Christianity vs Islam

[Link]

This is one of the reasons i like to speak to Shia rather then Sunni.

You seek to find consensus.

I have tried several times to engage in a conversation with you about the Quran , but somehow you disapear.

Why do you belive that Jesus did not die?

وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ ۚ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِنْهُ ۚ مَا لَهُمْ بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلَّا اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ ۚ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا | and for their saying, ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the apostle of Allah’—though they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but so it was made to appear to them. Indeed those who differ concerning him are surely in doubt about him: they do not have any knowledge of that beyond following conjectures, and certainly, they did not kill him. | An-Nisaa : 157

بَلْ رَفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا | Indeed, Allah raised him up toward Himself, and Allah is all-mighty, all-wise. | An-Nisaa : 158

وَإِنْ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ ۖ وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يَكُونُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا | There is none among the People of the Book but will surely believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them. | An-Nisaa : 159



These three verses contextualize each other. The third put's a seal to the context, no person will remain from the people of the book but that will believe in him before his death. Since the other two verses are talking about the subject of death of Jesus (a), the "before his death" refers to Jesus's (a) death and it's stubborn denial of people to say otherwise. The hadiths confirm as well, that this the proper interpretation. I can quote hadiths if you like.

وَإِنَّهُ لَعِلْمٌ لِلسَّاعَةِ فَلَا تَمْتَرُنَّ بِهَا وَاتَّبِعُونِ ۚ هَٰذَا صِرَاطٌ مُسْتَقِيمٌ | [Say,] ‘Indeed he is a portent of the Hour; so do not doubt it and follow me. This is a straight path. | Az-Zukhruf : 61

This shows Isa (a) will be a sign the hour is coming. Together, we can see that Isa (a) is yet to die and that he will be a sign that the hour is coming.

 

[Dimi95]

The Church has always been dynamic while adjusting to new situations and rethinking some previous positions. What sometimes has been forgotten, imo, is to make agape the #1 priority in all matters.

Yes , yes we have seen that lately with events in the Roman Church.
It all 'fits' with tradition.

 

[Dimi95]

وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِنْ شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ ۚ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِنْهُ ۚ مَا لَهُمْ بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلَّا اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ ۚ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا | and for their saying, ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the apostle of Allah’—though they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but so it was made to appear to them. Indeed those who differ concerning him are surely in doubt about him: they do not have any knowledge of that beyond following conjectures, and certainly, they did not kill him. | An-Nisaa : 157

بَلْ رَفَعَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيْهِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا | Indeed, Allah raised him up toward Himself, and Allah is all-mighty, all-wise. | An-Nisaa : 158

وَإِنْ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ ۖ وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يَكُونُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا | There is none among the People of the Book but will surely believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them. | An-Nisaa : 159



These three verses contextualize each other. The third put's a seal to the context, no person will remain from the people of the book but that will believe in him before his death. Since the other two verses are talking about the subject of death of Jesus (a), the "before his death" refers to Jesus's (a) death and it's stubborn denial of people to say otherwise. The hadiths confirm as well, that this the proper interpretation. I can quote hadiths if you like.

وَإِنَّهُ لَعِلْمٌ لِلسَّاعَةِ فَلَا تَمْتَرُنَّ بِهَا وَاتَّبِعُونِ ۚ هَٰذَا صِرَاطٌ مُسْتَقِيمٌ | [Say,] ‘Indeed he is a portent of the Hour; so do not doubt it and follow me. This is a straight path. | Az-Zukhruf : 61

This shows Isa (a) will be a sign the hour is coming. Together, we can see that Isa (a) is yet to die and that he will be a sign that the hour is coming.

"and for their saying, ‘We killed the Messiah"

Who is adressed here?

 

[Link]

"and for their saying, ‘We killed the Messiah"

Who is adressed here?

Children of Israel.

 

[Dimi95]

Children of Israel.

So that means the Jews?
You can start from Section 22 , verse 153.

You can see that the explenations from verse 153 don't include any events from the Gospels.
It is adressed only for the Jews and you answered me in the same way?

