Why should a Christian even look into Islam as a Possible true Faith?

[2ndpillar]

False or not, it is a significant event for the end times.

Even a blind squirrel will find a nut. It only requires one bad prophecy to undo a supposed prophet. As for the end time, well, you can always prophesize the "end", but it requires more to predict the day or the hour.

 

[Ebionite]

Thus all the Holy Books up to and Including the Quran were sealed. Muhammad being the Seal of the Prophets, indicating that the next Messengers from God would break this seals and release the meanings.

It's not clear that the sealed book of Isaiah refers to the Holy Books of any religion.

Isaiah is not talking about some unknown character coming out of some contrived prophet who was called the "praised one' (Muhammad). The seal is broken by the "Lion that is from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David" (Re 5:5).

For context, the book was originally sealed by Daniel:

But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Daniel 12:4

The idea of running is present in Habakkuk, where the watchman describes the vision of the time of the end.

I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved.
And YHWH answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make [it] plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.
For the vision [is] yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.
Habakkuk 2:1-3

The vision is associated with the valley of vision of Isaiah 22. Isaiah 22:22 speaks of the key of David, which relates to the root of David of Revelation 5:5 by the key and door of Revelation 3:

And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
Revelation 3:7

Revelation 3:3 refers to the thief, which connects back to the Habakkuk as the watchman.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Apparently, all the Abrahamic religions supposedly believe in the God of Abraham.

Yes, apparently so.
But, when Jesus said, He has come from the same God, the Jews did not and do not believe. Likewise, when Muhammad said, He is the Messenger of the same God of Abraham, both Christians and Jews do not believe. But the question was why, we do not see in our time, anyone who says, I believe in God of Abraham, but I do not believe, that same God spoke to Moses. Why?

 

[Ebionite]

But the question was why, we do not see in our time, anyone who says, I believe in God of Abraham, but I do not believe, that same God spoke to Moses. Why?

Because the politics of religion involves assuming the role of judge. In the Mosaic law Moses had that role, so there was motivation to marginalize it, for example by redefining Elohim as the Trinity.

And not as Moses, [which] put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
2 Corinthians 3:13

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that hangeth on a tree:
Galatians 3:13

And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise [their] children, neither to walk after the customs.
Acts 21:21

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Because the politics of religion involves assuming the role of judge. In the Mosaic law Moses had that role, so there was motivation to marginalize it, for example by redefining Elohim as the Trinity.

And not as Moses, [which] put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
2 Corinthians 3:13

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that hangeth on a tree:
Galatians 3:13

And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise [their] children, neither to walk after the customs.
Acts 21:21

No, i don't think that is the reason.
There was a time, that majority of people of Persia were followers of Zoroaster. But if you look now, their population is almost extincted. Less than 0.1 percent of Perisan population now are Zoroasterians. The same happend to followers of Abraham.
There was a time, (before Moses), and upto sometime after Moses, there were many followers of Abraham.
If anyone asked them, who is the true Prophet, they would have replied, Abraham. If anyone asked them, what about Moses, they would have replied, moses is a false prophet. He is a murderer who scaped from the town.
But, now they are extinct.
There will come a time, that, there will not be a single Christian on earth anymore. Every people last for a certain period. But, while their population is majority, they cannot believe it. They dont realize, people come and go.

 

[Dao Hao Now]

No, the original question was about suggestions.

Your link is to post# 54
The first 2 lines of which are;

This doesn’t answer the question asked;
Are you suggesting there is no such thing as objectivity?

The first line indicates that the question was asked previously.
Post #49 was where the original question was asked;…,,,, from post# 49

Are you suggesting that there is no such thing as objectivity?

Again in post# 54

This doesn’t answer the question asked;
Are you suggesting there is no such thing as objectivity?

I then prompted you again in post# 59 with;

Still haven’t answered my question.

And then again in post#141 quoted the original question again from post# 49;

Are you suggesting that there is no such thing as objectivity?

All the same question.

Is English not your primary language?
The word “suggesting” in the question is not a noun (the subject)…..it’s a verb.
It means…..
“Are you saying”…
“Are you implying”…
“Are you proposing”…
“Are you submitting”…
“Are you espousing”…
“Are you insinuating”…
“Are you proffering”…
“Are you eluding”…
“Are you inferring”…
“Are you arguing”…
“Are you claiming”…

Take your pick
All of these pertaining to whether….
objectivity exists.
Or, if you prefer — your wording of….

whether or not objectivity is real.

 

[Dao Hao Now]

I didn't say that, we look for a piece to "fit" into a known image.

I realize you didn’t say that.
Unfortunately, it’s the very thing that happens when you start with an assumption — rather than from neutral point that you feel is too difficult.

You recall you started by assuming…..

By "assuming" I mean, assuming it can be true,

You’ll recall where I suggested that the better approach is to start without assumptions;

There, in my opinion, is your first mistake.
Why make either assumption?

Why assume it can be true before any objective evidence indicates that it may be?
Why claim to “know it is definitely false”?
Wouldn’t the better alternative, be to not assume either until such time as some objective evidence comes along to determine if one or the other is likely true?

Which is where you deemed that as “most difficult”……

sure, that is the best way. To start from a neutral point. But, in practice, it is one of the most difficult things to do. One needs to become clean from all he has heard or learned, and taken as true, and start from a neutral point.

Instead you start with…..

By "assuming" I mean, assuming it can be true,

You then go to…..

we can first make an assumption, then later prove that assumption was a correct assumption. Nothing is wrong with that approach.

And then to……

Because in that approach I can eventually show the assumption was a true assumption.

And end with…..

That image, is the Truth.

Sure sounds like seeking things that fit the assumption to me.

 

[Ebionite]

The word “suggesting” in the question is not a noun (the subject)…..it’s a verb.
It means…..
“Are you saying”…
“Are you implying”…
“Are you proposing”…
“Are you submitting”…
“Are you espousing”…
“Are you insinuating”…
“Are you proffering”…
“Are you eluding”…
“Are you inferring”…
“Are you arguing”…
“Are you claiming”…

No, you don't get to redefine the terms. A claim and a suggestion are quite different things.

 

[Dao Hao Now]

When you asked “how can you be sure that you are not veiled from the truth?”

I explained;

By only accepting that which can be objectively demonstrated.

Your reply….

I claim the same thing. Why then, I have a different conclusion than you?

Why different conclusion?
Simple…..your conclusion can in fact not be objectively demonstrated……

dont claim I can prove Bahai Faith is True to anyone.
But, if we can start based on the assumption that Jewish Faith is true, then I can provide a consistent way, and show how the later Faiths are also True, from the same God.

If you could objectively demonstrate the truth of Baha’i Faith….you could prove it to someone.
Anything based on assumptions can not be objectively demonstrated……

I cannot prove it to others. But it is proved to me. There is a difference.

This is obviously subjective and not objective and therefore can not be objectively demonstrated…..

When I say, "I cannot prove it to others but, it is proved to me", I mean it takes too much to prove it to others. It took me several years to investigate and be proved to me. I cannot spend to share that much information, even if someone is truly and sincerely willing to investigate, let alone most people are not serious in knowing all that.

Again, if you could objectively demonstrate it, it could be proved to others simply by objectively demonstrating it…..
Particularly to people who are “sincerely willing to investigate it objectively.

When I say, "I cannot prove it to others but, it is proved to me", I mean it takes too much to prove it to others.

Simply objectively demonstrating it would do the trick.

i didn't doubt. When did I say, I doubt about anything?
I only thought it would be fair to start from neutral point and see where I get.
the motivation behind it, was not "doubt", but wanting to fairly investigate what I already believed to be true. There wasn't anything in the first place that cause me to doubt.

How do you jibe this statement with what you claimed in your previous post of what about 35 minutes earlier?…….

I didn't say that, we look for a piece to "fit" into a known image.
I said, when one investigates into Scriptures, we "discover" signs, that, are like pieces of a picture or puzzle. Once you investigate, you see the whole picture.
That's different than, if you already have an image, and try to make that image with pieces of puzzle. In this case, you do not know what the image looks like in the beginning. That image, is the Truth.

Try not to throw out your back!

Huh? Lol.

The case in point concerning doubt.
You know…..
The whole claptrap about being taught religion from leaders who misinterpreted religion by their ideas, so learned the religion wrong, so you see religion falsely, but don’t know that, but the religion is real, but what you learned was false…
Seems pretty doubtful to me.

 

[Dao Hao Now]

No, you don't get to redefine the terms. A claim and a suggestion are quite different things.

So you did understand the question…..
I gave you 12 verbs to pick from (including the original)
Why not simply answer it?

The best you can do is contest 1 contextual synonym?……
Sad!

 

[Ebionite]

I gave you 12 verbs to pick from (including the original)
Why not simply answer it?

Because the underlying issue is objectivity. An answer that implies certainty also implies that objectivity is attainable in a forum like RF.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Why different conclusion?

Someone makes a claim.
The case goes to the court. The judge gathers all the info that supports the claim and are against the claim.
Then after a careful investigation into the all the pieces of information, makes a conclusion, and gives a verdict.
I have done a significant investigation, but you haven't done that yet.
Not to blame. But just the way I see it.
Everyone is that Judge for themselves.
Even, when two judges investgate into the case, their verdict can be different. Why?
One reason could be being biased. Another reason, can be, they may have some presumptions.
another reason could be, making mistake in understanding the information, therefore coming to different conclusion.


The one who claimed is Baha'u'llah who claimed to be Manifestation of God.
The information that supports it, are the Scriptures, and history. The info that is against His case, are the words and opinions of the enemies or opposition at that time, or now.
It is quite a lot of info to consider. it requires a complete investigation.
This is the first reason, my conclusion is different than yours, that, I have done the investigation, Simply because I happend to know about Baha'u'llah much sooner than you.

Simple…..your conclusion can in fact not be objectively demonstrated……

It can be demonstrated objectively, but in practise it is very time comsuming, and I honestly do not believe too many people sincerely would be after its truth, and that stops me from wasting too much time on it.
I am not interst it in proving to anyone, as I dont have any motivation for doing so.
But I can give you some title of the reasons That will help for those who are interested in investigating the case farther by themselves.
Note that each one of these reasons, by itself requires investigating it and each one requires spending quite a long time to find the data, and carefully analyzing them.

Note that, it is like a case in a court. While, one specific reason by itself is not a proof, but when those reasons or evidences are put together, it solves the case, therefore, do not break the reasons in isolation from others, saying this reason does not prove it.

If you could objectively demonstrate the truth of Baha’i Faith….you could prove it to someone.
Anything based on assumptions can not be objectively demonstrated……

This is obviously subjective and not objective and therefore can not be objectively demonstrated…..

Again, if you could objectively demonstrate it, it could be proved to others simply by objectively demonstrating it…..
Particularly to people who are “sincerely willing to investigate it objectively.

Simply objectively demonstrating it would do the trick.

I can provide some of the main reasons, but it be out of this thread. If you want, you can make a thread, specifically related to proofs of Baha'u'llah, and I will participate.
this thread, is meant for Muslims vs Christians as described in the OP.
i will not be discussing Baha'u'llah in this thread.

 

[2ndpillar]

But the question was why, we do not see in our time, anyone who says, I believe in God of Abraham, but I do not believe, that same God spoke to Moses. Why?

I don't know, but it seems that "Christians" and Jews believe that God spoke to Moses. As for Islamist, I don't remember reading anything about them not believing that God spoke to Moses, but their Koran says that the book of the people (Jews) is from God, and that "book" refers to God speaking to Moses.

 

[Ebionite]

I don't know, but it seems that "Christians" and Jews believe that God spoke to Moses. As for Islamist, I don't remember reading anything about them not believing that God spoke to Moses, but their Koran says that the book of the people (Jews) is from God, and that "book" refers to God speaking to Moses.

The Quran says that Moses was sent by Allah. His name appears 136 times in the Quran.

 

[2ndpillar]

It's not clear that the sealed book of Isaiah refers to the Holy Books of any religion.


For context, the book was originally sealed by Daniel:

But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Daniel 12:4

The idea of running is present in Habakkuk, where the watchman describes the vision of the time of the end.

I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved.
And YHWH answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make [it] plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.
For the vision [is] yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.
Habakkuk 2:1-3

The vision is associated with the valley of vision of Isaiah 22. Isaiah 22:22 speaks of the key of David, which relates to the root of David of Revelation 5:5 by the key and door of Revelation 3:

And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
Revelation 3:7

Revelation 3:3 refers to the thief, which connects back to the Habakkuk as the watchman.

The hidden message refers to Matthew 13:13-14 & Isaiah 6:9, whereas Yeshua described the "kingdom of heaven" in parables, so that the "wicked" (Daniel 12:10) would not have eyes or ears to "understand". It is only hidden from the "wicked"/"lawless". The message in "parables" says that the "wicked"/"tares" would be protected until the "end of the age", when they would be the "first" to be gathered and then thrown into the "fire" (Matthew 13:30 & 41-42). Baha did not understand, nor did he blow a horn to warn the people of the "wrath to come" (Mt 3:7). He apparently tried to unite the varies false religions to unite under one banner, much the same as Constantine, and Abd al-Malik did to unite the Romans and the Arabs under a unified religious state banner. In the end, according to Daniel 2, the united Roman-Arab contingent, iron and clay, will fall along with the Greek, Persian and Babylonians (Iraq), all at the same time. You can state that everyone will "fall", but you nor Baha can state the hour or day. You are both as clueless as any drug addict found on the streets of San Francisco. You apparently don't know when, or the character of the actors. As for Isaiah 22:15-25, that is with respect to who the keys of David were given to, and who was put in charge of the royal household (church), that was Peter bar Jonas, and his heir the pope, in which they will "fall" in "that day", the day of the LORD (Joel 2:31-32), and anyone hanging on them will be "cut off".

 

[Ebionite]

You can state that everyone will "fall", but you nor Baha can state the hour or day.

Not everyone will fall. Can you state the hour or day?

 

[2ndpillar]

Not everyone will fall. Can you state the hour or day?

Per Isaiah 22:15-25, those who hang on the heir of Peter, the pope, will fall, "in that day". If Yeshua couldn't state the hour or the day, then one would be hard pressed to better him, although he did say, "you shall do greater things than me", for he would be in heaven, helping. According to Hosea 2 & 3, the return will be after "two days" (2000 years), in the 3rd day. (Hosea 3:2). Per Matthew 7:24-27, those who do not heed his message will "fall". The "Christians", the followers of the false prophet Paul, a wolf in sheep's clothing, have nailed the "Word" to the cross. It is not working out well for them, and it will according to Matthew 7:12 & 24:21, result in them walking down a wide path to destruction/great tribulation.

 

[Ebionite]

Per Isaiah 22:15-25, those who hang on the heir of Peter, the pope, will fall, "in that day". If Yeshua couldn't state the hour or the day, then one would be hard pressed to better him, although he did say, "you shall do greater things than me", for he would be in heaven, helping.

If you don't know the hour or the day then it's unfair to criticize others for not knowing it.

According to Hosea 2 & 3, the return will be after "two days" (2000 years), in the 3rd day. (Hosea 3:2). Per Matthew 7:24-27, those who do not heed his message will "fall". The "Christians", the followers of the false prophet Paul, a wolf in sheep's clothing, have nailed the "Word" to the cross. It is not working out well for them, and it will according to Matthew 7:12 & 24:21, result in them walking down a wide path to destruction/great tribulation.

It's Hosea 6:2, not 3:2, and it's about being healed, not the return.

The builder symbolism of Matthew 7:24 contrasts with that of Habakkuk 2:12, which follows from a description of Paul as the proud man.

 

[BrotherAlameen]

Jesus clearly said, No one comes to the Father except through Me. As Bible also says, clearly Jesus is Son of God. He died for the sins of others. As long as one believes in Jesus, he or she will be in heaven.
Beside this, there is no where in the Bible that says, after Jesus, God will reveal another Book called Quran through a Prophet called Muhammad from Arabia.
Jesus taught Love. After Him, no need for a false prophet to come and teach war.

So, three things for the Muslims to respond:

1. Do you even consider that your religion can be false? When did Jesus say, Muhammad comes. He warned there will be many false prophets.

2. Why should even a Christian believe for one Moment Islam can even possibly be true religion, when clearly Jesus said He is the only way to the Father. He clearly said, that He is the only Son of God?

3. Do you even care to have an answer to these questions, or you are just so sure that your religion is true, and you go to heaven. Do you consider that, your beliefs could just be based on Geographical location or family, and that from childhood you were brainwashed to believe Islam is true? Maybe you were brainwashed, how do you know?

I want to see how Muslims respond to these questions?

The main reason why Christians believe in Jesus is because God cannot die and therefore without him sending someone by his side, his only begotten son, the entrance for heaven wouldn’t have existed.

The references you have quoted from the Bible don’t prove Jesus is God because he isn’t. The trinity itself is a Pagan Doctrine as well and not actually biblical.

Allah does appear in the Bible, Yes. During the time when Apostle Paul preached at Athens, he gave reference to the “Unknown God” which is another one of the names of Allah and gave direct reference to him being the true God confirming that Allah is God indeed but to know more about him, they’d need to accept Jesus, repent off their idolatry and get baptized in Jesus name to receive the Holy Ghost and learn more about Jesus. Nonetheless, Mohammed wasn’t said to come, but rather The Gift of the Holy Ghost.

 

[2ndpillar]

If you don't know the hour or the day then it's unfair to criticize others for not knowing it.


It's Hosea 6:2, not 3:2, and it's about being healed, not the return.

The builder symbolism of Matthew 7:24 contrasts with that of Habakkuk 2:12, which follows from a description of Paul as the proud man.

I, unlike Baha, do not profess to be a prophet.
Hosea 5:15 -6:2 "I will go away and return to My place Until they acknowledge their guilt... He will revive us after two days"

After leaving, he will return after two days, which is 2000 years, with respect to a day being as a thousand years. You are not "healed", nor is Judah and Ephraim/Israel healed, as of today, so you must be waiting for a "return". Matthew 7:24, is that the "house"/church, which does not heed the message of the son of man will "fall".