Allaah(swt) we are giving our worship to somebody else or to an object. That may be overly simplified, but i believe it may give some insight as what we consider worship and worship to other than God(swt)
Click to expand...


OK. I get that. If one is talking in the general sense. But there are (in the over-simplified understanding you've provided) so many forms of obedience that one practices in daily life, that one could attribute much of daily life to be worship simply because we are obeying commands. For instance, is obeying stoplights worship? I don't think Muhammad meant that. And if mere obedience to people who are are leaders is meant to be understood as worship, then when Muhammad expected people to obey what he said (even though he was a messenger) he was still soliciting worship. And I don't think that is a proper understanding of what was meant by worship in Islam either. So, why apply that way of thinking to the reference to people obeying their priests? They aren't seeking worship nor are the people worshipping them any more than are those who are obedient to stoplights or the directives of Muhammad are engaged in worship.
 
Grace Seeker said:
OK. I get that. If one is talking in the general sense. But there are (in the over-simplified understanding you've provided) so many forms of obedience that one practices in daily life, that one could attribute much of daily life to be worship simply because we are obeying commands. For instance, is obeying stoplights worship? I don't think Muhammad meant that. And if mere obedience to people who are are leaders is meant to be understood as worship, then when Muhammad expected people to obey what he said (even though he was a messenger) he was still soliciting worship. And I don't think that is a proper understanding of what was meant by worship in Islam either. So, why apply that way of thinking to the reference to people obeying their priests? They aren't seeking worship nor are the people worshipping them any more than are those who are obedient to stoplights or the directives of Muhammad are engaged in worship.
Click to expand...

Peace Gene,

As a UMC Pastor, I am quite certain you do your best to see that people are obedient to your words and not obedient to you. The problem is some people have come to worship their faith and their priests rather then worshiping God(swt). The extreme example would be in cults, to a lesser degree it can be seen in Fundamentalism and some of the Orthodox/ Catholic practices.

This is an area in which us Muslims differ from most non-Muslims. We do not have any ministers or priests. The role of the Imam is quite different although some functions are similar. We do not see the Imam as being the "leader" in the same sense many churches see their Priest, Pastor or Minister. In simplicity the Imam is just the member of the congregation who is better educated or sometimes older. He is not seen as being different from any other person in the Mosque. In fact at prayer time in the Mosque if for some reason the Imam is not present a member of the congregation can take the role of Imam. In fact the most knowledgeable would be pretty much required to do so.

I think the easiest way to explain it, is think of the reasons you are a UMC Pastor and not a Catholic Priest. This is the concept we see to some extent in many Church leaders and see the obedience as being worship.
 
hola,

while i continue to agree with you that the similarities between islam and christianity are few and far between, i think what you said was interesting Woodrow.

one of the things that concerns me about islam is the way muslims seem to overly admire many of their religious leaders, past and present. to give you an example, i hear muslims talk about certain muezzins as though they are rockstars; that is even more pronounced with nasheed artists (consider sami yusuf); popular daee's like zakir naik and ahmed deedat are so respected it is considered an insult to islam by many to accuse them of fraudulence; and popular sheikhs (like sudais) have little followings of people who hang on their every word, i am frequently told that muslims are trying to redefine al azhar as the muslim vatican.

que Dios te bendiga
 
Last edited:
I want to second what Jayda said. In fact I do see Muslims lifting up their leaders and putting them on pedestals.

As for priests and ministers. Well, my understanding is that all Christian believers are priests and ministers. We each have different gifts and roles to play in the life of the church, but we are also each called to be ministers of the gospel in one form or another. In my congregation, if I am absent, another person from the congregation fills my place. This person is most commonly the lay leader or a lay speaker. Pretty much exactly what you described in terms of who would fill-in in place of the Iman.

While I admit that sometimes people will so honor leaders in the church that it borders on worship, this is evidence that things are not as they are supposed to be, not the norm. Even the ordering of worship is called "liturgy" which literally means "the work of the people". The role of the ordained clergy is merely to be raised up from among the people to focus on helping the people in their performance of worship of God. Clergy are set aside for that purpose, not to make them special, but because the function of the rest of the church is to take Christ to the world. (Sadly, somehow in people's minds this has gotten switch and too many seem to think that it is the clergy's job to go to the world and the people's job to pay them to do that. Nothing could be further from the truth.) Thus, ultimately, the function of the Iman and of the priest are more alike than you might imagine. The difference is that in most Christian communities (not all) the worship leader is a person who is not just set aside for that purpose but also makes his living at it. But the idea of it being a vocation, as in livelihood, is not integral to the concept of being a pastor or a priest, for all of us have callings (i.e. vocations) as ministers of one form or another in the Church.
 
christianity in sense they believe in prophet's upto Jesus. So believe in more prophets than jews & in sense that they accept Jesus as Mesiah. & that they r more receptive to TRUTH than jews.


[Quran:2:88] They say, "Our hearts are the wrappings (which preserve God's Word: we need no more)." Nay, God's curse is on them for their blasphemy: Little is it they believe.

[5:82] Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, "We are Christians": because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant.
 
Chirstains commit Shirk and Idol worship, which are the worst sins in Islam,while jews believe in the Onesses of God which makes them more closer to islam.
 
We all have to make sure that no matter how close some parts of their religions are. They are not Muslim. They hear the message of Allah and they deny it making them Kuffar. We should make a difference between the Muslims we know and the Non-Muslims we know. We should only trust the Muslims and dont trust the non-Muslims when it comes to important issues.
Take this verse into account:
5:51 O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
 
Shakoor15 said:
We all have to make sure that no matter how close some parts of their religions are. They are not Muslim. They hear the message of Allah and they deny it making them Kuffar. We should make a difference between the Muslims we know and the Non-Muslims we know. We should only trust the Muslims and dont trust the non-Muslims when it comes to important issues.
Take this verse into account:
5:51 O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
Click to expand...

Nor should you take them for your enemies
 
Whatsthepoint said:
[9:30] And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they![/I]

It seems to me the verse refers to all Jews and Christians not only those of Madinah. There is no specific reference to the Jews of Madinah
Click to expand...
Note the definite article "the" (al in arabic) which refers to some particularized Jews and Christians only. So of course there are exceptions eg. the Modern Jews and the Arianist Christians. As Qatada said, the Jews it refers to are only the Jews of Medina.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top