What do Christians really think about the Qur'an

[fallingblood]

Just as Moses was the mediator of the Law covenant which he instituded between God and the Isrealites, Jesus was the mediator of a covenant which he instituted between God and his followers. 'the New Covenant' is what he instituted with his apostles just as the prophet Jeremiah foretold at Jeremiah 31:31

The Messiah was always going to replace the mosaic law covenant because God was going to do away with sin....as the mosaic laws purpose was to remind people of their sins, it would make no sense keeping it in place forever because it highlighted sin. The Messiah was going to take the sin of the world away....this includes the very thing that highlighted that sin.

Jesus failed as the Jewish Messiah. The only way in which Jesus can be the Messiah is if one creates a new Christian Messiah that has nothing to do with Jewish beliefs. As soon as Jesus died, he was ruled out as the Messiah. Meaning, there is no way that Jesus can be the Jewish Messiah, as he died and Rome was still in control of the Jewish homeland.

More so, sin is still in this world.

Finally, that is not what the Mosaic laws purpose was. Jews don't keep the law in order to highlight their sins. They keep the laws out of love.

As for Jeremiah 31:31, it has nothing to do with Jesus. Actually, if Jesus made the law unneeded, then it contradicts Jeremiah 31 because, in context, God is still saying that one must follow his laws.

Only in that mosaic laws show us Gods viewpoint on things. Paul said at Romans 7:7 Really I would not have come to know sin if it had not been for the Law; and, for example, I would not have known covetousness if the Law had not said: “You must not covet."

So yes, we need to know and live by Gods standards...the mosaic laws show us what Gods standards are... but the point is that we are not expected to perfectly abide by the mosaic law. Even the jews were not expected to do so perfectly, God gave them a means by which to be forgiven when they transgressed his standards showing that he makes allowances for our imperfection.

But the law was a 'covenant' between Israel and God which is what a lot of people misunderstand. It was never going to remain in place forever because God always intended on having a relationship with people from ALL nations. The covenant of Isreal signified their special standing... but the better covenant which Jeremiah foretold would be a covenant for ALL nations to participate in and this way the whole world of mankind could be reunited with God under his sovereignty.

Actually, that is not at all what Jesus stated.

Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus is not saying what you said. And Paul is not saying what Jesus stated. Instead, Jesus is saying you have to follow the law to the smallest letter. Actually, he even admonishes those who would teach that a person does not have to follow the law.

Verse 20 really seals what Jesus is saying. He states clearly that one has to follow the law better than that Pharisees and the teachers of the law. There is no suggestion that one is suppose to abandon the law. The exact opposite is stated. The suggestion is that perfection, or near perfection is wanted for the followers of Jesus.

There is absolutely no mention of a new covenant with what Jesus is stating. Others later may state something of that tune, but it is going against what Jesus himself stated.

 

[Pegg]

you are thinking like a first century Jew. What makes you think that they were correct in their assumptions that the messiah was going to break the Roman yoke at that time?

To understand christianity one must first understand the purpose of the mosaic law and what is written in the OT. the Apostle Paul was a Pharisee so his explanations in the NT of how Christ fulfilled the law and why the new covenant was instituted is well explained.

And while im sure that the first century jews fully expected the Messiah to bring them salvation at that time, they failed to understand that the purpose of the Messiah was not simply for their own benefit but for the benefit of all the nations. Due to this fact, that still escapes the notice of many, the Messiah's work of bringing physical salvation was still in the future... however he did bring them spiritual freedom from the judiciary system of the mosaic law. That was a salvation because it meant they were free of the burden of making sacrifices for their sins.

but because they failed to grasp the spiritual side of things and were looking only for a physical salvation, they accuse Jesus of being a false messiah. And if you say that the jews were in the covenant out of love, then why were they continually disobeying and going against the covenant?

Why did Jeremiah prophesy that God would take the covenant and give it to another nation who would have Gods laws written on their hearts? Does that not indicate to you that perhaps the jews didnt love the law of God?

 

[fallingblood]

you are thinking like a first century Jew. What makes you think that they were correct in their assumptions that the messiah was going to break the Roman yoke at that time?

The Messianic Prophecy. Jesus died, and things progressively got worse until the Temple and Jerusalem were destroyed, and the Jews dispersed. There is no reason then to assume that Jesus is the Messiah.

It shouldn't take two tries to get fulfill Messianic prophecy.

To understand christianity one must first understand the purpose of the mosaic law and what is written in the OT. the Apostle Paul was a Pharisee so his explanations in the NT of how Christ fulfilled the law and why the new covenant was instituted is well explained.

You can't fulfill Jewish law. It simply is not an option. Jewish law was not something to be fulfilled. So if Paul tries to explain how Jesus fulfilled the law, then he simply was making things up.

Again, no one can fulfill Jewish law. It is not something to fulfill.

And while im sure that the first century jews fully expected the Messiah to bring them salvation at that time, they failed to understand that the purpose of the Messiah was not simply for their own benefit but for the benefit of all the nations. Due to this fact, that still escapes the notice of many, the Messiah's work of bringing physical salvation was still in the future... however he did bring them spiritual freedom from the judiciary system of the mosaic law. That was a salvation because it meant they were free of the burden of making sacrifices for their sins.

First, the Jews should be able to say what the Messiah is. It is their idea. And it is their religious beliefs, and scripture that matter here.

Also, not all Jews made sacrifices for their sins. And now, since the Temple is destroyed, Jews don't have to make sacrifices for their sins. So really, Jesus wasn't needed for that.

As for the Mosaic Law, it wasn't some cumbersome set of laws. Jews do them happily, because God commanded it.

And again, Jesus never abolishes the law. He tells his followers to follow the law to the smallest letter. So there is no suggestion from Jesus that there was a "freedom from the judiciary system of the mosaic law."

Really though, I don't think you understand the reason why Jews keep the Laws.

Finally, why couldn't God just give salvation to people in the first place? Why does he have to run around so much making so many confusing ideas and then not actually reveal it to his chosen people?

but because they failed to grasp the spiritual side of things and were looking only for a physical salvation, they accuse Jesus of being a false messiah. And if you say that the jews were in the covenant out of love, then why were they continually disobeying and going against the covenant?

That is incorrect again. You should check out the Essenes and their idea of the coming Messiah. They believed there would be two Messiahs, one a kingly messiah and the other a priestly messiah.

There were various ideas about the Messiah at that time. Jesus is simply called a false Messiah because he didn't fulfill any of the expectations, that God himself supposedly set out.

As for why some Jews go against the covenant, do we really need to address that? Did God not give people free will? Do people not have a choice? So some people decided the covenant wasn't for them. They would rather worship other gods that they thought were more effective. However, there were still the Jews who kept the covenant out of Love.

Why did Jeremiah prophesy that God would take the covenant and give it to another nation who would have Gods laws written on their hearts? Does that not indicate to you that perhaps the jews didnt love the law of God?

No, that does not indicate that at all. It simply indicates that God has a love for everyone.

Maybe you should talk to some Jews, or learn a little about Jewish history, especially during the first century. Or even better yet, take a world religion class so you can be informed about other religions.

 

[Dezzie]

Before I ever read the Qur'an I was taught that it was the work of the devil by many christian religions. It seams that the majority of christians see the Qur'an as being a negative or bad book. Do any christians thing the Qur'an is part of scripture or do they mostly think it is an evil book.

I have a friend who is a hardcore Christian and he has said a lot of bad things about the Qur'an. I actually confronted him about the things he was saying and he was making it sound like he wasn't trying to be mean. He then proceeded to say that he doesn't think the book is evil. I have no idea what Christians think. lol Especially since this friend of mine couldn't make up his mind when someone confronted him about his views.

 

[Pegg]

The Messianic Prophecy. Jesus died, and things progressively got worse until the Temple and Jerusalem were destroyed, and the Jews dispersed. There is no reason then to assume that Jesus is the Messiah.

the Jews overlooked a vital point about the Messiah. It was foretold that he would come twice, once as a sacrifice to die for obedient men, and then as a reigning king over an everlasting government.
They were so anxious to be delivered from Rome that they overlooked the necessity of the first presence and had eyes only for the glorious second presence.
Thats not Christs fault...he tried to explain thing to them but, like today, the majority reject it.

It shouldn't take two tries to get fulfill Messianic prophecy.
You can't fulfill Jewish law. It simply is not an option. Jewish law was not something to be fulfilled. So if Paul tries to explain how Jesus fulfilled the law, then he simply was making things up.

Again, no one can fulfill Jewish law. It is not something to fulfill.
First, the Jews should be able to say what the Messiah is. It is their idea. And it is their religious beliefs, and scripture that matter here.

and so it was Jews who explained the messiah. The NT writers were jews, yes?

Also, not all Jews made sacrifices for their sins. And now, since the Temple is destroyed, Jews don't have to make sacrifices for their sins. So really, Jesus wasn't needed for that.

so it took Rome to remove the necessity of obeying the Mosaic law from the Jews... not God? Does this mean the Roman Empire was more powerful then Jehovah?

 

[Wombat]

you are thinking like a first century Jew. What makes you think that they were correct in their assumptions that the messiah was going to break the Roman yoke at that time?

Literal interpretation of scripture. Read literally the OT foretells a warrior Messiah- white horse, sword of fire- to smite the enemies of Israel.
If ever they needed such a Messiah it was during the horror of the Roman occupation. And what did they get? According to the NT they got a carpenter on a donkey preaching “Love thine enemy”.
They could not make the connection between the expectation based on literal scriptural interpretation (surprise surprise) and what was delivered.
It was the same then as it is now... with Christians expecting a physical ‘rapture’ and with German Templars waiting at the bottom of Mt Carmel with a white horse for the Messiahs second coming. (Seen what’s on the top of the mountain?
http://news.bahai.org/sites/news.ba...bahai.org/files/images/684_00_restoration.jpg
Red roofs show the Templar colony... waiting for the Messiah to appear on the mountain-
http://i.pbase.com/o6/82/474982/1/74816618.0R3pkWGx.GermanColo_lSmall.JPG


Literalism is the scripture killer..... “The letter killeth, the spirit giveth life”.

When human beings have a >really important< message (about love/hope/pain) to convey they reach for poetry, analogy and metaphor-

“I am broken hearted and adrift on a sea of misery...”

The literalists (in every age) look for a surgeon and call search and rescue...and loose the plot in doing so

 

[Pegg]

Literal interpretation of scripture. Read literally the OT foretells a warrior Messiah- white horse, sword of fire- to smite the enemies of Israel.

Yes, the 2nd coming of the Messiah is described as such, However the first coming is described as:

Zechariah 9:9 &#8220;Be very joyful, O daughter of Zion. Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem. Look! Your king himself comes to you. He is righteous, yes, saved; humble, and riding upon an ***

Daniel 9:26 &#8220;And after the sixty-two weeks Mes&#8231;si&#8242;ah will be cut off, with nothing for himself. And the city and the holy place the people of a leader that is coming will bring to their ruin. And the end of it will be by the flood. And until [the] end there will be war; what is decided upon is desolations

Isaiah 53:2 "And he will come up like a twig before one, and like a root out of waterless land. No stately form does he have, nor any splendor; and when we shall see him, there is not the appearance so that we should desire him...He was despised, and we held him as of no account..."

The history the jewish response to Jesus is exactly what we read was foretold to happen. The jews say he did not fit the prophecies about him, but they were focusing on the wrong ones... their timing was all wrong. '
Jesus 2nd coming is still future....it is that coming, and it is now, that christians must stay awake for.

The literalists (in every age) look for a surgeon and call search and rescue...and loose the plot in doing so

i agree.

 

[Wombat]

Yes, the 2nd coming of the Messiah is described as such,.

Pegg, the >only< reason the expectation is >now< seen as applying to “the 2nd coming of the Messiah” is that we have 20/20 hindsight of post Christ advent. At the time of the Roman occupation there was no reason to believe/expect other than a warrior king Messiah based on their literal interpretation.
Easy for us to sit back and divide up what is applicable to the Second Coming based on a process of elimination re the First.
Problem is.....We may have got it just as wrong as the first century Jews and missed the Second Coming...like one would miss a ‘Thief in the night’

The history the jewish response to Jesus is exactly what we read was foretold to happen. The jews say he did not fit the prophecies about him, but they were focusing on the wrong ones... their timing was all wrong. '.

Ah huh...I can go with that...but I cannot look down upon them from this vantage point in history for wrong focus, bad timing and missing the Messiah....Not when there is a good case to show that we may well be in >exactly the same position<.
Sometimes the “timing” can be spot on and yet the focus/expectation wrong.
Ever heard of a guy called William Miller?-
William Miller (preacher) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
William Miller Biography

I invite you, in the spirit of Christ, to carefully consider his work, “timing” and conclusions-

" Miller became convinced that the 2,300 day period started in 457 B.C. with the decree to rebuild Jerusalem by Artaxerxes I of Persia. Simple calculation then revealed that this period would end in 1844. Miller records, "I was thus brought... to the solemn conclusion, that in about twenty-five years from that time 1818 all the affairs of our present state would be wound up."

Jesus 2nd coming is still future....it is that coming, and it is now, that christians must stay awake for..

Perhaps Pegg. But please keep in mind what you say above is >exactly< what Jewish perspective holds in relation to the first coming.

“christians must stay awake”?.....>ALL< must stay awake.
Are we “awake”?...Open minded and willing to investigate as fishermen and prostitutes once did despite the expectations of the day and the authority of the Scribes?

Pegg...When William Miller made his prediction regarding 1844 that year rolled around and Christ did not bodily descend from the clouds, nor arrive on a white horse with a sword of fire...Thus 1844 was declared- ‘The Year of The Great Disappointment’.

My question is...Did anything of religious significance happen in that year- 1844?

 

[Pegg]

Pegg, the >only< reason the expectation is >now< seen as applying to “the 2nd coming of the Messiah” is that we have 20/20 hindsight of post Christ advent. At the time of the Roman occupation there was no reason to believe/expect other than a warrior king Messiah based on their literal interpretation.
Easy for us to sit back and divide up what is applicable to the Second Coming based on a process of elimination re the First.
Problem is.....We may have got it just as wrong as the first century Jews and missed the Second Coming...like one would miss a ‘Thief in the night’

but the followers of Christ in the first century understood that he was coming again...they had faith that he was the Messiah and applied many of the prophecies to Jesus so we can also say that they believed in and understood the first coming. Its interesting to see how they also 'initially' had the view that Jesus was going to destroy the romans and rule as a king in their day.... they asked him the question and its recorded in Acts 1:6 When, now, they had assembled, they went asking him: “Lord, are you restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time?” 7 He said to them: “It does not belong to YOU to get knowledge of the times or seasons which the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction; 8 but YOU will receive power when the holy spirit arrives upon YOU, and YOU will be witnesses of me both in Jerusalem and in all Ju&#8231;de&#8242;a and Sa&#8231;mar&#8242;i&#8231;a and to the most distant part of the earth.”
His reply showed them that more was to come and later they understood fully that the 2nd coming was still future.

Ah huh...I can go with that...but I cannot look down upon them from this vantage point in history for wrong focus, bad timing and missing the Messiah....Not when there is a good case to show that we may well be in >exactly the same position<.
Sometimes the “timing” can be spot on and yet the focus/expectation wrong.
Ever heard of a guy called William Miller?-
William Miller (preacher) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
William Miller Biography

I invite you, in the spirit of Christ, to carefully consider his work, “timing” and conclusions-

" Miller became convinced that the 2,300 day period started in 457 B.C. with the decree to rebuild Jerusalem by Artaxerxes I of Persia. Simple calculation then revealed that this period would end in 1844. Miller records, "I was thus brought... to the solemn conclusion, that in about twenty-five years from that time 1818 all the affairs of our present state would be wound up."

Another man also calculated the timing of Christs 2nd coming...Charles Taze Russell. The March 1880 edition of the Watch Tower magazine identified the year 1914 as the time for the close of “the appointed times of the nations”

And im sure you know something very significant happened in that year.

Pegg...When William Miller made his prediction regarding 1844 that year rolled around and Christ did not bodily descend from the clouds, nor arrive on a white horse with a sword of fire...Thus 1844 was declared- ‘The Year of The Great Disappointment’.

My question is...Did anything of religious significance happen in that year- 1844?

Christs return was not going to be visible. Matthew 24:30 "And then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven"
Can we see into heaven? No. So we should not expect to visibly see Jesus in heaven, rather we watch for the 'sign' on earth....Jesus 'sign' that he had come into kingdom power was as explained to them in Matthew 24...that sign would be visible on earth and would signify to Christs followers that he had taken his seat in heaven.

 

[ellenjanuary]

Jeez, One thing at a time. What is law? "Do what thou wilt shall be the extent of the law," yet a rule to live by, or a simple statement such as "temperature varies directly with pressure and inversely with volume" does not encompass the seething morass that is the singular plurality that is society. Let me first present "the law of this here land:"

And here we have what I know of Sharia law:
[URL=''http://www.ehow.com/how_7522209_study-sharia-law.html"]

[/URL]
After weighing the evidence, I feel confident in handing down a ruling; judgment is how statute gets revised, but first, personal philosophies must be set aside.

For instance, do you believe in freedom?

While the illustrations may suggest Sharia law is voluminous; the source of the information is legal (as in how to practice Sharia law) and merely two tomes are required, with a third recommended. Which does not even qualify as a supplement to the ARS in the first image.

Freedom is anything other than free; but the western ideal includes equality under the law and motions for appeal when the law no longer expresses the most ethical equality for our type of society. As a Westerner with an interest in the ethics of freedom and its responsibility, I can plainly state that Sharia law has no place in our society.

It is not a matter of right or wrong, it is a matter of foundations; for as long as I functioned in a society beginning with family, through school, to walking halfway across this land - I have been immersed in American law. A)Respect freedom B)Don't get caught C)Is education enough to avoid disaster.

A culture that has no tradition of freedom is one served by Sharia law. At an estimate the comparative weight of the works tips the scales by at least a factor of fifty; that in order to be free in the western sense is to be governed by more than fifty times the amount of law - and the collection pictured above is the condensed version.

We are not free because we are right; we continue to express our freedom by taking every consideration that we are not wrong, the price of that freedom is that some of our members must be sacrificed upon the bar after four horrendous years of rote memorization. Not so that our lawyers can speak of what is right; but so they can guide the evolutionary process of our justice system furthest away from that which is most likely wrong.

And under such a justice system our culture has evolved to be the most imperial empire never dreamed of by any Caesar. To turn away from a course that has this lowliest of American citizens speaking of ethics, freedom, and shared information in a degree of material wealth unknown to most of the world is to deny every citizen of every country to experience such wealth, of ideas, of knowledge, of sustenance technology that ol' Julie would trade his oak leaves.

America does not have the right to conquer the world; but it has already taken the responsibility. Coca-cola, capitalism, and M-TV on one hand; being the most voracious consumers on the other; it may never be agreed that America was ever right about anything, but Americans are generally safe being not wrong. Like I know anything... in court, I would not be opposed to placing my hand on the Koran rather than the Bible (if such a practice still occurs) where tradition calls for ritual; but that is the extent I would mingle such a work with legislation.

Being distracted by Pegg and fallingblood's irreconcilable differences; I have found one of my own. Sharia seems too much the mortar of an alien foundation to consider such totally outside Islam. The Catholic Church, for example, still has an office of the holy inquisition. Dogma does not make good "law of the people."

 

[Wombat]

but the followers of Christ in the first century understood that he was coming again....

Indeed. They not only "understood that he was coming again" some/many thought it was immanent.

...they had faith that he was the Messiah and applied many of the prophecies to Jesus so we can also say that they believed in and understood the first coming.

Yes, we can see and say that...but at the time what they had come to understand and believe was 100% turn arround oppositional to the teachings of the scriptural authorities (Scribes and Pharisees) and the commonly held perception/expectation.
The followers of Jesus accepted a doctrine that completely flew in the face of everything they had been taught and the culture they had been raised in. >That< takes great courage and an incredible degree of open minded (“awake”) awareness and investigation.

Its interesting to see how they also 'initially' had the view that Jesus was going to destroy the romans and rule as a king in their day....

Indeed. And do not the >same< kinds of expectations abound within Chrisendom today? Rapture, End of the World, Thousand year Reign.....?

Are we any different? If we don't get what we expect would we be awake to other posibilities?

Another man also calculated the timing of Christs 2nd coming...Charles Taze Russell. .

Yes...I remember the name well...I believe he was Judge Taze Russell of the Hebrew (?) University (It has been twenty years...so memory fails). I recall the name because he corresponded with William Miller following 'The Great Dissapointment' of 1844. I am paraphrasing but in essence what he advised Miller was that his maths/timeline was solidly founded...but that the expectation (descent from clouds) was erroneous.
Prompted by Millers work Russell went on to make his own predictions.

And im sure you know something very significant happened in that year (1914). .

Sure. Events of great geopolitical significance. Ancient empires and kingdoms fell.

But my question remains Pegg- "Did anything of religious significance happen in that year- 1844?"

Christs return was not going to be visible.
Matthew 24:30 "And then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven".

That's a viable possibility and interpretation Pegg.

Another viable possibility is that William Miller was right about 1844.

And if anything of religious significance happened in that year...it would be something of a 'coincidence'.......wouldn't it?

What if it was a 'coincidence' not just down to the year...but down to the month and day?


"On May 24, 1844, Samuel Morse sends the first telegraph message "What hath God wrought ?"

Pegg....That message from Morse (a phrase from the Book of Numbers 23:23) was the birth of the very technology that you and I are currently using (with hardly an "awake" thought given to it ;-) to communicate across the world in seconds.
With that message the 'tyrany of distance' ended...and in a very real sense- so did the (old) world. In fact I bet if you look arround where ever you are now you will be hard pressed to find anything recognisable to the first Christians...their world has ended.

If something significant happend in the realm of religion in the days immediatly prior to May 24, 1844 (22-23 May)...would that not be a remarkable 'coincidence' worthy of further investigation?

That is...if we are to stay awake to the posibilities?

 

[Gaura Priya]

This thread is so interesting... I still believe that the Qur'an is divinely inspired and of God, and it is more reliable than the Bible with its many manuscripts...

 

[Wombat]

And under such a justice system our culture has evolved to be the most imperial empire never dreamed of by any Caesar. To turn away from a course that has this lowliest of American citizens speaking of ethics, freedom, and shared information in a degree of material wealth unknown to most of the world is to deny every citizen of every country to experience such wealth, of ideas, of knowledge, of sustenance technology that ol' Julie would trade his oak leaves.
America does not have the right to conquer the world; but it has already taken the responsibility. Coca-cola, capitalism, and M-TV on one hand; being the most voracious consumers on the other; it may never be agreed that America was ever right about anything, but Americans are generally safe being not wrong.."

At its peak the Roman Empire had some 36 military bases on foreign soil.
The British Empire had some 38 military bases on foreign soil.
The American Empire has 40 bases on foreign soil...Congrats...you're winning ;-) The post 9/11 Whitehouse initiated Pentagon conducted inquiry into the primary causes of suicide bombing found that troops on foreign soil was a, if not the, key factor. Think IRA against English, Tamil Tigers, ETA/Spain.
As an Australian I was popular media indocrinated with Rin Tin Tin and Mickey Mouse Club to the point at which I knew the names of most American Presidents before I even knew we had a Prime Minister

I like your post.

I like the cut of your jib.

Now........CLOSE PINE GAP! :slap:

Pine Gap - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Gaura Priya]

Sura 24:2&4 'Flogging'
2. The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.


4. And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations),- flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors;-

"The adulteress and the adulterer, you shall lash each of them with one hundred lashes, and do not let any pity overtake you regarding the system of God if you believe in God and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment.

The adulterer will only marry an adulteress or she who is a polytheist. And the adulteress, she will only be married to an adulterer or he who is a polytheist. And such has been made forbidden for the believers.

And those who accuse the independent females, then they do not bring forth four witnesses, you shall lash them with eighty lashes, and do not accept their testimony ever; and those are the wicked.

Except those who repent after this and do good, then God is Forgiving, Merciful."

-- Qur'an 24:2-5

Surah 5: 'Execution and Amputation'

33. The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;


38. As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.

"The recompense of those who fight God and His messenger, and seek to make corruption in the land, is that they will be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from alternate sides or that they be banished from the land; that is a disgrace for them in this world and in the Hereafter they will have a great retribution.

Except for those who repent before you overpower them, then know that God is Forgiving, Merciful."

-- 5:33-34


"As for the thief, both male and female, you shall cut from their resources 'as a penalty for what they have earned' to be made an example of from God. God is Noble, Wise.

Whoever repents after his wrongdoing and amends, then God will accept his repentance. God is Forgiving, Merciful."

-- 5:38-39


A trusty Qur'an translation: The Message

 

[fallingblood]

the Jews overlooked a vital point about the Messiah. It was foretold that he would come twice, once as a sacrifice to die for obedient men, and then as a reigning king over an everlasting government.
They were so anxious to be delivered from Rome that they overlooked the necessity of the first presence and had eyes only for the glorious second presence.
Thats not Christs fault...he tried to explain thing to them but, like today, the majority reject it.

There was no such point. The Messiah was never said to have to come back twice. He was only suppose to come once, as prophecy stated.

The idea that the Messiah would suffer and die, was completely foreign to Jewish understanding at the time.

and so it was Jews who explained the messiah. The NT writers were jews, yes?

The NT writers were Jews. However, they were also disagreeing with the vast majority of Jews. The blindly believed Jesus was the Messiah, and thus twisted everything to make him try to fit the idea. The fact though is that he was not the Messiah. He did not fulfill Messianic prophecy.

so it took Rome to remove the necessity of obeying the Mosaic law from the Jews... not God? Does this mean the Roman Empire was more powerful then Jehovah?

There is more to the Mosaic law then just animal sacrifice. Rome did not remove the necessity for that, they removed the possibility. Really, Rome did more to change Jewish law than Jesus ever did.

 

[Pegg]

"The adulteress and the adulterer, you shall lash each of them with one hundred lashes, and do not let any pity overtake you regarding the system of God if you believe in God and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment.

The adulterer will only marry an adulteress or she who is a polytheist. And the adulteress, she will only be married to an adulterer or he who is a polytheist. And such has been made forbidden for the believers.

And those who accuse the independent females, then they do not bring forth four witnesses, you shall lash them with eighty lashes, and do not accept their testimony ever; and those are the wicked.

Except those who repent after this and do good, then God is Forgiving, Merciful."

-- Qur'an 24:2-5



"The recompense of those who fight God and His messenger, and seek to make corruption in the land, is that they will be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from alternate sides or that they be banished from the land; that is a disgrace for them in this world and in the Hereafter they will have a great retribution.

Except for those who repent before you overpower them, then know that God is Forgiving, Merciful."

-- 5:33-34


"As for the thief, both male and female, you shall cut from their resources 'as a penalty for what they have earned' to be made an example of from God. God is Noble, Wise.

Whoever repents after his wrongdoing and amends, then God will accept his repentance. God is Forgiving, Merciful."

-- 5:38-39


A trusty Qur'an translation: The Message

How often do repentant ones actually be shown mercy though and avoid the punishment? There is a christian woman in jail in pakistan right now who is begging for mercy but the muslim community are demanding her head for the accusation of blasphemy.

Is God so unreasonable?

The christian way is much more reasonable for it simply says 'do not associate with such ones' ... there is no requirement for any sort of corporal punishment for sinners in the NT. To me this is more reasonable because it does not force someone to obey God... he gives people the choice. The judgment that he will give them in the judgement day will be based on their decision to obey or disobey and so by forcing them to obey the Quran is actually taking away their ability to live by reason of 'faith'

they are living by reason of fear of punishment instead.

Who trully has faith in God and who doesnt'... its a bit hard to tell when people are being forced to obey.

 

[Pegg]

There was no such point. The Messiah was never said to have to come back twice. He was only suppose to come once, as prophecy stated.

the first coming is earthly
Zechariah 9:9 “Be very joyful, O daughter of Zion. Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem. Look! Your king himself comes to you. He is righteous, yes, saved; humble, and riding upon an ***

the 2nd coming is heavenly & with great powerDaniel 7:13 “I kept on beholding in the visions of the night, and, see there! with the clouds of the heavens someone like a son of man happened to be coming; and to the Ancient of Days he gained access, and they brought him up close even before that One. 14 And to him there were given rulership and dignity and kingdom, that the peoples, national groups and languages should all serve even him. His rulership is an indefinitely lasting rulership that will not pass away, and his kingdom one that will not be brought to ruin

2 comings.

The idea that the Messiah would suffer and die, was completely foreign to Jewish understanding at the time.

yes it was because they were focusing on his 2nd coming...with power and glory to rule the nations.

Yet Isaiah 53 says very clearly that he would be killed and rejected
2 And he will come up like a twig before one, and like a root out of waterless land. No stately form does he have, nor any splendor; and when we shall see him, there is not the appearance so that we should desire him. 3 He was despised and was avoided by men,... and we held him as of no account. 4...But we ourselves accounted him as plagued, stricken by God and afflicted. 5 But he was being pierced for our transgression; he was being crushed for our errors....7 He was hard pressed, and he was letting himself be afflicted; yet he would not open his mouth. ...For he was severed from the land of the living ones. Because of the transgression of my people he had the stroke .burial place even with the wicked ones 9 And he will make his , and with the rich class in his death, despite the fact that he had done no violence and there was no deception in his mouth."

The NT writers were Jews. However, they were also disagreeing with the vast majority of Jews. The blindly believed Jesus was the Messiah, and thus twisted everything to make him try to fit the idea. The fact though is that he was not the Messiah. He did not fulfill Messianic prophecy.

Yes, and they disagreed with the vast majority of jews in the same way the prophets of old disagreed with the vast majority of jews. The jews did not have Gods spirit and therefore they could not understand these truths....the disciples of christ had holy spirit upon them and you cannot understand such things without Gods spirit.

There is more to the Mosaic law then just animal sacrifice. Rome did not remove the necessity for that, they removed the possibility. Really, Rome did more to change Jewish law than Jesus ever did.

Jesus never wanted to change the law. He lived the law because he loved Gods law.

 

[fallingblood]

How often do repentant ones actually be shown mercy though and avoid the punishment? There is a christian woman in jail in pakistan right now who is begging for mercy but the muslim community are demanding her head for the accusation of blasphemy.

Is God so unreasonable?

Is he? Did not God condone the killing of witches? Or the slaughter of innocents? Or would it be better to assume those are human actions not driven by God?

People can and do things in the name of religion that do not portray God. You should know that.

The christian way is much more reasonable for it simply says 'do not associate with such ones' ... there is no requirement for any sort of corporal punishment for sinners in the NT. To me this is more reasonable because it does not force someone to obey God... he gives people the choice. The judgment that he will give them in the judgement day will be based on their decision to obey or disobey and so by forcing them to obey the Quran is actually taking away their ability to live by reason of 'faith'

More reasonable? According to the NT, sinners will burn in hell for all eternity.

Plus, God is not forcing anyone to do anything in the Quran. There is still a choice. The Quran does not take away anyone's ability to live by reason of faith. The argument hardly even makes sense. Do I have to follow the Quran word for word to be alright with God? No. It simply doesn't happen.

More so, Christianity has been the backing or disguise for many atrocities. Many of these atrocities were and are done in the name of God, by Christians. Should we judge your religion by those individuals? That is what you're doing with Islam.

Finally, Christians have more than just the New Testament. You also have the Old Testament, which Jesus, and the apostles, as well as Paul, all remained were scripture, and thus should be observed. We really don't need to try to take the Bible out of context (like you did with the Quran) to how it is "evil."

they are living by reason of fear of punishment instead.

Have you ever been a Muslim? I don't think so. So how can you even state something like this?

More so, preaching fire and brimestone is not making people live by reason of fear of punishment? There are many cases in which Christians (not all of them), spread their religion by fear mongering.

I can say one thing though. I've been both Muslim and Christian, and I have to say I had a lot less fear of eternal punishment being a Muslim.

Who trully has faith in God and who doesnt'... its a bit hard to tell when people are being forced to obey.

That just shows you're ignorance, and disrespect for Muslims. To question their faith in God is simply uncalled for. And to say that they are being forced to obey, when you clearly have no personal idea of being a Muslim, and a warped view in total, shows your ignorance, and lack of want for any understanding of Islam.

 

[fallingblood]

the first coming is earthly
Zechariah 9:9 “Be very joyful, O daughter of Zion. Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem. Look! Your king himself comes to you. He is righteous, yes, saved; humble, and riding upon an ***

the 2nd coming is heavenly & with great powerDaniel 7:13 “I kept on beholding in the visions of the night, and, see there! with the clouds of the heavens someone like a son of man happened to be coming; and to the Ancient of Days he gained access, and they brought him up close even before that One. 14 And to him there were given rulership and dignity and kingdom, that the peoples, national groups and languages should all serve even him. His rulership is an indefinitely lasting rulership that will not pass away, and his kingdom one that will not be brought to ruin

2 comings.

First, the son of man discussed in Daniel has nothing to do with Jesus. Actually, it simply means human being. More so, it's talking about a heavenly being, like an angel. It's not talking about a human. You're using Jewish scripture, and thus should have a basic understanding of son of man. It isn't Jesus, nor even a messiah. The verse has nothing to do with the messiah.

Plus, there is no suggestion of two comings. The verses are speaking about two separate entities, only one being the Messiah. More so, Jesus was never a king. So he could not have fulfilled the first verse.

An understanding of Judaism would greatly help.

yes it was because they were focusing on his 2nd coming...with power and glory to rule the nations.

Yet Isaiah 53 says very clearly that he would be killed and rejected

Understanding Judaism would help. Reading Isaiah in context, would help. These verses are not talking about the Messiah. The verses are most likely speaking about Israel. It has nothing to do with the Messiah.

Yes, and they disagreed with the vast majority of jews in the same way the prophets of old disagreed with the vast majority of jews. The jews did not have Gods spirit and therefore they could not understand these truths....the disciples of christ had holy spirit upon them and you cannot understand such things without Gods spirit.

There are many problems there. First, how can you even say that the Jews did not have God's spirit? That in itself shows little respect for other religions.

Second, Jesus never fulfilled Messianic prophecy. People didn't reject him because they couldn't understand the truth. They rejected him because he was a failed Messiah. It is as simple as that.

And really, as for what the disciples though, we have little clues.

Finally, there is no reason to assume that Jesus followers were correct. The reason is quite simple. Jesus did not fulfill messianic prophecy. And much of the scripture quoted to show that he did, has nothing to do with the Messiah.

Jesus never wanted to change the law. He lived the law because he loved Gods law.

So then why is it alright for Christians not to love God's law?

 

[Archer]

Before I ever read the Qur'an I was taught that it was the work of the devil by many christian religions. It seams that the majority of christians see the Qur'an as being a negative or bad book. Do any christians thing the Qur'an is part of scripture or do they mostly think it is an evil book.

Well I loved the portions I have read. People fear what they do not understand.