Print Page | Close Window

I was reading recently (continued)

Printed From: WhyIslam.org
Category: General
Forum Name: InterReligious Dialogue
Forum Discription: Forum for people of various faiths to discuss and inquire about different religions
URL: http://www.whyislam.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=22248
Printed Date: 19 June 2019 at 1:50am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 8.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: I was reading recently (continued)
Posted By: eldon
Subject: I was reading recently (continued)
Date Posted: 26 March 2008 at 11:00am
Not sure why this discussion was archived, but am continuing it here, insha Allah.
 
-----------------
 
His followers, at least, apparently got the message, since they wrote the New Testament verses which do elaborate on both Jesus being the Word AND on human preexistance.
 
Damo808:
 Ofcourse you mean "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made" Which obviously means Jesus is God
 
 
That is the conclusion which many arrive at, however it is not the only conclusion to be gained from such verses. "The Word" is God's plan, His Wisdom, His Will, His Power which has always been with Him and is HIS.
 
God certainly expressed and showed forth His Wisdom, Will and Power through Jesus, "the Word made flesh", yet Jesus in the most critical time of his life said to God, "not my will, but Thy will be done" showing a difference between himself and the eternal Logos (Will of God).
 
Furthermore, as Jesus defined the Father as "the only true God" and "my God and your God", it is plentifully evident that he did not intend for people to conclude that "Jesus is God".
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Damo808: 
 I see.. so you acknowledge that Jesus is the Son of God ?
 for if he wasn't God's only Son, then why wasn't it phrased 'priests to God and OUR Father '?
 
In the spiritual and figurative sense, I agree that Jesus is the only born Son of God, howbeit not in the literal physical sense.
 
(Jesus is the only person whom Allah brought into being directly through the birth process. Adam, who is also called "the son of God" in Luke 3:38, was made, not born.)
 
Jesus said that God is OUR Father on several occasions and that is also an Old Testament teaching, but again He is not a Father in the literal sense of the word.
 
 
Damo808: 
 Only if seen from a non-Trinitarian viewpoint, however the trinity is expressed in many many places in the NT.. Ofcourse you'll dis-agree.
 
the trinity is inferred into the NT by some interpreters, however it is not specified by the text.
 
 Jesus did rebuke Thomas.. but please don't fudge the facts Eldon... Jesus rebukes Thomas, prior to adressing Jesus as God purely because he doubted He had actually risen from the dead in flesh. Its only when he places his fingers in Christs wounds is he convinced he's not seeing a ghost. when he says "My Lord, and my God" To which Jesus reply's "Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed"..... This should be enough to let all people know that Thomas hadn't said anything which was in any way contradictory to Jesus nature. Or are you supposing Jesus would have simply left such a blasphemous statement unchallenged if it wasn't true ?
 
Thomas' statement "my Lord and my God" is an exclamation, not necessarily an observation about the nature of Jesus.
 
As it counters Jesus own statement 11 verses previous, Thomas' exclamation is best NOT taken as a declaration of Jesus being God. 


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam



Replies:
Posted By: desertdude
Date Posted: 26 March 2008 at 2:38pm
Cool I see that my thread has made it across to WI 2.0 ( thats what I'm calling it anyways )

-------------
We r not the conspiracy theorists on this issue.It seems 2 me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four airliners and hitting 75 % of their targets-that feels like a conspiracy theory.C.Sheen


Posted By: MeInUSA
Date Posted: 26 March 2008 at 7:59pm
Originally posted by eldon

Not sure why this discussion was archived, but am continuing it here, insha Allah.
 
-----------------
 
His followers, at least, apparently got the message, since they wrote the New Testament verses which do elaborate on both Jesus being the Word AND on human preexistance.
 
Damo808:
 Ofcourse you mean "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made" Which obviously means Jesus is God
 
 
That is the conclusion which many arrive at, however it is not the only conclusion to be gained from such verses. "The Word" is God's plan, His Wisdom, His Will, His Power which has always been with Him and is HIS.
 
God certainly expressed and showed forth His Wisdom, Will and Power through Jesus, "the Word made flesh", yet Jesus in the most critical time of his life said to God, "not my will, but Thy will be done" showing a difference between himself and the eternal Logos (Will of God).
 
Furthermore, as Jesus defined the Father as "the only true God" and "my God and your God", it is plentifully evident that he did not intend for people to conclude that "Jesus is God".
 
  
 
I think what you aren't understanding is that Jesus did not come to this earth as God. He came as a man, as we can see from the below verse:
 

"Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient to death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Philippians 2:5-11

 
Before Jesus left this earth, He told his people they would understand, after He left, things they did not understand at the moment. If somebody knows where that verse is, please post it.  I can't recall right now.
 
Jesus not coming to walk this earth as God seems to really confuse Muslims.  B/c Muslims are constantly saying Jesus never claims to B divine/God N the Bible, perhaps some of the below will help.  But not only did He claim these things in the NT, but they are also written in the OT.
 
Jesus, Who is He?
    1. Jesus has two natures at the same time: divine and human at the same time.  He is both God and man (John 1:1,14; Col. 2:9).  This is called the Hypostatic Union.
    2. Jesus was born of the virgin Mary (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35).
    3. "He was born under the Law (Gal. 4:4) and fulfilled all of the Law of God (John 4:34 ; 8:29), even to the point of death (Phil. 2:8).
    4. In His death He bore the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us (Gal. 3:13). Thus in the death of Christ the sins of His people were judged (Rom. 3:23-26) and forgotten (Heb. 8:12), and the result of His act of righteousness was eternal life (Rom. 5:18).
    5. Jesus is worshiped - (Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33; John 9:35-38; Heb. 1:6).
    6. Jesus is prayed to - (Acts 7:55-60; Psalm 116:4 with 1 Cor. 1:1-2).
    7. Jesus is called God - (John 20:28; Heb. 1:8).
    8. He is the creator (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:15-17); Jesus is uncreated (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:15-17).
  1. Verses showing Jesus is divine
    1. He is God in flesh (John 1:1,14; 8:58 with Exodus 3:14; Col. 2:9; Phil. 2:5-8; Heb. 1:8).
    2. John 1:1,14  "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us..."
      1. This shows that Jesus is God in flesh. 
      2. If you say that John 1:1 should be "a" god, then...
      3. If Jesus is "a" god, then isn't that polytheism?
      4. If Jesus is "a" god, then how many gods are their in JW theology?
      5. If Jesus is "a" god, then is he a true God or false god since the Bible says there is only one God ( http://www.carm.org/kjv/Isaiah/Isaiah_43.htm#10  - Isaiah 43:10 ; http://www.carm.org/kjv/Isaiah/Isaiah_44.htm#6  - 44:6 , http://www.carm.org/kjv/Isaiah/Isaiah_44.htm#6  - 8 )?
      6. If Jesus is "a" god, then why does he tell people to come to him and not the Father ( http://www.carm.org/kjv/Matt/matt_11.htm#are - Matt. 11:28 )?
    3. John 8:58, "Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” With Exodus 3:14 "God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’”

A.     Jesus uses the same title for Himself that God uses of Himself.

B.      If you say that the verse is really, "I have been", then why did the Jews want to kill him -- especially when in John 10:30-33 they say they want to kill Him because He claimed to be God?  Where and what did Jesus say to cause them to think that?

    1. John 10:30-33, “I and the Father are one. 31 The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 33 The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.”

 .       Re:  John 10:30-33, What was Jesus saying that caused the Jews to accuse Jesus of claiming to be God?  If you can't say, then you don't know the text or the culture well enough to address the issue of Christ's deity.

    1. John 20:27 

 .       In John 20:27 Thomas called Jesus God by saying to Jesus, "My Lord and My God".  If Jesus is not God, then why did Jesus did not correct Thomas. Four verses later, it says that this is written so you might believe that Jesus is the son of God, (John 20:31). Therefore, we can see that the term Son of God is saying that Jesus is God.

    1. Col. 2:9, "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,"
    2. Phil. 2:5-7, "Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness."
    3. Heb. 1:8, "But of the Son He [The Father] says, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever..."

                                .            If Jesus is not God, why does God Himself call Jesus God in Heb. 1:8? 

                                                     A.            This is a quote from Psalm 45:6 which has the best translation of "Thy Throne O God..."

  1. Other Verses
    1. John 10:30-33,"I and the Father are one." 31The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" 33The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God."

                                .            Notice the Jews said, "You being a man, make yourself out to be God."  What did Jesus say that caused the Pharisees to say that Jesus was claiming to be God in John 10:30-33.  If you don't know, then you don't understand.

                                                        i.            Regarding John 10:30-33, if you deny that Jesus is God in flesh, then you are agreeing with the Jews who killed Christ because they did not accept who He really was.

    1. Col. 1:15-16, "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him."

                                .            Firstborn is a transferrable title and does not necessitate being first created.  Proof of this can be seen where Manasseh is the first born (Gen. 41:51-52 and then his brother Ephraim is called the firstborn (Jer. 31:9).

        1. Gen. 41:51-52, "And Joseph called the name of the first-born Manasseh: For, said he, God hath made me forget all my toil, and all my father’s house. And the name of the second called he Ephraim: For God hath made me fruitful in the land of my affliction." 
        2. Jer. 31:9, "...for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn."
    1. 1 Cor. 1:2, "To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours."

