How does one reconcile the view of Jesus in the Qu'ran with the Bible?

[Muffled]

There is, if you have read both the Qu'ran and the bible, there is no comparison. Of Jesus in the Bible to the Qu'ran.

I believe you could come to see it that way if you don't have the guidance of the Holy Spirit as I did.

 

[1robin]

I believe it means that God speaks through me.

Your still doing what I complained of before. You just keep giving me lists of what you do or do not believe. If I simply said I believe you are wrong and that I am right that would not make much a of a debate would it.

You need to instead tell my why I should accept what you believe. You didn't give me a single reason to believe God speaks through you so why should a agree with you? My bible tells me to check anyone's claims against the bible to see if they are speaking from God or not. I find you position contradictory to the bible that says Christ died for our sins, etc.... So I must reject what you claim.

I believe your estimation of my understanding is lacking in reasonable evaluation.

If you understood what I have been saying you wouldn't have said what you did above, or at least you would have said more than you did.

I believe you have to find contradictory statements in order to claim the law is working in this instance.

Yes, the Quran saying God never had a son and Christ never having doed of the cross compared with what the bible says about it is a contradiction. But you misunderstand what I meant be a law. The law of non-contradiction is a logical law not a spiritual one. Formally it is X can never equal X'. This is a law to which no contradiction is known to mankind. Just look up the law of non contradiction in any philosophical textbook.

In classical logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (also known as the law of contradiction, principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) states that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, e.g. the two propositions "A is B" and "A is not B" are ...
Law of noncontradiction - Wikipedia

I believe there are no such claims in the Qu'ran.

This surah among many contradict the bible and are core Islam doctrines.

Surah 4:136-176 -- Jesus wasn't really crucified, it just looked that way
Dwindling In Unbelief: Surah 4:136-176 -- Jesus wasn't really crucified, it just looked that way

This contracts

Mathew 27

 

[Muffled]

Your still doing what I complained of before. You just keep giving me lists of what you do or do not believe. If I simply said I believe you are wrong and that I am right that would not make much a of a debate would it.

You need to instead tell my why I should accept what you believe. You didn't give me a single reason to believe God speaks through you so why should a agree with you? My bible tells me to check anyone's claims against the bible to see if they are speaking from God or not. I find you position contradictory to the bible that says Christ died for our sins, etc.... So I must reject what you claim.



If you understood what I have been saying you wouldn't have said what you did above, or at least you would have said more than you did.

Yes, the Quran saying God never had a son and Christ never having doed of the cross compared with what the bible says about it is a contradiction. But you misunderstand what I meant be a law. The law of non-contradiction is a logical law not a spiritual one. Formally it is X can never equal X'. This is a law to which no contradiction is known to mankind. Just look up the law of non contradiction in any philosophical textbook.

In classical logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (also known as the law of contradiction, principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) states that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, e.g. the two propositions "A is B" and "A is not B" are ...
Law of noncontradiction - Wikipedia

This surah among many contradict the bible and are core Islam doctrines.

Surah 4:136-176 -- Jesus wasn't really crucified, it just looked that way
Dwindling In Unbelief: Surah 4:136-176 -- Jesus wasn't really crucified, it just looked that way

This contracts

Mathew 27

I believe God has not granted me a public prophetic ministry. That means you can believe what I say or not according to what the Holy Spirit leads you to believe if that is possible for you. I get that from the Bible concept a lot but the reality is that you have not proven that I speak contrary to the Bible. I have never said that Christ didn't die for our sins.I said that Jesus didn't die but He ended up dead so people will say that He died.

I believe you need to reread your statement. You simply said I didn't understand without saying what I didn't understand so the shoe is on the other foot.

I believe the Qu'ran does not say that despite Muslims desperate attempts to try to make it say that. It says that Allah is His Son. Also it says that Allah does not have sons which is absolutely His policy not to copulate and father children.

I believe it does by saying that it appears that way. The only way that Jesus could appear to die on the cross would be if He were on the cross. The only way Jesus could end up dead that people could observe was if He died but the fact is that he didn't die but left the body before it died. That is what the Bible says.

I believe I just explained why that isn't a contradiction. A crucifixion to be accomplished requires a person to die and Jesus did not. The body of Jesus died which is not the same thing.

 

[1robin]

I believe God has not granted me a public prophetic ministry. That means you can believe what I say or not according to what the Holy Spirit leads you to believe if that is possible for you. I get that from the Bible concept a lot but the reality is that you have not proven that I speak contrary to the Bible. I have never said that Christ didn't die for our sins.I said that Jesus didn't die but He ended up dead so people will say that He died.

