quote:Originally posted by Marcella: Say it to a muslims,they are changing or making a new things in Islam with no order from God.
i think what christians added and removed in their holy books was order from God isn`t it??.
Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
ok Israel: I don`t know if you male or female , but I think you are shemale. I think too it`s easy to insult me like it`s easy to insult and abuse you ok, be decent boy or girl as you see,however,I will reply you: 1:you said:" jesus gave his life for humanity"!! ok who was killed on the cross jesus or God , son or father,and if they are one, how can we believe that ,after jesus killd, he sits on the right side of God`s throne as your holybook says,so if they are one why they were two on the throne?( If ya'll are gonna try to "diss" Christians and Christianity, do yourself a favor and start with some inward reflection.). 2:when jesus said:" beware of false prophets.... .......you will know them by their fruits". he mean your clerics like bolos...etc. whom talk about trinity,without proved that in the bible,and many followers believed him.. 3: you said: "your boy muhammad...."ok i think that indecate what you learn in your home and church,and you must read your bible well to know what jesus ordered you to do, he said "pray for whom abuse you...." isn`t he?.so you have to read and do what jesus said to you and then defend about your doctrines ok, don`t be fanatical baby .anyway,you mention sudan,janjaweed&Darfurians , but what`s about hetller,bosh,sharoon,chatholics and protestants,,,,,,?!!that`s enough to you.. 4:you said:"Why did the Arabs that came to Egypt..."that is indicated you didn`t understand and read history well ,like you did with your holy book..firstly you coudn`t prove that,secondly muslims when they came to egypt they protected copts from romans whom killed and tormented them so they fled to desert weren`t them? so copts liked and encouraged arab when they came to egypt. 5:you said"why is a Muslim man able to marry....," ok,for example, when your sister marry of muslim mam ,her children will be to them father,that` mean they will be muslims,on the contrary, they will not, you understand.. 6:you said"Muslim clerics adding stuff to the "word"of allah". oh, again baby you betake to abusing ,however, i invite you to read well again ,to be aware and know what you says ok, however, muslims have one book, but you have alot,muslims didn`t reject their book,but you did that alot,muslims didn`t debug or add even one word in their book, but you did that alot...you want alot baby.. 7:I invite you again to read what`s the bible said about you( Israel)"jerusalim"????????? 8:i want to say to you what you wrote in the last line of your messege again:"If ya'll are gonna try to "diss" Christians and Christianity, do yourself a favor and start with some inward reflection.. 9:you must to learn also ,how to depate and how to respect the others. 10:i don`t know why there are somebodies like you hate islam and muslims, although we respect and believe in our prophet jesus like we do the same with our prophet muhammad,however iam sure that there are many christians and muslims still love and live together forever.
-------------------- abu maryam Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: Say it to a muslims,they are changing or making a new things in Islam with no order from God.
Where .. what and whom ?
EVERYTHING THAT IT'S NOT IN QURAN AND SOME SCHOLARS ARE TELLING YOU WHAT TO DO,BECAUSE THEY JUST THINK THAT IT'S RIGHT.IT IS NOT FROM GOD BUT FROM THEM,THEY ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING AGAINST TO GOD HE DIDN'T GIVE THEM PERMISSION FOR THAT. Posts: 979 | From: Another world | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: You think that Quran was never changed.But can you prove it?Because it is in your book doesn't mean that is true.How can you be so sure?!1400 years is 1400 years!
what kind of evidence do you need? People are reciting Quran for more 1400 years and none can change it. olden books have the same Quran as the modern books.
there is no evidence that anyone changed Quran. then Quran wasnt changed
WHAT KIND OF EVIDENCE,DO YOU SAY?IF SOMEONE IS SO SURE ABOUT SOMETHING HE SHOULD HAVE PROOF!BUT NO MUSLIM CAN DO IT.SHOW ME YOUR TRUTH AND I WILL BELIEVE BUT LIKE THAT CIAO. THIS IS MY PROOF THAT YOU JUST LIKE ALL OTHERS SO-CALLED MUSLIMS BLINDLY BELIEVE BUT NOONE FROM YOU CAN FUCKING PROVE IT.
Posts: 979 | From: Another world | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: Say it to a muslims,they are changing or making a new things in Islam with no order from God.
i think what christians added and removed in their holy books was order from God :D isn`t it??.
That's not the point.You muslims are saying "oh islam is the best greatest NEVER changed true religion" these are very big words,don't you think?
Posts: 979 | From: Another world | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: Say it to a muslims,they are changing or making a new things in Islam with no order from God.
Where .. what and whom ?
EVERYTHING THAT IT'S NOT IN QURAN AND SOME SCHOLARS ARE TELLING YOU WHAT TO DO,BECAUSE THEY JUST THINK THAT IT'S RIGHT.IT IS NOT FROM GOD BUT FROM THEM,THEY ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING AGAINST TO GOD HE DIDN'T GIVE THEM PERMISSION FOR THAT.
Marcella, be careful what you say! Have you heard the saying: "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!" Once again you are attributing things to Allah that you have no knowledge of. In the Qur'an Allah says:
“(And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger, if you believe in Allaah and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination”[al-Nisa’ 4:59]
So a Muslim should refer the disputed matter to the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and whatever appears to him to be more correct, based on the evidence, is what he should follow, because what is obligatory is to follow the evidence, and he may refer to the words of the scholars to help him understand the evidence.
But if a Muslim does not have sufficient knowledge to enable him to decide which of the scholarly opinions is more likely to be correct, then he should ask the people of knowledge whose knowledge and religious commitment he trusts and then follow the advice or fatwas they give. Allaah says:
“So ask the people of the Reminder (the scholars) if you do not know”[al-Anbiya’ 21:43]
If their opinions differ, then he should follow the one who is most trustworthy and most knowledgeable.
Posts: 4576 | From: Cairo | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know that,but I don't think that it's right.I don't agree with islamic laws anyway.If someone wants to believe do it at home with your family with your friends but why to make it for all people in the country if they maybe don't believe but they belong to that country and have rights to live there how they want to,I mean like we all in non-islamic countries.
Posts: 979 | From: Another world | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by newcomer: But if a Muslim does not have sufficient knowledge to enable him to decide which of the scholarly opinions is more likely to be correct, then he should ask the people of knowledge whose knowledge and religious commitment he trusts and then follow the advice or fatwas they give. Allaah says:
“So ask the people of the Reminder (the scholars) if you do not know”[al-Anbiya’ 21:43]
That's 21:7, not 43. But how do they come to the conclusion that the "people of reminder" have to be the scholars?
Posts: 3587 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
inshaa allah you are all in the best of health and iman.
unfortunately we live in very corrupt times and islam is becomming more corrupt by the day. ill give to you an example. i was asked by another muslim why i pray 5 times a day and i told them it was ordained by Allah subhaana we ta ala. they told me no! we pray because it is written for us in the sunnah. even to this day i cant believe many muslims are deluded and blind to not see why we pray. we are told in the Qur'an the times to pray, the actions/words. Praying was prescribed from the days of Ibrihim so when you think about it, when jibreel taught prophet muhammed sallallahe alahye we salam how to pray, he was relaying to him the past actions. now one may argue as to salat(prayer) being told by hadiths but it was an action shown to us through generations. i myself am a muslimah elhamdulelah and have strong iman. however as far as the sunnah(hadiths) go, unfortunately it seems many muslims are contraditory because we know the taurit and injel were changed what makes u think also hadiths were not changed? i urge you all to follow the quran and adhere to its words. as for the hadiths, they came about more than 100 years after prophet muhammed sallallahe alahye we salam has passed away so please go with what you feel is the correct hadiths and what will stregnthen you more in iman inshaa allah.
may allah guide you always
we salam
Posts: 26 | From: Australia | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: I know that,but I don't think that it's right.I don't agree with islamic laws anyway.If someone wants to believe do it at home with your family with your friends but why to make it for all people in the country if they maybe don't believe but they belong to that country and have rights to live there how they want to,I mean like we all in non-islamic countries.