                                .            Why is the phrase "Call upon the name of the LORD" (Hebrew, YHWH, i.e., Psalm 116:4) used only of God on the OT, and translated into the Greek in the LXX as "Call upon the name of the LORD (greek, KURIOS)," applied to Jesus in the NT (1 Cor. 1:2) if Jesus is not God in flesh?

                                                                                i.            The LXX is the septuagint which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament done by Jews around 200 B.C.

                                                                               ii.            Psalm 116:4, "Then I called upon the name of the Lord [YHWH]: "O Lord [YHWH], I beseech Thee, save my life!"

                                                                             iii.            The literal translation of 1 Cor. 1:2 is "...call upon the name of the Lord of us Jesus Christ." 

                                                                            iv.            For more information, please see http://www.carm.org/jw/nameofLord.htm - http://www.carm.org/jw/nameofLord.htm

  1. Son of God, Son of Man

A.     Does the term "Son of God" mean that Jesus is not God? If so, then does the term "Son of Man" mean that Jesus is not a man?

B.      Likewise, if the term "Son of Man" means that Jesus is a man, then what does the term "Son of God" imply?

  1. The Resurrection of Christ

0.      Jesus rose in the same body that He died in (John 2:19-21; Luke 24:36-43). Jesus' body is ‘resurrected.' We do not know exactly what His body is like, but the nature of the resurrected body is discussed by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:35-58.

                                .            John 2:19-21, "Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days." 20 The Jews replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” 21 But the temple he had spoken of was his body."

                                                     A.            Luke 24:39,  "Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”

                                                      2.            Right now Jesus is in heaven, still as, and eternally to be both God and man (1 Tim. 2:5; Col. 2:9).

                                                        .            This is important because Jesus is the High Priest forever: "where Jesus has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek,” (Heb. 6:20). A spirit cannot be a high priest, only a man can do that. Furthermore, Jesus always lives to make intercession for us "Hence, also, He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them," (Heb. 7:25).
 

 



Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 27 March 2008 at 11:05am
I think what you aren't understanding is that Jesus did not come to this earth as God. He came as a man...
 
I very well understand that, and furthermore understand that even after the resurrection according to the gospels, he told us that the One he called Father is his God and our God.
 
He never exalted himself as God while here upon earth, but rather exalted the One he called Father as "the only true God".
 
That should be enough for all people of faith to agree upon, and enough of a response to the lengthy cut and paste you posted.
 
(Jesus never exalted himself as God AFTER he left the earth either:  Jesus Christ the same, yesterday, today, and forever, remember? 
 
John 16:12,13 (to which you referred without remembering) is no justification for promoting Jesus-is-God doctrine.)
 
 
 
Peace be upon those who love the Truth Jesus conveyed.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: mai moslemah
Date Posted: 27 March 2008 at 11:07am
Good post eldon..i agree

-------------
But don`t you see?that i am truely free? this piece of scarf on me;i wear so proudly to preserve my dignity,modesty & integrity....why can`t i just be me??? "i am the one who is free!!!!



Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 27 March 2008 at 11:18am

 

"...furthermore understand that even after the resurrection..."

 
So was there a resurrection?


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: Damo808
Date Posted: 27 March 2008 at 4:07pm
Well posted USA....
 
...  If we were living 2,000 yrs in the future and someone uncovered a 70's sci-fi space space adventure novel. It would be the equivalent of future literary scholars  trying to argue that was set in the desert because there were a few referrences to sand.
 
 


-------------
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 12:34pm
Originally posted by LtTony

 

"...furthermore understand that even after the resurrection..."

 
So was there a resurrection?
 
according to the gospels, as the original quote stipulated, yes.
 
so the pertinent question is, why don't christians take the word of the resurrected Jesus as authoritative?  He said his God and YOUR God is the Father.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 1:11pm
Originally posted by eldon

Originally posted by LtTony

 

"...furthermore understand that even after the resurrection..."

 
So was there a resurrection?
 
according to the gospels, as the original quote stipulated, yes.
 
so the pertinent question is, why don't christians take the word of the resurrected Jesus as authoritative?  He said his God and YOUR God is the Father.
 
We do, as well as the words of the apostles and sacred tradition.  You may or may not be aware' but damo and I  hold a faith (catholic) that is based on sacred scripture AND sacred tradition.
 
But more importantly -- so there WAS a resurrection?
 
 


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: algebra
Date Posted: 28 March 2008 at 2:41pm
Thomas, a jew, would never have uttered 'My G_D' in exclamation. The name of G_D is sacred and not taken lightly by jews.

It is therefore quite apparent that Thomas was indeed referring to Jesus as 'his G_D'; not exclaiming 'my god'.


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 12:41pm

Thomas' declaration would have been one of wonder in exclamation, not of derogatory exclamation.

In any case, he was in no position to make a theological pronouncement counter to Jesus' own statement, 11 verses earlier.



-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 12:52pm
Originally posted by LtTony

 
 You may or may not be aware' but damo and I  hold a faith (catholic) that is based on sacred scripture AND sacred tradition.
 
 
I was raised Catholic myself and now realize that traditions that men hold as sacred are not necessarily in accord with Scripture.
 
 
But more importantly -- so there WAS a resurrection?
 
 
 
Yes, according to the gospel accounts, Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected in a glorified body that still bore the wounds of crucifixion.
 
The Quran is silent on the subject of the appearance of Jesus after the crucifixion event in which the Jews thought to kill him but Allah raised him up to Himself.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: Damo808
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 7:15pm
Originally posted by eldon

Thomas' declaration would have been one of wonder in exclamation, not of derogatory exclamation.

In any case, he was in no position to make a theological pronouncement counter to Jesus' own statement, 11 verses earlier.

 
 
 So in actual fact what your saying is Thomas was a little loose with His Idolotry. After all it amounts to no less when attributing the title of God to a mere human. Further if he was inaccurate by his theological pronouncement to Jesus face and speaking directly to Him, wouldn't you have thought it strange that Jesus makes clear that what He said was in no way incorrect in His reply ?


-------------
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 8:18pm
Originally posted by eldon

I think what you aren't understanding is that Jesus did not come to this earth as God. He came as a man...
 
I very well understand that, and furthermore understand that even after the resurrection according to the gospels, he told us that the One he called Father is his God and our God.
 
He never exalted himself as God while here upon earth, but rather exalted the One he called Father as "the only true God".
 
That should be enough for all people of faith to agree upon, and enough of a response to the lengthy cut and paste you posted.
 
(Jesus never exalted himself as God AFTER he left the earth either:  Jesus Christ the same, yesterday, today, and forever, remember? 
 
John 16:12,13 (to which you referred without remembering) is no justification for promoting Jesus-is-God doctrine.) 
 
 
 
MeInUSA's post addressed all the points you raised I believe.  And John 16 is certainly part of the picture, despite your denial.
 
I also like the point you brought up too, damo.


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 8:21pm
"But more importantly -- so there WAS a resurrection?"
 
 Yes, according to the gospel accounts, Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected in a glorified body that still bore the wounds of crucifixion.
 
The Quran is silent on the subject of the appearance of Jesus after the crucifixion event in which the Jews thought to kill him but Allah raised him up to Himself.
 
Can you elaborate a bit please?  Do you believe the gospel accounts?  Was there a crucifixion?


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 29 March 2008 at 10:06pm
 
Originally posted by LtTony

 
 You may or may not be aware' but damo and I  hold a faith (catholic) that is based on sacred scripture AND sacred tradition.
 
eldon: I was raised Catholic myself and now realize that traditions that men hold as sacred are not necessarily in accord with Scripture
 
Great, then you understand the concepts of sola scriptura,  the church and apostolic authority.  What traditions specifically are not in accord with scripture?
 
Here's my take: "Is Scripture the sole rule of faith for Christians? Not according to the Bible. While we must guard against merely human tradition, the Bible contains numerous references to the necessity of clinging to apostolic tradition."
 
Jesus gave all authority to his Apostles (Mt 18:18). n fact, he gave Peter the "keys to the kingdom of heaven."(Matthew 16:18–19). Christ didn't write a word; He established a church, one that has authority and His protection. (1 Tim 3:15 and Mt 16: 18) (also see:
  1. http://www.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=English&version=RSV&search=&passage=Acts+5:34-39 - Acts 5:34-39
  2. In http://www.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=English&version=RSV&search=&passage=Mat+28:19-20 - Mat 28:19-20 Christ says that he will be with us always.
  3. In http://www.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=English&version=RSV&search=&passage=John+10:28-29 - John 10:28-29 Christ tells us that his sheep cannot be snatched from his (or his Father's) hand. The flock cannot be lost.
  4. In http://www.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=English&version=RSV&search=&passage=John+14:18 - John 14:18 Christ says he will not leave us orphaned, and thus we will assume that he will always give the Church guidance.
  5. In http://www.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=English&version=RSV&search=&passage=Luke+2:30-33 - Luke 2:30-33 the angel promises that there will be no end to Christ's kingdom.
You are correct in saying that we are to reject "traditions of men that maketh void the word of God", however, the Bible explicitly tells us to "hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours." 2 Thessalonians 2:15
 
"I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you." I Corinthians 11:2
 
"We instruct you, brothers, in the name of [our] Lord Jesus Christ to shun any brother who conducts himself in disorderly way and not according to the tradition they received from us." 2 Thessalonians 3:6  (Might want to take a look at 2 Peter 3:13-18.)
 
Jesus gave the authority to teach in His name to the Apostles (Matthew 10:20; Luke 10:1; Luke 10:16) and promised that the Holy Spirit would protect them from ever teaching error (John 14:16-18, 26; 15:26; 16:13; 17:17-19; Luke 21:33).
Jesus further promised that the fruit that the Apostles bore (i.e., the Bishops they appointed and the Church that He built on them (Ephesians 2:19-22)) would remain faithful (John 15:16). The Apostles in turn taught (again, without error) that they had the authority to pass that office on to their successors, in my opinion.
 
 


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 30 March 2008 at 11:33am
Originally posted by LtTony

What traditions specifically are not in accord with scripture?
 

The trinity. Jesus and his disciples never used the word, yet by 500AD it had become the most important doctrine of Christianity, as per the Athanasian Creed.

Consider the raucous ongoings of the Counsel of Nicea, where the Trinity doctrine was decided upon, and consider all the turmoil among Christians since then because of that doctrine... even Christians putting other Christians to death over it.  Then tell me that that doctrine is any part of The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace. James 3:17,18

The Spirit of Truth sent correction to the Church from the inception of trinitarianism, but that correction was rejected even when formalized by the Revelation of the Quran.
 
Today what remains of Christianity is a highly scattered flock, all holding to the truth that Jesus is the Messiah, but divergent from Scripture in many respects and at odds even with one another.
 
Unity of faith is found, for all believers, in Islam: submitting our wills to all the Revelations of the Most High and conforming our hearts in genuine worship.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 30 March 2008 at 12:01pm
Originally posted by LtTony

"But more importantly -- so there WAS a resurrection?"
 
 Yes, according to the gospel accounts, Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected in a glorified body that still bore the wounds of crucifixion.
 
The Quran is silent on the subject of the appearance of Jesus after the crucifixion event in which the Jews thought to kill him but Allah raised him up to Himself.
 
Can you elaborate a bit please?  Do you believe the gospel accounts?  Was there a crucifixion?
 
Yes, I believe the gospel accounts:  to all on the scene it appeared that the Jews were successful in having Jesus put to death, even as the gospel writers reported.
 
However, even the New Testament elaborates greatly on what spiritually happened on the cross, which was certainly NOT the Jews taking Jesus' life:
 

In opposition to the Word-made-flesh PURE nature of Jesus, these verses describe a definite change in identity that took place on or before the cross:

2Corinthians 5:21 "God made him (Jesus) to be SIN"

(If Allah made Jesus to BE sin, then it was not the holy prophet Jesus who died on the cross, but the body of sin.)

Romans 6:6 "our old man is crucified with, that the body of sin might be destroyed"

Colossians 2:14 ~"the writ (legal document) of our transgressions against the Law was nailed to the cross"~

Ephesians 2:16 "enmity to the law was slain on the cross"

Romans 8:3 "God sending His own son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh"

(The first Adam was made in the likeness of Yah, the second Adam was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, which is what perished on the cross.)

All of those verses indicate that it was NOT the Word made flesh that died on the cross, but something else entirely: sin, enmity, transgression against the Word, the old fallen nature of man, the likeness of sinful flesh.

The verses above affirm the Quran's brief commentary "they killed him not, nor crucified him only a likeness of that was shown to them" and it affirms a substitution on the cross that most Muslims believe in, howbeit not in every particular detail, since there is some disagreement among Muslims as to who exactly was crucified (a disciple, Judas, Simon of Cyrene, Barabbas).


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: Squeegie
Date Posted: 30 March 2008 at 9:33pm
Originally posted by eldon

However, even the New Testament elaborates greatly on what spiritually happened on the cross, which was certainly NOT the Jews taking Jesus' life:
 

In opposition to the Word-made-flesh PURE nature of Jesus, these verses describe a definite change in identity that took place on or before the cross:

2Corinthians 5:21 "God made him (Jesus) to be SIN"

(If Allah made Jesus to BE sin, then it was not the holy prophet Jesus who died on the cross, but the body of sin.)

Romans 6:6 "our old man is crucified with, that the body of sin might be destroyed"

Colossians 2:14 ~"the writ (legal document) of our transgressions against the Law was nailed to the cross"~

Ephesians 2:16 "enmity to the law was slain on the cross"

Romans 8:3 "God sending His own son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh"

(The first Adam was made in the likeness of Yah, the second Adam was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, which is what perished on the cross.)

All of those verses indicate that it was NOT the Word made flesh that died on the cross, but something else entirely: sin, enmity, transgression against the Word, the old fallen nature of man, the likeness of sinful flesh.

The verses above affirm the Quran's brief commentary "they killed him not, nor crucified him only a likeness of that was shown to them" and it affirms a substitution on the cross that most Muslims believe in, howbeit not in every particular detail, since there is some disagreement among Muslims as to who exactly was crucified (a disciple, Judas, Simon of Cyrene, Barabbas).


Eldon, you seem to be mixing metaphors again. The verses you cite explain what happened on the cross, not the agency by which it happened. In a very real sense, we both crucified him and were crucified with him. Our sin drove him to the cross, our sin nature was nailed to the cross with him. Both are true, and this fact is what is being explained by the verses you misinterpret so well.

Please consider the complete thought in 1 Cor. 5-

17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit that God was, in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Paul is simply explaining the nature we received when we trusted in Christ and what had to happen to make that new nature available to us.

I realize that this response will in no way end the argument, but since God is glorified in our weakness, just think of how much room I'm giving God to glorify himself.



Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 31 March 2008 at 5:36am
 
Thank you for your posts squeegie and eldon.  I appreciate the time you took, squeegie, to put together a thorough "mixing metaphors" reply.
 
eldon:
 
"But more importantly -- so there WAS a resurrection?"
 
 Yes, according to the gospel accounts, Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected in a glorified body that still bore the wounds of crucifixion.
 
To clarify, eldon, are the gospel accounts of Christs death and resurrection accurate?  Was Christ actually/physically killed, and did He rise from the dead? 
 


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 31 March 2008 at 5:54am

What traditions specifically are not in accord with scripture?
 
The trinity....


 
OK.  I think you wrote that the word trinity is not mentioned in scripture.  Well, as someone said here before, neither is monotheism, or communion, or a lot of things.
 
But I think we can let that whole trinity deal pass for now.  I was wondering a couple of things:  one, are there any other traditions that you object to, and two, what did you think of the passages I provided on tradition, Christ giving authority to His apostles and His promises to protect the church?
 
One other thing....  do you think Jesus or His apostles ever testified that He was the Son of God; I mean, THE Son of God?  If so, what do you make of those passages?
 

Today what remains of Christianity is a highly scattered flock, all holding to the truth that Jesus is the Messiah, but divergent from Scripture in many respects and at odds even with one another.
 
Unity of faith is found, for all believers, in Islam


I thought I'd just throw my two bits in on this one.  It comes up here now and then.  While there are significant differences and independence in christian faith communities, they share nearly all of the essential and fundamental doctrines, IMO.  Interacting on this board has really opened my eyes to how much we have in common, in fact.  I've also seen a near equal amount of theological diversity among adherents of Islam.
 
 
 
 


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 31 March 2008 at 11:06am

Squeegie (Faith1?), I'll make it even simpler:

Jesus was the Pure Word of God made flesh, right?

What was slain on the cross was NOT the Pure Word of God made flesh, according to those New Testament verses I posted previously, right?

So, it appeared as though the Jews were successful in their plan to have Jesus killed by crucifixion, but the glorious reality is that they did not kill or crucify him, but it was only made to appear so, as actually a substitution was made. Your focus is more on the appearance of what happened rather than the glorious reality.
 
As it says elsewhere in the NT, it was not possible that death could hold him, but that he cried out unto Him that was able to save him from death and he was heard in that he feared. (Acts 2:24, Hebrews 5:7)
 
If we had been on the scene, insha Allah, all we would have been able to see was that Jesus was nailed to a cross, we would have heard him cry out, Father into Thy hands I commend my spirit, and "give up the ghost". If we'd been able to check his pulse, I don't think we'd find one. If we could have hooked him up to an EKG machine, I don't think there'd be any brain waves found. Any physician then present would likely have pronounced him dead.
 
But no human there present could see the substitution that had been made-- it was a spiritual reality only made known by Revelation well after the fact.
 
It was written that Jesus should taste death for every man-- not that death should swallow him-- but that death itself would be swallowed up in victory. I understand that Christians insist on the death of Jesus on the cross and his subsequent resurrection, however they should not overlook the New Testament verses I posted that provide a bridge of accord with the Revelation in the Quran on the subject:
 
The Jews (and the demonic forces that inspired them) ultimately did not kill or crucify Jesus though they certainly wished to, tried to and apparently DID. If they had known what they were really doing, the NT tells us, they would not even have tried to kill him (1Corinthians 2:7,8), as their bid for victory over Jesus was transformed to their utter defeat and ultimate condemnation.
 
