The Christiano-Islam Revelation Concept

[Tumah]

Ok. I'll be honest. I thought up the term before I thought of the question. Anyway.

I've kind of pointed this out in another thread with regards to Islam, but I wanted to develop the idea a little more.

Essentially, this concept of interpreting Scriptures to fit a "new" revelation that wasn't previously known or expected, is an idea in the Abrahamic pathways, that began with Christianity.

Judaism was running along when all of a sudden a religious development in the form of Jesus, brings a new revelation of/from G-d, to the religion that is expected to replace the previously understood religion.

Then Christianity does its Christian thing for a number of hundred years, when the newest prophet Muhammad, explains that G-d actually wanted to add a couple new tweaks to the previous tweakings He hath twooketh.

So I guess the question is, why do you Christians, ignore Judaism's claim that the TaNaCH and indeed the religion was already perfect before you came, but then turn around and voice those same claims to Muslims?

Why do you Muslims not believe Christians when they explain to you that your interpretation of their Scriptures is wrong, but then go ahead and tell our Bahai friends the same explanation about the Quran?

If you agree that a new revelation forces a reinterpretation of the previously understood passages of your predecessor, why do you deny the same to your successor?

 

[Sir_Loin]

"Judaism was running along when all of a sudden a religious development in the form of Jesus, brings a new revelation of/from G-d, to the religion that is expected to replace the previously understood religion."

What you fail to understand here is that it wasn't an "All-of-a-sudden" thing. Christianity happened after the birth of Christ. (Circa AD 30). --Christ being the son of God--; Christ being the one who died for everyone's sins. Jesus Christ overruled the "old" laws.
The group of people who choose to believe in and follow Jesus became Christians.
On the other hand, Jews turned a blank and continued their own way.

I can't comment on Muslims because I don't have the knowledge in that area.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Judaism was running along when all of a sudden a religious development in the form of Jesus, brings a new revelation of/from G-d, to the religion that is expected to replace the previously understood religion.

Then Christianity does its Christian thing for a number of hundred years, when the newest prophet Muhammad, explains that G-d actually wanted to add a couple new tweaks to the previous tweakings He hath twooketh.

So I guess the question is, why do you Christians, ignore Judaism's claim that the TaNaCH and indeed the religion was already perfect before you came, but then turn around and voice those same claims to Muslims?

The Jewish scriptures predict a Messiah, do they not? It is not as if someone just came along and announced a new revelation, the coming of a Messiah has been predicted throughout Jewish scripture. Christians (obviously) believe Jesus fulfils many of these prophecies and has brought man back to God, essentially ending in a spiritual sense the Jewish diaspora, bringing Gentiles into the fold and bringing revelation to its completion, as God Himself came to teach us on earth. Of course whether Jesus truly fulfilled those prophecies is another issue altogether, which I suppose is not something you wish to get into here.

We turn around and voice these "same claims" to Muslims because once God Himself has come to earth to teach us, effectively there is no more revelation necessary. Revelation saw its completion in the person of Jesus and what He shared with the Apostles. It's not like we pick a random point and say "Oh well there is no more revelation from this point on, we arbitrarily believe that revelation is complete from here on out." With Christ's death and resurrection, the Law has been fulfilled (not abolished) and revelation has been brought to its completion. Christians do not see any prophecy within the Jewish scriptures regarding Islam or the Baha'i faith, instead seeing the Messiah as the final completion and fulfilment of revelation and the religion.

 

[Akivah]

What you fail to understand is that almost every new revelation causing a new religion happened because of a chrismatic leader. Judaism had Abraham, Christianity had Jesus, Baha'i had Bahá'u'lláh, Islam had Muhammad, Mormons had Joseph Smith, etc.

The question remains, what does the new guy/revelation offer that the predecessor didn't?

[inserted the apostrophe]

 

[BruceDLimber]

What you fail to understand is that almost every new revelation causing a new religion happened because of a chrismatic leader. Judaism had Abraham, Christianity had Jesus, Bahai had Bahá'u'lláh, Islam had Muhammad, Mormons had Joseph Smith, etc..

The question remains, what does the new guy/revelation offer that the predecessor didn't?

(For the record, the correct spelling is Baha'i. The apostrophe is important because it represents the transliteration of a <silent> letter that alters the pronunciation.)

Genuine Divine Messengers both renew religion and provide updated social teachings ideally apropos for the new Age (spiritual teachings remain unchanged). One thus has teachings, laws, and procedures relevant to today rather than to some other situation millenia ago.

Peace,

Bruce

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Judaism was running along when all of a sudden a religious development in the form of Jesus, ...

… or Amos, or Isaiah, or Micah, or the Essenes, or the Pharisees, or …

I wonder how recognizable (or palatable) the 'Judaism' of the 2nd Temple Period would be to today's Jew.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Christianity happened after the birth of Christ. (Circa AD 30). --Christ being the son of God--; Christ being the one who died for everyone's sins. Jesus Christ overruled the "old" laws.

That is a statement of faith, not fact.

 

[Thana]

Judaism was running along when all of a sudden a religious development in the form of Jesus, brings a new revelation of/from G-d, to the religion that is expected to replace the previously understood religion.

Sneaky Christianity, tsk tsk.

Then Christianity does its Christian thing for a number of hundred years, when the newest prophet Muhammad, explains that G-d actually wanted to add a couple new tweaks to the previous tweakings He hath twooketh.

So I guess the question is, why do you Christians, ignore Judaism's claim that the TaNaCH and indeed the religion was already perfect before you came, but then turn around and voice those same claims to Muslims?

Why do you Muslims not believe Christians when they explain to you that your interpretation of their Scriptures is wrong, but then go ahead and tell our Bahai friends the same explanation about the Quran?

If you agree that a new revelation forces a reinterpretation of the previously understood passages of your predecessor, why do you deny the same to your successor?

In other words, Why don't we all hold hands and sing Kumbaya?

It's different from person to person, But generally people want to convert others to the 'right' religion or the 'right' way of thinking, Even if they're being hypocritical to their 'successor' as you say. They justify it by saying it's all in the name of salvation. Gotta convert 'em all.

Simply put, Jewish beliefs are incompatible with Christian & Islamic beliefs and vice versa, And so disagreement, debate and proselytizing ensues.

But then again, There are a lot who just say 'To each their own' and leave it at that

 

[Tumah]

"Judaism was running along when all of a sudden a religious development in the form of Jesus, brings a new revelation of/from G-d, to the religion that is expected to replace the previously understood religion."

What you fail to understand here is that it wasn't an "All-of-a-sudden" thing. Christianity happened after the birth of Christ. (Circa AD 30). --Christ being the son of God--; Christ being the one who died for everyone's sins. Jesus Christ overruled the "old" laws.
The group of people who choose to believe in and follow Jesus became Christians.
On the other hand, Jews turned a blank and continued their own way.

I can't comment on Muslims because I don't have the knowledge in that area.

And Muhammad the Prophet of G-d overruled the old "new" laws.
And Bahaullah the Messenger of G-d overruled the old old "new" laws.

The Jewish scriptures predict a Messiah, do they not? It is not as if someone just came along and announced a new revelation, the coming of a Messiah has been predicted throughout Jewish scripture. Christians (obviously) believe Jesus fulfils many of these prophecies and has brought man back to God, essentially ending in a spiritual sense the Jewish diaspora, bringing Gentiles into the fold and bringing revelation to its completion, as God Himself came to teach us on earth. Of course whether Jesus truly fulfilled those prophecies is another issue altogether, which I suppose is not something you wish to get into here.

And the New Testament speaks of a Prophet (John 1:21), does it not?
And John 14:16 prophecies another advocate that would come on G-d's behalf after Jesus, does it not?

We turn around and voice these "same claims" to Muslims because once God Himself has come to earth to teach us, effectively there is no more revelation necessary. Revelation saw its completion in the person of Jesus and what He shared with the Apostles. It's not like we pick a random point and say "Oh well there is no more revelation from this point on, we arbitrarily believe that revelation is complete from here on out." With Christ's death and resurrection, the Law has been fulfilled (not abolished) and revelation has been brought to its completion. Christians do not see any prophecy within the Jewish scriptures regarding Islam or the Baha'i faith, instead seeing the Messiah as the final completion and fulfilment of revelation and the religion.

And Jews believe that after G-d revealed Himself to the nation at Mt. Sinai, there is no need for further revelation.

So basically, Judaism had its cut off point. Then Christianity created a new one, with the "revelation on earth." Then Islam created a new one, with the prophecy of Muhammad.

What you fail to understand is that almost every new revelation causing a new religion happened because of a chrismatic leader. Judaism had Abraham, Christianity had Jesus, Bahai had Bahá'u'lláh, Islam had Muhammad, Mormons had Joseph Smith, etc.

The question remains, what does the new guy/revelation offer that the predecessor didn't?

Well, the difference that I can think of is that while Abraham brought an entirely new religion from scratch, Jesus, Muhammad and Baha'i built on its predecessors.

Which is the point I'm trying to make here. Once you put forth that it is possible to build on the previous, then you open yourself up for others to build upon you.

… or Amos, or Isaiah, or Micah, or the Essenes, or the Pharisees, or …

I wonder how recognizable (or palatable) the 'Judaism' of the 2nd Temple Period would be to today's Jew.

Amos, Isaiah and Micah, didn't change the status quo that preceded them.
And both the Essenes (whatever they were), the Pharisees and the Saducees, all worked with what they already had, under the umbrella of Judaism.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Amos, Isaiah and Micah, didn't change the status quo that preceded them.
And both the Essenes (whatever they were), the Pharisees and the Saducees, all worked with what they already had, under the umbrella of Judaism.

That comes very close to being a circular argument.

 

[Tumah]

That comes very close to being a circular argument.

Not sure how you mean.

 

[farouk]

Ok. I'll be honest. I thought up the term before I thought of the question. Anyway.

I've kind of pointed this out in another thread with regards to Islam, but I wanted to develop the idea a little more.

Essentially, this concept of interpreting Scriptures to fit a "new" revelation that wasn't previously known or expected, is an idea in the Abrahamic pathways, that began with Christianity.

Judaism was running along when all of a sudden a religious development in the form of Jesus, brings a new revelation of/from G-d, to the religion that is expected to replace the previously understood religion.

Then Christianity does its Christian thing for a number of hundred years, when the newest prophet Muhammad, explains that G-d actually wanted to add a couple new tweaks to the previous tweakings He hath twooketh.

So I guess the question is, why do you Christians, ignore Judaism's claim that the TaNaCH and indeed the religion was already perfect before you came, but then turn around and voice those same claims to Muslims?

Why do you Muslims not believe Christians when they explain to you that your interpretation of their Scriptures is wrong, but then go ahead and tell our Bahai friends the same explanation about the Quran?

If you agree that a new revelation forces a reinterpretation of the previously understood passages of your predecessor, why do you deny the same to your successor?

Peace upon you Tumah
Before getting into the details of all your concerns we need to put facts in proper prospective.Hence i have some simple questions for you.
1.Who invented this "ism" called "Judaism"?
2.What is the meaning of an "ism"?
3.What is the ethmology of the word "Judaism?

Tks in advance.
Peace
Farouk

 

[Sleeppy]

If everyone were able to be happy, they would be. This is why the Messianic Era, Judgement Day, etc are always put off until the future.

 

[Tumah]

Peace upon you Tumah
Before getting into the details of all your concerns we need to put facts in proper prospective.Hence i have some simple questions for you.
1.Who invented this "ism" called "Judaism"?
2.What is the meaning of an "ism"?
3.What is the ethmology of the word "Judaism?

Tks in advance.
Peace
Farouk

1. G-d? Moses? I'm not sure I understand your question.
2. "An indication of belief or principle" according to the Wiktionary
3. From the Greek Ioudaios, which became Judaismus in Latin and Judaism in English.

No problem.

If everyone were able to be happy, they would be. This is why the Messianic Era, Judgement Day, etc are always put off until the future.

I think you meant to post that in the "Are we in need of Salvation" thread.

 

[farouk]

Peace to all
Tumah
1.You mentioned God and Moses invented this "ism" called 'Juda-ism".
Please produce your proof from your Bible.

2.According to Wiktionary an "ism" is as ff.
From this link
-ism - Wiktionary

Suffix

-ism

1. Used to form nouns of action or process or result based on the accompanying verb in -ize. baptism (1300), aphorism (1528), criticism (1607), magnetism (1616)
2. Used to form the name of a system, school of thought or theory based on the name of its subject or object or alternatively on the name of its founder ((when de-capitalized, these overlap with the generic "doctrines" sense below, e.g. Liberalism vs. liberalism). Lutheranism (1560), Calvinism (1570), Protestantism (1606), Congregationalism (1716), Mohammedanism (1815),: Palamism (1949)
3. Used to form names of a tendency of behaviour, action or opinion belonging to a class or group of persons; the result of a doctrine, ideology or principle. atheism (1587), ruffianism (1589), giantism (1639), fanaticism (1652), theism (1678), religionism (1706), patriotism (1716), heroism (1717), despotism (1728), old-maidism (1776), capitalism (1792), nationism (1798), romanticism (1803), conservatism (1832), sexualism (1842), externalism (1856), young-ladyism (1869), opportunism (1870), blackguardism (1875), jingoism (1878), feminism (1895), dwarfism (1895)
4. Used to form nouns indicating a peculiarity or characteristic of language Atticism (1612), Gallicism (1656), archaism (1709), Americanism (1781), colloquialism (1834), newspaperism (1838), Shakespearianism (1886),
5. Used to form names of ideologies expressing belief in the superiority of a certain class within the concept expressed by the root word, or a pattern of behavior or a social norm that benefits members of the group indicated by the root word. ((based on a late 20th-century narrowing of the "terms for a doctrine" sense) racism (1932), sexism (1936), classism (1971), speciesism (1975), heterosexism (1979), ableism (1981)
6. (medicine) Used to form names of conditions or syndromes caused by or associated with a specific type of organism crotalism, daturism, latrodectism, loxoscelism,

3.You mentioned the ethmology of the word "Juda-ism" is from the Greek loudaios.
My question is what does the Greeks got to do with naming your religion?

Peace
Farouk

 

[Tumah]

Peace to all
Tumah
1.You mentioned God and Moses invented this "ism" called 'Juda-ism".
Please produce your proof from your Bible.

I'm really not sure what you are asking me. Are you asking me, who created the Jewish religion? Who created the "ism" suffix? I don't know what you want.

2.According to Wiktionary an "ism" is as ff.
From this link
-ism - Wiktionary

Suffix

-ism

1. Used to form nouns of action or process or result based on the accompanying verb in -ize. baptism (1300), aphorism (1528), criticism (1607), magnetism (1616)
2. Used to form the name of a system, school of thought or theory based on the name of its subject or object or alternatively on the name of its founder ((when de-capitalized, these overlap with the generic "doctrines" sense below, e.g. Liberalism vs. liberalism). Lutheranism (1560), Calvinism (1570), Protestantism (1606), Congregationalism (1716), Mohammedanism (1815),: Palamism (1949)
3. Used to form names of a tendency of behaviour, action or opinion belonging to a class or group of persons; the result of a doctrine, ideology or principle. atheism (1587), ruffianism (1589), giantism (1639), fanaticism (1652), theism (1678), religionism (1706), patriotism (1716), heroism (1717), despotism (1728), old-maidism (1776), capitalism (1792), nationism (1798), romanticism (1803), conservatism (1832), sexualism (1842), externalism (1856), young-ladyism (1869), opportunism (1870), blackguardism (1875), jingoism (1878), feminism (1895), dwarfism (1895)
4. Used to form nouns indicating a peculiarity or characteristic of language Atticism (1612), Gallicism (1656), archaism (1709), Americanism (1781), colloquialism (1834), newspaperism (1838), Shakespearianism (1886),
5. Used to form names of ideologies expressing belief in the superiority of a certain class within the concept expressed by the root word, or a pattern of behavior or a social norm that benefits members of the group indicated by the root word. ((based on a late 20th-century narrowing of the "terms for a doctrine" sense) racism (1932), sexism (1936), classism (1971), speciesism (1975), heterosexism (1979), ableism (1981)
6. (medicine) Used to form names of conditions or syndromes caused by or associated with a specific type of organism crotalism, daturism, latrodectism, loxoscelism,

Thank you...for...this. . . ?

3.You mentioned the ethmology of the word "Juda-ism" is from the Greek loudaios.
My question is what does the Greeks got to do with naming your religion?

Well, they were the ones that came up with the word Ioudaios. I imagine it is linked to Iouda, which was probably the Greek spelling of Judah and the "ios" is probably "of" or something like that, so it probably means, "of Judah."

I guess, the Greeks were responsible for providing the origin to the term that is colloquially used to describe us.

 

[Sleeppy]

If you know God, you know that He created of Himself with a great scope of diversity. You are easily able to misunderstand, and/or disagree with your own mother and father, who gave you your genetic being. So, keep in mind the complete sovereignty of God over all things; your question should be submitted to God, who has already established tomorrow.

 

[Akivah]

Before getting into the details of all your concerns we need to put facts in proper prospective.Hence i have some simple questions for you.

Now that Tumah has answered your simple questions to the best of his ability, I'm wondering if you'll make your point regarding the OP or continue to divert this thread.

 

[BruceDLimber]

If everyone were able to be happy, they would be. This is why the Messianic Era, Judgement Day, etc are always put off until the future.

Not so!

In the Baha'i view, Judgement Day occurrs every time a new Divine Messenger appears (typically every 500-1,000 years), renewing religion and establishing its next stage (as a "new" religion).

Everyone who then hears about the new religion is then judged by whether or not s/he accepts it.

Peace,

Bruce

 

[Sleeppy]

Not so!

In the Baha'i view, Judgement Day occurrs every time a new Divine Messenger appears (typically every 500-1,000 years), renewing religion and establishing its next stage (as a "new" religion).

Everyone who then hears about the new religion is then judged by whether or not s/he accepts it.

Peace,

Bruce

I can assure you; God's judgement occurs every day (moreso, continuously). Those who are looking and waiting will die, according to the judgement on Adam. And if they've raised children, these children will know the zealous God of their father.