Marcalla, you are perfectly entitled not to like Islamic laws and think Muslims should live like non-Muslims, but please don't let this cloud your thinking to "take the name of the Lord your God in vain".
Posts: 4576 | From: Cairo | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do christians have their christians countries?No and they can live how they like.Religion is for people who want live like that,but noone can choose it just like that for everyone!People are smart and old enough and they know what's good for them.Not the other.
Posts: 979 | From: Another world | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by newcomer: But if a Muslim does not have sufficient knowledge to enable him to decide which of the scholarly opinions is more likely to be correct, then he should ask the people of knowledge whose knowledge and religious commitment he trusts and then follow the advice or fatwas they give. Allaah says:
“So ask the people of the Reminder (the scholars) if you do not know”[al-Anbiya’ 21:43]
That's 21:7, not 43. But how do they come to the conclusion that the "people of reminder" have to be the scholars?
Hi Dalia!
Thanks for the correction on the verse number; I should have checked it out before I copied it. It is a common understanding that when the term “Ahl Al-Dhikr” is used in this verse 21:7 and also 16:43, that it is referring to the people of knowledge, in one case to the people who were knowledgeable about the Taurat and Injeel and in the other about the Qur’an. There are many verses that talk about the necessity to gain knowledge of the religion, and the superiority of those who have knowledge over those who don’t. This is also backed up by many hadith that refer to the high position of those of knowledge. It would be foolish to think that a religion as complex as Islam that was meant for all time and all people could be understood in all its depths by everybody; there are parts that are easy for everyone to understand, enough for them to carry out their daily practice, and there are other parts that it takes scholarship and deep understanding to fathom, as in any academic subject. Here are a few explanations I found on the internet about people understanding the term to mean the scholars/people of knowledge:
He, mighty and sublime is He, also commands, «Then ask the people of remembrance if you do not know» (16:43 & 21:7)—a verse of which the scholars of Islam have explained is evidence for the obligation of referring back to the scholars of Islam in religious affairs that we lack knowledge in. The late shaikh and exegete, 'Abdur-Rahmaan bin Naasir as-Sa'dee, may Allah have mercy on him, stated in Taiseer al-Kareem ar-Rahmaan:
And this verse, even if its reason was specific to questioning the people of remembrance—and they are the people of knowledge—about the status of the previous Messengers, then it is generally for every issue from the issues of the religion; its foundations and its branches. When the person did not have knowledge of them, that he asks whoever knows of them. Thus it contains the command for learning and questioning to the people of knowledge and it does not command questioning them except because teaching and answering of what they know is obligatory upon them. http://www.islamlife.com/readarticle.php?article_id=37
There are verses in the Qur'an which mention those who have a special knowledge and who know the inner meanings of the Qur'an: "Nay,- rather they are clear signs in the breasts of those who have been given knowledge." (29:49) "Question the people of the Remembrance if you do not know." (16:43; 21:7) "...If they had referred it to the Messenger and those in authority among them, those of them Whose task it is to investigate would have known the matter." (4:83) The Qur'an is a book of guidance revealed in clear Arabic in the language of the people and is the bearer of a Divine message. If the ta'wil of the Qur'an be unknowable to the learned and the erudite among the people, it would mean that God has sent a scripture containing inscrutable riddles and paradoxes, whereas the same scripture repeatedly claims to be a clear Book which removes doubts from the face of the truth. It is contrary to its own purpose. Moreover, God has commanded the audience of the Qur'an to contemplate and reflect upon its meanings, and that is a reasonable invitation only if it be possible to understand them, if not for everyone at least for the scholars and the learned in the teachings of religion. http://www.hawza.org.uk/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=54&Itemid=27
We said that Allaah the Wise has divided the Muslim community into two types of people: the Ahl adh-Dhikr, and those that depend on the Ahl adh-Dhikr. As Allaah says to the ordinary people: “then ask those who possess the Message (Ahl adh-Dhikr) if you do not know.” (Soorah 21:7 and 16:43) The Ahl adh-Dhikr are, as we all know, are the Ahl al-Qur’aan and the Ahl al-Hadeeth, those who know the authentic from the unauthentic, the general from the specific, the abrogating from the abrogated, and other such principles of Fiqh and Hadeeth. http://www.islaam.com/Article.aspx?id=401
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: Say it to a muslims,they are changing or making a new things in Islam with no order from God.
Where .. what and whom ?
EVERYTHING THAT IT'S NOT IN QURAN AND SOME SCHOLARS ARE TELLING YOU WHAT TO DO,BECAUSE THEY JUST THINK THAT IT'S RIGHT.IT IS NOT FROM GOD BUT FROM THEM,THEY ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING AGAINST TO GOD HE DIDN'T GIVE THEM PERMISSION FOR THAT.
And did they say that those are gods words, unless it is, if they have some fatwa, they just say there fatwa and what they think supports it in quran or sunnah's hadith, and they can be debated about it and not obeyed, they are not god to any extended, not in sunnah, unless it is god's word or prophet's mohamed (PBUH) words it is arguable. Anybody else can be debated including the very famous poineers in islam. Muslim scholars are only scholars, which means they read and learn about religion more than others (they study religion) and they have more knowledge in it because of that, and not all of muslim scholars can declare a fatwa, because there is a lot of religion science. Moreover non of them can bliss anybody, they can't even bliss themselves! One other thing, none of scholars did prohibited something that was halal nor did they make something haram, halal, they don't tell us our religion as they want, Mohamed (PBUH) said what means: 'the halal is well declared and the haram is well declared and between them there are somethings that are analogous, that you should avoid". Scholars know for the best that they will be the first to be judged upon there fatwa's, and they are as human as us and with no connection to god, except all human grace have, they are people and they are judgeable and can be critisized, and they can't help themselves out from hell, how can they help others .. where is your argument?
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by susy: salam alekom we rahmatoallah we barakaatoo
inshaa allah you are all in the best of health and iman.
unfortunately we live in very corrupt times and islam is becomming more corrupt by the day. ill give to you an example. i was asked by another muslim why i pray 5 times a day and i told them it was ordained by Allah subhaana we ta ala. they told me no! we pray because it is written for us in the sunnah. even to this day i cant believe many muslims are deluded and blind to not see why we pray. we are told in the Qur'an the times to pray, the actions/words. Praying was prescribed from the days of Ibrihim so when you think about it, when jibreel taught prophet muhammed sallallahe alahye we salam how to pray, he was relaying to him the past actions. now one may argue as to salat(prayer) being told by hadiths but it was an action shown to us through generations. i myself am a muslimah elhamdulelah and have strong iman. however as far as the sunnah(hadiths) go, unfortunately it seems many muslims are contraditory because we know the taurit and injel were changed what makes u think also hadiths were not changed? i urge you all to follow the quran and adhere to its words. as for the hadiths, they came about more than 100 years after prophet muhammed sallallahe alahye we salam has passed away so please go with what you feel is the correct hadiths and what will stregnthen you more in iman inshaa allah.
may allah guide you always
we salam
years and years and years of ignorance, Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by newcomer: But if a Muslim does not have sufficient knowledge to enable him to decide which of the scholarly opinions is more likely to be correct, then he should ask the people of knowledge whose knowledge and religious commitment he trusts and then follow the advice or fatwas they give. Allaah says:
“So ask the people of the Reminder (the scholars) if you do not know”[al-Anbiya’ 21:43]
That's 21:7, not 43. But how do they come to the conclusion that the "people of reminder" have to be the scholars?
are you the old Dalia?
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bibo1978: are you the old Dalia?
I thought that was quite obvious from my posts.
I changed my password a while ago and then couldn't get into my account again, so I had to create a new one.
Posts: 3587 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
you have done this before, and your name changed to dalia_006 or so, anyway I was just checking, so long no see , wb
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:He, mighty and sublime is He, also commands, «Then ask the people of remembrance if you do not know» (16:43 & 21:7)—a verse of which the scholars of Islam have explained is evidence for the obligation of referring back to the scholars of Islam in religious affairs that we lack knowledge in.
So the scholars have decided that those verses are referring to the scholars?! Now that's a very convincing argument.
quote:Thus it contains the command for learning and questioning to the people of knowledge and it does not command questioning them except because teaching and answering of what they know is obligatory upon them.
The Qur'an tells us to use all our senses and to not blindly accept any information, but this paragraph says the opposite. There is also a warning in the Qur'an not to give too much power to religous authorities, yet this paragraph tells us we're not to question scholars ... to me that's very contradictory as well.
And I don't know who Osama Abdallah is, but the text in the link really puts me off. It's very condescending, arrogant and full of cheap polemics. Instead of addressing very valid points all it does is try to belittle those who question, to make them look stupid, arrogant or ignorant and I find that pathetic to say the least. I'm really tired of the argument that those who decide to NOT blindly follow a scholar are only following their "personal whims", their "nafs" or whatever.
Scholars are human beings just like anyone else. Studying religion for decades does not automatically make someone a more spiritual or more religious person than another. And it's simply ridiculous to suggest that scholars never follow their whims and their personal opinions because it is very obvious that many of them do!
None of those texts gives a comprehensive explanation as to why exactly certain verses have been interpreted to refer to "scholars", instead they keep stressing scholars' authority and trying to intimidate "normal" people into believing they are not capable of making moral and religious decisions for themselves.
quote:There are verses in the Qur'an which mention those who have a special knowledge and who know the inner meanings of the Qur'an: "Nay,- rather they are clear signs in the breasts of those who have been given knowledge." (29:49) "Question the people of the Remembrance if you do not know." (16:43; 21:7) "...If they had referred it to the Messenger and those in authority among them, those of them Whose task it is to investigate would have known the matter." (4:83)
There are various ways in which the term "people of knowledge" or "people of remembrance" etc. could be interpreted and it is far from obvious that those expressions are referring to scholars only. Thus my initial question beause I've been thinking about this subject before.
How do we know what exactly God means by "knowledge"? Who says that knowledge only refers to scholarly and intellectual knowledge? "Wisdom", "knowledge" etc. are terms that can be interpreted in many ways and I find it very narrow-minded to suggest those terms are referring to scholarly knowledge only.
Sura 40:54 says that the Qur'an is "A guide and a reminder for people of understanding" (Hudan wathikra li-olee al-albabi). This verse seems to suggest that the Qur'an is for everyone who's open to it and possesses insight and understanding. So this verse does not at all suggest that the term "people of understanding" refers to a small elite group of people, i.e., the scholars – quite the opposite. Yet that's what those texts want to make us believe.
I guess I will never understand why so many people have the need to control others. I don't understand the arrogance of those who insist on establishing authorites and discouraging people from finding their own way. But, oh well, of course I'm just another misguided arrogant individual trying to twist religion to suit her personal needs and whims ... Posts: 3587 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: I know that,but I don't think that it's right.I don't agree with islamic laws anyway.If someone wants to believe do it at home with your family with your friends but why to make it for all people in the country if they maybe don't believe but they belong to that country and have rights to live there how they want to,I mean like we all in non-islamic countries.
well I have written this before and here I am again .. Pretty much what this forums is all about I see it in these verses of "The Cave":
32. Set forth to them the parable of two men: for one of them We provided two gardens of grape-vines and surrounded them with date palms; in between the two We placed corn-fields.
33. Each of those gardens brought forth its produce, and failed not in the least therein: in the midst of them We caused a river to flow.
34. (Abundant) was the produce this man had : he said to his companion, in the course of a mutual argument: "more wealth have I than you, and more honour and power in (my following of) men."
35. He went into his garden in a state (of mind) unjust to his soul: He said, "I deem not that this will ever perish,
36. "Nor do I deem that the Hour (of Judgment) will (ever) come: Even if I am brought back to my Lord, I shall surely find (there) something better in exchange."
37. His companion said to him, in the course of the argument with him: "Dost thou deny Him Who created thee out of dust, then out of a sperm-drop, then fashioned thee into a man?
38. "But (I think) for my part that He is Allah, My Lord, and none shall I associate with my Lord.
39. "Why didst thou not, as thou wentest into thy garden, say: '(Allah)'s will (be done)! There is no power but with Allah.' If thou dost see me less than thee in wealth and sons,
40. "It may be that my Lord will give me something better than thy garden, and that He will send on thy garden thunderbolts (by way of reckoning) from heaven, making it (but) slippery sand!-
41. "Or the water of the garden will run off underground so that thou wilt never be able to find it."
42. So his fruits (and enjoyment) were encompassed (with ruin), and he remained twisting and turning his hands over what he had spent on his property, which had (now) tumbled to pieces to its very foundations, and he could only say, "Woe is me! Would I had never ascribed partners to my Lord and Cherisher!"
43. Nor had he numbers to help him against Allah, nor was he able to deliver himself.
44. There, the (only) protection comes from Allah, the True One. He is the Best to reward, and the Best to give success
"To whom that can listen or imitate .. this is pretty much what it is all about check the verses that says:
35. He went into his garden in a state (of mind) unjust to his soul: He said, "I deem not that this will ever perish,
36. "Nor do I deem that the Hour (of Judgment) will (ever) come: Even if I am brought back to my Lord, I shall surely find (there) something better in exchange."
This is pretty much what is happening no one is denying god existance but they are speculating upon god and making there god what they want there god to be .. no one wants to be judged .. pretty much the truth .. I hope this clears to whom might read with an open heart and a thinkful mind" I hope this open your mind to our view of the aspect you are asking about. If you believe that Quran is from god (which muslims do believe) then the rules in it are god's rule, it is what god sees as the best for human grace and it is not arguable, you might not like being attached to earth through gravity but can u alter the gravity law "unless god had made a rule to alter it" !
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*: How do we know what exactly God means by "knowledge"? Who says that knowledge only refers to scholarly and intellectual knowledge? "Wisdom", "knowledge" etc. are terms that can be interpreted in many ways and I find it very narrow-minded to suggest those terms are referring to scholarly knowledge only.
You asked "how do they come to the conclusion that the "people of reminder" have to be the scholars?" and I assumed that the "they" you meant were the scholars, which was why I showed you what some scholars said on the subject.
The answer to these new questions is that we refer to the hadith, but as you will only take evidence from the Qur'an that was why I only posted those particular items as they were all I could find for you on a quick hunt round the internet. I agree that they don't fully answer your question, but then the further explanation, as with anything in Islam, comes from the Prophet, that was his mission.
