Why Christians Glorify the Cross?

[What Is Truth?]

That seems to me a convincing reason for wearing the cross.
But if christians consider the possibility that Jesus may not have been crucified (has been saved by God), all this cross sanctification could be inappropriate. But I know christians don't consider this possibility because big part of chritianity is based on the sacrifice of jesus : i mean if we suppose Jesus(as) was not crusified, the whole sacrifice idea will be untrue.

I think you've made an important point here: the truth of Christianity rests on whether a particular event happened in history. If Jesus didn't die by crucifixion, then Christianity is obviously false. But if he did, then the Quran (and so, Islam) is false. Then coming to the point made by The Vale's Lily, we have to look at the evidence for and against (in this case using a historical method), and ask ourselves whether it supports either Christian or Islamic belief.

 

[جوري]

It would be interesting to see you accomplish that when there is no historical record 'outside of the bible' of Jesus having existed and the bibles from the numerous errors pointed out has no textual integrity to begin with even of Jesus alleged last words. The one historicall accounts of Jesus from a separate source is said to be a forgery for its glowing terms which no independent historian would use to record facts.

I wouldn't however say Christianity is false ... Christianity as you believe it is false- yes, however, there were monotheistic pious christians and are in fact mentioned in the Quran!

all the best

 

[Danah]

Well, I think glo pretty much hit the nail of the head when she posted the text from Wikipedia- I wear a cross because it reminds me of the immense love God has for me. I don't think many parents would let their only child take the blame of my sins and wrongdoings and subsequently let their child die so I could be free- only God has that sort of love. And that is what wearing a cross reminds me of.

Should you keep carrying a simple of the thing that tortured your God?
look at this scenario:
"If we heard about a person killed by certain kind of knives, and then we saw a group of people keep wearing a symbol of that knife. The first thing that will come to anyone's mind is that those people were supporting killing that person so much that they even keep remembering the tool that killed him as a kind of gratitude.
But if those people loved that person and glorify him we will see them at least wear something with his name written on it/ his image/ one of his belongings or something like this...this is what we see in today's life"

I hope you got what I meant here.

 

[What Is Truth?]

It would be interesting to see you accomplish that when there is no historical record 'outside of the bible' of Jesus having existed and the bibles from the numerous errors pointed out has no textual integrity to begin with even of Jesus alleged last words. The one historicall accounts of Jesus from a separate source is said to be a forgery for its glowing terms which no independent historian would use to record facts.

You raise a number of important questions that would be worthy of their own threads:

• Are the New Testament documents historically reliable?
• Can the original text of the New Testament be known with any degree of certainty?
• Other than the "Testimonium Flavianum" (which is clearly inauthentic) are there any other non-Christian sources for Jesus' life?

And I think there is one other important question that needs to be considered before we get into any of this:

• By what criteria do we investigate whether an event occurred in (ancient) history?

I would argue that even by the most skeptical criteria (like those applied by such non-Christian NT scholars as Ehrman, Crossan and Ludemann), we must either accept that Jesus died by crucifixion or deny that anything can be known about ancient history whatsoever. So, how would you go about answering this question?

Best wishes,
Matthew

 

[Supreme]

Should you keep carrying a simple of the thing that tortured your God?
look at this scenario:
"If we heard about a person killed by certain kind of knives, and then we saw a group of people keep wearing a symbol of that knife. The first thing that will come to anyone's mind is that those people were supporting killing that person so much that they even keep remembering the tool that killed him as a kind of gratitude.
But if those people loved that person and glorify him we will see them at least wear something with his name written on it/ his image/ one of his belongings or something like this...this is what we see in today's life"

I hope you got what I meant here.

I think I get what you're saying. But please understand this: the cross reminds of us the pain Jesus went through for us because He died for us. I know it's an odd symbol to have as a religion's main icon- an ancient method of execution- but I suppose the cross has just lost its status as a killing tool over time. Nowadays, no one is executed from Roman esque execution.

Now, Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians- the forms of Christianity that are actually predominant in the world- have images of Jesus hanging on the cross with nails through His hands. I suspect this too reminds them of Jesus' love, although the image is gory, and is generally not used by Protestant Christians*, as the cross itself is sufficient.

*Bar some Anglicans, although they are so big, they cannot really be considered a Protestant denomination.