(LtTony, I think I answered your questions on the death & resurrection)


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 31 March 2008 at 11:26am
Originally posted by LtTony

one, are there any other traditions that you object to?
 
transubstantiation, mandatory celibacy for priests, nuns, & brothers, supremacy of Rome, Immaculate Conception of Mary, "the Mother of God" title, altars to saints, crucifix on the altar, bowing before statues and images, allowance of eating unclean foods, bingo, and probably a lot of others I can't think of offhand...
 
Originally posted by LtTony

and two, what did you think of the passages I provided on tradition, Christ giving authority to His apostles and His promises to protect the church?
 
Those traditions mentioned were specific to the context of the verses, not a general endorsement of all traditions.
 
I have no doubt that the Spirit of Truth has been faithful to lead believers in Jesus into all Truth, yet not all believers in Jesus have followed the Spirit of Truth's guidance.
 
Jesus described a strait and narrow path that leads to eternal life and cautioned us, "few there be that find it". He also foretold that, if possible, the very elect would be deceived.
 
Proverbs tells us that it is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings is to search out a matter. Searching the Scriptures and seeking the guidance of the Most High through the Spirit of Truth has led me to make the stand I make, believing in all His Revelations.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 31 March 2008 at 11:39am
Originally posted by LtTony

One other thing....  do you think Jesus or His apostles ever testified that He was the Son of God; I mean, THE Son of God?  If so, what do you make of those passages?
 
 
Yes, of course he did and they did.
 
However, neither he nor they meant that he was the Son of God in the literal sense, i.e. the product of divine semen and human egg (astagfirullah).
 
He was the only born (spiritual) Son of God in that Adam, who is also called the Son of God in the Bible, was not born, but was made.
 
The other "Sons of God" mentioned in the Bible were either incorporeal when the foundations of the earth were laid (Job 38:4-7) or "born again" sons of God by faith (John 1:12,13). 


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: Damo808
Date Posted: 31 March 2008 at 1:47pm
 
 
 
Yes, of course he did and they did.
 
However, neither he nor they meant that he was the Son of God in the literal sense, i.e. the product of divine semen and human egg (astagfirullah).
 
He was the only born (spiritual) Son of God in that Adam, who is also called the Son of God in the Bible, was not born, but was made.
 
The other "Sons of God" mentioned in the Bible were either incorporeal when the foundations of the earth were laid (Job 38:4-7) or "born again" sons of God by faith (John 1:12,13). 
 
 
 I believe that it is only Muslims who hold the view that if God were indeed to have a Son, the only way this would be possible would be through some divine copulation or otherwise impossible, whilst holding the very same belief that Allah need only say "be" for the impossible to occur.
 
 John 9:35-39: Jesus heard that they had cast him out: and when he had found him, he said to him: Dost thou believe in the Son of God? < Note he doesn't say, 'Do you believ that i am of the sons of God, but the "Son of God"

36 He answered, and said: Who is he, Lord, that I may believe in him? 37 And Jesus said to him: Thou hast both seen him; and it is he that talketh with thee. 38 And he said: I believe, Lord. And falling down, he adored him. <ie worshipped Him

Or even in John 10: 33 "The Jews answered him: For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, maketh thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them: Is it not written in your law: I said you are gods? 35 If he called them gods, to whom to word of God was spoken, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36 (What) Do you say of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world: Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God?"

 Not 'a' son of God, not of the 'sons' of God. But "the Son". Neither does he point out to the Jews that they were wrong in their assertation that he made Himself God in what He said. He never exactly said... ' Now wait a minute, how exactly did i say i made myself God", The people he was debating with were no mugs... they knew the controversy of what he was pitching and he made no attempt to distance himself from it.
 
 Then there's the Transfiguration mentioned in Mathew Mark and Luke which describes Jesus being accompanied with Moses and Elijah. Note it is Christ who is described as transformed to that resembling the figure mentioned in Daniel and Revelations not Moses and Elijah, obviously implying His prominence even above these Prophets of profound importance. 


-------------
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5


Posted By: Squeegie
Date Posted: 31 March 2008 at 10:58pm
Originally posted by eldon

Squeegie (Faith1?), I'll make it even simpler:

Jesus was the Pure Word of God made flesh, right?

What was slain on the cross was NOT the Pure Word of God made flesh, according to those New Testament verses I posted previously, right?

So, it appeared as though the Jews were successful in their plan to have Jesus killed by crucifixion, but the glorious reality is that they did not kill or crucify him, but it was only made to appear so, as actually a substitution was made. Your focus is more on the appearance of what happened rather than the glorious reality.
 
As it says elsewhere in the NT, it was not possible that death could hold him, but that he cried out unto Him that was able to save him from death and he was heard in that he feared. (Acts 2:24, Hebrews 5:7)
 
If we had been on the scene, insha Allah, all we would have been able to see was that Jesus was nailed to a cross, we would have heard him cry out, Father into Thy hands I commend my spirit, and "give up the ghost". If we'd been able to check his pulse, I don't think we'd find one. If we could have hooked him up to an EKG machine, I don't think there'd be any brain waves found. Any physician then present would likely have pronounced him dead.
 
But no human there present could see the substitution that had been made-- it was a spiritual reality only made known by Revelation well after the fact.
 
It was written that Jesus should taste death for every man-- not that death should swallow him-- but that death itself would be swallowed up in victory. I understand that Christians insist on the death of Jesus on the cross and his subsequent resurrection, however they should not overlook the New Testament verses I posted that provide a bridge of accord with the Revelation in the Quran on the subject:
 
The Jews (and the demonic forces that inspired them) ultimately did not kill or crucify Jesus though they certainly wished to, tried to and apparently DID. If they had known what they were really doing, the NT tells us, they would not even have tried to kill him (1Corinthians 2:7,8), as their bid for victory over Jesus was transformed to their utter defeat and ultimate condemnation.
 
(LtTony, I think I answered your questions on the death & resurrection)


Eldon, I'm unfamiliar with a Faith 1. Let me take your points one at a time and give my take.

2Corinthians 5:21 "God made him (Jesus) to be SIN"

Again, you must look at this verse in light of the surrounding text. We are new creatures because of what Jesus did on the cross by becoming sin, the holy one who knew no sin, to make the perfect payment required .

Romans 6:6 "our old man is crucified with, that the body of sin might be destroyed"


As I said before, not only did our sin cause him to be crucified, but we were also crucified with him. That portion of ourselves that tends to rebel died on the cross with him. But because our new nature is housed in the same shell that contained the old nature, sin will occur for as long as we draw breath. But we are no longer controlled by sin. We now have the ability, as per the new nature, to live as God requires. When we sin, we are doing something against our nature. And for me this serves as an indicator of that transformation, because now, when I do sin, it doesn't satisfy. Now sin leaves me unsatisfied, broken, and empty. This is proof that a change has happened. My sin nature has been destroyed, the body of sin.

Colossians 2:14 ~"the writ (legal document) of our transgressions against the Law was nailed to the cross"~

This is just another way of saying that the charges against us have been dropped based on what Christ did on the cross.

Ephesians 2:16 "enmity to the law was slain on the cross"

Enmity is antagonism, bitter feelings. So when we receive that new nature I spoke of, the Law ceases to be something the standards of which we will never meet, thereby showing us our miserable condition resulting in resentment toward the law for telling us the truth about ourselves. The Law no longer condemns but encourages.





Posted By: desertdude
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 8:32am

Colossians 2:14 ~"the writ (legal document) of our transgressions against the Law was nailed to the cross"~

This is just another way of saying that the charges against us have been dropped based on what Christ did on the cross.

 Well according to this we all have blanket immunity.Why should it matter wheter I believe in this or not ,my debt has already been paid and I am a free man .And since I have blanket immunity I should be able do whatever I please to do as I am above the law now .Surely jesus also cleansed my sins(past ,present and future) aswell when he was crucified and knew what all sins I am going to commit and scarificied himself for them .So all in all technically speaking I am free to roam the earth doing whatever I wish to do .No law applies to me asJesus took the hit for me

 Final thought what seems to good to be true usually is


-------------
We r not the conspiracy theorists on this issue.It seems 2 me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four airliners and hitting 75 % of their targets-that feels like a conspiracy theory.C.Sheen


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 11:05am

Colossians 2:14 ~"the writ (legal document) of our transgressions against the Law was nailed to the cross"~

Originally posted by Squeegie

This is just another way of saying that the charges against us have been dropped based on what Christ did on the cross.

Originally posted by desertdude


 Well according to this we all have blanket immunity.Why should it matter wheter I believe in this or not ,my debt has already been paid and I am a free man .And since I have blanket immunity I should be able do whatever I please to do as I am above the law now .Surely jesus also cleansed my sins(past ,present and future) aswell when he was crucified and knew what all sins I am going to commit and scarificied himself for them .So all in all technically speaking I am free to roam the earth doing whatever I wish to do .No law applies to me asJesus took the hit for me

 Final thought what seems too good to be true usually is
 
Yes, that is exactly the case, desert dude.  (thanks for starting this thread, by the way!)
 
The loose "my sins are forgiven" attitude prevailed so much in Christianity that it pretty much made the teachings of Jesus about living righteously to be overlooked.
 