Posts: 4576 | From: Cairo | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
First, I'll have some "light" fun with ya. Didn't mean to insult, but I can be clever as well. Such as your name, isn't Abu a man's name? If so, whats up with "Maryam"???????? Oh...I get it, the TRUE SHEMALE(LOL)!
Now that thats over with, I hope that you took the humor lightly cause I am not here to insult people. I am a male and I am here to grow and learn from people.
That being said, you are ignorant about Christianity......Sorry, that is just a fact.
Second, I can tell that you like to ramble just to ramble. I would love to have an educated debate with you, but I don't think that you are truly about that. If you are, PLEASE, let me know.
Whether you believe or not, Jesus Christ is still the Messiah. Jesus died and resurrected. See, this is what sets Jesus apart from anybody else. A Black Muslim dude tried to argue with me about the Sonship of Jesus Christ. At the end of the day, I told him, "Listen man, Jesus RESURRECTED from the grave. That ends the discussion because if Jesus did in fact resurrect, then there is nothing anybody can say that would ever sway my opinion." Dude said, "I don't want to argue about that.....". It was interesting that he didn't want to argue about the truth of Christ's resurrection, yet previously he was ranting about why Jesus wasn't the Son. My point is that if Jesus did in fact resurrect from the dead, then that validates the truth concerning the Sonship of Jesus, hands down.
Personally, I KNOW that he lives because I have experienced him. His resurrection, meaning his LIFE-GIVING PRESENCE, is what I have experienced. Because of my experience, I know that Jesus has resurrected from the dead.
And the Bible has some real esoteric stuff in there. Meaning that there are mysteries in the word of God that cannot be easily understood. So when I heard you guys talking about the book of Ezekiel, yeah, I stood to defend........... And believe me, the Bible can stand on its own. It is the word of God, and it will stand. And it says that every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. So even Muhammad will submit in recognition to the Messiahship of Jesus Christ. End of story. Any comments Abu Maryam..............
Hopefully we can agree to disagree. And maybe we can have some debates. Hopefully we can be peaceful. If not.........well like I said, the Bible will stand on its own. The scriptures were here before me and they'll be around long after I'm gone. Salaam
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Israel: Boy Abu Maryam,
First, I'll have some "light" fun with ya. Didn't mean to insult, but I can be clever as well. Such as your name, isn't Abu a man's name? If so, whats up with "Maryam"???????? Oh...I get it, the TRUE SHEMALE(LOL)!
Now that thats over with, I hope that you took the humor lightly cause I am not here to insult people. I am a male and I am here to grow and learn from people.
That being said, you are ignorant about Christianity......Sorry, that is just a fact.
Second, I can tell that you like to ramble just to ramble. I would love to have an educated debate with you, but I don't think that you are truly about that. If you are, PLEASE, let me know.
Whether you believe or not, Jesus Christ is still the Messiah. Jesus died and resurrected. See, this is what sets Jesus apart from anybody else. A Black Muslim dude tried to argue with me about the Sonship of Jesus Christ. At the end of the day, I told him, "Listen man, Jesus RESURRECTED from the grave. That ends the discussion because if Jesus did in fact resurrect, then there is nothing anybody can say that would ever sway my opinion." Dude said, "I don't want to argue about that.....". It was interesting that he didn't want to argue about the truth of Christ's resurrection, yet previously he was ranting about why Jesus wasn't the Son. My point is that if Jesus did in fact resurrect from the dead, then that validates the truth concerning the Sonship of Jesus, hands down.
Personally, I KNOW that he lives because I have experienced him. His resurrection, meaning his LIFE-GIVING PRESENCE, is what I have experienced. Because of my experience, I know that Jesus has resurrected from the dead.
And the Bible has some real esoteric stuff in there. Meaning that there are mysteries in the word of God that cannot be easily understood. So when I heard you guys talking about the book of Ezekiel, yeah, I stood to defend........... And believe me, the Bible can stand on its own. It is the word of God, and it will stand. And it says that every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. So even Muhammad will submit in recognition to the Messiahship of Jesus Christ. End of story. Any comments Abu Maryam..............
Hopefully we can agree to disagree. And maybe we can have some debates. Hopefully we can be peaceful. If not.........well like I said, the Bible will stand on its own. The scriptures were here before me and they'll be around long after I'm gone. Salaam
What if ur wrong? How do u know what u feel is not what the satan if making u feel? Ever think about that? Prophet Jesus pbuh never said in his scripture that he is God. It was St. Paul who was a unviersal preecher, who brought christianity to what it is today and built to what it is today, he is the one he gave Jesus the label as son of God.
Posts: 671 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
God has no son, we need son because we die and need to continue. God does not die, God is perfect, Jesus is the son of Mary PBT.
Posts: 90 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
ok miss/israel first,about my name abu maryam, as i said to you before,what you wrote indicated a degree of ignorance that you have.maryam mean in arabic st.mary "the mother of your God" as you say. and today it`s mean "the wife of your God""mary al magdalyya" if you don`t believe me you can watch "davinci code",so you musn`t mention the name of your mother and wife`s God like that again baby.and maybe it`s mean tomorrow a sister of your God,didn`t mean insult,i hope that you take the humor lightly,iam jocking baby,loool. second, what you wrote show that you like ramble just to ramble, and also that indicated what you learnt in your church and now you repeated it without any realizing.oh baby, who was said that jesus the sun of God?,who was said that jesus came to salvated us from adam`s sin?, how can we believe that there are three Gods in your doctrine and who was said that?!!how can i believe that again there are two Gods on the throne after jesus killed on the cross? how can i believe that jesus the father killed him self the son who was the same too!!? how can i believe that the beings like your clerics decided the nature of your God after that you belived that, and you said to me because " the Bible has some real esoteric stuff in there. Meaning that there are mysteries in the word of God that cannot be easily understood"!!!?so, why jesus didn`t say and explain that for us in your bible ,even he didn`t explain that to apostles or students to waiting for a clever cleric paul"polos" to explain that to us?!! where was jesus said in your bible that he is the God?you couldn`t find,and you know well that the word of " son of God" mean all prophets whom were came to israel isn`t it?!! so ,when you be wiseman and try to rethink of your doctrine ,we can depate and be peaceful,baby,shalom hoho.
-------------------- abu maryam Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
[13] When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? [14] And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. [15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? [16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. [18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. [20] Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. [21] From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. [22] Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. [23] But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. [24] Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. [25] For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. [26] For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? [27] For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Posts: 1172 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
you can't even respect people. I tried to make "fun" humor and tell you that I can go there with you, but that I didn't want to go there. Your acting like a witch. I guess that is what you are. I won't waste words on someone who has shown him/herself to be a fool. Salaam
P.S.-What is funny is that you haven't even shown yourself to be a MUSLIM, much less someone is who knowledgable about Christianity. I have studied Arabic, studied Islam, Greek, Hebrew,........anyway, your not worth the typing exercise. I hope that you will learn to not be miserable as you seem to be..........
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
hi israel thank you very much for what you wrote about me,but i feel that you was very angry. only i want to say to you that it`s easy to abuse and insult me ,but it`s hard too much to do the same with our prophet mohammed,i only remember what you said about him, you said"your boy mohammad".so when you learn how to respect the other,then you can ask the other to respect you!!! however if you want to debate any muslim or jew even hindus,don`t abuse and insult them prophet,and make your debate rely on respect,and try to do what our prophet jesus said to all of us "pray for whom abuse you". however,i invite you to not debate but to have a knowledge about christianity and islam,if you want,but on base of respect,ok man,it`s up to you.salam.
-------------------- abu maryam Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Israel: [QB] Boy Abu Maryam,
First, I'll have some "light" fun with ya. Didn't mean to insult, but I can be clever as well. Such as your name, isn't Abu a man's name? If so, whats up with "Maryam"???????? Oh...I get it, the TRUE SHEMALE(LOL)!
Abu Isn't a name in Arabic ! It only means "the father of" Abu Maryam is "The Father of Maryam". This is called "Konya" in Arabic, but you wont know what I mean if you have no clue about Arabic. Fahem ya Abu Jahl?
Posts: 1539 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mike rozier: [13] When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? [14] And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. [15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? [16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. [18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. [20] Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. [21] From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. [22] Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. [23] But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. [24] Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. [25] For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. [26] For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? [27] For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
thank you very much, that is what i mean,jesus is the son of man,not the son of God.as he said.not that only, but you must to know that all of God`s prophets was called sons of God according to bible. Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Assalamo alaykom Abu maryam,I told you should ignore that person so-called israel, he/she deserves no reply, he/she is here to insult, we are here to learn something and to clear something else. Those people think that Christianity is theirs and it is Western, you know they are wrong, it is ours, it was revealed here, we were Christians before them, we respect all prophets; apostles and slaves of God, the only God the absolute of perfection, majesty and beauty, God Of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon, Zechariahs, John, Jesus and Mohamed PBT. We told them that we are seeking for the truth, we have only one chance to live here, death is coming and we will face the true God, we have to use our mind to find out the truth, we can not cheat ourselves. It seems that the creator of the universe intends to show himself through the creation, he could show himself to us eye to eye, then we have no other choice or chance to reach him through our minds, but this is God’s will to show his presence through his deeds. We asked them several times to clear the major mysterious issues of Christianity, the nature of one God?, trinity!!? how? Where was trinity in the Old holy Book? Sin of Adam, why we are responsible? Salvation? of what? The nature of Jesus PBH? A God? A man? Who was crucified? God or man and why?. Unfortunately we have no answer, just arguments and insults. They are free to believe, we are free as well.
Posts: 90 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mike rozier: [13] When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? [14] And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. [15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? [16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. [18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. [20] Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. [21] From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. [22] Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. [23] But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. [24] Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. [25] For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. [26] For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? [27] For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
thank you very much, that is what i mean,jesus is the son of man,not the son of God.as he said.not that only, but you must to know that all of God`s prophets was called sons of God according to bible.
[16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
quote:Originally posted by mike rozier: [13] When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? [14] And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. [15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? [16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. [18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. [20] Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. [21] From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. [22] Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. [23] But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. [24] Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. [25] For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. [26] For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? [27] For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
thank you very much, that is what i mean,jesus is the son of man,not the son of God.as he said.not that only, but you must to know that all of God`s prophets was called sons of God according to bible.
[16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
thank you again,this mean the God is living not jesus. :)and don`t forget that,all prophets were the sons of living god.
Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jebran: Assalamo alaykom Abu maryam,I told you should ignore that person so-called israel, he/she deserves no reply, he/she is here to insult, we are here to learn something and to clear something else. Those people think that Christianity is theirs and it is Western, you know they are wrong, it is ours, it was revealed here, we were Christians before them, we respect all prophets; apostles and slaves of God, the only God the absolute of perfection, majesty and beauty, God Of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon, Zechariahs, John, Jesus and Mohamed PBT. We told them that we are seeking for the truth, we have only one chance to live here, death is coming and we will face the true God, we have to use our mind to find out the truth, we can not cheat ourselves. It seems that the creator of the universe intends to show himself through the creation, he could show himself to us eye to eye, then we have no other choice or chance to reach him through our minds, but this is God’s will to show his presence through his deeds. We asked them several times to clear the major mysterious issues of Christianity, the nature of one God?, trinity!!? how? Where was trinity in the Old holy Book? Sin of Adam, why we are responsible? Salvation? of what? The nature of Jesus PBH? A God? A man? Who was crucified? God or man and why?. Unfortunately we have no answer, just arguments and insults. They are free to believe, we are free as well.
walaykom assalam MR/jebran Iam sorry for not heard your advice , but only ,i want and seeking for the truth as you said this before.however i think there are alot of sane christianity`s followers seeking for truth like us indeed.so i hope they concentrate in what you said well.thank you again and God bless you.
Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mike rozier: [13] When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? [14] And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. [15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? [16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. [18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. [20] Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. [21] From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. [22] Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. [23] But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. [24] Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. [25] For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. [26] For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? [27] For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
thank you very much, that is what i mean,jesus is the son of man,not the son of God.as he said.not that only, but you must to know that all of God`s prophets was called sons of God according to bible.
[16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
thank you again,this mean the God is living not jesus. :)and don`t forget that,all prophets were the sons of living god.
wrong, It means what it says Posts: 1172 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
and what does it say .. does it say that jesus is the son of god or is he the incarnation body for the god, what actually was he according to you, he was the son of god then god had incarnated in him, how then was he brought by god, if he is his son then to make a son u need someone like you to reproduce your creation, you don't see a son for somethings that are not in couples. Like I have never heard that there is a son for the moon or the sun. "you may say that they are not a living things" well my debate is about there uniquness. If anything for our knowledge have a son "biological son" this means it comes from some intercourse, let me give u another example here. During cell reproduction one cell (the "parental" cell) divides to produce two daughter cells. The final part of the cell reproduction process is cell division, when daughter cells physically split apart from a parental cell "which no longer exists". In other words if you mean that jesus is reproduction of god then god had splitted "subbhanoh wat3ala, he is above such a thing and he is one". If not then there is a problem in the difenition of how jesus is the son of god? also he is the god but he wasn't actually the god all of his life, he was incarnation body for god, but he was the son of god before being incarnated, and yet god is one and like no other and jesus his son .. I don't get the idea
If I told to you my son this doesn't mean that you are my actual son, it is a matter of speach means that I will give u an advice or that I care for u, "like my friend, my buddy.. etc"
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
well mike, I don't want to question your faith,, o you can believe in whatever I am just asking
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by abu maryam 76: about christianty religion ,i knew that human decided a nature of them God after that alost of people beleive in what human decided not what God ordered.
You are right Abu maryam, Christians decided to form God's nature at the Global confrences held in Nikia and Khalkedonya in the early centuries. Differnt theories were debatable, some were imposed by Roman empire by force. Copts had been suffering a lot to stand firm in their creed, they even fled to the desert and invented monastries'life.In spite of clear idea about one God described in the Holy Book(Genesis & Exodus) they adopted trinity
All that the Christians believe about Jesus being God comes from Jesus' own words and actions in the Gospels, and the testimony of Jesus' closest disciples as preserved in the New Testament. Christian belief is based on what Jesus said about Himself and did to prove it and what the disciples had seen of Jesus and what they had been taught by Him. If you read the Gospels fairly you will see that Jesus identifies Himself as God and does many things that are the perogative of God alone. Christians have not made Jesus out to be God. We have only accepted what Jesus revealed about Himself. Christians are as sensitive to blasphemy as any Jew or Muslim. We have only accepted Jesus as God by examining the evidence left by Jesus Himself. These are some of many areas where I have found Muslims could be better informed.
Posts: 223 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: Say it to a muslims,they are changing or making a new things in Islam with no order from God.
It is often remarked about the Bible that since there are variations in the manuscripts that the text must be corrupt. I have found that most Muslims do not realize that their own book, the Quran, is in a similar situation. In the reliable Islamic traditions it is recorded that many of the companions of Muhammad had collections of the Quran that differed from each other. These differences have been preserved. The Quran collections differed in many respects, for example, the number and order of Surahs, the spelling of words, and the use of different words in the exact same contexts. If one examines these variations fairly, they will realize that the situations for the Bible and the Quran are the same. These variations in detailsdon't affect the overall reliability of the text. There are small areas that are in doubt as to the exact reading, but none of the variant readings affect any major or minor doctrine in Islam or Christianity. Both books are amazingly accurate as regards the historical preservation of their texts. The significant difference between the two books is in their message, not their textual history. It is a misconception to believe that one has been corrupted beyond reliability in the transmission of its text while the other has not.
Posts: 223 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by What Box: God The Eternal and self existant god.
Good, Now, what do Christians mean when they say, Jesus and the father are the same God? they mean that Jesus is self existent and eternal and so is the father?
Also when you guys say Jesus was man and God. If God means eternal and since man of course is not eternal, How do you explain this?
We Christians agree with Muslims that God is omnipresent. But I think that most Muslims would also agree that God can manifest himself in special ways if He chooses, with His conversation with Moses at the burning bush being one dramatic example.
God's omnipresence wasn't diminished by His presence in the burning bush. His presence in/ as the man Jesus also can't diminish His omnipresence. In neither case is His presence limited to those physical locations. In both cases those locations (the bush and Jesus' body) are places in which God is manifest in a special way.
In other words, Christians believe that the life of Jesus as a man on Earth is an Incarnation: a time during which God manifested Himself as a man. That does not prevent him from being omnipresent, but only says that He was present in a different way in the person of Jesus.
Against the Muslims, I would say this: if I say, "God could not be present in the man Jesus because He is omnipresent", then I am placing restrictions on how God can manifest himself. If He could manifest Himself in the form of a burning bush without giving up his omnipresence, why could he not manifest Himself in the form of a man?
Posts: 223 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bibo1978: In other words if you mean that jesus is reproduction of god then god had splitted "subbhanoh wat3ala, he is above such a thing and he is one". If not then there is a problem in the difenition of how jesus is the son of god? also he is the god but he wasn't actually the god all of his life, he was incarnation body for god, but he was the son of god before being incarnated, and yet god is one and like no other and jesus his son .. I don't get the idea
If I told to you my son this doesn't mean that you are my actual son, it is a matter of speach means that I will give u an advice or that I care for u, "like my friend, my buddy.. etc"
The problem here, in my opinion, is that people tend to confuse what is with what we perceive.
When we identify objects and concepts, we do so according to our perception of them. Thus a woman, unfamiliar with Japanese culture, might call a tatami mat a "rug", even though it's very much not a rug. (It's a mat that they sit on while eating.) Once she realizes that the mat doesn't function as a rug, she will stop calling it "rug" and will instead call it "mat" or "tatami".
Changing your thinking from "rug" to "mat" is pretty simple. In the 20th century, quantum mechanics required us to make a much more difficult conceptual change. Experiments showed that subatomic particles sometimes behaved as an energy wave, and sometimes behaved as a solid particle. They showed this by using the same type of particle in different situations: electrons fired at a TV-like screen, for example. This led scientists to identify what they call the "wave-particle duality" of matter.
What is this "wave-particle duality"? We have a concept of "wave": fluid, a form of energy, oscillating, conforming to the medium through which it passes. We have a concept of "particle": solid, a form of matter, generally unchanging in form. We even have a concept of how waves and particles interact; a particle might oscillate in space because a wave is moving it. But the "wave-particle duality" says that subatomic particles have both the properties of particles and of waves. This is very counterintuitive: how can something be both solid and yet fluid, matter and yet energy, unchanging in form and yet conforming to its medium?
We don't really know. We have equations to describe it, but we can't form an intuitive perception of something that is simultaneously particle and wave. We perceive waves and particles as separate, but through our experiments we have come to know that there is a substance that is neither what we perceive to be particulate, nor what we perceive to be a wave, but somehow appears to be like both.
When we perceive an electron as a particle, does that take away its duality? Of course not. And when we perceive it to be a wave, that doesn't take away its duality, either. An electron is one thing, one type of substance. Therefore, even though we can't help but think about electrons in terms of "particles" and "waves", an electron just is what it is, and is only one thing.
Relating this back to God:
The use of the words "person" and "God" must be related to how we perceive a reality. The use of the words "monotheism", "Godhead", "God", and so on all identify the truth that, regardless of our perception, there is only one God, who is indivisible.
The use of the word "person" generally identifies the fact that we are in a relation to another living entity, and therefore the use of the phrase "three Persons" identifies the fact that when we relate to God, we are relating to three living entities, each of Whom would be independently identifiable as a "Person". We cannot help but perceive Him/Them as three different Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, because our perception is so limited.
But that is our limitation, not His. God is What He is, as He told Moses; and even though the Incarnation has made it impossible to think of Him without thinking of three Persons, our perception of these three Persons cannot change God's essential unity.
Posts: 223 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bibo1978: and what does it say .. does it say that jesus is the son of god or is he the incarnation body for the god, what actually was he according to you, he was the son of god then god had incarnated in him, how then was he brought by god, if he is his son then to make a son u need someone like you to reproduce your creation, you don't see a son for somethings that are not in couples. Like I have never heard that there is a son for the moon or the sun. "you may say that they are not a living things" well my debate is about there uniquness. If anything for our knowledge have a son "biological son" this means it comes from some intercourse, let me give u another example here. During cell reproduction one cell (the "parental" cell) divides to produce two daughter cells. The final part of the cell reproduction process is cell division, when daughter cells physically split apart from a parental cell "which no longer exists". In other words if you mean that jesus is reproduction of god then god had splitted "subbhanoh wat3ala, he is above such a thing and he is one". If not then there is a problem in the difenition of how jesus is the son of god? also he is the god but he wasn't actually the god all of his life, he was incarnation body for god, but he was the son of god before being incarnated, and yet god is one and like no other and jesus his son .. I don't get the idea
If I told to you my son this doesn't mean that you are my actual son, it is a matter of speach means that I will give u an advice or that I care for u, "like my friend, my buddy.. etc"
God bless you MR/bibo1978 ,i think what you said is a logical matter,and only i want to add what i said before,when jesus killed on the cross ,as they said,he sit on the right of the God on the throne!!this mean that there were two God on the throne, and if they are one why they were not split on the throne? thank you again Mr/bibo1978.
Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by abu maryam 76: God bless you MR/bibo1978 ,i think what you said is a logical matter,and only i want to add what i said before,when jesus killed on the cross ,as they said,he sit on the right of the God on the throne!!this mean that there were two God on the throne, and if they are one why they were not split on the throne? thank you again Mr/bibo1978.
You must understand "right hand of God" in a figurative, symbolic, or poetic sense and not in a physical, bodily sense. No man has seen God at any time, nor can a human see Him (John 1:18; I Timothy 6:16; I John 4:12). God is a Spirit and as such He is invisible (I Timothy 1:17). He does not have a physical right hand unless He chooses to manifest Himself in a human form.
In the Bible, the right hand signifies strength, power, importance, and pre-eminence just as it does in the English phrases, "He is my right hand man" and "I would give my right arm for this." Trinitarian scholar Bernard Ramm says, "God's almightiness is spoken of in terms of a right arm because among men the right arm is the symbol of strength or power. Pre-eminence is spoken of as sitting at God's right hand because in human social affairs the right hand position with reference to the host was the place of greatest honor."
