Messages

181

Discussions / Re: Apostle Paul

« on: December 26, 2013, 09:59:34 PM »

This has not had any correspondence for a long time, however in case people still read this re Paul...

The issue of Pauls letters is not authenticity, but:

a)to remember that they were addressed to the Greek speaking world implementing the consensus of Isa's followers that the non-semitic peoples were not required to be circumcised, but follow the monotheism of Abraham.
b) Paul was as much "Tauhid" as any Muslim..... the trinity came later, Paul was is much misunderstood in that regard.

Wasalam

182

Discussions / Re: Bible, the Book in the Qur'an?

« on: December 26, 2013, 09:29:15 PM »

I should add to the bottom points... there are mistranslations in some translations that endeavor to support trinitarian thought. Also the Syriac Bible is based on the same Injil that is held today. Re the additional 7 books in the Old testament of the Catholic Bible which is the difference with the protestant Bible, this is considered not an important issue by the Christian Church being a part of the Torah..

183

Discussions / Re: Bible, the Book in the Qur'an?

« on: December 26, 2013, 09:22:28 PM »

As-salaamun Alaikum brother:

While the Holy Qur'an mentioned "of the book", it may refer to the Torah, Psalm and Gospel which was clearly mentioned in some ayats. It is claimed that the bible has, in it, the Torah, Psalm and Gospel but I feel that this is not what the Holy Qur'an is referring to.

Hello... Thanks for your question. I may not be the average person who is on this site, my name is Daniel from the link  "Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam", basically someone who endeavours to be grounded in the same theology of God as you do. Re your question, firstly if we begin with a starting point of the Hawariyuun of Nabi Isa, and end with the Holy Books known in Arabia by the Prophet Muhammad, it makes things a lot lest complicated.

According to history, the Injil that was held to by the followers of Jesus was the Hebrew Gospel, based on the Gospel according to Matthew. Matthew in particular is a problem for the church, because of its positiveness to the “Sharia of the Hebrews” (Torah), as opposed to Paul’s writing of law free for the Greek speaking world. It is highly likely that some sort of copy of the Hebrew Gospel is what Waraqa Bin Naufel was trying to translatefrom Hebrew to Arabic (Al-Bukhari ), with the followers of Isa migrating to Arabia after being expelled from Jerusalem by Roman forces.

However this was not the Injil the Prophet Muhammad was calling for reform in the interpretations of the “People of the Book”, so not to refer to God as 3 persons. (QS 4:171). The people using the Hebrew Matthew in the Mecca region were script monotheists, non-trinitarians and being Semitic, enemies of Rome.The only scriptures of the Torah, Zabur Injil in Arabia was in Syriac. This is what the Qu’ran would have been referring to.  That means Prophet Muhammad only could ever read the Torah Zabur Injil in Syriac, which I am not sure was known to him. Despite this, the message of the Torah, Zabur, Injil was often orally communicated in Arabic, which left people prone to deception. We must remember, Qur’an is about bringing reform to the Trinitarian views of those holding the Injil. This gives away the greatest clue immediately. In placing an unbiased History of the church of the East in the background of the Qur’an, the Qur’an becomes alive with a lot more meaning. This is the problem with theories of corruption of scripture that neither classical Islam interpreters or the Qur’an supports.

I should add :
a)   I believe Muhammad would have disliked (as I do) the term “Old and New Testament” as it had anti-semitic / replacement connotations (ie. Injil replaced Torah; Rome replaced Jerusalem; East replaced West etc.)
b)   The above does not mean endorsement of Trinitarian dogma.
c)   Important to remember that a portion of the New Testament are letters written to the Greek speaking world, dealing with the concessus of the hawariyuun for them to not be obligated to circumcision, but following the monotheism of Abraham..
Hope this helps. It is hard to keep short (-:
Wasalam

184

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: December 26, 2013, 11:27:07 AM »

With due apology to Jews & Christians as already explained by me that Taurat & Injeel are corrupted due to various reasons. Therefore we have believe whatever revealed in Holy Quran. Secondly Allah need not give all detailed life of Jesus as it has to deal with other important issues.

I believe the Muslim academic world is becoming increasingly aware that the view of the textual corruption of the Torah and Injil was not the view of classical Islam, or the Qur'an itself. Al-Razi (865 – 925) “How could there be any alteration in the Book whose words' sharpness has reached a great level of circulation in the East and in the West? … For no change can occur in a book that is well circulated among men. Every wise man can see that the alteration of the Bible was impossible for it was well circulated among men of different faith and backgrounds.”