 

[Abu Zainab]

Just thinking though, wouldn't it be amazing to be there when Jesus returns ...
That will be the end of all the arguments between Muslims and Christians! And we will finally know the whole truth

You are right...that would be amazing. But from what little I know about human nature we will be arguing if he is the "real" Jesus. If he says he is the son of god we will say he is a liar and if he says he is a prophet you will say he is a liar.

The best way to seek the truth is to submit ourselves to the Creator of all that exists and and ask Him to guide us and "inject" the truth in our souls and minds. Ain't that fair.

"O Creator....guide me to the religion of Abraham....the religion of Moses....the religion of Jesus and make me stick to it till I die"

 

[Missinglinks]

bismillah alhamdolillah

Why having a simbol wich never happened, he was never crucified, read with me...


The Quran says in Surah Annisa 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:-

Jesus said before the "crucification" that he will do the wonder of Jonah, let's look what it was to refresh our memory.
Jonah 1:17
But the LORD provided a great fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was inside the fish three days and three nights.


SoThe wonder of Jonah pbuh was three things that I will ask you:
- When he was thrown overboard, was he alive or dead?
- When the fish ate him, was he (in the fish) during those 3 days and 3 nights alive or dead?
- When the fish spew him on the beach, was he alive or dead?
answer: It was a miracle, he should be dead, but he was alive in all the 3 cases.

But when we ask a Christian, was Jesus pbuh alive or dead during those 3 days and 3 nights? The answer is then: Dead

The wonder of Jonah pbuh was, that he was eaten by a fish and survived, the wonder of Jesus pbuh was that he was burried in the earth, so this is not the same as the belly of fish (the conditions are different), but ok. Jesus pbuh did not survive the grave, because he was already dead.
So coming back to live is not the same as being all the time alive.

The third thing i want to discuss: How long did Jesus pbuh stayed in the state of "dead"(in the tomb)?
Mark 15:34 and Mathew 27:46 say both that he pbuh died on: 9 o'clock in the evening on a friday.
Mark 16:2 and Mathew 28:1 say both that He pbuh rised back to live before (the sun came up) sunday-morning (after the sabbath).
So let's count : friday night , saturday night = 2 nights
saturday = 1 day.
1 day and 2 nights dead..... this is not the same as 3 days and 3 nights or 3 days (even if it were only "days" or jewish days or roman days, no system of time on earth has ever counted this as three days!!!.).
so, you answer yourselve where he was during those "3 days and 3 nights".

so he was never crucified, because the real jesus pbuh according to bible shoudl stay 3 days and 3 nights, maybe he fled???!

 

[What Is Truth?]

Jesus said before the "crucification" that he will do the wonder of Jonah, let's look what it was to refresh our memory.
...
so he was never crucified, because the real jesus pbuh according to bible shoudl stay 3 days and 3 nights, maybe he fled???!

A couple of points:

1. What comparison was Jesus making?
   
   Let's have a look at the relevant verse:
   
   
   "For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matthew 12:40 (TNIV)​
   
   It is clear the comparison being made is between the length of time Jonah spent inside the fish and the length of time Jesus would spend "in the heart of the earth" (which means buried in a grave or tomb). Jesus did not say "For as Jonah was alive for three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish..." The very fact that Jesus uses the phrase "in the heart of the earth" implicitly implies that he would be dead (because you don't bury people who are still alive).
   
   
2. What does the phrase "three days and three nights" mean?
   
   "A day and a night" does not mean 24 hours; rather it is a Jewish idiom meaning "a continuous length of time". Typically, that length of time would be between a half and a whole day (i.e. roughly between 12 and 24 hours). So "two days and two nights" would be between one and a half and two days, "three days and three nights" would be between two and a half and three days, etc. Jesus was entombed from Friday after sunset to Sunday after sunrise, which is perfectly consistent with the way the phrase "three days and three nights" was used.

Finally, just four chapters later in the same gospel, Jesus predicts his death again:

"From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!" Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns." Then Jesus said to his disciples, "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it." Matthew 16:21-25 (TNIV)​

So if you want to use Matthew's gospel as evidence that Jesus didn't actually die, you will need to show three things:

• that Jesus is using the Jonah story in order to show explicitly that he would be alive for three days and nights, and not simply buried for the same length of time that Jonah was in the fish;
• that Jesus' prediction of his death in Matthew 16 is inauthentic;
• that the reasons you give for the inauthenticity of Matthew 16 do not also show the "sign of Jonah" passage to be inauthentic.

 

[What Is Truth?]

Jesus was entombed from Friday before sunset to Sunday before sunrise, which is perfectly consistent with the way the phrase "three days and three nights" was used.

