Hello from a Monotheist outside of Islam

[marealta]

Dear Daniel and Good Logic,

Thank you for the list of Quran verses that support the view of Jesus as Messiah. Although I am still learning around on what did actually Jesus do as a Messiah, both according to NT and Quran. The Jews at that time were waiting (and I believe they are still waiting now) for a political, a king, a messiah that will lead them against the oppressor, the Roman Empire at that time.
My faith at this point is that, Jesus did not give the Jews a power revolution, but instead he indicated that the kingdom he is bringing is not a political kingdom against the Roman Empire, but the Kingdom of God on earth.

As for atonement and original sin, I am also wondering what verses and point of view supported this doctrine. I partly disbelieve it, but I am still wanting to gain understanding to fully accept that it is wrong. A friend of mine told me that the atonement Jesus did was for the Jewish only, not for everybody after that era. But, I haven't read much about it. It would be good to read a discussion about it.

For the "son of God" title, I agree fully with Daniel. At the time of Old Testament and New Testament, the terms "son of God" and "Holy Spirit" were not corrupted theologically. The Jews use those kind of terms. "Sons of God" "Children of God" "son of David" "Israel is the bride of God (Marriage is used to describe the relationship between God and Israel" etc.
The Holy Spirit (ruach ha-kodesh) was not a separated entity of God, not an entity at all. Ruach hakodesh "...refers to the divine force, quality, and influence of the Most High God, over the universe or over his creatures, in given contexts" [Encyclopedia Judaica]

"Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." Gen 1:2

But after the Gentiles took over Christianity, the Semitic backgrounds of those terms were disregarded, and they injected weird theology that fits their paganistic thinking: "hypostasis" "oussia" etc. And I believe the Quran came to clarify the mistakes that the Gentiles made.

- - - - -

Paul is Jewish, non-Trinitarian, and misunderstood. It is to be taken in context that he was writing letters to various gentile cities, informing the teaching of Jesus. He called Jesus as 'Lord'. But Paul is human, so he is not in any way infallible. His words, I believe, is inspired by his faith, but it is not the word of God.

Around this point Christianity was a Jewish sect. The early Christians visited the synagogue, pray three times a day, fast two days a week: they were Jewish.

There was a war in 70 CE, but it didn't separate Christians from Judaism.

Up until the year 132-135 CE, a false messiah conducted a revolt against the Romans, his name was Bar Kochba. The followers of Jesus who were Jewish, did not want to accept Bar Kochba as a messiah and there was a conflict. Ultimately, the Romans overcame the revolt, and the Jews today consider Bar Kochba as a failed messiah.

"Cochba [bar Kochba] ... tortured and killed the Christians who refused to aid him against the Roman army." - p. 42, Greek Apologists of the Second Century, Robert M. Grant, The Westminster Press, 1988

.

The complete schism/separation of Christianity from Judaism happened after that.

Correct me if I got it wrong,
Peace for all

[AbbsRay]

Salaam
It is not my view, It is my friends who is Christian, who told me all about the Gospals and how Paul's writtings were questionable. I am a Palestinian and my whole life was a Muslim. So Did I ever open a Bible and read? No, I had the Qumran. I only knew the basics about what each religion believed.

I just started to hear about Paul from many of my Christian friends. I was curious if everyone who follows the Bible that was non Jewish viewed him the same. I saw you commented about Paul and Infill and wanted to see your view.

I only heard of the blindless and Jesus Killing him (which I can not even comprehend that ever happened based on my beliefs in the Qumran)

My intention was never to mock or speak badly of a man I never knew, I just wanted to hear your view. Sorry if you took it differently.

Salaam

[marealta]

Dear Abbsrayray,

I did not think that you are mocking anything or anyone. We are all sharing questions and views here.

Salaam

[good logic]

Greetings friends.

Please allow me to clarify " The son of GOD"  issue:

(The following verse is God talking to David about Solomon)" I will be His Father and he will be my son. I will never take my love away from him, as I took it away from your predecessor. (Chronicles 17:13)
And:
Yet the Israelites will be like the sand on the seashore, which can not be measured or counted. In the place where it is said to them, 'You are not my people,' they will be called 'sons of the living G-d. (Hosea 1:10)
The kings of Israel are referred to as sons of God because they are to be His representatives, ruling in his place on earth over His people.

"I said, You are Elokim; you are all sons of the Most High" (Psalm 82:6 )

 Jesus only said a phrase that was commonly said by Jews in his days, and Jesus did not claim to have a monopoly on son-ship with God. We are all God's children, Jesus is not the only one and never claimed to be the Begotten one.

GD bless.
Peace to all.

[marealta]

Dear all,

Allow me to quote more...

The ‘gods’ know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken.
“I said, ‘You are “gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’
But you will die like mere mortals; you will fall like every other ruler.”
Psalms 82:5-7

gods=sons of the Most High=kings=rulers=vicegerents

Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”
“Is that your own idea,” Jesus asked, “or did others talk to you about me?”
“Am I a Jew?” Pilate replied. “Your own people and chief priests handed you over to me. What is it you have done?”
Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders.
But now my kingdom is from another place.”
“You are a king, then!” said Pilate.
Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth.
Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”
“What is truth?” retorted Pilate.
John 18:33-38

What is Truth?

Salaam

[Zack]

Dear Daniel and Good Logic,


Around this point Christianity was a Jewish sect. The early Christians visited the synagogue, pray three times a day, fast two days a week: they were Jewish.

There was a war in 70 CE, but it didn't separate Christians from Judaism.

Up until the year 132-135 CE, a false messiah conducted a revolt against the Romans, his name was Bar Kochba. The followers of Jesus who were Jewish, did not want to accept Bar Kochba as a messiah and there was a conflict. Ultimately, the Romans overcame the revolt, and the Jews today consider Bar Kochba as a failed messiah.

"Cochba [bar Kochba] ... tortured and killed the Christians who refused to aid him against the Roman army." - p. 42, Greek Apologists of the Second Century, Robert M. Grant, The Westminster Press, 1988

.

The complete schism/separation of Christianity from Judaism happened after that.

Correct me if I got it wrong,
Peace for all

Hello all, Great to interact with you all! Just on the above, we need to be careful we are not confusing 3-4 different groups... The Tauhid community who followed the Hawariyuun labelled the Nazarenes, and were expelled from Jerusalem in 135AD, were never known as Christians. (From the historian Epiphanus). The Christians, accepted by the Hawariyuun, didn't associate much with the Nazarenes because the CHristians saw them as heretical, following basically a Halal diet and the law. The Hebrew followers of Jesus numbered in the 10's of thousands. Their journey is important, because they are basically the links from Mecca back to Jerusalem. . When expelled from Jerusalem, the Nazarenes were disowned by their Hebrew brothers. This is also important, because the Nazarenes became a separate entity from the Jews, and had communities in and around Mecca, with a Nazarene leader, Waraqa, officiating the wedding of before Muhammad. (According to Islamic historians Qutaybah, Al-Yaqubi and others). It is very clear that the heritage of Islam is from the Jerusalem followers of Jesus, which is from the Qur'an. "Nazarene" was a label, therefore "Islam" was natural to be adopted by this community.

Outside of the Nazarenes, was the Christian church centred in Rome. They have their early history grounded in the teaching of Jesus, accepted by the Hawariyuun in about 45AD, pioneered partly by Paul. However it is increasingly acknowledged that their history after its beginnings is not exactly reality. The Hawariyuun history has been sidelined, so that Peter transfers authority to the Gentile Christian Popes as head of the "Umaah". This is clearly untrue, with the family of Jesus in Jerusalem, starting with James and then Simeon,  being the true leaders. All of this is important, as Muslims have not been told their heritage. A lot of details are unknown with historical records being destroyed, however roughly the above is the Muslim heritage.

Just briefly, one large other groups, which are actually multiple streams, are in between the 2 groups above of the Hawariyuun and Christians... that is the Christian church of the East. This is the primary church Muhammad had contact with, their history is from the direct ministry of the Hawariyuun (not Paul) to the scattered Helenised (Greek speaking) circumcised. As Christians, they sholat, and have a very similar culture to Muslims. They were thrown out of the Catholic Church 150 years before Muhammad because their belief in Jesus was actually similar to the Quran, that the spirit of God was in Jesus as a separate entity to the human Jesus. The Church in the East thrived for 500 years in the Middle East and were the key to the Golden Age of the Arab world.

This is long......but I think it is important for Muslims and Christians to know their heritage. There is a lot of academic study in these areas these days, including this is a part of my study.

Wasalam.. Daniel

[marealta]

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for your explanation and I apologize to all for my ignorance and lack of information regarding this issue. I just remembered and realized that Quran address Christian as Nasara/Nasrani. Thank you for sharing your knowledge on this issue.
Was the East Church you mentioned, the same Eastern Church (Eastern Orthodoxy) in our time today? Or was it a different church? I don't know much about the early church history.

To be honest, I personally believe that the separated divine 'entity' is the Word, "Be!" through which the universe was created.
"The similitude of Jesus is that of Adam."

Salam...

[marealta]

Dear Daniel,

Is it possible to contact you out of this forum?

Thank you
Salam

[Duster]

Shalom / peace marealta and daniel .. pls don't deprive readers such as me of things we may learn from your conversations by speaking in private about topics like this. One thing I like about forums is the sharing bit. >>

[marealta]

Hello Duster,

I agree with your remark. As for email, I was about to ask some stuffs regarding our country, I don't know if that would be appropriate to be laid out here. But yes, general discussions however should be discussed in open.


To Daniel,

How do you reconcile the church doctrine about Isa and his death in the light of Quran? I have been thinking about a verse in Quran: Isa similitude is of Adam. That verse to me bears a deeper meaning than just being created by miracle (Isa and Adam). And I have stumbled on a theory, the Adam Christology, proposing that Isa is the last Adam, his resurrection was the first to be done, and it is done so that we can be resurrected after him. Does this view have any place in the continuation of Torah?

I also found an opinion that the NT, the gospels, should actually be put under the Torah (just like Talmud, etc), not as substitute.

Thank you

[Zack]

To Daniel,

How do you reconcile the church doctrine about Isa and his death in the light of Quran? I have been thinking about a verse in Quran: Isa similitude is of Adam. That verse to me bears a deeper meaning than just being created by miracle (Isa and Adam). And I have stumbled on a theory, the Adam Christology, proposing that Isa is the last Adam, his resurrection was the first to be done, and it is done so that we can be resurrected after him. Does this view have any place in the continuation of Torah?

I also found an opinion that the NT, the gospels, should actually be put under the Torah (just like Talmud, etc), not as substitute.

Thank you

I think firstly to begin with the actual crucifixion of Jesus I have presented 3 interpretations of the Qur'an to synchronise with the Bible I think it was p5 of this topic. Also I believe the Qur'an views the Bible as reliable, but issues with the twisting of meaning.

When we come to the application and meaning of the Injil universally, meaning what does it supposed to mean for a Muslim as a part of their pillar of faith, that is where we need to "go slow" and put emotions aside. A couple of key starting points are:

- There is only ONE truth, ONE "Ummah" / people of God. The words "Old Testament / New Testament" are not inspired words, but support the mindset of "Replacement Theology", that the Christian church has replace Hebrew; that the NT replaces the OT etc. etc. This is the same midset that Islam with its post Qur'an traditions often has of itself. That Islam is the final and true religion replacing the old, the Qur'an replaces the Injil etc.  In this aspect, Islam is not different to Catholic replacement theology.

The truth of what Paul presents is of the "New" (Gentiles) being grafted into the "old" (Hebrew). The message of the Injil from Jesus is to the Jews "Do not hope that you are a part of the "Ummah" simply because you are ethnically descended from Abraham." The Injil, including from Paul, is all about ONE.  One Ummah, Semitic and non-semitic.

- In regards to the meaning of the crucifixion, I think we need to understand that the Injil is about the 2 types of people in the Injil, those following the Torah (Hebrews), and those not (Gentiles). The Torah is 613 instructions for living, for the Roman Empire Gentiles it was summarised simply as "Love your neighbour". Paul wrote his inspired writings to Gentiles. Despite what Muslims have heard of his writings, 95% of it they would embrace as great truth. However his "articulating" of the one true message was for the Gentile mind. (ie. He himself said in 1 Cor 9 this was his principle... all things to all men.)

It is clear that the heritage of Islam is from the Jerusalem "Ummah". You can synchronize the message of Muhammad with that of Jesus brother, James, who was the head of the Jerusalem believers. "Faith without works is dead." As far as synchronizing the Qur'an to the Jesus of the Bible, the more important question is to which people? ..... those of Jerusalem or those of Rome? As Jesus was to James and the "Hawariyuun" in Jerusalem, Jesus was to Muhammad. In other words, if you took away all the writings of Paul to Roman Empire Gentiles, what does the Jesus you are left with look like? This is the challenge for Islam.

Wasalam
Daniel

[marealta]

It is clear that the heritage of Islam is from the Jerusalem "Ummah". You can synchronize the message of Muhammad with that of Jesus brother, James, who was the head of the Jerusalem believers. "Faith without works is dead." As far as synchronizing the Qur'an to the Jesus of the Bible, the more important question is to which people? ..... those of Jerusalem or those of Rome? As Jesus was to James and the "Hawariyuun" in Jerusalem, Jesus was to Muhammad. In other words, if you took away all the writings of Paul to Roman Empire Gentiles, what does the Jesus you are left with look like? This is the challenge for Islam.

Jesus who was born as a miracle, healed people, forgiving sins, preached against the tradition of men practiced by the Jews, reforming the wrongs in society, his sermon in the mount, his saying that he didn't came to abolish the law, knowing that he will be killed but still submitting to the will of God, got crucified, resurrected after three days...telling his disciples to preach to the 'nations', baptizing people in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit... being called 'Lord', 'Son of God', and.. Messiah.

[Zack]

Jesus who was born as a miracle, healed people, forgiving sins, preached against the tradition of men practiced by the Jews, reforming the wrongs in society, his sermon in the mount, his saying that he didn't came to abolish the law, knowing that he will be killed but still submitting to the will of God, got crucified, resurrected after three days...telling his disciples to preach to the 'nations', baptizing people in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit... being called 'Lord', 'Son of God', and.. Messiah.

Hi, Ah yes... but as you know....
a) "son of God" was hardly ever used and meant something totally different in the Hebrew world 500 years before Muhammad....It was referencing to God's agent and representative .... and Adam and many others were referred to as this...In fact more generic still, you are referred to as the son of God (ie. His agent of goodness)...That is simply the way Hebrew language was used, different to Muhammad's time (Rom 9:26)..
b) "Lord".... In the Bible "Lord" (Kurios) does not represent deity, but a level of authority. All sorts of people are referred to as lord (kurios). If each time it is translated as deity consistently, the Bible would not make sense.
c) Baptised in the name of the "Father, Son and Holy Spirit..... One by one.... i) son.. we have discussed above.... ii) Father..... The Hebrews refused to verbalise the word God (Yahweh) because of a tradition of fear of using His Name inappropriately. Therefore they used various alternatives.... (which is where Allah comes from the singular of Elohim).. Jesus used term "Father", as to indicate God presence close to mankind. iii) Holy Spirit... So to avoid misunderstanding, Holy spirit was used when God revealed his power / presence.
d) Baptism in these 3 names..... Firstly Jesus said he never baptised  (John 4:2), and there is no case in the whole Bible of any disciple baptizing in the name of Father, Son, Holy Spirit; nor is it heard of. There is no other such instruction in the entire Bible except for the last words of Matthew. In early church history, this sentence is missing in earliest manuscripts, as well as there is not trace of it in the Hebrew Bible. The gospel according to Mark (the earliest Greek Gospel account) has no such instruction..This is one of those verses which has a very strong basis for viewing as an addition to suit later tradition.

The baptism of jesus and the Hawariyuun was explained by Muhammad in Surah 2:138. The culture of the Hebrews was not for another to baptize, but for self-baptism. ( If you have watched the Jesus Film, he baptized himself)  And so this was the background to the following Surah in the Qur’an....2 different translations to emphasize a point:

Receive the baptism (Arabic: Sibgha) of God, and who is better than God in baptising? and Him do we serve.

We take our colour from God, and who is better than God at colouring. We are His worshippers.    (QS 2:138)

In the culture of exclusiveness, the distinctive at the birth of islam (submission) is the “Sibgha of God”. Sibgha means "dye" or "colour".  The Arab Christians at the time of Muhammad used to mix a dye or colour in the baptizing water to signify that the baptized person got a new colour in life. For Muslims, Baptism was the direct work of God Himself. Islam is being immersed into the character from God, reflecting his character.

Wasalam
Daniel

[marealta]

Thank you for sharing the verse 2:138. I did not know of this. I found an explanation in the web saying.

'Of what use is this formal baptism? What really is worth doing is to adopt the colour of God, and it is not water that gives one this colour but actual service and devotion to God.'

But what about John/Yahya, didn't he baptize?

So, for you Jesus is a mere prophet, or did he some person more exalted? This messiah, what did he really do?

[Zack]

But what about John/Yahya, didn't he baptize?

So, for you Jesus is a mere prophet, or did he some person more exalted? This messiah, what did he really do?

Yes.Baptism was a Hebrew ritual that Yahya carried out for those who wanted to repent... The Bible says repeatedly "John baptized you with water, Jesus baptized with the spirit ."... ie.. Follow Jesus (his teachings), and you will know and sense God's presence close to you....

Re your question about is Jesus a mere prophet.. From the Qur'an Q.S. 3:45  The angels said, “Mariam,  Allah* gives you good news of a word from him, whose name will be the Messiah,  Isa  son of Mariam,  [he will be] highly exalted  in this world and the next,  and brought near  [to Allah*].   or from the Injil    Acts 2:46.. God has made this Jesus "lord" (Kurios).

However remember, God fulfilled his purposes THROUGH Jesus. The original belief of the East was the the Spirit dwelt IN the human Jesus, like Yahweh dwelt in the tabernacle. This I believe explains why there seems to be contrasting statements in the Qur'an concerning Jesus....There is the human Jesus, and God's spirit.. Muhammad's call was to the Eastern theology.

You asked the Messiah, what did he do? He revealed God's character for us to follow in all aspects of life. Sometimes a couple of my Muslim friends feel like this is trying to excessively elevate Jesus. However that is because Jesus has been ingrained in them that Jesus is a western Christian figure. One day Jesus might return to be "muslim"   (-: