Title: Koran proves Jesus is GOD Source:
YouTube URL Source:[None] Published:Dec 7, 2015 Author:ArticleTen Post Date:2015-12-07 08:18:21 by BobCeleste Keywords:ACP Views:1417 Comments:37
Folks, we need to know if this is true or not, please, if you know anyone that is fluent in Arabic, ask them to listen to this and either verify it or let us know it is fabricated.
Folks this is important, unlike the press and the US G0vt, there are folks ready to eliminate and protect against the threat.
It is better to try evangelizing first and this video, if true, this video, may just be the evangelizing tool we have been looking for.
The Quran says that Jesus was born of a virgin, and was the purest prophet of God. It says that on judgment day, Jesus will judge the living and the dead. Jesus is central to Islamic eschatology, because he is the "true teacher" and final judge, the "Purest Prophet".
But he is a prophet in Islam. not God. The Quran says that Christians err when they say that God has a son, or that there is a spirit (the Holy Spirit) that stands alongside God. God is God Alone. He sent his Purest Prophet, the Teacher, through a virgin birth to teach the true way. That was Jesus. The Christians followed Jesus, which was good - the Quran says that the Christians are closest to Muslims. But the Christians erred by adding things to the message and mistaking Jesus' authority from God for divinity.
This is why "The Book", the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, are holy to Islam, but also treacherous, because the Jews and Christians added error and twisted meanings. That is why God sent Mohammed, who is neither the PUREST nor the GREATEST Prophet: the Quran makes it clear that Jesus, the Anointed One, was the Purest and Greatest prophet, the teacher, the final judge. Mohammed is the FINAL Prophet, who straightened out the kinks in the path by correcting the errors that Christians and Jews had added into the text.
Think of the way that some Protestants think of the Catholic Church...it was Holy once, but then it fell under the influence of the Empire and lost its way and introduced error. The Christians say that the Jews added things to what God revealed.
The Quran repeats what Christians say about the Jews - that they added and twisted things, and says that same things of the Christians.
There is a great deal in the Quran that is sympathetic to Christians in particular. And the purity laws of Islam are very similar to those of the Torah. The Muslims believe themselves to be the heirs of the religion of Abraham, through Ishmael, and that theirs is the authentic religion of Abraham. They think that the Jews added a lot of self-aggrandizing cultural material that didn't come from God.
They believe that the Christians came back to God from the Jews' drift, because the Christians correctly grasped (and grasp) that Jesus was holy, that his message was true, and that he was sent by God and will be the final judge.
Where the Christians screwed up, according to Islam, is in elevating Jesus from his status as the highest and holiest human - the Prophet Issa - to being a demigod, like the pagan Greeks and Romans and their demigod heroes.
Theologically, that is what Islam rejects about Christianity.
Culture, of course, has drifted far from theology. The Quran admonishes Muslims to be peaceful with Christians who are peaceful with them.
Of course history has turned out differently. The same can be said of the Christians and Jews, who have not followed the prescriptions of their God in their Scriptures either.
What I need to know is, is he correct in his imterpretation?
I have now had a chance to listen to the video. It is interesting, so I took what he had to say and went and read the portions of the Koran he mentioned.
Now, I do not speak Arabic. The Koran I use is the Yusuf Ali translation of 1934 which, among Koranic translations into English, is considered the "gold standard" by scholars of Islam, the "KJV" of the Koran.
So we have to take that for what it is worth.
To get what is being said in the text read in context, we do need to read more of the Sura.
The man in the video said that the name of this chapter is "The Family of Mariam". It is actually called "The Family of Imran", not "The Family of Mariam."
To understand this Sura, we should look at a representative sample of where it begins and how it moves along, because it gets to Mary and Jesus.
It starts with three letters: A.L,M. This probably means something (like IHS means something to Christians), but what, the translation does not say.
Starting at verse 2, through 7, we have:
"Allah! There is no god but He - the Living, the Self-Subsisting. Eternal. It is He who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; And he sent down the Law of Moses and the Gospel of Jesus before this, as a guide to mankind, and he sent down the Criterion of judgment between right and wrong.
Then those who reject faith in the signs of God (Allah) will suffer the severest penalty, and God is exalted in might, lord of retribution. From God, verily, nothing is hidden on earth or in the heavens.
He it is who shapes you in the wombs as He pleases, there is no god but He, the Exalted in Might, the Wise.
He is it who has sent down to thee the Book. In it are verses basic and fundamental (of established meaning). They are the foundation of the Book. Others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord and searching for its hidden meanings.
But no one knows its hidden meanings except God. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say 'We believe in the Book, the whole of it is from our Lord', and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding."
So, this is the general tone of this section of the Quran.
Before we move on, we need to pause and define what "Imran" is.
"Imran" is the Arab name for the father of Mary. So, the title of this chapter is "The Family of the Father of Mary."