This is not deny mistranslation to support post-Bible trinitarian dogma, or serious misinterpretation, or that particular parts of the New testament (in particular those by Paul) were written for the Greek speaking world relating to issues of their legitimacy before the God of Abraham despite non-circumcision.

Views of textual corruption basically evolved because of conflict between Islam and the Roman Empire 1000 years ago.... It is time for a serious re-look at how Islam views the Holy Books and how Christianity views the prophet Muhammad.

185

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: December 26, 2013, 10:42:08 AM »

Salaam.

In Al Qur'an, Jesus has been mentioned in the following Verses:

2:87, 2:136, 2:253, 3:45, 3:52, 3:55, 3:59, 3:84, 4:157, 4:163, 4:171, 4:172, 5:17(in two places), 5:46, 5:72(in two places),

5:75, 5:78, 5:110, 5:112, 5:114, 5:116, 6:85, 9:30, 9:31, 23:50, 33:7, 42, 13, 43:57, 43:63, 57:27, 61:6, and 61:14.

Since you must have already studied Injeel, you will be able to throw light on the notable differences regarding the description of Jesus in Qur'an and Injeel.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

Hello Ismail. In regards to the notable differences, I think it is easiest in putting this into 3-4 different categories......

a) Where there is additional information in the Qur'an not present yet not contradicting the standard New Testament / Injil. These are primarily relating to teaching that may be of more prominence in the Eastern Church, such as Jesus as a child.
b) Verses in the Qur'an that seem to indicate Jesus being only human and not divine. (eg. QS 5:75).. (See point below re this)
c) Verses in the Qur'an that seem to indicate Jesus being divine, and has traditionally been difficult for Islam to interpret. (eg. QS 3:45 / 4:171).. (See point below re this)
d) A verse in the Qur'an that seems to indicate Jesus was NOT crucified (QS 4:171) and others that do (QS 3:55)

In bring clarity to the above, it is important to understand that the Qur'an addresses real historical issues of the 6th / 7th century AD. The central issue during the life of the Prophet Muhammad was the division of the East and West church over the nature of Jesus. The difference was:
For the West (Roman Empire) , the human and divine nature of Jesus were inseparable. His humanity was divine.
For the East (ie. The Middle East and beyond), the human nature of Jesus was NOT divine, and the 2 natures were 2 separate entities. In other words, God spoke THROUGH Jesus, and the Word was IN Jesus.  A way to explain this difference is if a glass represented the human nature, and water represented the Divine nature. Gods Word to mankind was incarnated in Jesus. (QS 3.45)

All of this comes back to the danger of a different culture and language (Greek Speaking world) in interpreting the scriptures of a very different language and culture. The Eastern Christology I believe is consistent with the Bible and the monotheism of the Qur’an. The Qur’an is a response to a number of issues where the Church had departed of from the Bible message of the Hawariyuun.

186

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: December 23, 2013, 10:02:42 AM »

Hi,

Simply responding to your statement "As far as Qur'anists are concerned, they believe that whatever is in the Qur'an regarding Jesus if sufficient for a complete understanding of the person of Jesus."....

I would say that the reason for having 4 Holy Books in Islam (Torah, Zabur, Injil, Qur'an) is that they each represent revelation for a different period. In regards to Jesus, the Injil provides a more complete understanding concerning Jesus. IN regards to Muhammad and the 7th century, the Qur'an gives the most complete message. I would say that the Qur'an does not give a more complete message on the person of Jesus than the Injil.

Wasalam
Daniel

187

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: December 20, 2013, 12:52:37 PM »

Salaam.

Very sorry for the delay in replying.

You said:

It would be good for Islam to have a careful study of the Quran specifically concerning Isa, as well as the Surah Matthew in the Injil, and develop a “Tauhid based Christology”  so that there is freedom to consume  the teachings of Isa.

As far as Qur'anists are concerned, they believe that whatever is in the Qur'an regarding Jesus if sufficient for a complete understanding of the person of Jesus.

Now you see, the Christian scholars are better placed to understand and interpret Sura Mathew in the Injil.

Qur'an is open to all. So the Christian scholars are better placed to develop Thouheed based Christology.

If you have any links regarding it, we are anxious to view them.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

Sorry, just getting back to the forum. I have a differing view that "Christian scholars are better placed to develop a Christology." Was Isa a Muslim or Christian? Did Isa live in the era of Gentile Christianity, or the era pre-Christianity? Was Isa Semitic or Non-Semitic? Did Isa follow "Syariah" or "free from the law". The Gospel of Matthew is clearly a book in a Semitic, "Syariah-abiding" world.

"whatever is in the Qur'an regarding Jesus if sufficient for a complete understanding of the person of Jesus." I would say, Islam has rarely studied Jesus in the Qur'an seriously, and secondly, the Qur'an is not the complete revelation of Jesus. That is why Islam has 4 Holy Books..

Wasalam
Daniel

188

General Discussions / Re: Crucifixion

« on: November 29, 2013, 10:23:40 AM »

Hello,

As I said..... I pursue an interpretation, that is faithful to the text, that presents a unity of the message of the Holy Books. Hopefully both internally within the Qur'an, and between the Qur'an and the former Holy Books.

I believe there are many concrete historical links that connect the teachings of Islam back to the disciples of Isa (Hawariyuun), and that they faithfully guarded the Injil text. The recipient of this Waraqa Bin Naufel in Mecca, who officiated the marriage of the prophet. He translated the Hebrew Injil (which is Matthew) into Arabic (Al-Bukhari). According to Islamic historians, whose names you would be a lot more familiar with, the Tauhid teachings of the followers of Isa were present in Mecca and surrounding regions for generations before the prophet, who was very much integrated with them. Their belief was clearly confirming the death of Jesus on the "cross". 

As stated on another post, I see Islam as a consistent, connected message from the Hawariyuun, and as such Islam did not begin in Mecca, but a continued truth of Tauhid from Isa and before.

189

General Discussions / Re: Crucifixion

« on: November 28, 2013, 10:47:51 PM »

I saw the article, it had some good points but was more an overview of options. I think the verse quoted in the article:

003:055 "Lo! God said "O Jesus! Indeed, I shall cause you to DIE (Arabic: Mutawaffika) and shall exalt / raise you to Me (Warafi-uka)
is another key point.

The death of Isa is clearly presented in the Injil as a predestined matter, planned before the creation of the world. The same as the birth of Isa......  "It is easy for me, and [this is] so that we will make him a sign for people, and a mercy from us.  This was a predestined  matter.” QS 19:21. The Jews arrogantly said they killed Isa, but the death indicated the commitment of Isa to the will of God. Like his birth, his death was a predestined matter.

I think if Surah 2:154 is interpreted that the martyr lives in a a non-physical sense at death, and 4:157 is basically saying the same thing, it should be interpreted the same way.

190

General Discussions / Crucifixion

« on: November 28, 2013, 12:18:00 PM »

Hello all,

I am wondering what people here have concluded in regards to the crucifixion? For myself, as explained in another post, I believe that the Qur'an and "former Books" held to by Christians have a unity of message. (Although some translation errors exist to support dogma). The crucifixion is clearly presented in the Gospel. I should mention that the standard symbol of the cross (a small t ) is very unlikely to be shape of wood which Isa hung on (would have been old wood in a capital T probably).

Despite the unity of message, in the Qur'an it states: and because  of their saying, “We killed the Messiah,  Isa  son of Mariam,  Allah’s* messenger,” (though they did not kill him nor crucify him,  but it seemed so to them.) Surah An-Nisaa' 157

I have settled on understanding that the Qur'an speaks regularly not of a physical state, but a spiritual truth; often not with a western scientific view, but an Eastern spiritual view. Surah An-Nisaa' 157 is understood by looking at Surah Al-Baqarah [2]  154  in the background........

"Don’t say that those killed in Allah’s* path are dead, but alive, though you don’t realize it." Surah Al-Baqarah [2]  154  ... That is the spiritual reality of a martyr, someone who gives up their lives for the sake of love, for the sake of truth. This is a theme within the Bible, the 12 disciples as priests after they were martyred (Revelation), Isa..... when you lose your life you gain it... etc...

So basically Surah An-Nisaa' 157 is talking about a spiritual reality for the martyr.....

Any thoughts??

Regards
Daniel

191

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: November 23, 2013, 03:26:18 PM »

Salaam.

The world of Christianity believes that Jesus Christ of the Bible declared "Love thy God with all thy heart, all thy soul, and all thy strength. Love thy neighbor as thyself" as the Greatest Commandment encompassing all other Commandments.

So when we make a covenant with God according to the above Commandment, we dedicate our whole self to Him. When we have given our all to Him, nothing of us remains for anything other than Him.

Humbly,
A. Ismail Sait.

Yes, that is also correct. The whole response from Isa is:

"And one of the experts in the law came and heard them disputing together, and recognizing that he had answered them well,
asked him, “What commandment is the first of all?” Jesus answered, “The first is, Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one, and love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength. The second is this, Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these.”" Mark 12:28-30

Regards
Daniel

192

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: November 23, 2013, 10:43:12 AM »

There is no sense in calling one God mixture of three entities. God is only One without anybody besides Him or with Him. Trinity is against Tauhid. God is One & Supreme & nobody is partner in any capacity or form. As per your statistics only 2 per cent are true Christians in the world.

For you it makes no sense, but for a Greek thinking mindset not rooted in its Hebrew roots, it is the only alternative. The reasons I explained above re how anyone doing what is considered a miracle must be a "god." Generally the gospel of Matthew in particular will make more sense to a Muslim if they truly study it, than a Christian.... as the context of the world of Isa is islam.

However even then, a Muslim will be confused with some words in the Injil without having a Hebrew explanation. What is more, the Greek speaking world of his day.

All the best

193

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: November 23, 2013, 10:35:45 AM »

Salaam.

You said:

"It is my view that modern Islam has gone the other way in response, and the Nabi Isa of the Injil, and of the Quran, is generally not known or understood by Islam today"

Kindly elaborate.

Regards,
A. Ismail Sait.

In response to your question, I want to begin by saying that islam (small i) is the religion of God, from before the time of Prophet Ibrahim. Nabi Isa is viewed with the foundation that Tauhid is unchanging. 

Isa also lived out this understanding, and clearly states that this is the greatest commandment. Isa lived in a context of being confronted by traditions relating to the Sharia of his day (The Torah). And so his responses was revealing God’s mind in regards to Sharia Law. Islam when thinking of Isa needs to separate the post Bible developments of the creeds from the Semitic Isa.
It would be good for Islam to have a careful study of the Quran specifically concerning Isa, as well as the Surah Matthew in the Injil, and develop a “Tauhid based Christology”  so that there is freedom to consume  the teachings of Isa. This means developing an understanding of Isa as the Kalam Allah…. What does that mean; when he was strengthened by the spirit of Allah… when was that and what does it mean…   however most importantly apply the teachings of Isa within Islam. The challenge is to learn out of truth, and not learn out of traditions.

I have a link to help with this, the Tauhid Christology. However I am not sure if I can post links here?
This is foundational in Islam I believe, the Kitab Allah, including the Injil…  However some care needs to be taken….many interpretations / translations are Trinitarian slanted. However that is increasingly less as people are becoming aware of unfaithful translations.
Hope this begins to clarify….

194

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: November 22, 2013, 11:40:27 PM »

Sorry, I meant back in Pauls time, the Greek speaking world back then.

These days, maybe 98% of Christians believe in the trinity from all countries. However there are many slight variants. Ultimately they view that there is only one God, but that one God in three persons.

It is my view that modern Islam has gone the other way in response, and the Nabi Isa of the Injil, and of the Quran, is generally not known or understood by Islam today

195

General Discussions / Re: Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

« on: November 22, 2013, 04:30:10 PM »

Thanks for your response.

No religion moves from Tauhid to trinity in one step. It was a slow progression over 400 years. The best way to describe it is like a ship that is docked in a port but is not anchored, slowly drifting.

The Hawariyuun (Sahabat  Isa) were just as much "Islam" as Nabi Muhammad. Paul was pure Tauhid as well. The beginning days of Christianity were rooted in the Tauhid (Hebrew) teaching. However the descendants of the Hawariyuun (Sahabat setia Isa) were disowned / declared heretics by the non-Semitic peoples (CHristians) and didn't associate with them anymore. That meant the Tauhid teaching began to drift. The greek world was naturally prone to non-Tauhid. When they saw someone  do a miracle or an amazing sports ability, that person was considered a god. So for the Greeks, trinity is only natural if there is no real anchor.

The Injil is actually non-trinitarian, but anyone can take verses to support a dogma, the same as the Qur'an.

So in answer to your question, Paul did not create the trinity...... he is very misunderstood.