Trust me I did not assume you were a prophet and so far I have not really claimed you contradicted the bible. So far all I have been doing is trying to get you to stop telling me what you think is true instead of telling me why it is I should believe what you think is true actually is. I could respond to every point you make by declaring I think your wrong and that I am right but unless I give you good arguments that should convince you that I actually am right I would basically be wasting my time. This is what you have been doing. Every time I make a claim you say it is wrong and say you believe something else is true but you so far never give any arguments that show that your declaration about what you believe is actually true. I am beginning to wonder if I am ever going to get you to understand this.

I believe you need to reread your statement. You simply said I didn't understand without saying what I didn't understand so the shoe is on the other foot.

I didn't think I had to restate what it was I didn't think you understood because it immediately preceded my statement claiming you didn't under stand. This is turning into a word fight instead of a debate.

I believe the Qu'ran does not say that despite Muslims desperate attempts to try to make it say that. It says that Allah is His Son. Also it says that Allah does not have sons which is absolutely His policy not to copulate and father children.

I never made any argument about Muhammad having kids. I think you have me confused with someone else. What I said was that both the bible and the Quran can't both be truth because the Quran says that God does not have children where as the bible specifically says that God does have a son. One or both of these must be false because it is impossible that both are true. So your accusing me of doing the exact opposite od what I am doing.

Also as a side note here my God is greater than yours because my God can do something here that yours can't. My God is all powerful and anything apparently yours can't.

I believe it does by saying that it appears that way. The only way that Jesus could appear to die on the cross would be if He were on the cross. The only way Jesus could end up dead that people could observe was if He died but the fact is that he didn't die but left the body before it died. That is what the Bible says.

Your getting your own Quran wrong here. It specifically says: And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Translation

1. So you can see the first bolded part perfectly contradicts the bible that specifically says Christ died on the cross. And keep in mind the 4 guys who wrote the Gospels knew Christ and lived in that place at that time. The Quran is one man's word written 500 years later in a completely different place. By the historical method the bible should by accepted not the Quran.

2. Also not the second part. If this is true them Allah created the entire Christian faith by making it appear Christ died on the cross and didn't bother to straighten out his own monumental error for 500 years. Thank goodness this isn't true to begin with there is no way I would believe in a God this messed up.

I believe I just explained why that isn't a contradiction. A crucifixion to be accomplished requires a person to die and Jesus did not. The body of Jesus died which is not the same thing.

It never even hints that the guy they took off the cross was not dead. It just says it wasn't Christ. This is absurd because Jesus family watched the whole thing and prepared his body for burial afterwards.

I also don't get it, first the Quran says it wasn't even Jesus on the cross, then you say he didn't die, then you say that yes he did die. Do you even know what YOU believe about these verses.

I am not sure what you believe and I don't think you are either but:
1. The Quran specifically says that Christ did not die (was not even crucified).
2. The bible specifically says he was crucified and died.

Whatever you believe is irrelevant, the Quran and the bible contradict each other. In one he dies in the other he doesn't. Can't have it both ways so only 1 can be correct and by every single method used in historical studies it is the bible which should be believed not the Quran.

 

[Muffled]

Trust me I did not assume you were a prophet and so far I have not really claimed you contradicted the bible. So far all I have been doing is trying to get you to stop telling me what you think is true instead of telling me why it is I should believe what you think is true actually is. I could respond to every point you make by declaring I think your wrong and that I am right but unless I give you good arguments that should convince you that I actually am right I would basically be wasting my time. This is what you have been doing. Every time I make a claim you say it is wrong and say you believe something else is true but you so far never give any arguments that show that your declaration about what you believe is actually true. I am beginning to wonder if I am ever going to get you to understand this.

I didn't think I had to restate what it was I didn't think you understood because it immediately preceded my statement claiming you didn't under stand. This is turning into a word fight instead of a debate.

I never made any argument about Muhammad having kids. I think you have me confused with someone else. What I said was that both the bible and the Quran can't both be truth because the Quran says that God does not have children where as the bible specifically says that God does have a son. One or both of these must be false because it is impossible that both are true. So your accusing me of doing the exact opposite od what I am doing.

Also as a side note here my God is greater than yours because my God can do something here that yours can't. My God is all powerful and anything apparently yours can't.

Your getting your own Quran wrong here. It specifically says: And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Translation

1. So you can see the first bolded part perfectly contradicts the bible that specifically says Christ died on the cross. And keep in mind the 4 guys who wrote the Gospels knew Christ and lived in that place at that time. The Quran is one man's word written 500 years later in a completely different place. By the historical method the bible should by accepted not the Quran.

2. Also not the second part. If this is true them Allah created the entire Christian faith by making it appear Christ died on the cross and didn't bother to straighten out his own monumental error for 500 years. Thank goodness this isn't true to begin with there is no way I would believe in a God this messed up.


It never even hints that the guy they took off the cross was not dead. It just says it wasn't Christ. This is absurd because Jesus family watched the whole thing and prepared his body for burial afterwards.

I also don't get it, first the Quran says it wasn't even Jesus on the cross, then you say he didn't die, then you say that yes he did die. Do you even know what YOU believe about these verses.

I am not sure what you believe and I don't think you are either but:
1. The Quran specifically says that Christ did not die (was not even crucified).
2. The bible specifically says he was crucified and died.

Whatever you believe is irrelevant, the Quran and the bible contradict each other. In one he dies in the other he doesn't. Can't have it both ways so only 1 can be correct and by every single method used in historical studies it is the bible which should be believed not the Quran.

I believe then you are saying that Jesus had children. Or did copulate with another woman I don't know about. It is ridiculous to think talking about sons means the same thing every time. And the text does say there is a son to and for Allah.

I believe my God is greater than your God because yours is in a static text whereas mine is the living God.

I believe this is what the Bible says:
Luke 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

I believe I am glad to have you to keep me amused. It isn't God that gets things wrong; it is men and their false interpretations.

I am sure the original Arabic didn't say that. Other translations do a somewhat better job of it. I can understand why you can't see things from God's perspective though. I have explained this so many times I am beginning to hear an echo. THe text does not say Jesus wasn't on the cross but simply that He appeared to die there God and I know from what He said that He agave up the ghost instead of dying.

 

[1robin]

I believe then you are saying that Jesus had children. Or did copulate with another woman I don't know about. It is ridiculous to think talking about sons means the same thing every time. And the text does say there is a son to and for Allah.

You keep seeming to get me confused with others. I never said anything about Christ having any children. That is not part of any Christian doctrine I have ever heard. Now it is said that God (the father) had a son (Christ) but that was not through copulation. It was throw being begotten. Being begotten is not to be born in the traditional sense it is to have the same essence as the father. To be made out of the same stuff IOW. You are really getting our debate confused.

I believe my God is greater than your God because yours is in a static text whereas mine is the living God.

What book are you reading? Neither the Holy Ghost, the Father (God) or the son (Christ) is claimed to have ceased to exist by the bible. They all still exist and act in this world every day. You are really getting your theology all mixed up. My God is eternal in every sense of the word.

I believe this is what the Bible says:

Luke 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Gave up the ghost is a Greek term which means the separation of the soul from the body. That doesn't mean (in fact it proves) Christ's soul lived on. In fact his soul was reunited with his new perfected body when he was resurrected. I didn't know if your saying this means Christ ceased to exist but that is not what it says. In fact the bible else where says that to be absent from the body is to be present with God (at least for the believer).

I believe I am glad to have you to keep me amused. It isn't God that gets things wrong; it is men and their false interpretations.

I don't know what your referring to so I can't even evaluate it.

I am sure the original Arabic didn't say that. Other translations do a somewhat better job of it. I can understand why you can't see things from God's perspective though. I have explained this so many times I am beginning to hear an echo. THe text does not say Jesus wasn't on the cross but simply that He appeared to die there God and I know from what He said that He agave up the ghost instead of dying.

Well I am quite sure that it is your burden to show what your holy book says in Arabic. My God was smart enough to make a holy book that could be read in all languages, why did yours write a book that can only be understood correctly in a language less than 20% of the world can speak and even less than that can read it correctly. For that matter why are your God's followers only about 20% literate in any language?

 

[Muffled]

You keep seeming to get me confused with others. I never said anything about Christ having any children. That is not part of any Christian doctrine I have ever heard. Now it is said that God (the father) had a son (Christ) but that was not through copulation. It was throw being begotten. Being begotten is not to be born in the traditional sense it is to have the same essence as the father. To be made out of the same stuff IOW. You are really getting our debate confused.

What book are you reading? Neither the Holy Ghost, the Father (God) or the son (Christ) is claimed to have ceased to exist by the bible. They all still exist and act in this world every day. You are really getting your theology all mixed up. My God is eternal in every sense of the word.

Gave up the ghost is a Greek term which means the separation of the soul from the body. That doesn't mean (in fact it proves) Christ's soul lived on. In fact his soul was reunited with his new perfected body when he was resurrected. I didn't know if your saying this means Christ ceased to exist but that is not what it says. In fact the bible else where says that to be absent from the body is to be present with God (at least for the believer).

I don't know what your referring to so I can't even evaluate it.

Well I am quite sure that it is your burden to show what your holy book says in Arabic. My God was smart enough to make a holy book that could be read in all languages, why did yours write a book that can only be understood correctly in a language less than 20% of the world can speak and even less than that can read it correctly. For that matter why are your God's followers only about 20% literate in any language?

I believe that means you agree with the Qu'tran that God does not have sons (Through copulation). I am not the one confused.

I believe as far as I can tell, you never quote Him but only quote the Bible.

I believe it is not my book. My book is the Bible.

I believe you are in error. There are parts of Job that are untranslatable without the help of the Holy Spirit because no-one knows what the words mean. I tend to think of Hebrew as a difficult language to translate and although the Greek is closer to western thinking no-one seems to agree on how to translate the word Paracletos.