When the Bible speaks of Jesus sitting at the right hand of God, it means Jesus has all the power and authority of God. Jesus Himself made this clear in Matthew 26:64: "Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." (See also Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69.) Jesus thus claimed to have all the power of God; by this implication He declared Himself to be God. The Jews understood these claims and because of them the high priest accused Jesus of blasphemy (Matthew 26:65). Apparently, the high priest knew the symbolic meaning of the right hand in the Old Testament, and he therefore realized that Jesus was claiming to have God's power and to be God. First Peter 3:22 further demonstrates that "right hand" means Jesus has all power and authority: "Who is gone to heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him." Similarly, Ephesians 1:20-22 uses this phrase to say Jesus has pre-eminence over all principalities, powers, dominions, and names. This passage also links the right hand with the exaltation of Christ. In this connection, Acts 5:31 states, "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." (See also Psalm 110:1; Acts 2:33-34.)
Acts 5:31 indicates that the right hand of God or the arm of God sometimes specifically refers to God's power in salvation. Many other verses of Scripture speak of the right hand of God as representing the deliverance and victory God gives to His people (Exodus 15:6; Psalm 44:3; Psalm 98:1). Isaiah 59:16 says, "His arm brought salvation." It appears, therefore, that the description of Jesus on the right hand of God connotes that Jesus is the expression of God's saving power. This concept harmonizes with the association of the position of Jesus on the right hand of God with His mediatorial role, particularly His work as our intercessor and high priest (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 8:1).
No longer does Jesus submit Himself to human frailty and weakness. No longer is He the suffering servant. No longer are His glory, majesty, and other divine attributes hidden from the casual onlooker. He now exercises His power as God through a glorified human body. He now displays and will display Himself as the Lord of all, the Righteous Judge, and the King of the whole earth. That is why Stephen did not see Jesus Christ as the ordinary man He had appeared to be while on earth, but he saw Him with the glory of God and the power of God. Similarly, John saw Jesus revealed as God in all His glory and power (Revelation 1). This exaltation, glorification, and unveiling of Christ culminated at His ascension. Mark 16:19 says, "So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven and sat on the right hand of God."
The phrase "sat down" indicates that the sacrificial work of Christ is not continuing but is complete. "When he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Hebrews 1:3). "And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes… But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool" (Hebrews 10:11-13).
Posts: 223 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
I just felt that you and Jebran were trying to challenge Christiantiy. Jebran definitely did, cause he wrote to you saying, "Jebran said:
You are right Abu maryam, Christians decided to form God's nature at the Global confrences held in Nikia and Khalkedonya in the early centuries. Differnt theories were debatable, some were imposed by Roman empire by force. Copts had been suffering a lot to stand firm in their creed, they even fled to the desert and invented monastries'life.In spite of clear idea about one God described in the Holy Book(Genesis & Exodus) they adopted trinity.
Now Abu Mary, that is disrespectful to me. Like I said, it really doesnt' matter what Muslims say about God, because Christians and Jews have always believed in ONE GOD! JEBRAN! Do you think that oneness of God is a new concept that Muslims inspired? Don't be ignorant and answer "yes". Jesus Christ resurrected from the grave, period. The resurrection of Jesus ends all argument, because no matter how hard it is to understand the Sonship of Christ, if he resurrected, you ought to trust that God Almighty knows what he is talking about when he spoke from the heavenly cloud in Matthew 17. Here is the scripture:
"1After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. 2There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. 3Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus. 4Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will put up three shelters—one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah."
5While he was still speaking, a bright cloud enveloped them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!"
I trust God rather than the illogic of man! Salaam........
Posts: 826 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Marcella: Say it to a muslims,they are changing or making a new things in Islam with no order from God.
It is often remarked about the Bible that since there are variations in the manuscripts that the text must be corrupt. I have found that most Muslims do not realize that their own book, the Quran, is in a similar situation. In the reliable Islamic traditions it is recorded that many of the companions of Muhammad had collections of the Quran that differed from each other. These differences have been preserved. The Quran collections differed in many respects, for example, the number and order of Surahs, the spelling of words, and the use of different words in the exact same contexts. If one examines these variations fairly, they will realize that the situations for the Bible and the Quran are the same. These variations in detailsdon't affect the overall reliability of the text. There are small areas that are in doubt as to the exact reading, but none of the variant readings affect any major or minor doctrine in Islam or Christianity. Both books are amazingly accurate as regards the historical preservation of their texts. The significant difference between the two books is in their message, not their textual history. It is a misconception to believe that one has been corrupted beyond reliability in the transmission of its text while the other has not.
Well I disagree with that, bible in its concept as abook is not same as the quran, there were no such thing as disciples with each has his own version of quran, you said that there was variable versions of quran which is far from the truth because if such a thing had ever happened each one will be very consistant with what he have because as for any muslim Quran is the words of god, so if I am a true muslim and I know that this was never in quran or it wasn't like this, it is intuitively that I won't agree in the new Quran. No matter what ?, which have never happened, although as I have said before quran was in its first 30 yrs taught by tongue and it wasn't written "as a whole book" but there were trusted persons with the verses, i.e. each verse was saved but what we call "the quran savers", actually each verse was written by one saver and this verse is witnessessed by two other of the "quran savers" and they were the witnesses upon the quran when it was collected in uthmann's life, each verse was witnessesed upon with two of them plus the original written manuscript, the bible in the other hand is written upon each disciple hearing, which means that it differs in many ascepts, the original manuscripts of the gosbels doesn't exist, which means that your previous information is very inaccurate. and there is No versions of quran but there is a different "recitings"
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by abu maryam 76: God bless you MR/bibo1978 ,i think what you said is a logical matter,and only i want to add what i said before,when jesus killed on the cross ,as they said,he sit on the right of the God on the throne!!this mean that there were two God on the throne, and if they are one why they were not split on the throne? thank you again Mr/bibo1978.
You must understand "right hand of God" in a figurative, symbolic, or poetic sense and not in a physical, bodily sense. No man has seen God at any time, nor can a human see Him (John 1:18; I Timothy 6:16; I John 4:12). God is a Spirit and as such He is invisible (I Timothy 1:17). He does not have a physical right hand unless He chooses to manifest Himself in a human form.
In the Bible, the right hand signifies strength, power, importance, and pre-eminence just as it does in the English phrases, "He is my right hand man" and "I would give my right arm for this." Trinitarian scholar Bernard Ramm says, "God's almightiness is spoken of in terms of a right arm because among men the right arm is the symbol of strength or power. Pre-eminence is spoken of as sitting at God's right hand because in human social affairs the right hand position with reference to the host was the place of greatest honor."
When the Bible speaks of Jesus sitting at the right hand of God, it means Jesus has all the power and authority of God. Jesus Himself made this clear in Matthew 26:64: "Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." (See also Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69.) Jesus thus claimed to have all the power of God; by this implication He declared Himself to be God. The Jews understood these claims and because of them the high priest accused Jesus of blasphemy (Matthew 26:65). Apparently, the high priest knew the symbolic meaning of the right hand in the Old Testament, and he therefore realized that Jesus was claiming to have God's power and to be God. First Peter 3:22 further demonstrates that "right hand" means Jesus has all power and authority: "Who is gone to heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him." Similarly, Ephesians 1:20-22 uses this phrase to say Jesus has pre-eminence over all principalities, powers, dominions, and names. This passage also links the right hand with the exaltation of Christ. In this connection, Acts 5:31 states, "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." (See also Psalm 110:1; Acts 2:33-34.)