EDIT: I meant before rather than after.

 

[جوري]

we investigate whether an event occurred in (ancient) history?
I would argue that even by the most skeptical criteria (like those applied by such non-Christian NT scholars as Ehrman, Crossan and Ludemann), we must either accept that Jesus died by crucifixion or deny that anything can be known about ancient history whatsoever. So, how would you go about answering this question?

Best wishes,
Matthew

Your very question is faulty.. it is not a this or else response. I don't accept Jesus' alleged godhood based on your bible and logic alone I don't even have to seek other scriptures for that.. and secondly I don't accept that a God that is all merciful would 'forsake' his alleged only son, or himself in the case of Christianity for something as anti-climactic as having a taste of human-life and dying as a sin eater .. how many different versions do you actually have revolving around his death?

More than half of the books inside the NT were traditionally attributed to Paul. 14 out 27 were believed in to be written by Paul, thus speaks to the degree of influence that Paul had on the formation of the NT. Here is a man that has neither met with Jesus and was his nemesis don't you think that if god wanted this man as an apostle he'd have chosen him to sit with him at the table?

either way it is all inconsequential from a Muslim point of view because ultimately whether you believe him god or not wouldn't matter one bit, Jesus like other messengers before him was sent to a select few Jews again as per your bible.. thus the message whatever it maybe isn't universal!

all the best

 

[glo]

You are right...that would be amazing. But from what little I know about human nature we will be arguing if he is the "real" Jesus. If he says he is the son of god we will say he is a liar and if he says he is a prophet you will say he is a liar.

I believe that when Jesus returns there will be no doubt in anybody as to who he is!
No more questions, no more doubt - just the clear and simple truth ... and I hope that people will then still have the chance to submit to the Truth and to declare their faith in God.

The best way to seek the truth is to submit ourselves to the Creator of all that exists and and ask Him to guide us and "inject" the truth in our souls and minds. Ain't that fair.

"O Creator....guide me to the religion of Abraham....the religion of Moses....the religion of Jesus and make me stick to it till I die"

That's so beautiful! :statisfie
I completely agree. Submission to God and a willingness and open heart to accept his love and receive his guidance are really the best way to ensure a faithful journey with God.

May God bless you.

 

[Predator]

A couple of points:

1. What comparison was Jesus making?
   
   Let's have a look at the relevant verse:
   
   
   "For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matthew 12:40 (TNIV)​
   
   It is clear the comparison being made is between the length of time Jonah spent inside the fish and the length of time Jesus would spend "in the heart of the earth" (which means buried in a grave or tomb). Jesus did not say "For as Jonah was alive for three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish..." The very fact that Jesus uses the phrase "in the heart of the earth" implicitly implies that he would be dead (because you don't bury people who are still alive).
   
   
2. What does the phrase "three days and three nights" mean?
   
   "A day and a night" does not mean 24 hours; rather it is a Jewish idiom meaning "a continuous length of time". Typically, that length of time would be between a half and a whole day (i.e. roughly between 12 and 24 hours). So "two days and two nights" would be between one and a half and two days, "three days and three nights" would be between two and a half and three days, etc. Jesus was entombed from Friday after sunset to Sunday after sunrise, which is perfectly consistent with the way the phrase "three days and three nights" was used.

Finally, just four chapters later in the same gospel, Jesus predicts his death again:

"From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!" Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns." Then Jesus said to his disciples, "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it." Matthew 16:21-25 (TNIV)​

So if you want to use Matthew's gospel as evidence that Jesus didn't actually die, you will need to show three things:

• that Jesus is using the Jonah story in order to show explicitly that he would be alive for three days and nights, and not simply buried for the same length of time that Jonah was in the fish;
• that Jesus' prediction of his death in Matthew 16 is inauthentic;
• that the reasons you give for the inauthenticity of Matthew 16 do not also show the "sign of Jonah" passage to be inauthentic.

Jesus promised them a sign . A sign means a miracle - AN ACT BEYOND HUMAN POWER.

(Matthew 12:39)

". . . An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign (miracle), and
there shall no sign (miracle) be given to it, but the sign (miracle) of the
prophet, Jonah."

When you expect a man to die, and he does not die, only then is it a MIRACLE. If a man
faces a firing squad and six bullets are pumped into his body at the given signal, and the man
dies. Is it a miracle? "No!" But if he lives to laugh it off, would that be a miracle? Of course it
would be a MIRACLE. We expected Jonah to die each time, but he does not die; therefore, his
is a multiple MIRACLE.


