Can we pray for our christian friends?
-
Their 'exact' word is actually 'fully DIVINE and fully human' at the same time..
Xtianity (just like sunniism, shiitism and others) is the result of syncretism from many traditions/beliefs/cultures..The word "DIVINE" was a loan word from Latin "DIVO" which also a loan word Proto-Indo-Iranian (Ancient central asia + caucasus language) DEIWO with literal meanings of "Shining"... ANother derivation of "DEIWO" are found in Sanskrit "DEVA".. with the same (literal) meanings "Shining".
In cultural context the meanings of "DEIWO" become "Shining Beings" -> "Supernatural / Coming From Heaven beings".
Within Hinduism, Krishna is another example of figure who often refered as "DEVA", much of it is due to a segment within "Gita" where it's told Krishna shows his 'true form' to Arjuna which being described as "Majesticly Shining".
Within eastern cultural traditions.. the 'universal force / power' a.k.a 'Brahman' often 'descended/manifested' as 'avatar'. These avatars are often 'descended' from 'heaven' to meddle with human affairs. Mostly their objective of 'descending' is to restore 'dharma' (Good deeds / righteousness) upon the earth. The word 'avatar' by itself has a literal meanings of 'descent'.
A quite similar concept can be found within western cultural traditions, only the names are different, they call 'avatar' as 'angelos' (Greek for messenger) or 'Malakh' (Semitic). They believe that these 'angels' / 'malakh' are also 'made of light' (shining) and 'supernatural'.. Although within their tradition there are many legends and stories where those avatar/malakh/angel can also take form as 'human being' with flesh and blood. Similar story also appears in the Quran.
As thus the statement of X as "Divine and human" at the same time is actually carry the notions that X is a kind of 'the universal force /power''s angel or avatar but not 'the universal power / force' itself. Although they are some kind of 'the universal force / power's manifestation.
As thus; to which concept does one map the word "God" to?.. to "Avatar"/"DEIWO"? or to the "Universal Force/Power"?
I left that to each individuals...Just sharing that with you guys for your better understanding...
Salam / Peace
Good point you made. If you heard a lecture by Gary Miller, a Christian convert to Islam who used to be a Christian clergy, he said that he used to ask his teachers at the clergy what does it mean God has a son and what kind of son is that and yet he was never able to get an answer. It was unexplainable. Gary Miller used to conduct lectures with Ahmed Deedat.
But the Koran does talk about Jews and Christians as monotheist. And these religions claim monotheism. I think that Jesus was a test because of his unique nature. His birth was unique and he left the Earth uniquely. Just like the Koran is ahistorical so we were left with the Sunni and Shia fitna. The Koran does not talk about places and names and biographies and so the later generation had to manufacture them. I think its a fitna to see what people will do later on.
But in the end faith is an individual issue. And the Koran did talk about Jews and Christians as monotheist. But not all have faith. Therefore just like we do against Sunni and Shias, we must attcak their doctrine and not their faith as we do not know what really goes insiode the mind of a Christian since the Trinity is actually impossible.
2.62] Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve
Not all of them are alike; a party of the people of the Book stand for the right, they recite the Verses of God during the hours of the night, prostrating themselves in prayer. They believe in God and the Last Day; they enjoin good and forbid wrong; and they hasten in good works; and they are among the righteous. And whatever good they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for God knows well those who are God fearing. 3113-115
And there are, certainly, among the people of the Book, those who believe in God and in that which has been revealed to you, and in that which has been revealed to them, humbling themselves before God. They do not sell the Verses of God for a little price, for them is a reward with their Lord. Surely, God is Swift in account. 3199
So here the Koran recognizes that there are Jewish believers and Christian believers. We must focus on attacking the Trinity doctrine or the teachings of the Talmud and Sunnah and not faith since we never will know who hasfaith in God and who does not. What a Christian may say about Jesus is one thing and what he actually believes is another. We can never really know because the Trinity is unexplainable.
-
Good point you made. If you heard a lecture by Gary Miller, a Christian convert to Islam who used to be a Christian clergy, he said that he used to ask his teachers at the clergy what does it mean God has a son and what kind of son is that and yet he was never able to get an answer.
The terminology of "Son Of God", is a translated word from Hebrew "Ben Elohym" and it has a plural form of "Beney Elohym". Literally it does mean "Son Of God", however it's also an idiom and the actual meanings in such context is actually "God's man" (Singular) or "God's people" (plural / beney elohym). Not all Christians aware of this (mis) translation / misconception of Hebrew idiom.
The same case happened with the terminology of "DIVINE" which I have posted earlier.. a case of misconception..
I would like to highlight the similarity between the case of Muhammad and Jesus..
Christians ulema/clerics/priest/ruler will always insist on the importance of "Jesus Divinity" because
God --> transfer power to --> Jesus --> transfer power to --> Church
They will often (mis) quote a verse in the Gospel which said that "Peter is the 'foundation' of church" and as thus a transfer of authority from Jesus to Peter.
And they shall bicker against each others on 'whose church did Peter build first", Catholics will insist that it's the church in Rome, (and as thus they inherit the 'authority' Orthodox will insist that it's the church in Antioch (and as thus they inherit the 'authority' and the Coptics will insist that it's the church in Alexandria (and as thus they inherit the 'authority'.
The same story with Muhammadans... struggle for power to control the masses..
When the dogma of "Jesus Divinity" crumbled... so does their authority/power....
Salam / Peace
-
The terminology of "Son Of God", is a translated word from Hebrew "Ben Elohym" and it has a plural form of "Beney Elohym". Literally it does mean "Son Of God", however it's also an idiom and the actual meanings in such context is actually "God's man" (Singular) or "God's people" (plural / beney elohym). Not all Christians aware of this (mis) translation / misconception of Hebrew idiom.
The same case happened with the terminology of "DIVINE" which I have posted earlier.. a case of misconception..
I would like to highlight the similarity between the case of Muhammad and Jesus..
Christians ulema/clerics/priest/ruler will always insist on the importance of "Jesus Divinity" because
God --> transfer power to --> Jesus --> transfer power to --> Church
They will often (mis) quote a verse in the Gospel which said that "Peter is the 'foundation' of church" and as thus a transfer of authority from Jesus to Peter.
And they shall bicker against each others on 'whose church did Peter build first", Catholics will insist that it's the church in Rome, (and as thus they inherit the 'authority' Orthodox will insist that it's the church in Antioch (and as thus they inherit the 'authority' and the Coptics will insist that it's the church in Alexandria (and as thus they inherit the 'authority'.
The same story with Muhammadans... struggle for power to control the masses..
When the dogma of "Jesus Divinity" crumbled... so does their authority/power....
Salam / Peace
Could be. But about Christianity it seems to me that the Romans did not struggle with authority the way the Abbasids did. After all without Muhammad what was Mecca? The Roman empire was there long before Christianity. But the Abbasids were only there because of their geneology with Muhammad. The collapse of the Ummayids, also Meccan, and the riots that toook place during Al Mutawakkil's reign in the early years of the Abbasids must have made them realize that with limited authority and historic status they could not rely on geneology alone. It was during the Mutawakkil's reign that the concept of the Sunnah emerged and became the state religion. I am not very acquainted with the Church histroy so I may not know. Joseph Schacht wrote an interesting piece about how the Muhammedan Sunnah came to be.
The need of creating some kind of theoretical justification for what so far had been an instinctive reliance on the opinions of the majority, led, from the first decades of the second/eighth century onwards, to the living tradition being retrojected, and to its being ascribed to some of the great hgures of the past. This process, too, began in Kufa, where the stage of doctrine achieved in the time of Hammad b. Abi Sulayman (d. I20/73 was attributed to Ibrahim al-Nakha'i (d. 95-6/7I3-I5). The Medinese followed suit and retrojected their own teaching to a number of ancient authorities who had died about the turn of the century, some of whom later became known as the 'seven jurists of Medina'. At the same time as the doctrine of the school of Kufa was retrospectively attributed to Ibrahim al-Nakha'i, a similar body of doctrine was directly connected with the very beginnings of Islam in Kufa by being attributed to Ibn Mas'ud, a Companion of the Prophet who had come to live in that city, and Ibrahim al-Nakha'i became the main transmitter of that body of doctrine, too. In the same way, other Companions of the Prophet became the eponyms of the schools of Medina and of Mecca. One further step in the search for a solid theoretical foundation of the doctrine of the ancient schools was taken in 'Iraq, very early in the second/eighth century, when the term ' Sunna of the Prophet ' was transferred from its political and theological into a legal context, and identified with the sunna, the ideal practice of the local community and the corresponding doctrine of its scholars. This term, which was taken over by the school of Syria, expressed the axiom that the practice of the Muslims derived from the practice of the Prophet, but it did not as yet imply the existence of positive information in the form of ' Traditions ' (Hadith), that the Prophet by his words or acts had in fact originated or approved any particular practice. It was not long before these Traditions, too, came into existence, and the persons who put them into circulation were the Traditionists.
The ancient schools of law themselves represented, in one aspect, an Islamic opposition to popular and administrative practice under the later Umayyads, and the opposition group which developed into the Traditionist movement emphasized this tendency. As long as a Companion of the Prophet had been the final authority for the doctrine of a school on a particular point, it was sufficient for a divergent doctrine to be put under the aegis of another Companion of equal or even higher authority, as happened in Kufa where all kinds of minority opinions were attributed to the Caliph 'Ali, who had made Kufa his capital. But after the general authority of the Prophet himself had been invoked by identifying the established doctrine with his sunna, a more specific reference to him was needed, and there appeared detailed statements or 'Traditions' which claimed to be the reports of ear- or eye-witnesses on the words or acts of the Prophet, handed down orally by an uninterrupted chain of trustworthy persons. Very soon the emphasis shifted from proposing certain opinions in opposition to the ancient schools to disseminating Traditions from the Prophet as such, and the movement of the Traditionists, which was to develop into a separate branch of Islamic religious learning, came into being. It was the main thesis of the Traditionists that formal Traditions from the Prophet superseded the living tradition of the school. The Traditionists existed in all great centres of Islam, where they formed groups in opposition to, but nevertheless in contact with, the local schools of law. Initially the ancient schools offered strong resistance to the disturbing element represented by the Traditions, but they had no real defence against their rising tide; they had to express their own doctrines in Traditions which allegedly went back to the Prophet, and to take increasing notice of the Traditions produced by their opponents. Finally the outlines and many details of Islamic law were cast into the form of Traditions from the Prophet. In this way, one of the greatest and most successful literary fictions came into being.
http//www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/schacht.asp
Authority moved backwards as the Meccan dynasties shielded themselves more and more with Muhammad and his companions because that is all Mecca really had. Their geneology status kept them in the game but could not keep them there long so they had to create a theocracy that can give them more authority. The person who would end up giving them that is Muhammad himself. So Muhammad'e enemies, the Meccans, ended up being his biggest beneficiaries. How odd.
-
Could be. But about Christianity it seems to me that the Romans did not struggle with authority the way the Abbasids did.
Well they did...
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Wars_of_the_Tetrarchy_%28306-324_AD%29Religion is a perfect tool for ruler to secure his authority and control the mind of the people..
"In 321, Constantine instructed that Christians and non-Christians should be united in observing the venerable day of the sun. Constantine himself disliked the risks to societal stability that religious disputes and controversies brought with them, preferring where possible to establish an orthodoxy."
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_GreatAnd since he control the church (he can appoint a pope who shall be the head of the church), the power layout of God->Jesus->Church give him the comfort of projecting an 'illusion' to the mind of the people that he got his authority from "Heaven". If the 'pope' dare to go against his will well he can easily replace the pope with somebody else..
The layout of
God->Jesus->Many Churches
Is too much of a headache for him... that's why he feel the need to 'unite' the churches (with force if possible) into one easily controllable church (Catholic Church) where Catholic = Universal.This mark the 'importance' of 'conversion', conversion into state universal religion shall establish control of the ruler over the people. In return converted people shall earn extra benefits of being regarded as the 'state citizen'. That's why converted out from the state religion is considered as an act of 'hideous crime' and punishable by death.
Compare the Roman layout with the current layout in Saudi's Kingdom.. it''s practically the same..
Salam / Peace
-
Well they did...
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Wars_of_the_Tetrarchy_%28306-324_AD%29Religion is a perfect tool for ruler to secure his authority and control the mind of the people..
"In 321, Constantine instructed that Christians and non-Christians should be united in observing the venerable day of the sun. Constantine himself disliked the risks to societal stability that religious disputes and controversies brought with them, preferring where possible to establish an orthodoxy."
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_GreatAnd since he control the church (he can appoint a pope who shall be the head of the church), the power layout of God->Jesus->Church give him the comfort of projecting an 'illusion' to the mind of the people that he got his authority from "Heaven". If the 'pope' dare to go against his will well he can easily replace the pope with somebody else..
The layout of
God->Jesus->Many Churches
Is too much of a headache for him... that's why he feel the need to 'unite' the churches (with force if possible) into one easily controllable church (Catholic Church) where Catholic = Universal.This mark the 'importance' of 'conversion', conversion into state universal religion shall establish control of the ruler over the people. In return converted people shall earn extra benefits of being regarded as the 'state citizen'. That's why converted out from the state religion is considered as an act of 'hideous crime' and punishable by death.
Compare the Roman layout with the current layout in Saudi's Kingdom.. it''s practically the same..
Salam / Peace
I think what you are talking about is a theocracy. I was talking about how authority was formulated. That Chrisianity was seen by the Romans of a way to unite the roman Empire and keep it stable is something I agree with after all all theocracies are for that reason. Like the Pharoah and ancient Egypt and Babylon and Greece. However I was talking about how that authority came to be. The Ummayids and Abbasids were already Islamic but could not attain authority so the Sunnah came to the rescue. So the Sunnah was added for authority. The Romans had authority but were not Christian and became Christian. This is why there is no concept like the Sunnah in Christianity but we find that in Islam and Judaism. Both these religions traced their added traditions to some prophetic figure for it to enjoy authority. Something the Romans did not have to do. The celebration of Christmas is a good example of that, it is not scriptural however Christians celebrate Christmas and even at different times like the Ethiopian Church and Eastern Orthodox Church. However you will never be able to establish something like that in Islam without some religious evidence.
-
Good point you made. If you heard a lecture by Gary Miller, a Christian convert to Islam who used to be a Christian clergy, he said that he used to ask his teachers at the clergy what does it mean God has a son and what kind of son is that and yet he was never able to get an answer. It was unexplainable. Gary Miller used to conduct lectures with Ahmed Deedat.
But the Koran does talk about Jews and Christians as monotheist. And these religions claim monotheism. I think that Jesus was a test because of his unique nature. His birth was unique and he left the Earth uniquely. Just like the Koran is ahistorical so we were left with the Sunni and Shia fitna. The Koran does not talk about places and names and biographies and so the later generation had to manufacture them. I think its a fitna to see what people will do later on.
But in the end faith is an individual issue. And the Koran did talk about Jews and Christians as monotheist. But not all have faith. Therefore just like we do against Sunni and Shias, we must attcak their doctrine and not their faith as we do not know what really goes insiode the mind of a Christian since the Trinity is actually impossible.
2.62] Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve
Not all of them are alike; a party of the people of the Book stand for the right, they recite the Verses of God during the hours of the night, prostrating themselves in prayer. They believe in God and the Last Day; they enjoin good and forbid wrong; and they hasten in good works; and they are among the righteous. And whatever good they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for God knows well those who are God fearing. 3113-115
And there are, certainly, among the people of the Book, those who believe in God and in that which has been revealed to you, and in that which has been revealed to them, humbling themselves before God. They do not sell the Verses of God for a little price, for them is a reward with their Lord. Surely, God is Swift in account. 3199
So here the Koran recognizes that there are Jewish believers and Christian believers. We must focus on attacking the Trinity doctrine or the teachings of the Talmud and Sunnah and not faith since we never will know who hasfaith in God and who does not. What a Christian may say about Jesus is one thing and what he actually believes is another. We can never really know because the Trinity is unexplainable.
Just as a side note Sunnies and shiites are among 'people of the book' .
Peace
-
The celebration of Christmas is a good example of that, it is not scriptural however Christians celebrate Christmas and even at different times like the Ethiopian Church and Eastern Orthodox Church. However you will never be able to establish something like that in Islam without some religious evidence.
How about the "Mawlid"??
There's no Mawlid on Hadith/Sunna is it?
It was justified by "Ijma Ulema" as commanded by their Emir/Sultan...
Similarly with Christmas.. justified through "Pope Edict".. as commanded by Constantine..And I agree.. Eid-Al-Adha, The Tawaf and Kissing the black stone.. got it's 'authority' from Hadith/Sunna..
They need to create the hadith/sunna to justify those... apparently they didn't stop there..Just as a side note Sunnies and shiites are among 'people of the book' .
Good point..
Salam / Peace
-
How about the "Mawlid"??
There's no Mawlid on Hadith/Sunna is it?
It was justified by "Ijma Ulema" as commanded by their Emir/Sultan...
Similarly with Christmas.. justified through "Pope Edict".. as commanded by Constantine..And I agree.. Eid-Al-Adha, The Tawaf and Kissing the black stone.. got it's 'authority' from Hadith/Sunna..
They need to create the hadith/sunna to justify those... apparently they didn't stop there..Good point..
Salam / Peace
Good point about the Mawlid but isn't that the reason why the Salafis reject it? They say it is not the Sunnah. Yes Sufism did diverge but they were able to do so because the Sufi sheikhs enjoyed authority. Sufism is a very unique aspect of Islam but the reason I think they are slowly dying now is precisely that their enemies label them as not being the followers of the Sunnah.
But good point and now I see why some have said Sufism is very similar to Christianity.
-
Sure you can it's not forbidden in Quran..
-
The people of the Book in the Koran are the Jews.
No. plz read
4171 O people of the scripture, do not transgress the limits of your religion, and do not say about GOD except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was a messenger of GOD, and His word that He had sent to Mary, and a revelation from Him. Therefore, you shall believe in GOD and His messengers. You shall not say, "Trinity." You shall refrain from this for your own good. GOD is only one god. Be He glorified; He is much too glorious to have a son. To Him belongs everything in the heavens and everything on earth. GOD suffices as Lord and Master.
Sunnies and shiites are among 'people of the book.
No. They are believers. According to Quran, believers are the people who accept what was sent to Mohammad. Sunnies and shiites accept Quran as divine scripture. But they don't follow it properly ,that's why Mohammad's only complaint about his people will not be that they rejected anything or associated partners to Allah but just
2530 The messenger said, "My Lord, my people have deserted this Quran."
People of the book are those who already had scripture before revelation of Quran. They are practically christians and jews (and may be some more). Someone among the people of the book, after being introduced with Quran's message becomes a "believer or rejecter of the people of the book" depending whether he accepts or rejects the message.
3199 Surely, some followers of the previous scriptures do believe in GOD, and in what was revealed to you, and in what was revealed to them. They reverence GOD, and they never trade away GOD's revelations for a cheap price. These will receive their recompense from their Lord. GOD is the most efficient in reckoning.
peace
-
Good answer... bravo
It's a sectarian spirit for 'not to pray' / 'not to help' / 'not to bless' those who are 'THEM' and 'NOT US'...
yes , and it's also a sectarian spirit to call those who maintain salat and give zaakat "Mohammadans" and "mushreeks" while calling themselves "monoteists" instead muslims and befriending those who reject Quran.
-
No. plz read
4171 O people of the scripture, do not transgress the limits of your religion, and do not say about GOD except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was a messenger of GOD, and His word that He had sent to Mary, and a revelation from Him. Therefore, you shall believe in GOD and His messengers. You shall not say, "Trinity." You shall refrain from this for your own good. GOD is only one god. Be He glorified; He is much too glorious to have a son. To Him belongs everything in the heavens and everything on earth. GOD suffices as Lord and Master.
No. They are believers. According to Quran, believers are the people who accept what was sent to Mohammad. Sunnies and shiites accept Quran as divine scripture. But they don't follow it properly ,that's why Mohammad's only complaint about his people will not be that they rejected anything or associated partners to Allah but just
2530 The messenger said, "My Lord, my people have deserted this Quran."
People of the book are those who already had scripture before revelation of Quran. They are practically christians and jews (and may be some more). Someone among the people of the book, after being introduced with Quran's message becomes a "believer or rejecter of the people of the book" depending whether he accepts or rejects the message.
3199 Surely, some followers of the previous scriptures do believe in GOD, and in what was revealed to you, and in what was revealed to them. They reverence GOD, and they never trade away GOD's revelations for a cheap price. These will receive their recompense from their Lord. GOD is the most efficient in reckoning.
peace
People of the book are the Jews and not Christians. The Rabbis to this day will tell you they rejected Jesus because he claimed to be god. However the real reason why they rejected him is the same reason Sunnis and Shias reject us.
4.153.173 The people of the Book ask thee to cause a book to descend to them from heaven Indeed they asked Moses for an even greater (miracle), for they said "Show us Allah in public," but they were dazed for their presumption, with thunder and lightning. Yet they worshipped the calf even after clear signs had come to them; even so we forgave them; and gave Moses manifest proofs of authority. And for their covenant we raised over them (the towering height) of Mount (Sinai); and (on another occasion) we said "Enter the gate with humility"; and (once again) we commanded them "Transgress not in the matter of the sabbath." And we took from them a solemn covenant. (They have incurred divine displeasure) In that they broke their covenant; that they rejected the signs of Allah. that they slew the Messengers in defiance of right; that they said, "Our hearts are the wrappings (which preserve Allah.s Word; We need no more)";- Nay, Allah hath set the seal on their hearts for their blasphemy, and little is it they believe;- That they rejected Faith; that they uttered against Mary a grave false charge; That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not- Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;- And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them;- For the iniquity of the Jews We made unlawful for them certain (foods) good and wholesome which had been lawful for them;- in that they hindered many from Allah.s Way;- That they took usury, though they were forbidden; and that they devoured men's substance wrongfully;- we have prepared for those among them who reject faith a grievous punishment. But those among them who are well-grounded in knowledge, and the believers, believe in what hath been revealed to thee and what was revealed before thee And (especially) those who establish regular prayer and practise regular charity and believe in Allah and in the Last Day To them shall We soon give a great reward. We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms. Of some apostles We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah spoke direct;- Messenger. who gave good news as well as warning, that mankind, after (the coming) of the apostles, should have no plea against Allah. For Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise. But Allah beareth witness that what He hath sent unto thee He hath sent from His (own) knowledge, and the angels bear witness But enough is Allah for a witness. Those who reject Faith and keep off (men) from the way of Allah, have verily strayed far, far away from the Path. Those who reject Faith and do wrong,- Allah will not forgive them nor guide them to any way- Except the way of Hell, to dwell therein for ever. And this to Allah is easy. O Mankind! The Messenger hath come to you in truth from Allah. believe in him It is best for you. But if ye reject Faith, to Allah belong all things in the heavens and on earth And Allah is All-knowing, All-wise. O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" desist it will be better for you for Allah is one Allah. Glory be to Him (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs. Christ disdaineth nor to serve and worship Allah, nor do the angels, those nearest (to Allah) those who disdain His worship and are arrogant,-He will gather them all together unto Himself to (answer). But to those who believe and do deeds of righteousness, He will give their (due) rewards,- and more, out of His bounty But those who are disdainful and arrogant, He will punish with a grievous penalty; Nor will they find, besides Allah, any to protect or help them.
As can be seen it is talking about the Jews and not Christians. Christians are refered to as "nasara" in the Koran. I am not sure about the Trinity part. So it could be refering to Christians as well however looking at the context it seems to be talking about Jews.
-
In general the people of the book can either be the Jews or the Christians or both depending on the context of the verses in the Quran.
For example? Sura 4152 obviously is talking about the Jews alone.
4153 The people of the book ask you to bring down to them a book from the heavens. They had asked Moses for even more than that, for they said, "Let us see God plainly!", so the lightning bolt took them for their wickedness. Then they took the calf after the proof had come to them, and We pardoned them for this; We gave Moses a clear authority.
Whilst sura 4171 is talking about the Christians?
4171 O people of the book, do not overstep in your system, nor say about God except the truth. Jesus the son of Mary was no more than God's messenger and the fulfillment of His word to Mary, and an inspiration from Him. So acknowledge God and His messengers, and do not say, "Trinity." Cease, for it is better for you.(Christians are the ones who use the term "trinity" Not the Jews.) God is only One god, be He glorified that He should have a son! To Him is all that is in the heavens and what is in the earth. God is enough as a caretaker.
The verse above is saying that whoever the people of the book are they are saying ?trinity? . God says ?Cease, for it is better for you.?. Which group of people uses the word trinity??? Isn't it the Christians?
In sura 3199 this verse is referring to both the Jews and Christians since both are recipients of the pervious scripture (The Torah and the Injeel)
3199 Surely, some followers of the previous scriptures do believe in GOD, and in what was revealed to you, and in what was revealed to them. They reverence GOD, and they never trade away GOD's revelations for a cheap price. These will receive their recompense from their Lord. GOD is the most efficient in reckoning.
Basically anyone who are students any of the scriptures (the Torah, the Injeel and the Quran) are more or less people of the book so in fact sunnies and shites are people of the book as well. HOWEVER the term ?people of the book? as used in the Quran generally specifies only two groups , the Jews and the Christians because of the CONTEXT of the verses.
Peace,
Kevin
-
yes , and it's also a sectarian spirit to call those who maintain salat and give zaakat "Mohammadans" and "mushreeks" while calling themselves "monoteists" instead muslims and befriending those who reject Quran.
Islam in all its manifestations absolutely rejects the Quran. Have you ever studied their doctors and theologians? What they teach necessarily implies a rejection of the Quran, it doesn't matter what they otherwise claim. In fact the Jewish Rabbi who rejects the Quran openly, probably without knowing anything about it, is more honest, in that he does not claim that the Quran supports his false religion. According to your reasoning, as long as a roman catholic says he believes in the Quran, then nothing he teaches or does can put him outside of revealed truth. The post Quranic religion called Islam is shirk because it rejects the word of God as its final authority, and therefore gives the glory, that belongs to God alone, to their demons, which they camouflage as traditions.
As far as salah and zakaah go, well you simply beg the question. Why is their religious practice definitional? Ironically their doctors teach that you CANNOT do salah and zaakah without their satanic traditions, as the word of God is wholly impotent to provide the "necessary details". Yet here you are defending the teachings of these people, as if they were of God! In their satanic religion you are NOT a "muslim" precisely because you faithfully accept the word of God as sufficient, and yet you cite their "salah" and their "zaakah" as proof of their orthodoxy!
-
- When someone rejecting Quran it's his/her own business with Allah, not ours D Unless that person harm us, now thats become our 'business'. When that person dont harm us do we have to hate them? Read these, only a few examples written in Quran
-Wealth and buildings are the beauty of this life. But the good deeds that remain behind are better with your Lord for a reward, and better for hope. (1846)
-Kind words and forgiveness is far better than a charity that is followed by harm. God is Rich, Compassionate. (2263) - Who said that ? Salat and Zakat are mentioned in Quran as part of our duties as Muslims.
- Muslim should abide only God.. not some imam/fellow person.. Even Rasulullah was sent by Allah only to deliver Allah's message.. not to create his own law. Because a Muslim is a Monoteist,
- Say, I warn you only through the Revelation. But the deaf can hear nothing when they are warned (2145)
- When someone rejecting Quran it's his/her own business with Allah, not ours D Unless that person harm us, now thats become our 'business'. When that person dont harm us do we have to hate them? Read these, only a few examples written in Quran
-
yes , and it's also a sectarian spirit to call those who maintain salat and give zaakat "Mohammadans" and "mushreeks" while calling themselves "monoteists" instead muslims and befriending those who reject Quran.
I don't see it as 'sectarians' to call anyone anything.... (e.g. Americans, Africans, Asians, Mohammedans, Christians, Buddhist, Wahhabis, Suffis, Sallafis, Catholics, Saudis, Atheists, Footballers, Actors, Actress, Socialists, Nationalists, Zionists, Tourists, Capitalists.. and so on and so forth)
As long as they don't incite hatred towards those who they regards as "NOT US" but "THEM"..
-
Now I really feel Like praying to God so that he would guide her in life but am not sure what would Quran say to that. I know that you are not supose to pray for polytheists and Catholics do have their saint thing that they are big on.
So, yeah can we pray for Catholics and other Christians, also can we pray for atheists who have helped us in life? Pray to God to guide them to himself.
Dear Brother
You are justifiably in confusion because most of the Muslims including those who have strong conviction that "Quran" is an only source for the knowledge of Deen e Islam. obviously it is very difficult to break the shackles around our necks by the traditions and sometime we perceive un-intentionally according to the traditions ( Islamic History, Biography of Prophet and Hadith). Therefore a misconception prevail among Muslims.
I understand that your question is actual not for Dua but for (Prayer, (you wish that the person who helped you in every manner must be rewarded by Allah Subhanna) The word Al-Dua'a ( you called prayer) is defined as under
Definition
Da?a also spelled as ?Dua? meaning ?to call someone?. Therefore, ?ad- da?a? means ?the forefinger which is used as a sign to call someone?. ?ad dayiah? denotes ? the cry of the horses in a battle?. Hu?a minni dawatar rajul convey ?he is at distance where a man?s voice can reach him; he is at a calling distance. (Taj) ?Ibn- e- Faaris? said its basic meanings are ?to incline someone towards oneself eloquently by speech or conversation?. Dayahu alal ameer, means he took him to ameer (leader); in this context ?dayi ?is not only one who calls but also someone who persuade you to someone else (for example to an ideology); or call someone.iddia?oo,(yad- da-oon) means ?to wish or desire? (Taj ul Urus); ?to call on someone, repeatedly?.(672 Tadau alaih, means ?they gathered against him?. tada?a alaihal aduwu min kulli jaa?nib, means ?the enemy attacked him from all sides?. tadaa?atilhaitaan means ?walls fall down one by one?.
( Taj ul Urus) Da?autuhu zaida, means I named him Zaid ad dayee-o means adopted son ? (taj) plural is ad-ia-oo 334 ad daayiah means the milk that is left behind in the teats of the animals so that the left over milk may obtain with its help, at the time of, milking the animal again; (taj) by the reason - cause.
Such things, which entice and excite emotions of human called, ad dawa-ee (Muheet) (these meanings should be kept in mind because they throw light on the meaning of the word dua ? Call? ). Wad-oo shohada?akum 223, means ?call those who will help you?. in Surah Kahaf, nadao and da?a have been used as synonym;
1852. In Surah Airaaf, 7.193, AAalaykum adaAAawtumoohum am antum mitoon(a) has been used as antonym; which means to be quiet as such da?a would mean to call. In Surah Baqarra, verse # 261, fa(o)dAAu lan rabbaka means Call upon your ?Rubb? for us.Al-dAAua call- request - applies for.
An excerpt from Lughat ul Quran by Mr.GA.Pervaiz
if you need further information about this,please go to http//rmakhtar.logspot.com
Peace!