Is that correct , what do you think?

 

[Starise]

But the Bible is a corrupted message.
It's an interpretation of translation of a translation.
The Koran is in its original language.
So I've heard to justify Islam as the one true faith.

I've asked people..."Why is your religion the
singularly correct one out of the many?"
They'll respond with it being the only one
with this or that. People of different religions
will simply substitute different thises or thats.
This larger picture is unavailable to them.
What a shame.
We could have fewer wars.

I realize this is a discussion. Probably not a debate and definitely not a war, but I would beg to differ with you on this. The earlier documents were found and compared to more recent translations. Not saying there aren't any small clerical errors, however the book is pretty much the same message it was thousands of years ago.. We know that to be true.

And even if the Muslim book is from the older languages, it still needs to have authenticity.

 

[Link]

So that means the Jews?
You can start from Section 22 , verse 153.

You can see that the explenations from verse 153 don't include any events from the Gospels.
It is adressed only for the Jews and you answered me in the same way?

Is that correct , what do you think?

If you have a point just make it brother.

 

[Jimmy]

To an outsider of both religions who has little interest in their theological differences, the principle difference between the two is that Christianity has been subjected to several centuries of humanistic influence since the Enlightenment. Christians accept democracy and women's rights for example more readily that Muslims, but less than humanists, and this isn't coincidence.

The principle differences between the two religions is in the rendering. On paper, the two look very much alike. Christians and Muslims each revere a Semitic desert god that is an angry and harshly judgmental strongman who requires worship and submission and who is very interested in your sex life and what you eat.

Believers of both attend temples (Mosques or churches) and obey paternalistic, misogynisitic clergy.

Both religions embrace magical thinking, mythology, dogma, the supernatural, and ritual.

Each feature demons angels, prayer, an afterlife, a judgment, and a system of reward and punishment after death.

Both religions are patriarchal, authoritarian, misogynistic, sexually repressive, anhedonisitic, atheophobic, homophobic, antiscientiific, use psychological terrorism on their children, have violent histories featuring torture, genocide and terrorism, and demand obedience and submission.

Each consider faith a virtue and reason a problem.

Each has a history of opposing human rights and science.

Each advocates theocracy over democracy.

But the West has moved further from this than the Muslim world for the reasons given, so the two religions don't look nearly as alike now as they did before one began being transformed by a new ideology.

lol. Don’t take things so seriously.

 

[Trailblazer]

Many Christians don't believe even Jesus. But, by what the Bible tells, Jesus is the Messenger of God:

Yes, that is what I believe, that Jesus was a Messenger of God, since He brought a message from God to humanity.
Jesus came to bear witness unto the truth about God.

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Do you know did Muhammad say something that is not already in the Bible?

Yes, I believe that He did reveal some new things, but I have not read the Qur'an so I don't know everything that Muhammad revealed.
A Muslim such as @Link would be a better source of information than me.

 

[Revoltingest]

That is an assamption of how it could be corrupted.

So by saying this you deny the possibility that those people spoke more then one language.
This is the criteria you are using.

When you are multilingual person you are able to preserve the message.

So you are assuming from the very begining that they were not able to.

That's just an assumption and does not define corrupted.



Why did Uthman ibn Affan(ra) order to burn all but his codex?



What is shame is that most fail to see that large picture that in some way is unavailable to you also.

What is crucial is to have the same consistency of moral and ethics in all war crimes.

Richard boyd barrett
"I also find it remarkable when we say we must brake our dependency on Russian fossil fuel and oil,and at the very same time we increase our imports of Saudi oil.Ironically the Saudi Arabia this year has doubled its import of Russian oil and is effectievly laundering Russian oil , but we are now importing more of the Saudi dictatorship,one of the most brutal dictatorships in the world,that just like Vladimir Putin is engaged in a 15 year long war against the people of Yemen that has claimed the life of tens of thousands of people"

We could have fewer wars , only if everybody was able to see the trash in their own backyard and at least if they tried to remove it.

What also most fail to see is how religion is used in politics.
Or should i say , how politics is using religion as a puppy?

You ask many questions I can't answer.
But I hear what I hear from Christians & Muslims.
I presented their views.

 

[Dimi95]

If you have a point just make it brother.

When Allah said,
'O Jesus, I will cause thee to die a natural death and will exalt thee to Myself, and will clear thee from the charges of those who disbelieve, and will place those who follow thee above those who disbelieve, until the Day of Resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, and I will judge between you concerning that wherein you differ. [3:56]

-The word mutawaffeeka means 'I will cause you to die'. Whenever God is the fa’il (subject) and man is the maf’ul (object), it always refers to death. It means that God takes the soul of the man. In this case, it applies to Jesus(as) which in turn means that he has passed away naturally.

So let's see if this matches up with other verses.

And if We show thee in thy lifetime the fulfilment of some of the things with which We have threatened them, thou wilt know it; or if We cause thee to die before that, then to Us is their return, and thou wilt see the fulfilment in the next world; and Allah is Witness to all that they do. [10:47]

'O my Lord, Thou hast bestowed power upon me and taught me the interpretation of dreams. O Maker of the heavens and the earth, Thou art my Protector in this world and the Hereafter. Let death come to me in a state of submission to Thy will and join me to the righteous.' [12:102]

I just don't see how the Quran says that Jesus did not expirience death.

 

[Trailblazer]

You claim what you can not prove.

"So do I, because it has not been corrupted by Christianity, who tried to make Jesus into God."

That was a belief, not a claim. Can you prove that Jesus is God?

I don't think that you understand what 'Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made' means.

I do not think you understand what that means.
All things were not made through Jesus, all things were made by God.

John 1 King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Those verses are about God, not about Jesus. All things were made by God since God created the heavens and the earth.

The Word refers to the divine perfections that appeared in Jesus Christ, and these perfections were with God. The Word does not mean the body of Jesus but rather the divine perfections manifested in Jesus. Jesus was like a clear mirror and the divine perfections were visible and apparent in this mirror. Therefore, the Word was the divine appearance. This is the meaning of the verse which says: “The Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

When God sent Jesus, God was “manifested” in the flesh and Jesus dwelt among us. God did not become flesh, but rather the divine perfections of God were manifested in Jesus who came in the flesh and revealed the Word of God to humanity.

1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

God was manifest in the flesh, not incarnated in the flesh. If God had been incarnated in the flesh then God would have become flesh and we would be able to see God; but Jesus said no man has ever seen God.

John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

 

[Dimi95]

You ask many questions I can't answer.
But I hear what I hear from Christians & Muslims.
I presented their views.

It is ok.

I am sorry if i pushed with some questions.

 

[Revoltingest]

I realize this is a discussion. Probably not a debate and definitely not a war, but I would beg to differ with you on this. The earlier documents were found and compared to more recent translations. Not saying there aren't any small clerical errors, however the book is pretty much the same message it was thousands of years ago.. We know that to be true.

And even if the Muslim book is from the older languages, it still needs to have authenticity.

I present what others believe.
The purpose is to show that neither
faith has the logical high ground.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is ok.

I am sorry if i pushed with some questions.

It's OK to ask.
I just have no answers.

 

[Trailblazer]

Quran 31:15 (The Wise)
"But if they strive To make the join In worship with Me Things of which thou hast No knowledge, obey them not ; Yet bear them company In this life with justice (And consideration), and follow The way of those who Turn to Me (in love) : In the End the return Of you all is to Me, And I will tell you The truth (and meaning) Of all that ye did."

Thr Qur'an had warned it's readers in the Q (2: 6–23), that it treats a reader the way you approached it.

And you don't think that averse above applies equally to you?

"But if they strive To make the join In worship with Me Things of which thou hast No knowledge" ?

 

[Dimi95]

"So do I, because it has not been corrupted by Christianity, who tried to make Jesus into God."

That was a belief, not a claim. Can you prove that Jesus is God?

I am sorry , i forgotted to say 'by Scripture'.

I do not think you understand what that means.
All things were not made through Jesus, all things were made by God.

