Christianity vs Islam

[Trailblazer]

Mmm .. Jesus did not say that .. that would be the author(s);

That's OK .. Jesus probably said something much like that.

Why do you believe that Jesus said what is in John 14 and not what is in John 1?

..but it needs to be taken in context. He was speaking to his disciples, or those around him at the time.
..so it applies to THEM i.e. following other than him, such as the Sadducees, will not succeed

Most Christians, however, take it to mean that there will be no more prophets/messiahs to come.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me..

Yes, Jesus was speaking to his disciples, or those around him at the time. If Jesus said that Jesus never meant that He was the only way to the Father for all of time!

I believe that Jesus was the Way to the Father during the dispensation of Jesus, but after Muhammad showed up Muhammad was also the Way.
Of course Christians believe that Jesus is the Only Way to the Father for all of time and eternity, and I consider that belief arrogant. I cannot respect that belief or excuse it in my mind. It is so arrogant and it upsets me so much I can barely type.

I don't think we can know that.

No, we cannot know that as a fact unless it happens.

The same could be said about the followers of Moses or Muhammad. It starts off with an insignificant
number of people, and spreads to a significant amount.

Yes, that's true, and it also applies to the Baha'i Faith.

Well, yes ..politics often spoils things for us all .. but G-d is able to guide whomsoever He wills.

Agreed.

"Some were guided by the Light of God, gained admittance into the court of His presence, and quaffed, from the hand of resignation, the waters of everlasting life, and were accounted of them that have truly recognized and believed in Him. Others rebelled against Him, and rejected the signs of God, the Most Powerful, the Almighty, the All-Wise.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 145

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Why do you believe that Jesus said what is in John 14 and not what is in John 1?

If you read John 1, it is the narrator speaking, not Jesus.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Why do you believe that Jesus said what is in John 14 and not what is in John 1?

Well, for starters, it is not CLAIMED that Jesus said John 1.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, for starters, it is not CLAIMED that Jesus said John 1.

Well then, so much for all the verses about the Word that Christians heavily rely upon.

 

[Link]

If you read John 1, it is the narrator speaking, not Jesus.

The narrator being God though Christians don't know this, it's not John, but God revealing to Isa (a) to John and hence the Gospel of John. This was done to each disciple.

The better translation however:

In the start was the word, and the word was with the exalted ones, and the exalted ones were the word.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The narrator being God though Christians don't know this, it's not John, but God revealing to Isa (a) to John and hence the Gospel of John. This was done to each disciple.

The better translation however:

In the start was the word, and the word was with the exalted ones, and the exalted ones were the word.

I'm not sure what you mean. I know of no one who claims that the person who wrote the gospel of John was deity. Many believe it to have been the apostle John, and others say it is more than one author. But no one says any of those people are God.

Why are you making "exalted ones" plural? The word in the Greek text is θεὸς , which is singular, god.

 

[Link]

I'm not sure what you mean. I know of no one who claims that the author of John was God. Many believe it to have been the apostle John, and others say it is more than one author. But no one says any of those people are God.

I realize the narrative is that among Christians, they see it from God in the sense they are "inspired" but per Quran, God revealed the Gospel, not inspired disciples who wrote it. He revealed it same way he revealed the Quran.

 

[Link]

Why are you making "exalted ones" plural?

The translation is off by me, so let me correct it:

In the start was the word, and the word was with the exalted ones, and the exalted ones was the word.

I translate it as such because I don't think singular reference by God always means the subjects are not plural.

For example "Twelve Captain" in 5:12 is singular, Wali in 5:55 for the God, the Messenger, and the third group, is a singular.

I think God used similar style in both the Torah and Gospels. As well books between. It's to show the exalted ones are so united they are one entity.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I realize the narrative is that among Christians, they see it from God in the sense they are "inspired" but per Quran, God revealed the Gospel, not inspired disciples who wrote it. He revealed it same way he revealed the Quran.

If by revealed you mean that God dictated it, I don't think the New Testament makes that claim. The ONLY claim is that it is inspired. Are there some Christians who imagine God dictated it? I'm sure there are.

FWIW, I don't think the Quran is dictated by God either. I think Muhammed is its source.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The translation is off by me, so let me correct it:

In the start was the word, and the word was with the exalted ones, and the exalted ones was the word.

I translate it as such because I don't think singular reference by God always means the subjects are not plural.

No offense, but language works a particular way. In English the word God is singular. it is always singular. If you want to make it plural you have to alter it to gods. The word in the Greek text is θεὸς , which is singular, god. There is no way it can mean gods.

For example "Twelve Captain" in 5:12 is singular, Wali in 5:55 for the God, the Messenger, and the third group, is a singular.