The Koran I use is the Yusuf Ali translation of 1934
WOW, my ass is indiscriminate with any version of the Quran I use. The page sheets go down the toilet after a rub or two from a daily bowel movement and then a flush, thereafter. It just works!
As is your right. I want to understand what these people think and believe, for the same reason that I knew the capacity of all of the Soviet missile systems.
the Quran says that the Christians are closest to Muslims
Just like when you talk about the Bible it seems to me that you don't know what you are talking about. With you everything has to be verified. In my view you get so much wrong.
Where did you find that bullcrap at? You didn't you made it up. Here is what that evil Koran actually says.
Qur’an (5:51) Don’t take Jews or Christians for friends. If you do, then Allah will consider you to be one of them.
Qur’an (2:65-66) Christians and Jews must believe what Allah has revealed to Muhammad or Allah will disfigure their faces or turn them into apes, as he did the Sabbath-breakers.
#11. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13, CZ82, GarySpFc, liberator, BobCelste, Don, tomder55 (#9)
Qur’an (2:65-66) Christians and Jews must believe what Allah has revealed to Muhammad or Allah will disfigure their faces or turn them into apes, as he did the Sabbath-breakers.
Yeah not getting a warm and fuzzy from the above. I did grow some facial hair during no shave November but did not turn into an ape:)
But I agree with both you and Vic.
We have two Muhammads and two Qur'ans.
One of tolerance in Mecca and one which developed into non tolerance and violence.
It's interesting how Muhammad tried to evangelize very much like the apostles in Mecca. Seems the message did not catch on and he had to shift approach.
It is easy to see why he failed at peaceful evangelism. Islam lacks the central message of the Christian Gospel...the Atonement of sins through the shed Blood of Christ and the Resurrection.
I said you are both correct. Probably the most balanced internet piece is below:
It's interesting as well that the early Muslim scholars applied the Mecca Qur'an for Muslims who are not living in Muslim lands and the Medina Qur'an for Muslim majority rule.
Fake quote. You're like my "friend" who picks out fake bogus quotes to try to prove their point. Why get stuff from obscure and unreliable websites and sources when you can just look at the actual stuff?
There's only one source for that bogus quote and the furthest it goes back seems to go to "skepticsannotatedbible". Funny how a website proved on debunking the Bible and the Qu'ran is using fake quotes. Totally no agenda there.
Context is everything. If one starts from a position of hatred, one will find everything hateful.
This "apes" business, in context, is not about Christians and Jews. It's about Sabbath breakers under the Torah.
Here is the FULL context of Sura 2, Chapter 8.
"Those who believe And those who follow the Jewish [Scriptures]
And the Christians and the Sabians, And who believe in God And the Last Day And work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
And remember We took your covenant and we raised above you (the) Mount (Sinai). "Hold firmly to what We have given you, and bring to remembrance what is therein. Perchance ye may fear God."
But ye turned back thereafter. Had it not been for the grace and mercy of God to you, ye had surely been among the lost.
And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath, We said to them "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."
So we made it an example to their own time, and to their posterity, and a lesson to those who fear God.
And remember Moses said to his people: "God commands that ye sacrifice a heifer," They said "Makest thou a laughingstock of us?" He said "God save me from being an ignoramus!"
They said "Beseech on our behalf thy Lord to make plain to us what (heifer) it is!" He said "He says: the heifer should be neither too old nor too young, but of middling age. Now do what ye are commanded!"
They said "Beseech on our behalf the Lord to make plain to us her color." He said: "He says a fawn-colored heifer, pure and rich in tone, the admiration of beholders!"
They said: Beseech on our behalf thy Lord to make plain to us what she is; to us all heifers alike. We wish indeed for guidance if God wills.
He said "He says: a heifer not trained to till the soil or water the fields; sound and without blemish." They said: "Now hast thou brought the truth." Then they offered her in sacrifice, but not with good will. _____
So, that is what this text is all about. Contrary to the assertions so strenuously made above, the Koran does not say here that Allah says he will turn Christians and Jews into apes. The passage of the Koran refers to God dealing with Sabbath breaking Jews.
Moreover, the language is metaphorical. "Be ye apes, despised and rejected" for breaking the Sabbath. This is YHWH talking to Jews under the Mosaic covenant. That becomes clearer and clearer as one reads on. Here, the Quran is dwelling in the Torah, in the sacrifice of the red heifer, and giving details about the mindset, the attitude of the Hebrews vis a vis Moses and God. They mock and cavil. Finally they do accept the truth and do it, for a time, but without goodwill.
The writer her is getting at something fundamental: the attitude of men towards God in light of the commandments. Nothing in this passage speaks of having to be a Muslim or being turned into an ape.
Nor does it say that God actually turned men into chimpanzee. It would be clearer had the translator given us "Be ye as apes, rejected and despised", because that is obviously the meaning. Those who ignored the Sabbath were rejected and despised.
There are plenty of things to worry about in the Koran, but it won't do take a line here and a line there out of context, and make it say what it doesn't say in context, any better than it does to do that with the Bible.
