Qu'ran: Did Jesus die?

[TashaN]

Not so separate--they all trace their authority through Abraham. Each in succession accepts the previous religions.

There is no relationship between Abraham and your faith.

He did in fact die as all men die in the given time.

Not according to Islam, and what you call as a fact is no more than a mere assumption and guessing in your part as Allah said in the Quran.

.... 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. (Quran 4:157)

I can only depend upon what the Apostles of God tell me is true. Since Those APostles of God are not God either, they do not possess Absolute Truth either. They possess a more sure knowledge than I, but that knowledge is not Absolute. Absolute knowledge is only possessed by God.

Man can grasp truth, but not absolute truth. He can only comprehend truth relative to man's station as a Creation of God.

Therefore the Torah is true, but it's truth is not Absolute. The Injeel is true, but it's truth is not Absolute. The Qur'an is true, but it's not Absolute Truth.

I don't know about the Apostles or the scriptures you believe in, but for Islam, what Prophet Mohammed "peace be upon him" say to us revlealed to him by God is the absolute truth and the Quran hold the absolute truth as well.

[3] Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire.

[4] It is no less than inspiration sent down to him. (Quran 53:3-4)

 

[Popeyesays]

I'm sorry, Truth; but I think you are becoming shrill, rather than communicative.

I can and have been respectful of Islam all along. I do not ask you to believe as I do, but you are beginning to demean my faith, and I think it has gone far enough.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Popeyesays]

Truth,

I am not interested in having this conversation with you anymore. Can I ignore a moderator?

Regards,
Scott

 

[TashaN]

I'm sorry, Truth; but I think you are becoming shrill, rather than communicative.

I can and have been respectful of Islam all along. I do not ask you to believe as I do, but you are beginning to demean my faith, and I think it has gone far enough.

Truth,

I am not interested in having this conversation with you anymore. Can I ignore a moderator?

Well, i apologize if i have offended you Scott, but that was my plain opinion, and it has nothing to do with me being a Mod. or not so please don't mix things like that, and of course, you can ignore whatever you want and i don't think you were asking for my permission, because you are free to do what is best for you. You didn't need to go off-topic, you could just skip the things which you had no answer for and that would do just fine.

Just to let you know, i respect all religions and beliefs, but i have the right to say what my faith say about them, for hypocrisy is not my game.


Peace and blessing,

TT

 

[Dirty Penguin]

No, i was simply showing that your claim in the pervious post is not accurate when you said:

"There is absolutely no Biblical evidence that there was any substitution for Jesus materially or spiritually."



Who is the Paraclete?



Please quote Jesus when he say so.



Voluntarily? I doubt it.

Jesus Christ prepared himself to fight and asked his deciples to follow him in doing so.

"When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything?" And they said, "Nothing" Then said he unto them, "But now, he that hath no purse, let him take it, and likewise his bag; and he that hath no SWORD, let him sell his garment and buy one!" (HOLY BIBLE) Luke 22:35-36

This is a preparation for Jihaad as you can see.

". . . Lord, behold, here are two SWORDS." And he said unto them, "It is enough". (HOLY BIBLE) Luke 22:38

If the swords were spiritual, then the "garments" must also be spiritual. If the disciples of Jesus were to sell their SPIRITUAL garments to buy SPIRITUAL swords, in that case they would all become SPIRITUALLY naked! Furthermore, one does not lop off peoples physical ears with spiritual swords.

"And, behold, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his SWORD, and struck a servant of the high priests, and cut off his ear." (HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 26:51

The only purpose of swords or guns is to maim and to kill. People did not carry swords to pare apples and bananas in the time of Christ.

". . . Master, shall we smite them with the sword?" (HOLY BIBLE) Luke 22:49

But before Jesus could attempt a reply, the impetuous Peter struck out with his sword and cut off the right ear of one of the enemy. Jesus had not anticipated Roman soldiers. Realising that the tables were turned against his misconceived strategy, he advises his disciples:

". . . Put up again thy sword into its place; for all they that TAKE THE SWORD shall PERISH WITH THE SWORD." (HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 26:52

Did Jesus not know the truth of this statement when he ordered his disciples to sell their garments and buy SWORDS? He surely did! Then why the contradiction now? . There is really no contradiction! The situation changes, so the strategy must also change. He had sense enough to realise that against trained and well-equipped Roman soldiers it would be suicidal for his sleepy warriors to offer even a pretence of resistance.




Why Jesus must be killed in order to make you love him? to make you feel pity for him or something?

Perfect....All of this sounds literal to me. Don't have to read between the lines. Jesus and his followers were ready for battle.

