How Can A Muslim Marry A Christian?
-
Christians and Unitarians are not the same thing. First of all to be a Christian you have to believe that there is only one God and that is God (Allah). You have to believe in the Holy Trinity. God the Father, God the Son, and The Holy Spirit. Also that Jesus is God's son. That he died and rose again. If a person does not believe those things then they are not a Christian. A Unitarian does not believe in the Holy Trinity, so he would not be a Christian.
A Jehovah's witness is not a Christian. They do not believe in the Holy Trinity, or that Jesus is God's son.
To me it sounds like you are operating under "The Church's" definition of what a Christian is. My understanding of the meaning "Christian" is, one who attempts to be "Christ-like". Therefore, if in pursuit of learning the truth about Jesus, one's understanding of the Gospel's leads them to reject the Trinity, this does not make them any less of a Christian. In my opinion it makes them closer to being Christ-like. Calling Unitarians, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc. non-Christians because of there rejection of the Trinitarian concept parallels calling persons who reject Hadith being viewed as non-Muslims because they do not follow mainstream Muslim doctrine.
Brian
-
Yeah however even without making any form of image of Muhammad Sunnis and Shiahs are already idolizing him anyway. So what is the point of forbidding the portraying him? Besides, in Al Quran God is the only one who can not be made an image of.
the idea that maybe one day ppl will get loss and worship these statues and images like the ppl in my story , well that's all in my opinion but i say it bcuz there isn't any picture of Mohamed (peace be upon him) and it's forbidden to show his face in any movie ..etc , i'm not sure that's the point tho
-
And here I will probably get in deep trouble with other Catholics that may scan this sight, but, based on my understanding, here's how things lie in my head
Jesus is the product of a miraculous creation. (Not that all life isn't miraculous) That is, he didn't come about in the usual way. God COULD have simply said "Be" and he would be, a full grown man right where God wanted him to be. Instead, God chose to give him a mother, a birth and a childhood. As we do refer to Mary (Maryam) as Jesus's mother, we can only logically draw that half of who Jesus is came from her (though yes I know in the end all comes from God). Mind you we have no confirmation on that at all. Did Mary genetically contribute to Jesus, or was she basically carrying around the package? It's a question that hasn't specifically been answered, but in light of two faiths professing her to be his mother, we make that leap. If half of what made Jesus is Mary, then the other half is....what exactly? God's will. So for practical intents and purposes, if Jesus has a mother, then he has a father in God. PRACTICAL..not so much literal. No one is implying that Jesus came about in the usual way.
The point made in the Qu'ran is that many Christians take Christ out of context. He is, in their eyes, held equal to God, which, is probably not a good idea. Now this isn't cause to diminish him or his role in history and faith. He IS the Messiah, that much is covered in the Qu'ran as well. But he is not, nor should he ever be placed on equal footing with God. In the original Trinitarian concept he is not.
The Trinitarian explanation commonly accepted is that of St. Patrick, who explained the Trinity using a Shamrock (a wildflower characterized by stems supporting three independent leaves joined at their bases). He pointed to the leaf in the center, sitting tall and straight and said "When you think of the relationship of Jesus to God and the Holy Spirit, think of it like this shamrock. Three leaves, independent. This one at the top is God, and the other two are Jesus and the Holy Spirit." All part of the same plant the Will of God, but holding independent places in history and teaching. And the other two always inferior to the first. Many Christians do forget that last part.
Jesus's conception, birth, life and death are all miraculous.. no matter whether you believe in the Qu'ran or the Bible. He was divinely conceived, born under miraculous circumstances, lived to teach a faith growing corrupt and dark in itself to look for the light, and his death...well, the Christian version (Crucifixtion, Resurrection, Ascension) speaks for itself...but don't you think the Qu'ranic version holds a bit of miracle to it as well? For God to prtect Jesus and invoke his ascension while allowing the populous to believe he had been killed (Which ever version of that, the traditional or the Ahmed Deedat version you believe) is some pretty outstanding stuff.
I'm not proselytyzing here, I'm trying more to open up a degree of understanding for the reverence Christians hold for Christ. Too often I see Muslims degrading people of other faiths, instead of being respectful of them. And Far Far too often I see Muslims decry Judaism and Christianity without ever having read the Bible or the Torah and Talmud.
Can a marriage work between a Christian and a Muslim? I don't know yet. But so far so good. It's a LOT of work, and a lot of maintaining the core values of our faiths Love, respect, kindness, mercy.
-
Though Christians are definitely mushrikeen, they are a special category of mushrikeen idolators which Muslim men are allowed to marry, because their idolatry is not that severe and therefore their likelihood of embracing Islam is greater than an average idolator like a hindu, zoroastrian, etc.
-
Though Christians are definitely mushrikeen, they are a special category of mushrikeen idolators which Muslim men are allowed to marry, because their idolatry is not that severe and therefore their likelihood of embracing Islam is greater than an average idolator like a hindu, zoroastrian, etc.
Actually, no, they (who do it) are continuously condemned for upholding Jesus as a son of an omnipotent God, and Allat or some other. So no, it isn't "lesser idolatry".
-
they are a special category of mushrikeen idolators which Muslim men are allowed to marry, because their idolatry is not that severe and therefore their likelihood of embracing Islam is greater than an average idolator like a hindu, zoroastrian, etc.
Maybe mushrikeen should have a color code, like terror threat levels in the U.S. -
Peace
Though Christians are definitely mushrikeen, they are a special category of mushrikeen idolators which Muslim men are allowed to marry, because their idolatry is not that severe and therefore their likelihood of embracing Islam is greater than an average idolator like a hindu, zoroastrian, etc.
Christians that worship Jesus arent Christian and it is stated so in the Quran of those that worship Jesus and Mary. They reject the truth and are idolaters. Mushrikeen is mushrikeen.
Pagans indeed are those who say that GOD is the Messiah, the son of Mary. Say, "Who could oppose GOD if He willed to annihilate the Messiah, son of Mary, and his mother, and everyone on earth?" To GOD belongs the sovereignty of the heavens and the earth, and everything between them. He creates whatever He wills. GOD is Omnipotent.
5116 GOD will say, "O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, `Make me and my mother idols beside GOD?' " He will say, "Be You glorified. I could not utter what was not right. Had I said it, You already would have known it. You know my thoughts, and I do not know Your thoughts. You know all the secrets.
5117 "I told them only what You commanded me to say, that `You shall worship GOD, my Lord and your Lord.' I was a witness among them for as long as I lived with them. When You terminated my life on earth, You became the Watcher over them. You witness all things.
1937 And yet, the sects are at variance among themselves Woe, then, unto all who deny the truth when that awesome Day will appear!
4365 But factions from among those began to hold divergent views woe, then, unto those who are bent on evildoing - for the suffering on a grie?vous Day!
Peace
-
amuslim the translation you are using is very faulty. 517 does not say pagans (mushrikeen) it says disbelievers
They indeed have disbelieved who say Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. (517)
-
Peace Yusha
amuslim the translation you are using is very faulty. 517 does not say pagans (mushrikeen) it says disbelievers
They indeed have disbelieved who say Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. (517)
A pagan is a disbeliever, it can mean that or a polythiest. I actually look at other translations before I post one and most just said disbeliever except for this one. I figure that since the ayat is speaking of those that mention partners with God, Pagan would be the best translation of Kafar.
Again, these are not Christians.
Peace
-
All idolators (mushrikeen) are disbelievers, but not all disbelievers are idolators. Satan is a disbeliever (kafir) but he is not an idolator, indeed he believes in Allah as the one Lord, but he is still a disbeliever. This is why people should use a more precise translation, especially for the Quran, no word it uses is of any consequence, but purposely used by Allah in His infinite wisdom.
-
Peace Yusha
All idolators (mushrikeen) are disbelievers, but not all disbelievers are idolators. Satan is a disbeliever (kafir) but he is not an idolator, indeed he believes in Allah as the one Lord, but he is still a disbeliever. This is why people should use a more precise translation, especially for the Quran, no word it uses is of any consequence, but purposely used by Allah in His infinite wisdom.
So are you telling me that by making Jesus as Allah is not shirk? Are "Christians" that do this exempt from being shirk, even though what they do is shirk?
Peace
-
So are you telling me that by making Jesus as Allah is not shirk? Are "Christians" that do this exempt from being shirk, even though what they do is shirk?
Peace
Of course it is shirk! I am the one who said Christians are mushrikeen. All I am saying to you is your translation of the Quran is not completely accurate, that's all.
-
And behold, We said to the angels "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so iblis he refused and was haughty He was of those who reject Faith (234)
Iblis is among the KAFIREEN which means he disbelieves in Allah or His attributes or even in the status of Adam (Alaihi salaam) which is enough to render one as a disbeliever.
-
A rejector, not a disbeliever.
-
That is simply Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation. He translates disbeliever as one who rejects faith. Both mean the same thing. Here is an alternative translation by Picktall
And when We said unto the angels Prostrate yourselves before Adam, they fell prostrate, all save Iblis. He demurred through pride, and so became a disbeliever. (234)
-
It's a bad translation. Disbeliever means someone who denies their perception, and Satan never denied his perceptions. Translating "kafir" as "disbeliever" or "unbeliever" causes much strife and misleads people into thinking Islam preaches against non-adherents.
-
Kafir means disbeliever, rejector of faith, unbeliever, non-believer, rejector, etc., they all mean the same thing in English. And the fact of the matter is the Holy Quran preaches very strongly against disbelievers (non-Muslims).
If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah., never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good). (385)
There is no need to be politically correct about the Holy Quran in order to please the disbelievers.