Jesus too, after the ordeal he is supposed to have gone through, ought to die. If he died it
would be no miracle. But if he lived, as he had himself foretold, and proved "according to
the scriptures", it would be a "sign" - a MIRACLE! And these are his words:

"For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so shall the son
of man be . . ." - (Matthew 12:40).

How was Jonah in the whale's belly for three days and
three nights - Dead or Alive?

The Muslims, the Christians and the Jews again give a
unanimous verdict of A-L-I-V-E! How was Jesus in the tomb, for the same period of time -
Dead or Alive? Over a thousand million Christians, of every church or Denomination give a
unanimous verdict of D-E-A-D!

Is that like Jonah or un-like Jonah in your language? And
everyone whose mind is not confused, says that, that is very

UN-LIKE Jonah. Jesus said that he would be "LIKE JONAH" and his infatuated followers say
that he was "UN-LIKE JONAH!". Who is lying - Jesus or his followers?

They say it was the time factor that Jesus was prophesying about, and not whether he would be Dead or Alive. They say, "Can't you see
that he is emphasising the time factor? He repeats the word, "three", four times." These are
drowning men clutching at straws, drowning women do the same! What did Jesus say?
Jesus was nowhere near the "heart of the earth"; he was supposed to have been in a
tomb, which is well-above ground-level. Maybe he was speaking figuratively.
Three and three are no doubt repeated four times, but there is nothing miraculous about a
time factor. The Jews were asking Jesus for a "sign" - a miracle and there is nothing to
make THREE days, or THREE weeks or THREE months into a miracle.

For eg: The first time when I went to New York from Chicago , 2 years ago , was by train, and the train took exactly
THREE days and THREE nights to reach there. Hooray! It's a Miracle! Nonsense you will say,
and I am forced to agree.

But it is not so easy for you to agree because your "salvation" hangs upon a thread.


Therefore you must hold on for dear life. We can afford to be charitable. So let us humour
you !

So was it the time factor that Jesus was out to fulfil?

You would say "Yes!" .

When was he "crucified" ? The bulk of Christendom believe that it was on a Friday afternoon some
two thousand years ago


More than a thousand and one sects and denominations of Christianity, bickering on every
aspect of faith, are nevertheless, almost all agreed that Jesus Christ was SUPPOSED to have
been in the tomb on the night of Friday. He was still SUPPOSED to be in the tomb on the
day of Saturday. And he was still SUPPOSED to be in the tomb on the night of Saturday.1
But on Sunday morning, the first day of the week, when Mary Magdalene visited the tomb,
she found the tomb empty. .



If it was the time factor that Jesus was trying to stress in the prophecy under discussion, let us
see whether that was fulfilled, "according to the scriptures", as the Christians boast.

You will no doubt observe from the above table that the grand total amounts to no more than
ONE day and TWO nights and, juggle as you may, you will never, never get three days and
three nights as Jesus had himself foretold, "according to the Scriptures". Even Einstein, the
Master mathematician, cannot help you for this!

Can't you see the Christian is giving a double
lie to Jesus from this one prophecy alone. Jesus said, that he would be LIKE Jonah!


1. The Christians allege that Jesus was UNLIKE Jonah. Jonah was ALIVE for three
days and three nights, whereas Jesus was "DEAD" in the tomb!(?)

2. Jesus said that he would be in the tomb for THREE days and THREE nights,
whereas the Christians say that he was in the tomb for only ONE day and TWO
nights

Who is lying, Jesus or the Christians?

 

[glo]

Greetings, Airforce

Your post made me smile, because I am forever struck (and bemused) by the literalism some Muslims seem to demonstrate.

The question of how long Jesus was in the grave inevitably raises it's head at Easter time in my house, so I did some research this year.

I found a couple of different thoughts and understandings on this - one (in a nutshell) being that at the time of Jesus' death there were two Sabbaths (one the ordinary weekly Sabbath, the other - two days prior - another annual Sabbath, the Day of the Unleavened bread). According to that theory Jesus died on Wednesday, was buried on Wednesday night and rose again on Saturday evening (as he had already been resurrected when the women came to the grave before sunrise on Sunday). Three nights and three days.
You can read more about that view here.