And that's why Allah turned people away from idolizing the cross through the Quran, and once again re-emphasized the importance of not just believing but DOING right.
 
His forgiveness and Mercy are available to anyone who turns away from sin, but people who presume to continue in sin --based on the idea of Jesus providing forgiveness through the cross-- are going further astray.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 11:22am
Originally posted by Squeegie



Eldon, I'm unfamiliar with a Faith 1. Let me take your points one at a time and give my take.

2Corinthians 5:21 "God made him (Jesus) to be SIN"

Again, you must look at this verse in light of the surrounding text. We are new creatures because of what Jesus did on the cross by becoming sin, the holy one who knew no sin, to make the perfect payment required .

Romans 6:6 "our old man is crucified with, that the body of sin might be destroyed"


As I said before, not only did our sin cause him to be crucified, but we were also crucified with him. That portion of ourselves that tends to rebel died on the cross with him. But because our new nature is housed in the same shell that contained the old nature, sin will occur for as long as we draw breath. But we are no longer controlled by sin. We now have the ability, as per the new nature, to live as God requires. When we sin, we are doing something against our nature. And for me this serves as an indicator of that transformation, because now, when I do sin, it doesn't satisfy. Now sin leaves me unsatisfied, broken, and empty. This is proof that a change has happened. My sin nature has been destroyed, the body of sin.

Colossians 2:14 ~"the writ (legal document) of our transgressions against the Law was nailed to the cross"~

This is just another way of saying that the charges against us have been dropped based on what Christ did on the cross.

Ephesians 2:16 "enmity to the law was slain on the cross"

Enmity is antagonism, bitter feelings. So when we receive that new nature I spoke of, the Law ceases to be something the standards of which we will never meet, thereby showing us our miserable condition resulting in resentment toward the law for telling us the truth about ourselves. The Law no longer condemns but encourages.



 
I understand and agree with your assessments for the most part, but not with the idea that "the charges have been dropped" in any absolute sense.
 
My point though is that none of those actualities of faith that are described in those verses were apparent to anyone who viewed the crucifixion scene. The few who loved Jesus there were grieving because to all appearances and all their understanding, a holy righteous man was being killed cruelly and unjustly.
 
None of them said, "Oh look, our old man, the body of sin, is being crucified!", "Hey, the writ of our transgressions is nailed to the cross!", "Wow, enmity to the Law is being put to death!" "Woah, God made Jesus to BE sin for us..."
 
Those verities were unseen at the time and only revealed afterwards.
 
Though Christians will never deny that Jesus was crucified, they should acknowledge that the Quran's assessment of the scene, "they killed him not" is accurate in the face of the most important unseen features, revealed later in the NT, of what was accomplished at Calvary.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: desertdude
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 4:14pm
Youre most welcome Bro

 Another point hit me as I was reading this .Why would god keep on preaching the law and go thru so much death and destruction for thousands of years ,when he was going do away with all of it in one swift blow .What he was playing a game and when things got bad he just decided to start over from a clean slate .Ok that might be a bit scarcastic but seems like thats what happened .
 And what kind of god is he ,was putting his creation in so much trouble and trials and very strict laws and guidelines and then the few generations which were (and are to follow )jesus birth all they have have to do is believe in the cross and they can basically coast thru life .Now that doesnt seem very fair to me .

 One last question ,how can ,for me personally belief in the cross and death of jesus offer me salvation ,I mean is that all I have to do ?I mean I'm not planning to go on any murder sprees and string of criminal activites ,but basically live a normal life and if I just believe that Jesus is my saviour ,is that me .Well on face value seems like a easiest ticket to heaven
But somehow that seems like something way too easy.

 But I am looking for a proper answer ,I've already heard god loves me so much that he sacrified his only son for me etc etc ,but somehow that duznt cut it for me .Has to be something solid .I repeat my question .How can my my belief in the death of jesus and his resurrection save me from eternal damnation ( My life and the cross,two seprate events so how am I to believe they are interlinked and how ? )

Hope most of my ramblings make sense


-------------
We r not the conspiracy theorists on this issue.It seems 2 me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four airliners and hitting 75 % of their targets-that feels like a conspiracy theory.C.Sheen


Posted By: Squeegie
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 5:47pm
Originally posted by desertdude

Colossians 2:14 ~"the writ (legal document) of our transgressions against the Law was nailed to the cross"~

This is just another way of saying that the charges against us have been dropped based on what Christ did on the cross.

 Well according to this we all have blanket immunity.Why should it matter whether I believe in this or not ,my debt has already been paid and I am a free man .And since I have blanket immunity I should be able do whatever I please to do as I am above the law now .Surely Jesus also cleansed my sins(past ,present and future) as well when he was crucified and knew what all sins I am going to commit and sacrificed himself for them .So all in all technically speaking I am free to roam the earth doing whatever I wish to do .No law applies to me as Jesus took the hit for me

 Final thought what seems to good to be true usually is




Desert, just because salvation is made available to all of humanity doesn't mean that everyone will accept the offer. Ed McMahon shows up in my mailbox all the time telling me I may have already won the publisher's clearing house sweepstakes. But then, I never reply, so I'll never have the prize patrol ringing my doorbell. If we choose not to accept an offer, we have no right to expect the offer to affect us.




Posted By: desertdude
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 6:58pm
 Why not after all god made an ultimate sacrifice of himself to himself for our sake his created creatures .I think he would include all humanity .Its like  I send out aid to a poor village and only give it to a selected few .Ok for the sake of argument lets say I accept the cross and all that goes with it and become a true chirstian then surely my previous post applies to me .Now I truly believe jesus took the fall for me so now I am truly a free man .NOW  I am above the law have immunity from sin.Isn't this correct then ?

 And you forgot to answer as how the cross can save me ?


-------------
We r not the conspiracy theorists on this issue.It seems 2 me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four airliners and hitting 75 % of their targets-that feels like a conspiracy theory.C.Sheen


Posted By: Damo808
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 8:05pm
Originally posted by desertdude

Colossians 2:14 ~"the writ (legal document) of our transgressions against the Law was nailed to the cross"~

This is just another way of saying that the charges against us have been dropped based on what Christ did on the cross.

 Well according to this we all have blanket immunity.Why should it matter wheter I believe in this or not ,my debt has already been paid and I am a free man .And since I have blanket immunity I should be able do whatever I please to do as I am above the law now .Surely jesus also cleansed my sins(past ,present and future) aswell when he was crucified and knew what all sins I am going to commit and scarificied himself for them .So all in all technically speaking I am free to roam the earth doing whatever I wish to do .No law applies to me asJesus took the hit for me

 Final thought what seems to good to be true usually is
 
 Hi DD
  Forgiveness of sins is possible through Christ. But this doesn't mean one can choose to live an immoral way of life.  God as you'll agree knows the hearts of all men. If your approach to life with the knowledge of sin is to lead an immoral life with the mistaken idea that there is no consequence, then the gravity of your sin is multiplied upon yourself. Hell is always an option. Forgiveness of sin is only attained when the one is genuinely sorrowfull for their actions rather than merely fearful of the consequences of them.


-------------
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5


Posted By: desertdude
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 8:48pm
"Forgiveness of sins is possible through Christ" how ?Just by beileving in it and then living a moral life ? How does that make me forgiven ?

 and like i asked earlier how is his dying 2000 yrs ago interlinked with my life and sins now ????

 And ( yes once again another one pops into mind as I write this ,are'nt we the curious one today)why do chirstians ask for repentance and forgiveness of sins ,Isnt that tab already been paid by somebody else ?


-------------
We r not the conspiracy theorists on this issue.It seems 2 me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four airliners and hitting 75 % of their targets-that feels like a conspiracy theory.C.Sheen


Posted By: Squeegie
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 9:28pm
Originally posted by desertdude

 Why not after all god made an ultimate sacrifice of himself to himself for our sake his created creatures .I think he would include all humanity .Its like  I send out aid to a poor village and only give it to a selected few .Ok for the sake of argument lets say I accept the cross and all that goes with it and become a true chirstian then surely my previous post applies to me .Now I truly believe jesus took the fall for me so now I am truly a free man .NOW  I am above the law have immunity from sin.Isn't this correct then ?

 And you forgot to answer as how the cross can save me ?


The cross saves no one. You make false assumptions if you think Christians view the cross as some sort of talisman. I do have a cross necklace, but the  reason I wear it is as a reminder of the price that was paid for my sin. The cross stands as a collective condemnation of mankind and our sin. It is not standing there smiling at us. It is not our friend. It shows us just how serious a matter sin is, that Jesus would go so far as to die so he wouldn't have to live without us in eternity.

To view salvation as a license to sin is to completely misunderstand the purpose of the incarnation, and any Christian who views salvation in this way shares your misunderstanding.

Also, it is quite possible to believe in the death and resurrection of Christ and go to hell. I can believe that exercise will have long term health benefits, but until I use that Stairmaster in the basement, I will not enjoy these benefits.


Posted By: Squeegie
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 9:56pm
Originally posted by desertdude

and like i asked earlier how is his dying 2000 yrs ago interlinked with my life and sins now ????

 And ( yes once again another one pops into mind as I write this ,aren't we the curious one today)why do Christians ask for repentance and forgiveness of sins ,isn't that tab already been paid by somebody else ?




Desert, I could reply with the question "How does Mohamed talking to an angel 1400 years ago effect my life in 2008?"

Another aspect of this newness I keep mentioning is the fact that when we become believers, God gifts us with the presence of his holy spirit. That makes faith a present reality rather than merely an historical curiosity. That presence heightens our sensitivity to our sin, making it easier to notice when we are getting into a situation we can't handle with our own resources. It also helps us to grow to be more like Christ. Therefor the net results of Jesus' death and resurrection are inextricably linked to my life 2000 years later for it ends up affecting everything I do.

We repent and ask for forgiveness because if we don't, we will not grow. At the moment of salvation there is forgiveness that will encompass past sins, but future sins should be dealt with as they occur. If there is no sorrow for sin, especially now that we are members of God's family, then did we really mean it when we asked to be saved? And true sorrow for sin always leads to confession and repentance.

And real repentance is both passive and aggressive. Aggressive in that we stop doing whatever it is we have been doing, but passive in that we allow God to help us to do this. And God helps us by giving us something to take the place of whatever we needed to repent about. If you try to stop, you have just created a vacuum. If you don't fill that vacuum with something of God's, then it will eventually fill itself with whatever will fit the shape of the vacuum, and that will end up being the sin you repented of in the first place.

I've talked enough, I think.


Posted By: desertdude
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 10:31pm
Ok most of what you made sense and most of my post you didnt understand .I understand ( and already knew from before )what you are saying .

 And to answer your question It doesnt make an ounce of diffrence to me of The prophet talking to an angel 1400 yrs ago ( ) .What makes a diffrence is what the angel said to him and then the prophet repeated those words to it .It are those words which make a diff to me ,should i choose to accept them

"Therefor the net results of Jesus' death and resurrection are inextricably linked to my life 2000 years later for it ends up affecting everything I do" Please expound on this maybe I'm just thick .I still dont see the link .

 And the part u misunderstood about my post is when I say Cross I mean the whole ten yards ,being a complete chirstian ,I think it was paul who said without the cross and the resurrection out faith is in vain ,hence the refrence to the cross.

 What I am STILL saying is why do I have believe that jesus was crucified and how does that belief prevent me from damnation or makes me a better person or offers me salvation ?.

 ( another one popped in my mind ) why do chirstians beileve we muslims are gonna get it in the end( no sugar coating pls ). I mean we beielve in jesus we respect him and his mother .We follow all of his teachings ,we pray like he prayed in some manner ,techinally speaking we muslims are more chirstian than chirstians them self .Then how come we gonna get the short end of the stick in the end ?


-------------
We r not the conspiracy theorists on this issue.It seems 2 me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four airliners and hitting 75 % of their targets-that feels like a conspiracy theory.C.Sheen


Posted By: Squeegie
Date Posted: 01 April 2008 at 11:08pm
Desert, what Paul said was that if Christ is not raised, did not return to life after his death on the cross, THEN our faith is vain because the fact of the resurrection is the fulcrum upon which our faith is hinged. It stands or falls on the point of the resurrection. If it in fact happened, then it's all true, salvation is available for those who believe, we are at peace with God.

When I say events 2000 years past are linked to my day to day life, I mean that everything I do is viewed through who I am in Christ. The fact that I am forgiven, that I am a new creature because of Jesus' death and resurrection should profoundly affect how I live my life. It should affect how I act as a wife and a parent. I should be willing to forgive my husband of his many (he just popped in to see what I'm writing about) shortcomings because I have been forgiven my own shortcomings. It should affect how I do my job, before I married it affected my dating choices. My understanding of the resurrection impacts how I spend my money and how and why I give money charitably.  I react in all these arenas based on what was done for and to me in the resurrection of Christ. Because I have been forgiven of so much, then my primary attitude in life should be one of gratitude, and that attitude should work its way into every aspect of life.


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 02 April 2008 at 3:25am
 
Wow, some really great posts, squeegie.  Thank you for your contribution.


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: desertdude
Date Posted: 02 April 2008 at 6:47am
Ok squeege ,Again I understand what your saying ,but basically your just repeating what you said in your previous post .

  Although one thing I found intresting is when you say
"It stands or falls on the point of the resurrection. If it in fact happened, then it's all true, salvation is available for those who believe"
 What I wanna know is why ,let say for the say of argument the resurrection didnt happen .Does everything jesus did ,preach all the guidances he gave ,all the miracles he performed stand for nothing ?Are you saying his life was in vain and that only the resurrection puts a stamp of approval on his life ?
 
 Seems a little harsh that if jesus didnt rise from the dead then all he did was a Lie .That is kinda crude if you ask me .Putting so much importance on the resurrection.

 Lemme give this another shot and try to rephrase my question.What I am trying to say is why do i HAVE to believe in the crucifiction ,as jesus did sacrifice himself for all humanity Past,present and future ok you say it does not offer me blanket immunity ( which I think is kinda hypocritical BTW )What about all the people who we went before chirst .What about them .They had no idea about what was going to happen ,Humanity in general wasnt aware of a future jesus ,What happens them ?

 Also my question remains unanswered that god made people go thru such a strict code before jesus and then felled it down in one swift swoop .Isn't that kinda seriously unfair that nowadays all you need to do is believe in chirst and live a moderately decent life and you should be quite certain for a one way ticket to heaven ,and ppl of the past had to adhere to the LAW which according to modern day chirstianity was so strict that god had to abloish it cuz it was so strict that no one could follow it stricly and was source of constant sin


-------------
We r not the conspiracy theorists on this issue.It seems 2 me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four airliners and hitting 75 % of their targets-that feels like a conspiracy theory.C.Sheen


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 02 April 2008 at 9:28am
Speaking from my own experience within Christianity, I focused early on the verses where Jesus said, Think not that I am come to destroy the law... I am come to fulfill it... till heaven and earth pass one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of the least of these commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven:  but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19)
 
As I went about trying to keep and teach even those least commandments of the law, I found many enemies within the ranks of Christendom. And as I naturally gravitated towards fellowship with other Christians who kept the law, I still found enmity among them towards each other. It was only when I found the following Quran verse that I began to understand the whole situation:
 
5:14 From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done.
 
That has such an undeniable ring of Truth to it, that I could make no argument against it.
 
As for the cross, Jesus said No man can be my disciple unless he takes up his cross and follows me. That takes emphasis off of Jesus' cross onto each individual believer's cross!  So what was Jesus talking about?
 
Apparently each believer has his own life to lead in obedience to the Will of God, which will cause him discomfort, suffering and even death. And though we certainly seek blessings along the way so that we can "bear the cross", we have to have the same submission that Jesus showed: "not my will, but THY Will be done".
 
Now, the symbol of the cross is not present in Islam, but the actuality of submission to the Will of Allah IS there. Jesus set a good example of submission to Allah's Will, as did all the Prophets, but we have to have that same submission as well, it's not enough to just "ride on the Prophets' coat tails".
 
We thank Allah for the example of Jesus and all the Prophets and we thank Allah for the Grace to live according to the same Spirit they lived by. It is an amazingly wonderful thing that Allah can offer forgiveness and eternal Life to man after all we've done against His Will, so we ought to have enough insight among us to come to common terms concerning Him.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 02 April 2008 at 4:10pm
 
 
Thank you for your replies, eldon.  Although I disagree with many of of your suppositions, they are interesting have provided valuable insight.  Are the views and reasoning you express essentially those of "typical muslims"? "Orthodox Islam"?  I'm just trying to figure out if these are just your own ideas or those that are relatively common.
 
What was slain on the cross was NOT the Pure Word of God made flesh, according to those New Testament verses I posted previously, right?
 
I don't read it that way at all. 
 
 
 
Originally posted by LtTony
one, are there any other traditions that you object to?
 
transubstantiation, mandatory celibacy for priests, nuns, & brothers, supremacy of Rome, Immaculate Conception of Mary, "the Mother of God" title, altars to saints, crucifix on the altar, bowing before statues and images, allowance of eating unclean foods, bingo, and probably a lot of others I can't think of offhand...
 
That's quite a list; each a topic on it's own, for sure.  I would say some scriptural, however.  I understand what you're saying, though; many christians believe some of the practices you mention are unscriptural.
 
 
Originally posted by LtTony

....and two, what did you think of the passages I provided on tradition, Christ giving authority to His apostles and His promises to protect the church?
 
Those traditions mentioned were specific to the context of the verses, not a general endorsement of all traditions.
 
No, definitely not all traditions; only those that came from the Apostles, the early church, from God.
So there are acceptable traditions but only those that are documented in the Bible?  "Oral messages" that become "epistles"?  Epistles of Paul, in fact.  I just thought that odd coming from a muslim, since Paul takes such a beating around here.  I mean, tradition determined Paul's letters were authenticly inspired --  the "tradition" of a church, one that has authority.
I think the practices -- the traditions -- of the early church provide context to scripture, help us determine authentic teaching.
 
 
 
As for the cross, Jesus said No man can be my disciple unless he takes up his cross and follows me. That takes emphasis off of Jesus' cross onto each individual believer's cross! 
 
"Takes the emphasis off Jesus' cross."  Wow.  I'm not even going to ask what part of scripture you back that up with.  It is pretty clear from the Apostles and other early followers in scripture (including Paul, and tradition) that it is all about Christ's sacrifice on the cross.  The sacrifice that you say only appeared to happen, but is useful for you to make your point. 
 
 

He (Adam) was the only born (spiritual) Son of God in that Adam, who is also called the Son of God in the Bible, was not born, but was made. 
 
This also would make an interesting thread all it's own.  Among other things, what I find interesting is you take one reference to Adam in a genealogy listing to make a huge theological leap that is contradicted by multiple other remarks (i.e., "Only begotten, "Son of Man," etc.)
 
Again, thanks for your replies and patience.
 
 


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: Squeegie
Date Posted: 02 April 2008 at 10:39pm

Originally posted by desertdude

Ok squeegee, Again I understand what you’re saying, but basically, your just repeating what you said in your previous post.

 

Desert, unfortunately I can only speak for my own experience. I tried to give examples of how I know salvation works. I don’t have direct access to the mind of God to fully understand the means by which trusting in Christ results in a life-giving change. But in order for it to work, I need not understand all the details. I have given birth twice in my life and though I’m very familiar with what it’s like to be pregnant, I do not understand all the inner workings of that process. But then, I don’t need to. All that matters is that nine months later I could hold my son and daughter in my arms.



 

Originally posted by desertdude

Although one thing I found interesting is when you say "It stands or falls on the point of the resurrection. If it in fact happened, then it's all true, salvation is available for those who believe"
 What I wanna know is why, let say for the say of argument the resurrection didn’t happen. Does everything Jesus did, preach all the guidance he gave, all the miracles he performed stand for nothing? Are you saying his life was in vain and that only the resurrection puts a stamp of approval on his life?

 

 

If the resurrection didn’t happen, then we would likely not be having this exchange of thought. Peter, James and John would have gone back to fishing, as we saw in Luke’s gospel. And Luke probably wouldn't have written a gospel. The Church would never have taken off like it did because there was nothing about it that would touch every person who considered the words of Jesus. Yes, Jesus’ words and thoughts were impressive and probably without parallel, but without something to galvanize his followers into evangelism dynamos, we’d probably recall Jesus as often as we do John C. Fremont (James Buchanan’s opponent in the 1856 national election.). I am not saying that his life was vain for saying what he did and living as he did, but he also said he came to give his life as a ransom for many. If he didn’t in fact do so, then his reliability as a messenger of God is in question. Are God’s messengers in the habit of not living up to their word?

 


 

Originally posted by desertdude

What I am trying to say is why do i HAVE to believe in the crucifiction, as Jesus did sacrifice himself for all humanity Past, present and future ok you say it does not offer me blanket immunity ( which I think is kinda hypocritical BTW )What about all the people who we went before Christ .What about them .They had no idea about what was going to happen ,Humanity in general wasn’t aware of a future Jesus ,What happens them ?

 

Crucifiction? Ha ha, cute. I did not say it doesn’t offer blanket immunity. I said that once we are saved, we take the entire matter of sin far more seriously and begin taking measures to work it out of our lives, said measures looking very much like confession and repentance. God invites us to be involved in the process. The folks who came before Christ had prophets who told them of a coming messiah. If they believed that messiah would be sent, God credits them with trusting in him. And that’s where it all comes together. God is asking us to trust him where his plan for salvation is concerned. How do we express that trust? By believing that Jesus did what his disciples said he did, what the five hundred witnesses to the risen Christ said they saw, by living in such a way that our life shows we believe

 

Originally posted by desertdude

Also my question remains unanswered that god made people go thru such a strict code before Jesus and then felled it down in one swift swoop. Isn’t that kinda seriously unfair that nowadays all you need to do is believe in Christ and live a moderately decent life and you should be quite certain for a one way ticket to heaven ,and ppl of the past had to adhere to the LAW which according to modern day Christianity was so strict that god had to abolish it cuz it was so strict that no one could follow it strictly and was source of constant sin

 

Part of the reason the law was so strict was to emphasize the fact that there is no way we can keep it of our own will. Even if God made it easier with only one commandment (Thou shalt not eat meat on Fridays during months that end in ‘y’ or ‘r’), there would still be people who craved a steak at the end of the week twelve months out of the year. Also, remember that the entirety of the law was not strictly God-authored. There were well-meaning rabbis who amplified the original commandments to the point that it had become more of a burden than anything else. I personally still feel obliged to keep the commandments, though I sometimes do so less than perfectly. But we’re(God and I together) working on it



Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 03 April 2008 at 9:59am
As for the cross, Jesus said No man can be my disciple unless he takes up his cross and follows me. That takes emphasis off of Jesus' cross onto each individual believer's cross! 
 
Originally posted by LtTony

"Takes the emphasis off Jesus' cross."  Wow.  I'm not even going to ask what part of scripture you back that up with...
 
It's right there in what Jesus said:  No man can be my disciple UNLESS he takes up his cross. It's not enough for Christians to just believe in Jesus' cross, but they have to take up their own cross as well.
 
Originally posted by LtTony

Are the views and reasoning you express essentially those of "typical muslims"? "Orthodox Islam"? 
 
All Muslims believe that we have to submit our wills to Allah and suffer trials and testings, persevering despite hardship, overcoming doubt and uncertainty through faith. That equates to the principle of "taking up your cross", though Islam doesn't endorse the term "cross".
 
And all Muslims believe that Jesus submitted himself to Allah's Will and taught the Truth to his disciples about keeping even the least commandments.
 
Not all Muslims were Christians beforehand like me though, so they don't necessarily share my exact perspective about what's written in the Bible.
 
Thanks for your remarks and responses as well.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 04 April 2008 at 4:13pm

 

"As for the cross, Jesus said No man can be my disciple unless he takes up his cross and follows me. That takes emphasis off of Jesus' cross onto each individual believer's cross!"
 
Originally posted by LtTony

"Takes the emphasis off Jesus' cross."  Wow.  I'm not even going to ask what part of scripture you back that up with..."
 
It's right there in what Jesus said:  No man can be my disciple UNLESS he takes up his cross. It's not enough for Christians to just believe in Jesus' cross, but they have to take up their own cross as well.
 
Of course the words are there, but THEY DO NOT impart the message you are claiming.  I'm sorry, but to think so is an embarrassing and illiterate interpretation.  I just have to shake my head.  There are a lot of things in Islam that make sense; this just isn't one of them
Yes, we have to take up our own crosses to follow Jesus.  But that is an OBVIOUS metaphor.  It doesn't mean that Jesus expects His followers to LITERALLY pick up a wooden cross.  NOR does it place this metphorical act equal to what was accomplished on THE CROSS.   Bearing "a cross" is part of our faith, but it is NO WHERE NEAR what took place on Calvary.
 


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 04 April 2008 at 4:21pm
Dude wrote: "techinally speaking we muslims are more chirstian than chirstians them self"
 
Yes, we noticed that attitude, LOL.
 
 
Dude wrote: But somehow that seems like something way too easy.
 
But elsewhere on the board, (waheed or eldon, I think; or someone on the "pork question") posted that Christianity teaches a difficult  and narrow path.  So which is it -- easy or difficult?  You guys need to get your stories straight.


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: M.A.R.W.A.N
Date Posted: 04 April 2008 at 4:53pm
Originally posted by LtTony

But elsewhere on the board, (waheed or eldon, I think; or someone on the "pork question") posted that Christianity teaches a difficult  and narrow path.  So which is it -- easy or difficult?  You guys need to get your stories straight.



Obviously, you're not the sharpest tool but I pity this monstrous disorientation. Please cast your functional eyes back to reality.

Let's ignore the possibility that all muslims are robots made at WIPU (Why Islam Processing Unit). Let's pretend that Muslims are people, who are made up of individuals that possess differences. Differences like....pfft , I don't know....gender, personality, experience, knowledge, thoughts, opinions, etc.

Then let's pretend you haven't frequented this forum in what seems to be like forever so that we don't have to conclude how obtuse it is for person who's been here as long as you to have missed out on the fact that muslims can occasionally express opinions that are (here it comes.....) diverse.

There is no story to get straight. What you saw were two opinions, perfectly valid in their own right.


-------------
http://www.islamonline.net/english/index.shtml - www.islamonline.net


Posted By: scruggnut
Date Posted: 04 April 2008 at 5:56pm
Originally posted by M.A.R.W.A.N

Originally posted by LtTony

But elsewhere on the board, (waheed or eldon, I think; or someone on the "pork question") posted that Christianity teaches a difficult  and narrow path.  So which is it -- easy or difficult?  You guys need to get your stories straight.



Obviously, you're not the sharpest tool but I pity this monstrous disorientation. Please cast your functional eyes back to reality.

Let's ignore the possibility that all muslims are robots made at WIPU (Why Islam Processing Unit). Let's pretend that Muslims are people, who are made up of individuals that possess differences. Differences like....pfft , I don't know....gender, personality, experience, knowledge, thoughts, opinions, etc.

Then let's pretend you haven't frequented this forum in what seems to be like forever so that we don't have to conclude how obtuse it is for person who's been here as long as you to have missed out on the fact that muslims can occasionally express opinions that are (here it comes.....) diverse.

There is no story to get straight. What you saw were two opinions, perfectly valid in their own right.
You really shouldn't comment about someone not being the sharpest tool when it took you just short of twenty minutes to figure out that you had incorrectly spelled frequented; but you nailed obtuse...that has to count for something.
I'm just kidding...you are right, though; it was a case of 2 different opinions. 
But seriously...isn't there a scholar that you guys could talk to in order to clear the picture up?
 


-------------
Waiting an eternity for an apology from one who never apologizes but always demands one.


Posted By: M.A.R.W.A.N
Date Posted: 04 April 2008 at 8:05pm
If that's the only mistake you can pick out in my post, then maybe I am sharp tool afterall and you, apparently a blunt instrument. No prob, I like that we can makes these kinds of jokes together.

But you're right (about me being right). Thank you for confirming it coz I wasn't sure until I read your post.

I hope this wasn't too arrogant for you, I know you don't like that and I hate to dissapoint.


edit: I misspelled the word dissapoint (shoot, and also misspelled).


-------------
http://www.islamonline.net/english/index.shtml - www.islamonline.net


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 05 April 2008 at 11:13am
Originally posted by LtTony

But elsewhere on the board, (waheed or eldon, I think; or someone on the "pork question") posted that Christianity teaches a difficult  and narrow path.  So which is it -- easy or difficult?  You guys need to get your stories straight.
 
I wrote something about Jesus teaching the strait and narrow path that leads to eternal life, which includes the notion that the best of his disciples will keep and teach even the least commandments of the Law.
 
Christianity in general, however, looks much more like "the broad way which leads to destruction and many there be which go in thereat", by virtue of the fact that most Christians don't keep and teach even the least commandments and mostly consider those who do to be "legalistic" and even heretical.
 
And M.A.R.W.A.N. is right, besides quotes from the Bible, Quran, and other sources, what I write here is my own opinion from my own point of view. If anyone agrees or disagrees I welcome any reasoned response.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 05 April 2008 at 11:24am
Originally posted by LtTony

 

"As for the cross, Jesus said No man can be my disciple unless he takes up his cross and follows me. That takes emphasis off of Jesus' cross onto each individual believer's cross!"
 
Originally posted by LtTony

"Takes the emphasis off Jesus' cross."  Wow.  I'm not even going to ask what part of scripture you back that up with..."
 
It's right there in what Jesus said:  No man can be my disciple UNLESS he takes up his cross. It's not enough for Christians to just believe in Jesus' cross, but they have to take up their own cross as well.
 
Of course the words are there, but THEY DO NOT impart the message you are claiming.  I'm sorry, but to think so is an embarrassing and illiterate interpretation.  I just have to shake my head.  There are a lot of things in Islam that make sense; this just isn't one of them
Yes, we have to take up our own crosses to follow Jesus.  But that is an OBVIOUS metaphor.  It doesn't mean that Jesus expects His followers to LITERALLY pick up a wooden cross.  NOR does it place this metphorical act equal to what was accomplished on THE CROSS.   Bearing "a cross" is part of our faith, but it is NO WHERE NEAR what took place on Calvary.
 
 
Tony, I think you're being intentionally illiterate here.
 
What I said was:
 
All Muslims believe that we have to submit our wills to Allah and suffer trials and testings, persevering despite hardship, overcoming doubt and uncertainty through faith. That equates to the principle of "taking up your cross" though Islam doesn't endorse the term "cross".
 
I wasn't talking about anyone having to take up a wooden cross, but to follow Jesus is to follow his example of submission to Allah's Will, and THAT is the most essential ingredient of salvation.
 
Whether he died on the cross or not doesn't save anyone without their own submission to Allah as well.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: Squeegie
Date Posted: 05 April 2008 at 11:50pm
Eldon, are 21st century Christians therefor at a decided disadvantage in that the cross is now used as a symbol of remembrance rather than an instrument of execution?

I think there are reasonable inferences that can be drawn from this statement. To take up one's cross and follow Jesus doesn't imply a death on that cross, though this is certainly a possibility, especially in areas of the world hostile to the message of the cross. One who is carrying a cross is living at the point of death. I think the statement is meant more to suggest an attitude the disciple ought to be carrying, i.e. to live as though you are ready to die. He has already made it known that they would encounter resistance. "Love your enemies" implies that we will have them.


Posted By: LtTony
Date Posted: 06 April 2008 at 12:03am
Originally posted by eldon

Originally posted by LtTony

 [Quote]

"As for the cross, Jesus said No man can be my disciple unless he takes up his cross and follows me. That takes emphasis off of Jesus' cross onto each individual believer's cross!"
 
Originally posted by LtTony

"Takes the emphasis off Jesus' cross."  Wow.  I'm not even going to ask what part of scripture you back that up with..."
 
It's right there in what Jesus said:  No man can be my disciple UNLESS he takes up his cross. It's not enough for Christians to just believe in Jesus' cross, but they have to take up their own cross as well.
 
Of course the words are there, but THEY DO NOT impart the message you are claiming.  I'm sorry, but to think so is an embarrassing and illiterate interpretation.  I just have to shake my head.  There are a lot of things in Islam that make sense; this just isn't one of them
Yes, we have to take up our own crosses to follow Jesus.  But that is an OBVIOUS metaphor.  It doesn't mean that Jesus expects His followers to LITERALLY pick up a wooden cross.  NOR does it place this metphorical act equal to what was accomplished on THE CROSS.   Bearing "a cross" is part of our faith, but it is NO WHERE NEAR what took place on Calvary.
 
---------
 
 
Tony, I think you're being intentionally illiterate here.
 
What I said was:
 
All Muslims believe that we have to submit our wills to Allah and suffer trials and testings, persevering despite hardship, overcoming doubt and uncertainty through faith. That equates to the principle of "taking up your cross" though Islam doesn't endorse the term "cross".
 
I wasn't talking about anyone having to take up a wooden cross, but to follow Jesus is to follow his example of submission to Allah's Will, and THAT is the most essential ingredient of salvation.
 
Whether he died on the cross or not doesn't save anyone without their own submission to Allah as well.
 
 
  
 
 
"...overcoming doubt and uncertainty through faith. That equates to the principle of "taking up your cross" though Islam doesn't endorse the term "cross".
 
I like that part.
 
"...but to follow Jesus is to follow his example of submission to Allah's Will, and THAT is the most essential ingredient of salvation."
 
I think it is one ingredient, the secondary one.  I think faith that Jesus is the Son of God, the messiah and our Saviour through His death and resurrection is the first and most essential....
 
""As for the cross, Jesus said No man can be my disciple unless he takes up his cross and follows me. That takes emphasis off of Jesus' cross onto each individual believer's cross!"

... but it doesn't shift the "emphasis off of Jesus' cross."

"Whether he died on the cross or not doesn't save anyone without their own submission to Allah as well."
 
That is an interesting talking point, even among Christians.  I think if you truely believe in Christ, you will earnestly try to follow what He taught (inclu. submitting to Allah).  At least that is what Christ said.
 

 
 


-------------
"“We love death. The US loves life. That is the difference between us two.” Osama Bin Laden


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 06 April 2008 at 10:02am
Originally posted by Squeegie

One who is carrying a cross is living at the point of death. I think the statement is meant more to suggest an attitude the disciple ought to be carrying, i.e. to live as though you are ready to die.
 
There is an actual "dying to sin" that any believer must go through and I think that is exactly what "taking up the cross" entails. Romans' chapter six deals extensively with that subject.
 
For in that he (Jesus) died, he died unto sin once:  but in that he lives, he lives unto God. Likewise, reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God... 6:10-11
 
I suggest that Jesus "died unto sin once" during his whole life, refusing to sin despite being tempted like any other man to do so. The death on the cross was the death of the old man, the sin nature which believers are to reckon as accomplished in themselves.
 
Being ready to die for the faith is also a necessary outlook for any believer, but death to sin is a more fundamental aspect of faith.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam


Posted By: eldon
Date Posted: 06 April 2008 at 10:27am
Originally posted by LtTony

""As for the cross, Jesus said No man can be my disciple unless he takes up his cross and follows me. That takes emphasis off of Jesus' cross onto each individual believer's cross!"

... but it doesn't shift the "emphasis off of Jesus' cross."

 
"Taking up your cross" is what actualizes that which took place on Calvary:  your death to sin and realization of Life in the Spirit of Christ.
 
That overcoming victorious Spirit was in all the Prophets, according to 1Peter 1:11, whose example we are to follow, shunning sin and forbidding evil to accomplish good in this life.
 
Muslims have the further and more detailed example of Muhammad to follow, by which we "hold fast to the rope of Allah" which unites the people of faith throughout time. (Peace and blessings be upon all the Prophets)
 
"Whether he died on the cross or not doesn't save anyone without their own submission to Allah as well."
 
That is an interesting talking point, even among Christians.  I think if you truely believe in Christ, you will earnestly try to follow what He taught (inclu. submitting to Allah).  At least that is what Christ said.
 
I fully agree.


-------------
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083966/Confirming-the-Glory - Islam - Islam



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide - http://www.webwizguide.info