User login
Author Information
Poll
Why have you visited this website?
To check for updates
11%
Read posts
39%
Contribute to discussions
6%
Share content
3%
Social media brought me here
6%
Tis fate
35%
Total votes: 634
Active forum topics
Recent blog posts
Quick Links
Who's online
There are currently 0 users online.
In the bible Isaac, and not Ishmael, is ordered to be sacrificed to God. He is the promised son of Abraham, and the father of what will become the hebrew people (well technically the nation of israel is Jacob), and very much his beloved son. just before the deed is done God orders him to stop and so he does, then God sends a lamb instead to be sacrificed and Abraham does so - this is the beginning of the covenant.
It is also why we call Jesus the "Lamb of God" because he was both the son and the sacrifice - beginning the New Covenant.
Couldn't he have done that with Christ, or with any of the Prophets for that matter (and in fairness the same can be asked of Christ or our Prophets). lol I think I may be asking you "what was God thinking" which is a little unfair, but it's one of my hangups with Islam. Just like you i'm sure don't really get why there needed to be a crucifixion and resurrection, I don't understand why there needed to be a Muhammad.
lol that's how i've always read it. She wanted him to be happy because they really loved each other - and i'm not a scholar so i'm sure i'm wrong. But I definitely sensed some bitterness in the "gift"
How did God talk to prophets - on a totally random thought, before Muhammad in the Qur'an?
Answer me something Dave, according to your faith does God love me as a muslim?
www.piczo.com/zikr
how can you [u]not[/u] believe in [i]All[/i] of something yet believe its the word of God
www.piczo.com/zikr
You are thinking like a muslim - not a Christian.
We trust the Bible to tell us about God, not biology.
You have to understand, the bible is a written by [i]people[/i], people we have determined were witnessing God or were being talked to by God, and thus offer something instructional about his relationship to us.
These are people who had no concept of science or the world about them - everything seemed miraculous and when they recorded it they would naturally embellish. That's why numbers specifically are so far off. 100,000 soldiers defeating 10,000 soldiers and the like. It's not God giving us a history lesson, it's people who cannot comprehend just how massive the thing was and embellishing with their own interpretations of the science or factuality behind it.
The ten plagues are the classic example.
(are they in the Qur'an too btw?)
Yes, especially.
Jesus Christ is a call [i]back[/i] to God. However consistent with the New Covenant it is a call back out of love and not fear of smiting. He specifically alikened what he was doing to shepharding, and that he would leave the 99 sheep to reclaim the one lost sheep out of love.
It's the whole point.
There is nobody without worth to God. - In fact most of the people he personally sought were the poorest and most despised by others.
Lawyers, tax collectors, poor people, sick people, prostitutes, criminals.
according to your faith, is God going to put me in Heaven or Hell (dying as a muslim) ?
www.piczo.com/zikr
i have looked at your comments in a non-muslim way but believe me it doesnt make sense in the slightest
Which? do you mean witnessed and talked to by [u]Jesus?[/u] (pbuh) or do you mean the other 'part of God, the [u]Father?[/u] :?
www.piczo.com/zikr
Not sure.
Just ignore that bit... brainstorming.
What I can certainly say for now is that we are called to chose him and to follow him and he will [i]lead[/i] us to Heaven. So really what it should be about is "following Christ" because you want to serve and please God, not because you want to get to heaven.
So there is an aspect of choice and intention that is involved and i'm not sure how they effect the answer to your question.
Let me think about those issues, read up a bit and i'll get back to you with an answer in a day or two.
you'll probably give me a diferent answer to which other christians give me (as usual) but anyway..
they said that the christian God loves all humans wether they obey Him or not. but when i asked about the people in Hell they said yes He loves them too but they will still get punished.
it doesnt make sense how can God love you and punish you in Hell at the same time?
whereas in Islam the answer is simple & common sense
www.piczo.com/zikr
The books of the Bible are seperate. The book of Isaiah was either written by Isaiah or more than likely by people who followed his ministry in the latter portion of the 8th Century BC. This was then saved as part of the "Nevi'im" - the collected works of the prophets. Then a long time later comes Ezekiel in the early 6th Century BC, again he either writes his revelations down or more than likely those around him who knew and followed him wrote them down this also added to the "Nevi'im" skip ahead to 60 AD, and we have the letters of the apostles and the early writings of the gospels - like their predecessors written accounts taken down by people who knew and followed Christ. Some time after that we Christians - as distinct though derived from the Jews, stopped differenciating between the Torah (Law), the Neviim (works of the Prophets) and the Ketuvim (Wisdom), and simply called it [i]all[/i] "Biblios" (in greek) or "Bible."
Thus the Bible is the collected works of people's writings and Chronicalings of God's revelations and interactions with humanity throughout the centuries.
It's not like one day Jesus came down and handed us "the Bible." He authored nothing.
Anyway - as a result of the fact people were chronicalling these inspired events and messages the Bible, from a literary standpoint necessarily carries the different thought processes and ways in which a specific group of near eastern people at various different times in history understood God and how he interacted with people. They lived in a preindustrial, patriarchal, and had no understanding of the scientific complexity of the world that we have.
Yet all the same they are recording the interactions between humanity and God, and therefore contain the eternal truth of God's purpose for and relationship with Humanity.
There is no reason that scientific innaccuracies like evolution or world floods should be shocking to us - nor is there any reason we should not find eternal religious truth in it as a result of this. The flood for example - was not worldwide but regional, however from the perspective of those pre-industrial peoples who witnessed the devastation there is no reason to assume it wasn't a worldwide flood. What they thought of geological happenings is of little consequence to me today - I don't have an interest in where when and what magnitude ancient floods were. What does interest me is the underlining message that we are taught about God. Regardless of how large the flood was we are certain that God caused it to happen and wanted it to happen, and the reason we follow the story of Noah is because it tells us directly [i]why[/i] God wanted and allowed it to happen.
Therefore we can still believe in the Bible as the source to which we must refer for God's word - yet not believe in its literary, historic or scientific merits, as that part is so obviously the word of men writing it down.
God is one. Witnessing Jesus [u]is[/u] witnessing God. Consequently we make no difference between the ancient Israelites recording their witnessing of God in the desert, Moses witnessing of God on Mount Sinai or
the Gospel writers and Disciples witnessing God in Jesus Christ.
As a result all of the books of the Bible (except for books of "Wisdom" like proverbs and the Song of Solomon) - were written by people who witnessed God in some form or another and that necessarily includes those who witnessed God in the form of Christ.
Well, with Christianity or any religion for that matter there are problems of authority resulting from (among other things) variations in knowledge, and adherence to sub disciplines. Therefore variation in response shouldn't be shocking to you nor representative of anything consequential.
As for hell, God doesn't punish you - you punish yourself by not choosing him. He wants you to [i]choose[/i] him not to simply follow along because you were told to. He offers salvation and all that is required of you is to take it.
The greatest punishment Hell has to offer is to be denied the presence of God.
The greatest reward Heaven has to offer is the opportunity to serve him - eternally - in his presence.
If you spend a lifetime not choosing to serve and not wanting to serve, hell is a natural - and pitiable result.
But the question about Muslims and Jews specifically is difficult because while you both recognize God you don't recognize his unity, you deny Jesus Christ.
So I wouldn't want to answer until I have scholarship under my belt to back up what I am saying - rather than just speaking off the top of my head with my own interpretation.
Ignoring the 'debate', I'll go back a apage:
The Story of Prophet Isma'eel according to muslims. The sacrifice and Eid -ul -Adha. The christians believe (I think) that it was not Prophet Isma'eel, but Prophet Is'haaq.
Can we have some more details? How did this start the covenant according to the christians?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Admin, see second post on this page:
gosh u guys have almost filled out an entire new page for me to catch up on... but wil have to leave that for tomorrow. must. sleep. now.
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
sorry... too fast ... moving... must ...hold ... on.
So what was the covenant?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Augustus,
At least spell my name right! Ok so I will check the context of Isiah, no problem. But I dont go on anti-christianity websites like the one u named.
I dont agree with the "Jesus(pbuh) praying to his father to help him and to strengthen his spirit". If Jesus(pbuh) was God he wouldnt pray to anyone, end of. Also he wouldnt say things like "I can of myself do nothing", "why call me good? There is only one good and that is the father in heaven", "my father and YOUR father" - (My God and your God). Jesus(pbuh) is referred to as a prophet many times in the Bible. Ok so he raised the dead, so did others. A lot of things which Jesus(pbuh) did were also done by other ppl according to the Bible.
I said u are an idol worshipper bcoz thats the truth.
Quote:
Also, you say that Muhammad(pbuh) wasn't a prophet. Ok so how do you explain the Qur'an with all its amazing scientific facts? This proves that it is God's revelation to the final messanger.
E-V-O-L-U-T-I-O-N.
Figure that one out and get back to me.
Whats that supposed to mean? Just answer the question.
By the way we don't reject Jesus(pbuh) like you reject Muhammad(pbuh). We accept him as the Messiah, one of the mightiest messengers of God, BUT not God. He is not God.
Guys, seeing as this topic started on Zakir Naik, his videos are available to d/load on his website - www.irf.net
The media, government, tried to blow us, but they can't out the flame, or doubt the name.
hey come on dont end the topic it was getting interesting :?
www.piczo.com/zikr
Lol not ending the topic bro.
The media, government, tried to blow us, but they can't out the flame, or doubt the name.
[deleted]
Sorry. I wanted to comment on something...
I was gonna make the point that muslims refer to christians as people if the book. Not idolators.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
admin how come you just copied his reply lol. if your waiting for Daves reply he had to go somewhere he will reply when he is back.
[i]from NO TOPIC post[/i]www.piczo.com/zikr
I was wondering the same thing but it's probably coz he wants my post to be the last, at the bottom so he can read it. Plz don't post under this!
[EDIT BY ADMIN]
This forum is fluid. people will keep discussing things.when he cmes back, just point him to your earlier post. I have removed the repetition.
The media, government, tried to blow us, but they can't out the flame, or doubt the name.
err. no. he doesnt. :? in fact he is always mentioning them and saying 'they dont know what they're on about'. he disagrees with evangelicals who do not represent the whole of christianity. u should read his post properly.
there's nothing funny about that guys - he had a point. 'Allahuakbar' u were making the point that the Quran contains 'amazing scientific facts'. true, but Augustus was asking 'then y does it not back evolution.' fair point but i'd say: its 'the theory of' evolution. at one point in time, scientists thought the earth was flat.
Islam does support the theory of evolution to some extent - almost everything except the part that says 'humans evolved from apes' and 'there was no involvement of God in this process'.
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
ok dust i'll read posts properly i hope you do too.....
so, Allahuakbar copy it all again...
www.piczo.com/zikr
yea, u really should start reading posts
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
Wass,
Sorry it took so long i've been incredibly busy.
After talking to my wife's (i'll explain that) priest and my pastor and reading up on Guthrie and some other sources the answer is the following:
1. Muslims believe in a different God, a different Jesus Christ and a different plan of salvation.
2. There is no salvation outside of Jesus Christ (not Isa)
3. God offered Jesus Christ as our salvation to [u]all people[/u] [i]because[/i] God loves [u]all people[/u] not just Christians, and we are given the ability to choose him, or to not. The consequences of not chosing him are to lose salvation and therefore Hell.
4. Superceding everything we know or can learn from scripture regarding our relationship with God, especially as it effects his judgement of us, is God's will at any given moment. Therefore - superceding everything I just said is the caveat "but God will decide"
There is no scholarship I found that indicates God no longer loves people in hell, nor is there scholarship that indicates if he does. Therefore I cannot answer authoritatively on that part of the question.
wait there this is confusing me :?
i thought christians believed jesus was god, many christians have told me this, i thought you pray to jesus christ, are not christians supposed to ask forgiveness to jesus christ,
however i have seen Jesus christ refered to as gods son and refered to as lord.
This is all confusing to a non-christian-please elaborate
Sorry I see why that confused you.
I misspoke, the Father sent the Son for the salvation of all people. Jesus Christ (the Son) is God and the Father is God. I have an annoying habit of using "the Father" and "God" interchangably which is confusing when you are talking about the Trinity.
Jesus Christ is called "the Son" because his relationship to "the Father" is filial - it's a description of how they are connected, not necessarily the literal father son relationship like you have to your father.
The abbreviated explanation of the Trinity is this:
[img]http://www.biblewheel.com/images/TrinityShield_300.jpg[/img]
It's called the "Trinity Shield" and is a visual tool to help understand the concept.
The letter D stands for "Deus" meaning "God"
P stands for "Pater" meaning "Father"
F stands for "Filius" meaning "Son"
SS Stands for "Spiritus Sanctus" meaning "Holy Spirit"
On the lines between P, F, SS and D you see "est" which means "is"
On the edges between P, F and SS you see "non est" which means "is not"
That's the trinitarian model in a nutshell "The Son is God, the Father is God, the Holy Spirit is God, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is not the Father, the Father is not the Son"
lol I wouldn't use/consult/consider the opinions of/give the time of day to Answering-Islam.com if you paid me in diamond tipped gold krugerrands.
Aside from the fact I don't like them and aside from the fact they don't know anything about Christianity much less Islam, I prefer to make my own judgements especially ones as important as my religious convictions. The internet is a nice research tool - but it's not the oracle of delphi and I don't intend to outsource my decision making to it.
If you go to a place like answering-islam.com, answering-christianity.com, scientology.com, myreligionisthebestreligionever.com, everythingisayisright.com you're going to get filtered information. And when you make decisions with filtered information... you're not really arriving at your own conclusions you're just jumping on to a track somebody laid down for you so you could arrive at a conclusion they've already prepared for you.
I'm just a little bit too stubborn/independent for that. And I don't need krugerrands.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
It's an Ahmad Deedat argument that is only circulated on anti-Christian websites. It's copied from a lecture of his called "What the Bible says about Muhammad the Prophet of Islam," a sort of laundry list of selective reading. The reason it's not quoted anywhere else is that mainstream scholars never took Deedat seriously. I just dismantled his argument with the simple added step of [i]reading the entire[/i] Chapter, odd considering he claimed to have read the whole Bible. The thing is i'm only the lay, so if a layman can tear down Deedat just by reading more than two sentances what are the chances doctorates of Canon law are paying much attention to him? Consequently Deedat arguments only appear in the obscure footnotes of cyberspace or amongst writers with no credibility to lose.
Again you're quoting way out of context.
John 5:30 I am not able of myself to do anything; according as I hear I judge, and my judgment is righteous, [i]because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father who sent me.[/i]
Thus if you read just a few more words than "I can do nothing by myself" you find a reiteration that Jesus is "sent" from "the Father" which only [u]reinforces[/u] the Trinity model.
Matthew 19:17 i'll give you a bi since you are quoting a common misinterpretation, the actual text from greek reads:
"ο δε ειπεν αυτω τι με λεγεις αγαθον ουδεις αγαθος ει μη εις ο θεος ει δε θελεις εισελθειν εις την ζωην τηρησον τας εντολας"
"And he said unto him, [i]Why askest thou me concerning that which is good?[/i] One there is who is good: but if thou wouldest enter into life, keep the commandments."
Then Jesus goes on to tell the rich man what is good and how to be - he tells him to keep the commandments and asks him to abandon his money. He does not wish to do so, walks away very sad then the disciples ask Jesus what they will recieve for following Jesus and he promises them thrones in heaven over all the tribes of Israel (obviously symbolic). Thus you have Jesus challenging the man asking him why he is asking Jesus Christ what is good, telling the man only God can answer that question, then he proceeds to answer it.
Don't take my word for it - check the greek yourself (it's byzantine greek) and then read it in context of the entire passage, the conclusion is obvious.
I honestly have no idea what you mean by "my father and your father" however please clarify there.
An who else raised people from the dead? Or cast out demons who ran away shrieking that he is the Son of God? (Lk. 8:28)
What you are overlooking is that Jesus Christ is also referred to as the Son of God, he even calls himself that (Luke 22:70) and he is tried for saying he was "Son of the Most High" before the Sanhedrin - it's ostensibly what he was executed for. Ignoring that is the [i]only way[/i] you could reduce him to only a mere prophet.
Using the Bible to prove Islam is a futile effort.
Much like Wass gets different answers depending on who he asks about Christianity - I get different answers about this too. I noticed it very much depends on what mood the speaker is in. Very often if they are annoyed I am a kaffir, or if they want to ingratiate themselves on me I am a "people of the book" which leads to an interesting can of worms when I ask precisely what that means as a religious designation rather than a political one.
Therefore i'm going to need you to hit me with some scholarship or something, who says I am an idol worshipper and on what basis?
My short answer is that there are no "amazing scientific facts" in the Qur'an. You bring up things like fetal development by alikening a Qur'anic passage to the development of the womb and claiming there was absolutely no way anybody could have known this, when in reality Hippocrates and Galen amongst a host of other pagan greeks nearly 1000 years before Muhammad were already writing treatises on human embryo development based on observations they made with pig and chick development.
On top of this (and far more importantly in my opinion) you ignore the fact that the Qur'an [i]conflicts[/i] with science on a great number of fields. All this said I am willing to give the Qur'an its day in court based on its [b]religious merits[/b] - not scientific, since it lacks the latter and besides such inquiry doesn't indicate anything about God anyway.
Until you can explain satisfactorially why science is wrong in so many areas the Qur'an conflicts with it - any incidental alignments really seem to be a moot point. Wouldn't you agree? It either has to be completely factually correct for that line of though, or not - no middle ground.
I posed this same question to an innumerable evangelicals who are obsessed with this "infallible bible" nonsense.
Still waiting on their evidence too.
Yes, you reject Jesus the Christ. The names "emmanuel" and "khristos" don't actually hold any meaning if you divorce his connection to God like that. It's a non-sequitur.
But here is the 2.1 billion dollar question - Why do muslims think that if they can disprove the divinity of Christ they are convincing Christians that Muhammad is a Prophet?
lol Annette's after me - gnight folks
its this part now that is confusing, if the son (jesus) is god
and the father(god) is god,
and the holy father is god
you have 3 gods :?
how can god be a father to himself :?:
They are the same God. Three distinct parts or ways we experience God.
He sent a part of himself to the world to live and die as a human, however this does not mean that he left heaven or stopped being God. God is able to be in all of us at the same time he is able to govern the universe at the same time he was able to walk among us. The other parts/aspects/personae of God were active communicative and unified with Jesus during his time on Earth.
That he was sent to Earth by himself and was [i]born[/i] as a man (John 11:27) while still being in heaven is why he called himself the Son of God (Luke 22:70) and one with God (John 10:30) at the same time.
Thanks for that youve explained better than any of my uni mates could
this is extremely similar to what a hindu told me at my work place, i asked how can you have so many gods , how can god be on earth and in the heavens at the same time, he said its a misconception that hindus have many gods,he only prays to one god as there is one god but god takes many forms these different , he can take the form as an elephant, monkey and human and still be in the heavens , just that he acknowledges all the different forms, i guess this is similar to christians who believe god could take a form of a human i.e. jesus, and still be in heaven
[/quote]so in actaul fact christians believe jesus was not gods son , because son means 'a male human offspring'(collins dictionary) , so jesus was god and son is used as some sort of expression :?: , so god sent himself to earth :?:
so when Jesus comes back to earth, will you refer to him as god :?:
also i am to believe that the bible was not written by jesus/god/holy spirit, so who wrote it and how do christians know it was really gods words :?:
Pages