Personally speaking, I think we miss the point if we try to read Jesus' words literally.
If you know the gospels, then you will have an understanding of how often Jesus spoke in parables and stories to get his point across to his listeners.
He tried to explain to his followers the things which were to come: that he was going to die and be raised to life again.
The story of Jonah points towards the death and resurrection of Jesus. It was a story his followers would have been very familiar with, which they could have related to and which - hopefully - would have helped them to understand.
There is some information on the similarities between Jonah and Jesus here.


I found this article quite interesting:

Perhaps the source of the confusion over Matthew 12:40 ["For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."] occurs precisely because we try to read it in a literal fashion, as though it referred to a time period of exactly 72 hours. What we may be doing is reading our modern views of time exactness into an ancient figure of speech that didn’t contain it, or imposing our sense of precise time-telling on the ancient Jewish sense. In fact, Matthew 12:40 may be consistent with and reflect the way people thought of time in their day, not in our era.

Are there any biblical examples where "after three days and three nights" may not mean exactly 72 hours? Yes, 1 Samuel 30 is an example. The account in this chapter is about David and the Amalekites, and certain events in the village of Ziklag. Verse one tells us that, "David and his men reached Ziklag on the third day" (emphasis ours throughout). Upon arriving at Ziklag, David encountered an Egyptian, the slave of an Amalekite. He told David, "My master abandoned me when I became ill three days ago" (verse 13). The account also says that the Egyptian had not eaten or drunk for "three days and three nights" (verse 12).

However, proponents of a 72-hour burial say that how long Jesus was in the tomb was the sign that he gave of his messiahship. But is this true? While the apostles referred in a general manner to the length of time Jesus was dead and buried, they never used the chronological measurement as the proof. They used such expressions as "after three days" or "on the third day," but they did not attempt to prove an exact length of time. The apostles spoke of the resurrection itself, not the length of time, as the proof that Jesus is the Messiah. It stands to reason that the fact of Jesus’ death and resurrection is what demonstrates him to be our Savior. Whether Jesus was in the tomb two days, three days or ten days has no bearing on the issue of his messiahship.

In summary, if we remember that the phrase "three days and three nights" is an expression of the disciples’ culture, rather than scientific exactness, then we should have no problem with understanding Matthew 12:40. The "sign" that Jesus gave was not the length of time that he would be in the tomb, but it was the fact that he would die, be buried and be raised to life.

This last sentence (still from the same article) really sums it up to me:

We need not be concerned about the exact time Jesus was in the tomb, for our salvation does not depend on that. What is important is that Jesus died and was resurrected to become our Savior (2 Corinthians 15:3-4).

 

[جوري]

How do you decide which is literal and which isn't when you literally believe that god died?

all the best

 

[Supreme]

How do you decide which is literal and which isn't when you literally believe that god died?

all the best

That would purely be down to the individual's interpretation. I'm a liberal Christian- I accept that the vast majority of events in the Bible literally happened. However, I do believe there were some events- most notable in the early books of the Old Testament- that are more metaphorical than literal.

 

[Predator]

According to that theory Jesus died on Wednesday, was buried on Wednesday night and rose again on Saturday evening (as he had already been resurrected when the women came to the grave before sunrise on Sunday). .

Jesus didnt get resurrected because his body wasnt spiritual . The below verse by Paul says that the resurrected bodies are spiritualised

1 Corinthians 15:44

It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

As we can wee that Jesus begins calming the disciples' fear for taking him
to be a ghost. He says:

"Behold (have a look at) my hands and my feet, that it is I myself (I am
the same fellow, man!): handle me and see; for A SPIRIT has no flesh and
bones, as you see me have.
. . . And he showed them his hands and his feet."
(Luke 24:39-40)

Jesus begins calming the disciples' fear for taking him
to be a ghost. He says:
What was the man trying to prove? That he had been resurrected from the dead? - That he
was a spirit? - What has the demonstration of hands and feet to do with resurrection? "It is I
MYSELF!" Can't you see, you fools!? "For a SPIRIT . . . " - any spirit, has "NO flesh and
bones, as YOU see ME have!". This is an axiomatic, self-evident truth. You do not have to
convince anybody, whether Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Jew, Atheist or Agnostic. Everyone will
acknowledge without any proof that A SPIRIT HAS NO FLESH AND BONES!



Then why does Jesus need to belabour the point? It is simply because the disciples were
thinking that he had returned from the dead, that he had been resurrected, and if so he
would be in a spiritual form - A SPIRIT! And Jesus is telling them that he is NOT that - he is
not a spirit - NOT resurrected!