I think God used similar style in both the Torah and Gospels. As well books between. It's to show the exalted ones are so united they are one entity.

I don't think God has ever used ANY writing style. ALL religious texts, from the Torah to the Quran to the Vedas or Book of Mormon etc etc etc are ALL written by human beings. If you want to say that they are inspired by God or the super bowl or the cute girl down the street, that's fine. But it doesn't make those things the author.

 

[Link]

No offense, but language works a particular way. In English the word God is singular. it is always singular. If you want to make it plural you have to alter it to gods. The word in the Greek text is θεὸς , which is singular, god. There is no way it can mean gods.

I don't think God has ever used ANY writing style. ALL religious texts, from the Torah to the Quran to the Vedas or Book of Mormon etc etc etc are ALL written by human beings. If you want to say that they are inspired by God or the super bowl or the cute girl down the street, that's fine. But it doesn't make those things the author.

Okay I thought it used a word that can be either exalted ones or God. Thanks for the correction.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Okay I thought it used a word that can be either exalted ones or God. Thanks for the correction.

Not a problem. I didn't know myself until I researched it for the thread. Apparently the plural in Greek is θεούς, pronounced theoús, as opposed to the singular θεός, pronounced theós. So that little U makes all the difference

Isn't Google translate just the bees knees?

 

[muhammad_isa]

FWIW, I don't think the Quran is dictated by God either. I think Muhammed is its source..

Why?

Muhammad, peace be with him, claimed that he was having revelations.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Why?

Muhammad, peace be with him, claimed that he was having revelations.

Occam's razor.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Occam's razor.

..and what "simplest explanation" would that be?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

..and what "simplest explanation" would that be?

That Muhammed created the Quran, just as Paul wrote his epistles, and Joseph Smith composed the Book of Mormon. Books are written by human beings on a regular basis. It is simply not necessary to insert some supernatural explanation when it is so easily explained by something that happens every day.

 

[Link]

That Muhammed created the Quran, just as Paul wrote his epistles, and Joseph Smith composed the Book of Mormon. Books are written by human beings on a regular basis. It is simply not necessary to insert some supernatural explanation when it is so easily explained by something that happens every day.

From a secular perspective, how do you justify the repetition of miracles being performed but accusation of sorcery, along with the fact the family of the reminder can perform such miracles per the context of the two verses?

I'm not saying this brings certainty. But people won't believe in historical existence of Moses (a) and Jesus (a) mainly because of miracles same is with the Quran.

I see why some non-Muslims say Mohammad (s) didn't exist, then is it the case Imam Hussain (a) and Imams (a) from offspring made up their lineage and pretended to be able to perform miracles? Why didn't ruling powers pretend instead to be offspring of Fatima (a) if the supposedly made up the Quran per these non-Muslims?

I think the simplest explanation, maybe, that he was truthful. This doesn't bring certainty, but I think Occam's razor can be seen both directions so it is not that helpful.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

From a secular perspective, how do you justify the repetition of miracles being performed but accusation of sorcery, along with the fact the family of the reminder can perform such miracles per the context of the two verses?

A miracle is any rare and wondrous event that we do not YET have an explanation for. Miracles happen to people in EVERY religious tradition, and indeed even to people who are not religious at all. Thus, miracles are never proof of truth claims.

Magick/sorcery does not actually work. Science has pretty much debunked it. Thus, it makes no sense to say, "Well, that miracle in that awful religion over there is clearly an example of sorcery." Sorry.

On a personal level, my feeling is that God didn't determine the laws of physics just to turn around and break them. My assumption is that there are natural explanations for all miracles. We just don't always know what those natural explanations are.

 

[Link]

A miracle is any rare and wondrous event that we do not YET have an explanation for. Miracles happen to people in EVERY religious tradition, and indeed even to people who are not religious at all. Thus, miracles are never proof of truth claims.

Magick/sorcery does not actually work. Science has pretty much debunked it. Thus, it makes no sense to say, "Well, that miracle in that awful religion over there is clearly an example of sorcery." Sorry.

On a personal level, my feeling is that God didn't determine the laws of physics just to turn around and break them. My assumption is that there are natural explanations for all miracles. We just don't always know what those natural explanations are.

Fair enough.

I'm just saying you have to a very complicated explanation either way even though in your case, it's not known. So Occam's razor is not that helpful here.

 

[muhammad_isa]

That Muhammed created the Quran, just as Paul wrote his epistles, and Joseph Smith composed the Book of Mormon. Books are written by human beings on a regular basis. It is simply not necessary to insert some supernatural explanation when it is so easily explained by something that happens every day.

..but that does not explain why billions of people believe that Muhammad's claim that he
received revelations is true.

Paul did not claim that what he recited/wrote was "the words of God".