John 1 King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:1-3 in Greek
ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
οὖτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν.
πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν. ὃ γέγονεν

Do you understand Greek?
Do you understand the root of words in Greek?
How do they interact with other ancient language and what is their connection?

We can quote every version - KJV , NIV , SUV and so on and so forth but me and you will be consistent on doctorines.

I am not interested in your lectures , i am interested in how you got there.
Everyone defends their own dogmas at the very end

Btw , John1:15 reads:
"John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, 'This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.'"

You say that Jesus is the manifestation of God , Ok no problem.

How is that manifestation 'before me'?

 

[Dimi95]

And you don't think that averse above applies equally to you?

"But if they strive To make the join In worship with Me Things of which thou hast No knowledge" ?

What does this Sura represent , do you know that?

I think that you don't know enough about Quran to talk with me , so i think me and you should stick on the The Bible.

But , if it gives you any comfort , it applies to everyone equally.

Let @Link answer my questions.

 

[Trailblazer]

John 1:1-3 in Greek
ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
οὖτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν.
πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν. ὃ γέγονεν

Do you understand Greek?
Do you understand the root of words in Greek?
How do they interact with other ancient language and what is their connection?

No I do not understand Greek... Although my mother was Greek, I never learned the language.

We can quote every version - KJV , NIV , SUV and so on and so forth but me and you will be consistent on doctorines.

I am not interested in your lectures , i am interested in how you got there.
Everyone defends their own dogmas at the very end

How I get there - the basis for my beliefs - is the Baha'i Writings. With that knowledge I make my own interpretations of the Bible.

Btw , John1:15 reads:
"John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, 'This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.'"

I hope you understand that verse is subject to different interpretations.
That said, I am accustomed to reading the Writings of Baha'u'llah and He spoke plainly about God and Jesus and Himself and who He was claiming to be.

The New Testament is not clear at all. Jesus spoke figuratively rather than plainly, but He said there would come a time when that will no longer be the case. I believe that time has come since I believe that Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ.

John 16:25-28 New International Version

25 “Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father. 26 In that day you will ask in my name. I am not saying that I will ask the Father on your behalf. 27 No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God. 28 I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.”

You say that Jesus is the manifestation of God , Ok no problem.

How is that manifestation 'before me'?

‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.'"

Do you think that verse is Jesus saying that He was before God? How could Jesus come before God?

That verse is about as clear as mud.

Who came after Jesus? Baha'u'llah came after Jesus, so that verse could be referring to Baha'u'llah, since He came in the station of the Father, just as Jesus came in the station of the Son.

 

[Link]

When Allah said,
'O Jesus, I will cause thee to die a natural death and will exalt thee to Myself, and will clear thee from the charges of those who disbelieve, and will place those who follow thee above those who disbelieve, until the Day of Resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, and I will judge between you concerning that wherein you differ. [3:56]

-The word mutawaffeeka means 'I will cause you to die'. Whenever God is the fa’il (subject) and man is the maf’ul (object), it always refers to death. It means that God takes the soul of the man. In this case, it applies to Jesus(as) which in turn means that he has passed away naturally.

So let's see if this matches up with other verses.

View attachment 87097

And if We show thee in thy lifetime the fulfilment of some of the things with which We have threatened them, thou wilt know it; or if We cause thee to die before that, then to Us is their return, and thou wilt see the fulfilment in the next world; and Allah is Witness to all that they do. [10:47]

View attachment 87098

'O my Lord, Thou hast bestowed power upon me and taught me the interpretation of dreams. O Maker of the heavens and the earth, Thou art my Protector in this world and the Hereafter. Let death come to me in a state of submission to Thy will and join me to the righteous.' [12:102]

I just don't see how the Quran says that Jesus did not expirience death.

Salam

Per Quran, God uses the same word for when people dream. And then he returns the ones who he didn't write death for. Sometimes it's used for death but in the expression as in God takes his soul up.

The ambiguity however is removed completely in the verse after. All three verses together make it very clear Isa (a) is alive and won't die without all people of the book believing in him.