 

[Popeyesays]

Truth;

"There is no relationship between Abraham and your faith."

Is, in my eyes disrespectful of my religion.

"You didn't need to go off-topic, you could just skip the things which you had no answer for and that would do just fine."

But I do have answers for them, but those answers raise your rancor.

I think you owe the board an apology without condition.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Do you really understand what i'm talking about?

There is absolutely no evidence that God's spirit can only be reserved for you and those who worship Jesus alone, nor you have proof that trinity is a correct doctrine.

Exactly....That is why I love looking through the bible to find out who God gives his spirit to....Because it is not reserved soley to Jesus.

Isaiah 63:11
Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?

I believe the above is talking about the Holy Spirit in Moses. (i could be wrong on this one).

Daniel 4:18
This dream I king Nebuchadnezzar have seen. Now thou, O Belteshazzar, declare the interpretation thereof, forasmuch as all the wise men of my kingdom are not able to make known unto me the interpretation: but thou art able; for the spirit of the holy elohim is in thee.

Luke 1:41
And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit:

Luke 1:67
And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying,

Luke 2:25
And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Spirit was upon him.

 

[Popeyesays]

I believe the Trinity is an invented dogma, much like the insistence that Jesus could not have died on the cross. They both come from mis-reading the religious text in question, and both are inflicted upon the followers of the religion by those who claim clerical authority.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Dirty Penguin]

No he didn't, he was crying to God asking for help.

Was the prayer of Jesus (pbuh) being answered? He had cried (o the loving father in heaven for help, with strong crying and tears:

"And being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat was, as it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground" (HOLY BIBLE) Luke 22:44

What can be expected from such heart-felt prayer and importuning? One of the four brothers of Jesus reminds us that:

"The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much."
(HOLY BIBLE) James 5:16

1. The Christians give brothers and sisters to Jesus, through a union of Mary with Joseph the Carpenter. (Matthew 13:55-56).

2. God Almighty does not go up or down He is Omnipresent. All-Prevading. Present everywhere!


Paul confirms that his supplications did not fall on deaf ears:

"Who, in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was HEARD in that he feared." (HOLY BIBLE) Hebrews 5:7

What does it mean "God heard" his prayers! It means that God accepted his prayers. God Almighty is not deaf at any time. He is the All-Hearing God. He heard (accepted) the supplication of Jesus in the same way that He had heard (accepted) the prayer of father Abraham. Abraham, in his old-age had prayed for a son, and Ishmael was born. The words of Abraham had become flesh. Ishmael literally means "GOD HEARD", in Hebrew. Zakariah also in his old-age prayed for a son, and God heard (accepted) his prayers, and John the Baptist was born. Now Jesus cried for help, and God heard (accepted) his prayers:

"And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him."
(HOLY BIBLE) Luke 22:43

Strengthening him in the faith, in the hope that God will save him. This is actually what he was beseeching God to do for him. When and how rests alone in the Hands of God. His ways are not our ways.

Believe me, when you say that Jesus have to be killed in order to save you, you remind me of some horror American movies where the father or the mother, etc have to kill their son or relative, etc if they suspected that a devil spirit or something is inside him, and they bring him to the church and they slay him and then they thank God that their task is done perfectly. :areyoucra

You should be the first one to admit that Jesus wasn't killed nor he was crucified if you really love him. By claiming that you should see your loved one killed in order to spare your self is nonesense to me and show a contradiction of emotions and thinking in your part.

Also, please don't forget to comment in the following.

"Touch me not! For I am not yet ASCENDED unto my Father" (HOLY BIBLE) John 20:17

He is simply saying: "I AM ALIVE!"

"And they (the disciples), when they heard that he was ALIVE, and had been seen by her (Mary Magdalene),they BELIEVED NOT." (HOLY BIBLE) Mark 16:11

This what I have been saying.... OH MY GOODNESS......It is as clear as the nose on ones face......

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

Truth;

"There is no relationship between Abraham and your faith."

Is, in my eyes disrespectful of my religion.

"You didn't need to go off-topic, you could just skip the things which you had no answer for and that would do just fine."

But I do have answers for them, but those answers raise your rancor.

I think you owe the board an apology without condition.

Regards,
Scott

He is correct but maybe his delivery should have been softer. Meaning there is no evidence for that in the Quran which is our source Allah says that the claim that he is anything other then one who submits to Allah. Saying that the bab is related from the testimony of Quran is blasphemy for us. We cannot go against something Allah has decreed.

what does the Bab say about Abraham in your books forgive me I know very little about you guys.

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

I believe the Trinity is an invented dogma, much like the insistence that Jesus could not have died on the cross.

They both come from mis-reading the religious text in question,

What on earth are you talking about the Quran is very clear in the fact that he did not die on the cross.

and both are inflicted upon the followers of the religion by those who claim clerical authority.

Regards,
Scott

Are you kidding me we are talking about 2 seperate things, in two seperate books. What do you mean by all this?

 

[!Fluffy!]

Actually, I think both statements agree.
The body of Jesus remained on the cross, but the spirit went up to heaven. God raised the REAL Jesus. The flesh is dust.

Regards,
Scott

Sorry, but the idea that Jesus flesh is dust and that the Messiah did not die on the cross is unsupportable from a Scriptural standpoint. The witnesses, apostles went out of their way to make it very clear that Christ died on the cross and was resurrected 3 days later in the flesh, he went out of his way to prove it by eating and drinking, and inviting Thomas to touch his wounds, thus to believe and remove all doubt.

So no, there is really no logical way to reconcile the Quranic and New Testament views on Jesus and the resurrection.

 

[Popeyesays]

Sorry, but the idea that Jesus flesh is dust and that the Messiah did not die on the cross is unsupportable from a Scriptural standpoint. The witnesses, apostles went out of their way to make it very clear that Christ died on the cross and was resurrected 3 days later in the flesh, he went out of his way to prove it by eating and drinking, and inviting Thomas to touch his wounds, thus to believe and remove all doubt.

So no, there is really no logical way to reconcile the Quranic and New Testament views on Jesus and the resurrection.

From a scriptural standpoint (assigning a timeline to the Gospel description of the crucifixion) Jesus seems to have died in about a three hour period. This was highly unusual by Roman practice. Death usually took 24-48 hours, even with both legs broken to deny the victim to relieve the slow suffocation by taking on his body's weight by pressing his feet against the cross to support his weight.

One can compare the descriptions of the crucifixion of Jesus with the stories of the crucifixion of the Spartacus rebels, or other cases and see that it is not an ordinary event.

Jesus died quickly in an execution where the suffering dragged on for days.

This gives me reason to believe that God reduced the sufferings of Christ by taking Him quickly.

From Wikipedia:
"
The goal of Roman crucifixion was not just to kill the criminal, but also to mutilate and dishonour the body of the condemned. In ancient tradition, an honourable death required burial; leaving a body on the cross, so as to mutilate it and prevent its burial, was a grave dishonour.
Under ancient Roman penal practice, crucifixion was also a means of exhibiting the criminal’s low social status. It was the most dishonourable death imaginable, originally reserved for slaves, hence still called "supplicium servile" by Seneca, later extended to provincial freedmen of obscure station ('humiles'). The elite of Roman society (only about 10% of the population) were almost never subject to capital punishments; instead, they were fined or exiled. Josephus mentions Jews of high rank who were crucified, but this was to point out that their status had been taken away from them. Control of one’s own body was vital in the ancient world. Capital punishment took away control over one’s own body, thereby implying a loss of status and honour. The Romans often broke the prisoner's legs to hasten death and usually forbade burial."

Regards,
Scott

 

[Popeyesays]

I believe the Trinity is an invented dogma, much like the insistence that Jesus could not have died on the cross.

What on earth are you talking about the Quran is very clear in the fact that he did not die on the cross.

Are you kidding me we are talking about 2 seperate things, in two seperate books. What do you mean by all this?

They are both examples of dogma being created by clerics. There are also examples in Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other examples within Christianity and Islam.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Quiddity]

Just out of curiousity, how did this thread turn from "Did Jesus die" to the Trinity?

 

[Popeyesays]

Just out of curiousity, how did this thread turn from "Did Jesus die" to the Trinity?

Go up thread and you will find The Truth brought it up.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Quiddity]

Go up thread and you will find The Truth brought it up.

Regards,
Scott

Alrighty....let's try to keep this on topic irregardless of who decides to stray. Don't contribute to off topic posts if that is the case. Let the debate continue...

 

[Popeyesays]

It was exemplary of dogma created long after the period of a Prophet's lifetime or direct writings. As is the Islamic dogma denying Christ died upon the cross.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

It was exemplary of dogma created long after the period of a Prophet's lifetime or direct writings. As is the Islamic dogma denying Christ died upon the cross.

Regards,
Scott

What is and what Prophet? Are you saying that the Islamic dogma denying Christ came after the death of the Messenger.? Is this what you are saying?

 

[Mujahid Mohammed]

They are both examples of dogma being created by clerics. There are also examples in Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other examples within Christianity and Islam.

Regards,
Scott

No the Trinity was created by the cleric, the Quran was given by Allah to the Messenger. Besides what does that have to do with the reconciliation between text which you say is possible?