If I tell you in English that "Because I have flesh and bones - I am not a SPIRIT, I am not
a GHOST, I am not a SPOOK!" - is that what it really means in your language? You say,
"Yes!" (This reasoning equally applies to every language under the sun). In other words,
Jesus was telling his disciples, when he said: "Behold my HANDS and my FEET", that the
body he wanted them to see, feel and touch was not a SPIRITUAL body, nor a
METAMORPHOSED1 body, nor a RESURRECTED body. Because a resurrected "body" becomes
spiritualised!


The resurrected persons will be immortalised: Needing no food, no
shelter, no clothing, no rest. "For they are equal unto the angels," meaning that
they will be ANGELISED, they will be SPIRITUALISED, they will become SPIRITUAL
CREATURES, they will be SPIRITS!

he says: "Aspirit has no flesh and bones, as you see me have" - I am NOT a spirit, I am NOT a
ghost, I am NOT a spook, I am NOT RESURRECTED! I am the same living Jesus - ALIVE!

"And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and feet."
(Luke 24:40)

The disciples were "overjoyed and wondered", what could have happened? They had
thought that he was dead and gone, but here with them stands their Master, with flesh and
bones - with 100% characteristics of a man ALIVE!


To assure them further, to calm their shaky nerves, he asks: "Have you here any meat",
i.e. anything to eat?

24:42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. 24:43 And he took [it], and did eat before them

"And they gave him a piece of broiled fish and of a honeycomb,
and he took it, and DID EAT before them." To prove what? That he is RESURRECTED?
Why does he not then say so instead of proving everything to the contrary? Presenting his
physical body for examination, eating and masticating "broiled fish and honeycomb



SO What is wrong with our Christian brethren? Jesus says that a spirit has no flesh and bones,
they say that it has! Please ask your friends among them; Who is lying? Jesus, Paul or you, the billion so-called followers of his?

 

[Steven John]

Peace,

I was thinking today, If the cross was the thing that Jesus was crucified on "as Christians believe" and suffered too much for the sake of humanity to save them from the original sin. Why it is glorified like this?

I mean if someone was killed/tortured by a certain tool, should we glorify that tool to keep remembering that person?:?

I was looking for that old thread of "Questions answered by Christians" but didn't find it!! If any mod can move this post to there I will be grateful. If not, then khair inshaAllah.

AsSalum o Aleikum,
I have no authority on this subject but will share some of my experience with you as i too have pondered question similar to your asking.

First and for most not all Christians have any importance of the cross. Some fellowships have gone to great lengths to ensure crucifix / cross are not to be seen.

Others keep the cross close to them. I dont know of any Christians that "glorfy" the cross as you word it. If i were to look at Catholics for example they say in their mass "all glory and praise is to the Father (Allah)" but they do venerate crosses.

I think to venerate means make holy, that is that item will be kept and shared only for religious reflections and celebrations.

Why "the cross" i feel it is more the lessons they have from the narrated stories they have of Yeshua (pbwh) surrendering his will to Allah. For the purpose that Allah could reaffirm that repentant sinners can turn to Allah. Some thing the Jews did not understand or teach from their understanding of the Torah.

Of course many of the Christian people have wide and varied levels of understanding as do Muslims about their faith practice. I remember and old Brother at the mosque had no idea why animals were offered over the three days. He did not know the connection to Abraham's (pbuh) offering but thought it was just to ahev a feed and the children were given money.

Allah encourages us to be patient and understanding looking for goodness in those who profess to be seeking Him.

May Allah bless and guide us

"i will be what I will be', you have free will so choose who you see

 

[جوري]

yeah the Arab Christians that I know Lebanese especially always invoke the cross and take its name so instead of saying in the name of Allah, they'll substitute with the word 'cross' in Arabic.. it is strange.. but then again nothing is strange anymore.. I have heard and seen just about everything..

 

[Steven John]

AoA,
it is interesting to know that some say Jews of old saw a persons name as meaning them, the way one is. So we may say in the name of Allah, best i understand is we want to do it His way. When a Christian does some thing by the way of the cross they would mean in self less giving. absolutely wrong to see Allah wanting us to do for each other in selfless giving.
Of course i have no authority to speak for anyone's heart, Allah knows best, this is just my reflection from listening and reading.

By His will may Allah bless and guide us as we seek to submit to Him in the ways of truth.

"I will be what I will be", you have free will so choose who you see.

 

[Steven John]

Edit , NOTabsolutely wrong to see Allah wanting us to do for each other in selfless giving.