Why cant Christians agree on Jesus pbuh

[Servant_of_the_One1]

For us muslims its plain simple Jesus pbuh was prophet and messenger of Allah, we reject all the socalled divinity claimed against Jesus.


But when it comes to christians, they are so divided about him!
1) trinity
2) son of god
3) two nature
4) incarnation of god
5) angel michael
6) prophet and messiah( Early jewish christians)

 

[Mycroft]

Because that's what you get from a chaotically cobbled-together anthology of disjointed documents, composed, revised, translated, distorted and 'improved' by hundreds of anonymous authors, editors and copyists, unknown to us and mostly unknown to each other, spanning nine centuries.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

Because that's what you get from a chaotically cobbled-together anthology of disjointed documents, composed, revised, translated, distorted and 'improved' by hundreds of anonymous authors, editors and copyists, unknown to us and mostly unknown to each other, spanning nine centuries.

Amazing!!

And at the time of Nicean 323 they burned many gospels.
It seems christianity is very disorganised religion when it comes about the nature of Jesus pbuh.

U wont find this within muslims about Muhammad pbuh, or jews about Moses pbuh, or Buddhists about Buddha.

 

[rosends]

Amazing!!

And at the time of Nicean 323 they burned many gospels.
It seems christianity is very disorganised religion when it comes about the nature of Jesus pbuh.

U wont find this within muslims about Muhammad pbuh, or jews about Moses pbuh, or Buddhists about Buddha.

There actually is division within Judaism as some view Moses as an historical figure and others don't. And some Muslims are Sunni while others are Shia, indicating a pretty basic division in the central leadership concept. Is it fair to ask why Muslims can't agree on what the assignment of leadership was upon the death of Mohammed?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

And at the time of Nicean 323 they burned many gospels.

There actually is division within Judaism as some view Moses as an historical figure and others don't. And some Muslims are Sunni while others are Shia, indicating a pretty basic division in the central leadership concept. Is it fair to ask why Muslims can't agree on what the assignment of leadership was upon the death of Mohammed?

And, apparently, there is not even consensus on the date of the Council of Nicaea or its aftermath.

 

[Aquitaine]

Amazing!!

And at the time of Nicean 323 they burned many gospels.
It seems christianity is very disorganised religion when it comes about the nature of Jesus pbuh.

U wont find this within muslims about Muhammad pbuh, or jews about Moses pbuh, or Buddhists about Buddha.

What are you on about - Islam has it's own internal strife. Just look at the Shia/Sunni split for example.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

There actually is division within Judaism as some view Moses as an historical figure and others don't. And some Muslims are Sunni while others are Shia, indicating a pretty basic division in the central leadership concept. Is it fair to ask why Muslims can't agree on what the assignment of leadership was upon the death of Mohammed?

U do know that the disagreement between shias and sunnis is regarding the political leadership?
They never disagree about that Muhammad pbuh was the last prophet and messenger of Allah.


I wouldnt make this topic if the disagreement amongst christians was about the leadership after Jesus pbuh left. However their main disagreement is not leadership but the Nature of Jesus pbuh.

 

[Aquitaine]

U do know that the disagreement between shias and sunnis is regarding the political leadership?
They never disagree about that Muhammad pbuh was the last prophet and messenger of Allah.


I wouldnt make this topic if the disagreement amongst christians was about the leadership after Jesus pbuh left. However their main disagreement is not leadership but the Nature of Jesus pbuh.

But they do disagree over the validity of some of his teachings through the Hadiths. Some rather important teachings, too.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

What are you on about - Islam has it's own internal strife. Just look at the Shia/Sunni split for example.

That is totally something different.

Show me any shia and sunni that are disagreeing about Prophet Muhammad pbuh's nature....

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

But they do disagree over the validity of some of his teachings through the Hadiths. Some rather important teachings, too.

Are they disagreeing about his nature? That he is the last prophet and messenger of Allah?

 

[Aquitaine]

That is totally something different.

Show me any shia and sunni that are disagreeing about Prophet Muhammad pbuh's nature....

"Quran only" Muslims, along with disagreements over which Hadiths are legitimate, if any.

 

[Aquitaine]

Are they disagreeing about his nature? That he is the last prophet and messenger of Allah?

There are Muslims even on RF alone who argue with other Muslims over whether or not Mohammad condoned marrying and having sex with children, for starters.

 

[kepha31]

Amazing!!

And at the time of Nicean 323 they burned many gospels.

Amazing! You can get the Gnostic gospels on line, so they didn't do a very good job of burning them. Even if they did burn certain ones off the face of the earth, you would have no way of knowing they existed in the first place. Besides, if certain books were actually burned, somebody somewhere would have made note of it. I would like to see some scholarly documentation of the Council of Nicae burning anything, and Dan Brown, author of the Divinci Code, is a fictional writer, not a scholar, where much of this pop history comes from. Nicae started in 325, not 323.

 

[kepha31]

And, apparently, there is not even consensus on the date of the Council of Nicaea or its aftermath.

There is. 325 AD. The Council of Nicae gets Modernist heat because it was a Catholic council. It dealt with the Arian heresy, the Meletian schism, settled the date for Easter, clarified (did not invent) the divinity of Christ, and:

The Council of Nicea dealt with many of the same canonical issues in 325 that are dealt with in the Church's current canon law, both Eastern and Western. Its decrees concern the qualifications, precedence and jurisdiction of bishops and priests (canons 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 19), the proper role of deacons at the celebration of the Eucharist (canon 18), measures to ensure the validity of the ordination of bishops (canon 4), uniformity in the celebration of the Church's Eucharistic Liturgy (canon 20), the preservation of the celibacy of the clergy (canon 3) and the treatment of penitents and their reconciliation (canons 11, 12, 13, 14). It's worth quoting a few of these canons that show the Council's Catholic character quite unambiguously.​

Baptists at Nicea by Fr. Hugh Barbour, O.Praem. ::

Christianity without consistency is not Christianity.

 

[rosends]

U do know that the disagreement between shias and sunnis is regarding the political leadership?
They never disagree about that Muhammad pbuh was the last prophet and messenger of Allah.


I wouldnt make this topic if the disagreement amongst christians was about the leadership after Jesus pbuh left. However their main disagreement is not leadership but the Nature of Jesus pbuh.

So just the Ahmadis argue over the nature of Mohammed as the last prophet? Is the Mahdi not a prophet? The distinctions between the Imam as hidden, or not is too confusing for me to follow.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

So just the Ahmadis argue over the nature of Mohammed as the last prophet? Is the Mahdi not a prophet? The distinctions between the Imam as hidden, or not is too confusing for me to follow.

Ahmadis are not regarded as muslims by all scholars from shias and sunnis. They disbelieve in Allah's words and the prophet's words. It is clearly stated in the quran and hadith that Muhammad pbuh is the final prophet & messenger.


As for Mahdi, he is not born at the moment and he is not a prophet either. He is rightly guided leader of the muslims. Only shias believe that he is in safehouse(hidden) somewhere in the earth/heaven.


@Aquitaine Come back when u find disagreement amongst muslims about weither prophet Muhammad pbuh is human, god, son of god, angel! U are missing the point.

 

[Desert Snake]

For us muslims its plain simple Jesus pbuh was prophet and messenger of Allah, we reject all the socalled divinity claimed against Jesus.


But when it comes to christians, they are so divided about him!
1) trinity
2) son of god
3) two nature
4) incarnation of god
5) angel michael
6) prophet and messiah( Early jewish christians)

Any religion that grows to a certain size is going to become factionalized. You question has already been answered, basically, however, there might be other answers. The Xian faith grew outside of a Canon, a text. When the Scripture was written down, as is the case with all language, the narrative can be interpreted in various ways.
Backtrack.
The pagan priesthood temples in Europe, wanted to maintain power. They had to stay legit, while, at the same time, advocating this ''new' religion. Major problem. So they incorporated, and meshed, some beliefs, into Christianity, the new religion which was essentially taking over, with their own beliefs.
We are, to an extent, unable to ''prove'' certain things about our beliefs; yes, there is disagreement. I find myself, unable to ''prove'' certain beliefs I have about Jesus, etc., from Scripture. There is interpretational room, here. There is a way to come to a few different conclusions, from reading the same text.
This is where, the earliest traditional beliefs, would come into play.
My beliefs, that Jesus is literally G-d, and the 'trinity' is like a description, rather than three separate individuals, is what I believe the earliest beliefs to be. Yes, many disagree. However you really need to study this material, outside of a church bias, etc., to start to understand how the various interpretations came about.

 

[Vishvavajra]

But when it comes to christians, they are so divided about him!
1) trinity
2) son of god
3) two nature
4) incarnation of god

All of those are different ways of expressing the same thing, and all are accepted by orthodox Christians. "Son of God," by the way, doesn't refer to literal genetic descent. It's a title of anointed kings and judges in the Hebrew Bible.

5) angel michael

Never heard that one before.

6) prophet and messiah( Early jewish christians)

No, that's pretty much all Christians right there.

The only odd one in your list is #5. The rest are accepted by the vast majority of Christians today, although that hasn't always been the case (e.g. the Trinity wasn't an idea that existed in early Christianity, and not all Christians have historically viewed Jesus as an incarnation of God).

 

[psychoslice]

Amazing!!

And at the time of Nicean 323 they burned many gospels.
It seems christianity is very disorganised religion when it comes about the nature of Jesus pbuh.

U wont find this within muslims about Muhammad pbuh, or jews about Moses pbuh, or Buddhists about Buddha.

Just imagine how the world would be today, if all those books weren't burnt, what were they trying to hide ?.

 

[LuisDantas]

For us muslims its plain simple Jesus pbuh was prophet and messenger of Allah, we reject all the socalled divinity claimed against Jesus.


But when it comes to christians, they are so divided about him!
1) trinity
2) son of god
3) two nature
4) incarnation of god
5) angel michael
6) prophet and messiah( Early jewish christians)

Because ultimately it matters little even whether there was a historical Jesus. He is in practice just a convenient symbol and reminder of various doctrines, not all of them even conceivably compatible with each other.

It is sad that Christianity has made itself a religion of beliefs. It leads to so many cross-purposes.