Acts 5:31 indicates that the right hand of God or the arm of God sometimes specifically refers to God's power in salvation. Many other verses of Scripture speak of the right hand of God as representing the deliverance and victory God gives to His people (Exodus 15:6; Psalm 44:3; Psalm 98:1). Isaiah 59:16 says, "His arm brought salvation." It appears, therefore, that the description of Jesus on the right hand of God connotes that Jesus is the expression of God's saving power. This concept harmonizes with the association of the position of Jesus on the right hand of God with His mediatorial role, particularly His work as our intercessor and high priest (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 8:1).
No longer does Jesus submit Himself to human frailty and weakness. No longer is He the suffering servant. No longer are His glory, majesty, and other divine attributes hidden from the casual onlooker. He now exercises His power as God through a glorified human body. He now displays and will display Himself as the Lord of all, the Righteous Judge, and the King of the whole earth. That is why Stephen did not see Jesus Christ as the ordinary man He had appeared to be while on earth, but he saw Him with the glory of God and the power of God. Similarly, John saw Jesus revealed as God in all His glory and power (Revelation 1). This exaltation, glorification, and unveiling of Christ culminated at His ascension. Mark 16:19 says, "So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven and sat on the right hand of God."
The phrase "sat down" indicates that the sacrificial work of Christ is not continuing but is complete. "When he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Hebrews 1:3). "And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes… But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool" (Hebrews 10:11-13).
If jesus is god then why should he need the powers of god !!!
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bibo1978: In other words if you mean that jesus is reproduction of god then god had splitted "subbhanoh wat3ala, he is above such a thing and he is one". If not then there is a problem in the difenition of how jesus is the son of god? also he is the god but he wasn't actually the god all of his life, he was incarnation body for god, but he was the son of god before being incarnated, and yet god is one and like no other and jesus his son .. I don't get the idea
If I told to you my son this doesn't mean that you are my actual son, it is a matter of speach means that I will give u an advice or that I care for u, "like my friend, my buddy.. etc"
The problem here, in my opinion, is that people tend to confuse what is with what we perceive.
When we identify objects and concepts, we do so according to our perception of them. Thus a woman, unfamiliar with Japanese culture, might call a tatami mat a "rug", even though it's very much not a rug. (It's a mat that they sit on while eating.) Once she realizes that the mat doesn't function as a rug, she will stop calling it "rug" and will instead call it "mat" or "tatami".
Changing your thinking from "rug" to "mat" is pretty simple. In the 20th century, quantum mechanics required us to make a much more difficult conceptual change. Experiments showed that subatomic particles sometimes behaved as an energy wave, and sometimes behaved as a solid particle. They showed this by using the same type of particle in different situations: electrons fired at a TV-like screen, for example. This led scientists to identify what they call the "wave-particle duality" of matter.
What is this "wave-particle duality"? We have a concept of "wave": fluid, a form of energy, oscillating, conforming to the medium through which it passes. We have a concept of "particle": solid, a form of matter, generally unchanging in form. We even have a concept of how waves and particles interact; a particle might oscillate in space because a wave is moving it. But the "wave-particle duality" says that subatomic particles have both the properties of particles and of waves. This is very counterintuitive: how can something be both solid and yet fluid, matter and yet energy, unchanging in form and yet conforming to its medium?
We don't really know. We have equations to describe it, but we can't form an intuitive perception of something that is simultaneously particle and wave. We perceive waves and particles as separate, but through our experiments we have come to know that there is a substance that is neither what we perceive to be particulate, nor what we perceive to be a wave, but somehow appears to be like both.
When we perceive an electron as a particle, does that take away its duality? Of course not. And when we perceive it to be a wave, that doesn't take away its duality, either. An electron is one thing, one type of substance. Therefore, even though we can't help but think about electrons in terms of "particles" and "waves", an electron just is what it is, and is only one thing.
Relating this back to God:
The use of the words "person" and "God" must be related to how we perceive a reality. The use of the words "monotheism", "Godhead", "God", and so on all identify the truth that, regardless of our perception, there is only one God, who is indivisible.
The use of the word "person" generally identifies the fact that we are in a relation to another living entity, and therefore the use of the phrase "three Persons" identifies the fact that when we relate to God, we are relating to three living entities, each of Whom would be independently identifiable as a "Person". We cannot help but perceive Him/Them as three different Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, because our perception is so limited.
But that is our limitation, not His. God is What He is, as He told Moses; and even though the Incarnation has made it impossible to think of Him without thinking of three Persons, our perception of these three Persons cannot change God's essential unity.
well your idea here is that we don't know, it is above our knowledge but we have to believe that because it is in the bible, so what the quran had came to disagree with this, in fact in quran god have gave excuse for christians until the quran came. Still, the main problem is in the idea that why god would do this .. to save people .. he can do this while saving us the trouble .. the idea of how can god in his human existance form, he would wait for time whom will hold the time, the idea of if god can incarnate in human, then tomorrow The idea of god that can be inside anything or contaminated with anything "place or time or whatever" .. then who was there before the big bang .. if you know physics enough you will no that there was niether time nor place before that.
someone can claim he is god, the idea if he can incarnate in anything then may be the pagans whom worshipped some statue that was incarnated with god. although god is capable of anything "he is god", we are not like god nor does he is alike us in anyway or he is alike to anything. this is said plainly in quran. and this is fair enough to be true, why should god want to be human, the other problem is in the major flaws in old testemant about god being vulnerable to beign equated to anything, in quran he is above all his creation. The idea of god wrestling with his creation .. subb7anno wata3ala ..
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by What Box: God The Eternal and self existant god.
Good, Now, what do Christians mean when they say, Jesus and the father are the same God? they mean that Jesus is self existent and eternal and so is the father?
Also when you guys say Jesus was man and God. If God means eternal and since man of course is not eternal, How do you explain this?
We Christians agree with Muslims that God is omnipresent. But I think that most Muslims would also agree that God can manifest himself in special ways if He chooses, with His conversation with Moses at the burning bush being one dramatic example.
God's omnipresence wasn't diminished by His presence in the burning bush. His presence in/ as the man Jesus also can't diminish His omnipresence. In neither case is His presence limited to those physical locations. In both cases those locations (the bush and Jesus' body) are places in which God is manifest in a special way.
In other words, Christians believe that the life of Jesus as a man on Earth is an Incarnation: a time during which God manifested Himself as a man. That does not prevent him from being omnipresent, but only says that He was present in a different way in the person of Jesus.
Against the Muslims, I would say this: if I say, "God could not be present in the man Jesus because He is omnipresent", then I am placing restrictions on how God can manifest himself. If He could manifest Himself in the form of a burning bush without giving up his omnipresence, why could he not manifest Himself in the form of a man?
we muslems didn`t say God coudn`t manifest himself...but we say it`s unsuitable for God to incarnated in the human body which he created.and why he did that, as you say he did that to salvated us from adam`s sin,and what adam`s sin? adam`s sin was ate the apple,which was a big sin that needed the God to incarnated in human body to salvated us from what the other did not what i did!!!!so i think it`s unfair matter,because the God is fair,and he will punish me for what i did,not for what the other did,also we muslems didn`t deny the ability of God ,but we deny what you said about icarnated of who created us in human body ,if you can say also the God can icarnated in satan too !!! altough and it`s easy for God to salvate us by one word like it`s easy to clerics and pastors to do that.
Posts: 92 | From: egypt | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
isn`t it??.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic