Judeo-Christian Context of the Quran?
-
Can we be sure that a man called Jesus ever existed? Or even Abraham and Moses? Is there any proof whatsoever of their existence?
Of course not! ) Because we are limited in what we can experience and for how long we can experience, on our best day everything is "vanity and a grasping at wind." So there is no hard-and-fast proof of anything.
The way I personally look at it is like this If I were trying to pass off myths as true in a place where they might not accept them, what would I have done? How far would I go to assert my false integrity? Now, what does the most reliable history tell us they did? I cannot speak for stories of Moses or Abraham, but since what Jesus' initial followers belong to recorded history, we can get a good idea of what it is they did, once we peel off the Roman contempt for them.
If I were a person who made Jesus up, trying to pass off myths of Mithras/Horus/Bacchus as historical in a "person" that I was a "follower" of and who had "conferred" a ministry to me, there's a few things I would do 1) I'm going to come off glowing and completely reliable and devoted in my telling of my discipleship as proof of my reliability to tell the story and to be a proper leader, 2) I'm going to expect heavy compensation for my services as a teacher and religious leader. "Give me your money and your young women" a la David Koresh. 3) I'm going to come up for some sort of a foolproof "test" or measure to show that anyone who opposes me is clearly evil and will suffer the wrath of what ever I'm going to call my deity. "Those who are corrupt will scoff at the truth I'm going to tell. Their requests for proof are proof of their own evil." or something along those lines.
But you don't really find any of these things happening with the early Christians. The gospels, which are a product of the early Christians, clearly do not put the apostles in a good light most of the time. They come off as morons and bumbling idiots who do a worse job of understanding Jesus than the demons cast out of possessed people. The emphasis of the early Christians on a family-style community and relative egalitarianism didn't leave much room for anyone to hoard the community's wealth, and they certainly did not enjoy acceptance in mainstream Roman society. They were snubbed at best and at worst subject to torture and death as atheists for failing to burn incense to Caesar and accepting the Roman pantheon.
There doesn't appear to be anything gained in trying to rewrite a myth. No one got money, sex, power, or prestige out of it (initially), and if I were going to make up a religion, those would be the things I would definitely want out of it. I'm not making an appeal for the historical truth of Jesus, but I'm saying that logically it seems from Christianity's very inception, the devotees clearly believed what they were believing and doing was the truth because they staked everything on it and weathered waves of occasional and intense persecution, all without raising the sword in return - at least, until Constantine.
All the theories about re-hashed myths simply don't make sense when you look at how seemingly normal people put their heads on the block for this story when given the choice to recant and live. Nothing in history tells us people did it for Mithras or Bacchus, common myths with mystery cult followings even at the time of Jesus. But they did do it for Jesus. Why? Something perhaps might be different.
Peace.
-
Myowndesert, Isn't it possible that over time, what started out as truth (let's say Jesus didn't have any superpowers) turned into myth? And the idea of Jesus we have today isn't very accurate?
Can you prove Objectively that God Exists ? Or even Does Phoenix1 Exists or is it a Case of I Think , Therefore I am ?
Almarh0m, Does God exist? it depends on what you mean by God. I am currently not sure about my concept of God, so I'll try to prove it when everything's clear. And Phoenix1 does, unfortunately, exist as well. You will just have to deal with me.
-
Myowndesert, Isn't it possible that over time, what started out as truth (let's say Jesus didn't have any superpowers) turned into myth? And the idea of Jesus we have today isn't very accurate?
Anything's possible. I learned in physics that it is possible for all of the atoms in the cup of coffee sitting on my desk to simultaneously vibrate in the same direction with enough force to momentarily overcome gravity. If this were to happen, it would literally jump off my desk. While this is possible, it is not probable. Statistically, it is very improbable. In this case, it would be better to look at probability instead of possibility.
IMHO, the truth of Jesus is relatively untampered with in the gospels and epistles. However, the "lens" through which Jesus was viewed has changed over time as culture, language, history, dogma, etc has changed or added to the understanding of the story. Most people can't see the difference between the lens itself, and what it is they are looking through the lens to see.
Besides, now we are comparing apples to oranges. The links you originally posted asserted that Jesus went from myth to truth. Now you are suggesting that the truth was lost and became myth. It can't work both ways.
-
Peace all,
Phoenix1, you said
Almarh0m, Does God exist? it depends on what you mean by God. I am currently not sure about my concept of God,
May I offer you this suggestion, don't start with God. Seek thy Lord. If thy Lord is the Creator then thy Lord can be God the Creator. The movement is from the visible to the invisible. From the creation, the creator of the creation can become your God.
When one reads the quran beginning from tradition, i.e. 1-1 bismillah... God or Allah is necessarly presumed to be known to begin with. Otherwise bismillah makes no sense. If the journey of the reading begins non-traditionally in chronology at 96-1 (or #1 in chronology) then you find yourself with iqra bismi rabbikallathii khalaq. Read in the name of your Lord who has created. The bism is not with Allah to begin with but with the Lord, the rabbi. In this case the rabb is the creator. I would say that from there, the construction of ones concept of God has more freedom to evolve and reveal itself than from a starting point where revelation has occurred. How can one praise God as in 1-2 without having a concept of God to begin with? God is said to be the Lord of the worlds. Who is thy Lord?
What is to be discovered to begin with is that the Lordship belongs to no man. 'My Lord Jesus' is an impossible formula. All of England's historical Lordship doesn't make any sense. All of France's historical seignorial system likewise. Who is thy Lord?
adjwi
-
'My Lord Jesus' is an impossible formula.
Lordship does not mean divinity, but authority. Hebrew has two words for "Lord." One is Adonai, referring to the Divine Lord, who is God alone. The other is adoni, referring to a human authority. Was Adam divine? And yet God made all creation bow to him. Iblis was cast out because he failed to bow. If Jesus was created like Adam, then tell me why he should not also be reverenced and obeyed by all of creation?
-
Peace,
Lordship does not mean divinity, but authority. Hebrew has two words for "Lord." One is Adonai, referring to the Divine Lord, who is God alone. The other is adoni, referring to a human authority. Was Adam divine? And yet God made all creation bow to him. Iblis was cast out because he failed to bow. If Jesus was created like Adam, then tell me why he should not also be reverenced and obeyed by all of creation?
This is an interesting question and what you have presented with Adonai and adoni looks like a door to confusion. I am not aware that the term 'rabb' is used anywhere by God to describe a human in the quran. However this is what the Pharaoh said of himself as we find in 79-24 He said "I am your lord, the Most High." Now he is described in the quran as a transgressor. Do you think Jesus would have described himself to his people as a lord? The respect for Jesus like the respect for Adam is like the respect for what the quran comes with and that is the spirit, ruuh.
1529 "So when I perfect him, and blow of My spirit in him, you shall yield to him."
359 The example of Jesus with God is similar to that of Adam; He created him from dust, then He said to him "Be" and he was.
26192 And this is a revelation from the Lord of the worlds.
26193 It was sent down with the trusted Spirit.Historically, the quran appears after the concept of Trinity. It's purpose amongst other things, appears to me in the correction of incorrect concepts that have entered faith through time. The concept of the lord Jesus seems similar. I beleive Jesus deserves respect, but not as a lord.
adjwi
-
Peace,
This is an interesting question and what you have presented with Adonai and adoni looks like a door to confusion. I am not aware that the term 'rabb' is used anywhere by God to describe a human in the quran. However this is what the Pharaoh said of himself as we find in 79-24 He said "I am your lord, the Most High." Now he is described in the quran as a transgressor. Do you think Jesus would have described himself to his people as a lord?
It really isn't that confusing in Hebrew. Most english translations of the Jewish scriptures will distinguish between Adonai and adoni by capitalizing the one that refers to God alone. For instance, Psalm 1101 - "The Lord (Adonai) said to my lord (l'adoni), "Sit here at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool." The Lord with a capital L refers to God. The lord with a little l refers to human authority. This verse, interestingly, is the most commonly quoted Messianic reference to Jesus in the New Testament, clearly stating that the earliest Christians were perfectly comfortable calling Jesus both lord and messiah.
The respect for Jesus like the respect for Adam is like the respect for what the quran comes with and that is the spirit, ruuh.
1529 "So when I perfect him, and blow of My spirit in him, you shall yield to him."
359 The example of Jesus with God is similar to that of Adam; He created him from dust, then He said to him "Be" and he was.
26192 And this is a revelation from the Lord of the worlds.
26193 It was sent down with the trusted Spirit.Historically, the quran appears after the concept of Trinity. It's purpose amongst other things, appears to me in the correction of incorrect concepts that have entered faith through time. The concept of the lord Jesus seems similar. I beleive Jesus deserves respect, but not as a lord.
adjwi
So tell me how you respect someone as messiah-king, who will return to judge the wicked, and do not obey them. Tell me what king will allow you to disobey him and still call yourself a loyal subject. Jesus addressed the very notion of those who were willing to pay lipservice to him and yet not obey his teachings or his authority
Matthew 721-29 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash."
When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law."
Jesus asserts that the way to be obedient to the teachings of the Father is to put into practice Jesus' words and teachings. It is my understanding that the Quran is supposed to build upon previous revelation, not replace it. The references to Jesus as lord in the New Testament are many and well-documented. To make the case that all of them are corrupted references requires heaps of linguistic, cultural, and manuscript evidence. It has been my experience that most Muslims don't even respect the Judeo-Christian scriptures enough to even read them, much less understand the language and culture in which they were written (though I wish to heaven someone would prove me wrong). Essentially, it is the same mistake that the Christians at Nicea made they made statements about Jesus from the gospels 300+ years after they were written, without bothering to understand them in their context, and the next thing you know the Nicene Creed becomes the final statement of Christian belief.
While the Quran rightly corrects Trinitarian errors, it is my understanding that it is silent on the subject of calling Jesus "lord" in the proper sense of messianic authority. If it is silent in this matter, then perhaps it is a matter that does not need correcting. Just a thought from your friendly neighborhood Unitarian Christian. )
-
It really isn't that confusing in Hebrew. Most english translations of the Jewish scriptures will distinguish between Adonai and adoni by capitalizing the one that refers to God alone. For instance, Psalm 1101 - "The Lord (Adonai) said to my lord (l'adoni), "Sit here at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool." The Lord with a capital L refers to God. The lord with a little l refers to human authority. This verse, interestingly, is the most commonly quoted Messianic reference to Jesus in the New Testament, clearly stating that the earliest Christians were perfectly comfortable calling Jesus both lord and messiah.
Contradiction; in Psalm 1101 ?my lord (l?adoni)? uses ?lower case? to refer to Jesus then should use the same and NOT ?Upper case? in Matthew below?
Matthew 721-29 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven.
They were perfectly comfortable with master, rabbi, teacher, and sir as well.
Same as in Albanian the word Zot is used for God and also for respectful Lord, Mr. or Sir?
Zonja dhe Zoti Smith ? Zoti t? bekoft?!
Mrs. and Mr. Smith ? God bless you!
Jesus asserts that the way to be obedient to the teachings of the Father is to put into practice Jesus' words and teachings. It is my understanding that the Quran is supposed to build upon previous revelation, not replace it. The references to Jesus as lord in the New Testament are many and well-documented. To make the case that all of them are corrupted references requires heaps of linguistic, cultural, and manuscript evidence. It has been my experience that most Muslims don't even respect the Judeo-Christian scriptures enough to even read them, much less understand the language and culture in which they were written (though I wish to heaven someone would prove me wrong). Essentially, it is the same mistake that the Christians at Nicea made they made statements about Jesus from the gospels 300+ years after they were written, without bothering to understand them in their context, and the next thing you know the Nicene Creed becomes the final statement of Christian belief.
Dialog with Samaritan woman aligns with Qur?an?
John 4
19 The woman said to him, "Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet.
20 Our fathers worshiped in this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship."
21 Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour comes, when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, will you worship the Father.
22 You worship that which you don't know. We worship that which we know; for salvation is from the Jews.
23 But the hour comes, and now is, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such to be his worshippers.
24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."
25 The woman said to him, "I know that Messiah comes," (he who is called Christ). "When he has come, he will declare to us all things."
26 Jesus said to her, "I am he, the one who speaks to you."
Peace
-
Nun de Plume are you Albanian living in Albania?
Yes and no, my father escaped Albania during communism when it was proclaimed an Atheist state to Montenegro (my birthplace) then to America when I was 9 years old.
Albania is one of the few places where Christians and Muslims send well wishes during holidays; Christians bid Muslims happy Ramadan and vice versa.
Famous unity poem?
http//www.albanianliterature.net/authors2/AA2-16poetry.html
...
Albanians, you are killing kinfolk,
You're split in a hundred factions,
Some believe in God or Allah,
Say 'I'm Turk,' or 'I am Latin,'
Say 'I'm Greek,' or 'I am Slavic,'
But you're brothers, hapless people!
You've been duped by priests and hodjas (imams)
...
Wake, Albanian, from your slumber,
Let us, brothers, swear in common
And not look to church or mosque,
The Albanian's faith is Albanianism!
FEJA E SHQIPTARIT ESHTE SHQIPTARIA!That slogan above communists twisted against religion and atheists still do today; always have to remind was not against religion and quote the last line of that poem?
And not shame ourselves before God!
Sorry to digress and hope that was a tad interesting.
Peace
-
Contradiction; in Psalm 1101 ?my lord (l?adoni)? uses ?lower case? to refer to Jesus then should use the same and NOT ?Upper case? in Matthew below?
Matthew 721-29 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven.
They were perfectly comfortable with master, rabbi, teacher, and sir as well.
Same as in Albanian the word Zot is used for God and also for respectful Lord, Mr. or Sir?
Zonja dhe Zoti Smith ? Zoti t? bekoft?!
Mrs. and Mr. Smith ? God bless you!
Dialog with Samaritan woman aligns with Qur?an?
John 4
19 The woman said to him, "Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet.
20 Our fathers worshiped in this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship."
21 Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour comes, when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, will you worship the Father.
22 You worship that which you don't know. We worship that which we know; for salvation is from the Jews.
23 But the hour comes, and now is, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such to be his worshippers.
24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."
25 The woman said to him, "I know that Messiah comes," (he who is called Christ). "When he has come, he will declare to us all things."
26 Jesus said to her, "I am he, the one who speaks to you."
Peace
About Matthew - not necessarily, because Matthew is written in greek, not hebrew. It only happens to be capitalized because the translation I pasted from did so. Greek does not have the same distinction between a reference to Divine Lordship and human authority. There is only one word, "kurios", and the translator is left with having to use context to determine who it refers to. Context clearly shows the vocative "Kurie, kurie!" in Matthew 721 referring to Jesus. Why did the translation I quoted capitalize it? I don't know. Some still do it for Psalm 110, even though they should know better.
I'm not sure what your point is with the reference to John 4, but you certainly can't limit what Jesus' role as Messiah is to what is listed in 7 verses. If you object to calling Jesus "lord" because it is never explicitly done so in the Quran, that does not bother me at all. I only made the post because another poster made the assertion that the statement "my lord Jesus" is an impossibility. For a Christian, the lordship of Jesus spiritually and politically is without question.
-
Peace all,
For a Christian, the lordship of Jesus spiritually and politically is without question.
Who is a Christian? Is it one who believes in Christ. Who is Christ? Is he the resurrected Jesus met by Paul? Is Christ, Jesus who died on the cross to erase the original sin?
The quran doesn't use the term Christ for Jesus nor Christian for those who accompanied him. The notions are different and those differences have importance. As such, Mohammed and the quran today, can well be seen as anti-christ, but also and most importantly as pro-messiah.
For example the God of Adam in the quran forgave. Isn't this different than the God of Adam in the Old Testament? Establishing the origins of the history of Jesus from the Old Testament rather than the quran makes a difference.
Mohammed was neithor lord nor king. However, he certainly was a spiritual and a 'political' figure who was enabled to act at the center of his community. Could you not see then a continuity and progress in the work of Jesus? As a believer in God, of Jesus the messiah, of unity, where do you stand with regards to Mohammed and the quran today? Can you not compliment and apply the teachings of Jesus progressively with the use of the quran?
adjwi
-
Peace all,
Who is a Christian? Is it one who believes in Christ. Who is Christ? Is he the resurrected Jesus met by Paul? Is Christ, Jesus who died on the cross to erase the original sin?The quran doesn't use the term Christ for Jesus nor Christian for those who accompanied him. The notions are different and those differences have importance. As such, Mohammed and the quran today, can well be seen as anti-christ, but also and most importantly as pro-messiah.
The term "Christian" did not originate with Christians, but was a term of insult and mockery applied to disciples of Jesus at Antioch. Somehow, it stuck at some point, but originally they called themselves followers of the Way.
The term "Christ" is an anglization of the greek word "Christos", which is a title meaning "Anointed one." The term "Messiah" means the same thing in Hebrew. As Jews before and at the time of Jesus became more reliant on the greek language, they used terms in that language. In short, "Messiah"="Christ" in translation from Hebrew to Greek. I think what you are saying, and I would generally agree, that the term "Christ" and "Messiah", although they literally mean the same thing, have come to have different connotations to different people.
For example the God of Adam in the quran forgave. Isn't this different than the God of Adam in the Old Testament? Establishing the origins of the history of Jesus from the Old Testament rather than the quran makes a difference.
I don't see a difference in the accounts. After all, in the Old Testament account, God gives skins of animals to Adam and Eve as a covering. The phrasing of this in Hebrew not only implies that this was a compassionate act for the covering of their nakedness, but also as a "covering" for their sin. This is the Hebrew sense in which forgiveness is understood - that God covers our sins so as to spare us from his judgement, but the deed can never be erased, and we will have to account for it at the judgment.
God certainly did forgive Adam, but just as with all sin, sometimes there are consequences for our actions that must be faced. God is most merciful, but he is also just. He can forgive, but he must also correct and discipline.
I see a balance in the two passages. The Torah emphasizes that there are real consequences that we must face for disobedience, and the Quran emphasizes God's willingness to forgive. But I do not see a contradiction.
Mohammed was neithor lord nor king. However, he certainly was a spiritual and a 'political' figure who was enabled to act at the center of his community. Could you not see then a continuity and progress in the work of Jesus? As a believer in God, of Jesus the messiah, of unity, where do you stand with regards to Mohammed and the quran today? Can you not compliment and apply the teachings of Jesus progressively with the use of the quran?
adjwi
Let me answer this way I see the possibility of continuity and affirmation of the work of Jesus, but the word "progress" is one that I cannot acknowledge. Jesus occupies a special place in the history of God's revelation. Prophets have indeed done miracles, some even ascended to heaven. But Jesus in the Christian tradition is the only person to die, resurrect, and ascend into heaven, not to mention his miraculous birth. He is the only one that has attained to the final resurrection of the dead, while all others sleep awaiting the day of judgment. I do not know how there is the possibility of progress from that.
I cannot answer definitively for where I stand in regards to Mohammed and the Quran right now. I very much believe that we will be judged for our words, and I do not want to speak rashly in this matter. I will say this thus far in my reading of the Quran, I suspect Mohammed to be a prophet and the Quran to be inspired, but I'm afraid the Quran's interpretation has been corrupted by many Muslims through the hadiths, and they have used the book as a divisive matter between Jews, Christians, and Muslims, when a correct interpretation of it should serve to unify all of the children of Abraham, not lead to further dissention and bloodshed. I've been told that I must reject all other previous writings as corrupt if I accept the Quran, and frankly, I do not see any major contradiction thus far between the Torah, the New Testament, and the Quran. Let me give you an example
Surah 4157 - And their saying "We have killed the Messiah Jesus the son of Mary, the messenger of God!" And they had not murdered him, nor killed him by crucifixion, but it appeared to them as if they had. Those who dispute are in doubt of him, they have no knowledge except to follow conjecture; they did not kill him for a certainty.
Muslims tell me this means that Jesus was not killed on the cross, but by tradition say someone else was put in his place. But what about John 1017-19?
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.
The passage from Surah 4 and John 10 are staggeringly in parallel. Jesus makes it clear that no man takes his life, but he lays it down willingly in obedience to God. So the Quran is right of course the Jews did not kill him or crucify him, he allowed them to do so. Their power over him to take his life was only an appearance. The passage in John makes it clear that submitting to the cross and being resurrected were commands given to him by God, and his statement caused division among the Jews, similar to the phrase from the Quran "Those who dispute are in doubt of him, they have no knowledge except to follow conjecture.."
Does this make sense? It is not my intent to convert Muslims to Christianity, seeing as 99% of all Christians think I am a heretic because I do not believe in the Trinity. It does not matter what name a person goes by, because God knows those who are obedient to him. But these are some of the things I am investigating through reading the Quran, and thus far, I see no major contradiction. Perhaps I will be able to give you a more definite answer to your question once I complete reading the Quran.
Peace.
-
Peace,
It is not my intent to convert Muslims to Christianity
I can't see this as possible. What I do see possible are people who historically were Christians entering the deen and participating in establishing the right path today. People who seek the continuity of the work of Jesus with the use of the quran. This I see. No unity is achievable in my mind in exclusion of the quran. The book has to be read, not as a spectator but as a participant.
Referring oneselve as Christian refers one to Christ and indentifying one other than to God directly opens the door to association. Jesus transformed the Jewish identity and today humanity faces the same challenge of transforming it's identity in relation to a one and unique God. This God, our Lord, is our creator and his guiding presence ever-present throughout history can be read in synthesis by reading the quran. So is part of my understanding today.
adjwi
-
Muslims tell me this means that Jesus was not killed on the cross, but by tradition say someone else was put in his place. But what about John 1017-19?
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.
The passage from Surah 4 and John 10 are staggeringly in parallel. Jesus makes it clear that no man takes his life, but he lays it down willingly in obedience to God. So the Quran is right of course the Jews did not kill him or crucify him, he allowed them to do so. Their power over him to take his life was only an appearance. The passage in John makes it clear that submitting to the cross and being resurrected were commands given to him by God, and his statement caused division among the Jews, similar to the phrase from the Quran "Those who dispute are in doubt of him, they have no knowledge except to follow conjecture.."
Does this make sense?
No, makes no sense and ?those who differ are full of doubts? means exactly that ? no one except God knows truth of matter and all interpretation is conjecture.
Although as to ?how? only God knows we are assured?
-
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;-
As to parable of the good shepherd; teaches all prophets submit their lives to God and are one in purpose; the rest of John chapter 10 even the term ?son of God? is clearly explained?
http//onlineparallelbible.com/john/10.htm
John 10
29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all. No one is able to snatch them out of my Father's hand.
30 I and the Father are one."
31 Therefore Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, "I have shown you many good works from my Father. For which of those works do you stone me?"
33 The Jews answered him, "We don't stone you for a good work, but for blasphemy because you, being a man, make yourself God."
34 Jesus answered them, "Isn't it written in your law,'I said, you are gods?'
35 If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken),
36 do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world,'You blaspheme,' because I said,'I am the Son of God?'
This also agrees with Qur?an?
John 2017
'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'Surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serve Him; this is the right path.
Peace
-
-
What I do see possible are people who historically were Christians entering the deen and participating in establishing the right path today. People who seek the continuity of the work of Jesus with the use of the quran. This I see.
Lol, no offense, but I am already rejected by many of my Christian brothers for believing that Jesus is not divine. What makes you think I would be treated any differently in the deen because I still use the title "son of God" for Jesus (in its proper usage), and believe there is no man greater than Jesus? Regardless of whether or not I come to believe the Quran is true and can reasonably articulate my beliefs from the Quran, you and I know my beliefs would not be welcome in the community.
No unity is achievable in my mind in exclusion of the quran. The book has to be read, not as a spectator but as a participant.
It must also be read in light of previous revelation. I do not believe the Quran can be properly understood without being able to understand the Torah and the New Testament.
Referring oneselve as Christian refers one to Christ and indentifying one other than to God directly opens the door to association.
I'm assuming you are referring to the Quranic adminition not to join partners to God. I call myself a Christian because I hope and pray to live up to his example. I pray for God to grace me with his Spirit so I may live as Jesus did. This in no way assigns equality with God to anyone. Jesus lived in perfect submission to God, and I desire to do the same. There is for me but one God, all-powerful, ineffable, all knowing, all good, and one authority, Jesus, through whose example and teachings I come to know the one true God. Thus far, I am investigating as to how the Quran fits into this. It does, so far, seem to bear witness to the same revelation, but I will not answer hastily. As the Quran says, "I will show you my signs, so do not be hasty." But I do not believe that the Quran condemns me for taking Jesus as a patron, which is the same as calling him "lord" with a little "l". Quran 931 condemns those who took priests and monks as patrons in place of God and the Messiah, not those who take Jesus as a patron.
Peace.
-
Peace,
Let me answer this way I see the possibility of continuity and affirmation of the work of Jesus, but the word "progress" is one that I cannot acknowledge. Jesus occupies a special place in the history of God's revelation. Prophets have indeed done miracles, some even ascended to heaven. But Jesus in the Christian tradition is the only person to die, resurrect, and ascend into heaven, not to mention his miraculous birth. He is the only one that has attained to the final resurrection of the dead, while all others sleep awaiting the day of judgment. I do not know how there is the possibility of progress from that.
The notion of progress in history is important for me and in the realization of succession there must be success. Is it possible then to see such progress in a life with the knowledge of heaven? Living the life which promises heaven. Can we see this with Mohammed and those who accompannied him? Where they living the life which promises heaven? What kind of life is that today?
adjwi
-
No, makes no sense and ?those who differ are full of doubts? means exactly that ? no one except God knows truth of matter and all interpretation is conjecture.
For a Christian, the cross is not a matter of conjecture or interpretation. For me, it does not mean that Jesus died on the cross for my sins so I can go out and commit as many as possible, but for a perfect example of how I must also live. The cross as a historical reality becomes a spiritual truth to which I must live up
Galatians 524 - "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires."
For a Christian, if the crucifixion is not a real event, then there is no freedom that can ever be gained from the temptations that are common to all humans.
It is true that all prophets submit their lives to God, but no one did it better or as perfectly as Jesus. Even Moses sinned against God and was not allowed to enter the promised land, but Jesus was obedient even to his death on the cross, therefore God raised him from the dead as the firstborn from the dead and given him a name above all names.
As to your comments about the meaning of "son of God" you do know that I am a Unitarian Christian, and already agree with you on that point, right? I'm not saying that the Quran is wrong, I'm saying I think what I have read thus far agrees with the Bible.
Peace.