In fact, when people do that, in religious or political arguments, it makes them look really weak. It's like that NBC reporter who stitched together a bunch of Trump responses and broadcast something that made Trump sound like he was going to round up the Muslims and put them in concentration camps. Once the context was seen, the bad faith effort of the reporter was revealed. And one could then see how desperate that the reporter was to make up something that was not there, because what Trump was actually saying was rough, but not crazy.
When people twist words and take a line here, a line there, once it is seen, it looks pretty desperate and pathetic. Have they no better arguments than THAT?
"Those who believe And those who follow the Jewish [Scriptures]
And the Christians and the Sabians, And who believe in God And the Last Day And work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
And remember We took your covenant and we raised above you (the) Mount (Sinai). "Hold firmly to what We have given you, and bring to remembrance what is therein. Perchance ye may fear God."
But ye turned back thereafter. Had it not been for the grace and mercy of God to you, ye had surely been among the lost.
And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath, We said to them "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."
So we made it an example to their own time, and to their posterity, and a lesson to those who fear God.
And remember Moses said to his people: "God commands that ye sacrifice a heifer," They said "Makest thou a laughingstock of us?" He said "God save me from being an ignoramus!"
They said "Beseech on our behalf thy Lord to make plain to us what (heifer) it is!" He said "He says: the heifer should be neither too old nor too young, but of middling age. Now do what ye are commanded!"
They said "Beseech on our behalf the Lord to make plain to us her color." He said: "He says a fawn-colored heifer, pure and rich in tone, the admiration of beholders!"
They said: Beseech on our behalf thy Lord to make plain to us what she is; to us all heifers alike. We wish indeed for guidance if God wills.
He said "He says: a heifer not trained to till the soil or water the fields; sound and without blemish." They said: "Now hast thou brought the truth." Then they offered her in sacrifice, but not with good will. _____
So, that is what this text is all about. Contrary to the assertions so strenuously made above, the Koran does not say here that Allah says he will turn Christians and Jews into apes. The passage of the Koran refers to God dealing with Sabbath breaking Jews.
Those words should be on toilet paper. So I can wipe my ass on them.
You're not defending Christianity by lying. You're not attacking the Koran by raging about things it doesn't say. You're disgracing yourself by coming unhinged. It would be best for you to calm down and return to reason.
Indeed context is important. I must point out the 'ape' comment was used in a humorous tone. The main thrust of my post was on the "Two Muhammads and two Qur'ans.
Indeed context is important. I must point out the 'ape' comment was used in a humorous tone. The main thrust of my post was on the "Two Muhammads and two Qur'ans.
As in my first post on this thread, I must point out the 'when' and 'where' Muhammad said something is very important.
The first link I posted up thread discusses the difficulties of 'pinning down' Quran passages without knowing exactly the time/location/situation of Muhammad. Call it Quranic exegesis for lack of a Islamic term.
To make matters worse, no future Muslim scholar saw fit to come up with a chronological Quran. So we have a little bit of Medina here, and some Mecca here and so on.
You're not satanic. You're just regularly wrong. You get scripture wrong then when you are corrected you ignore it.
For example don't work don't eat.
Once I spent every weeknight and most of a weekend going through the whole Bible for you - the KJV at your request. I lined up for you every passage about treatment of the poor. I even used Strong's, to make sure that I captured EVERY instance of Scripture discussing poverty. I put a lot of effort into that.
You disregarded it. You ignored all of that volume of Scripture as if it were nothing. You did not miss a beat in repeating your dogma, and then you said that I don't demonstrate my points with Scripture. But I did.
I'm not going to get a fair hearing in your court. I know that from experience.
On this thread, Bob Celeste posted a question. Nobody attempted to answer it. I started to, using the text from the Koran that he was asking about. And you came charging to the attack, as usual.
I avoid communicating with you because I know the exchange will be hostile and sterile.
Here, on this thread, if you've decided the Koran is toilet paper, that's fine. But it doesn't answer Bob Celeste's question. I'm going to continue to answer his question.
So, Bob, to return to this film - and recalling that you are specifically looking to evangelize Muslims using the Quran - let's continue to advance through it.
We saw that the speaker said that the name of Sura (Chapter, or Book) III is "Family of Mary", but it is in fact "Family of Imran", with Imran being the Arabic name for Mary's father. So yes, it does speak of Mary's family, but it isn't CALLED "Family of Mary". It is a little detail like that that will cause minds that are suspicious to slam shut.
Likewise, if you talk to Muslims for the purpose of evangelization, you cannot take the strident approach of people who just hate them and who are not trying to persuade them of anything, that "Allah" is not "God". In Arabic, "Allah" is the word "God". It's the same word in Hebrew: Eloah, and we always translate that as God. In the First Century Christian Syriac Peshitta, a translation of the Old and New Testaments into Aramaic (many Syriac Christians believe that the New Testament IS the Peshitta, and that the Greek versions are translated from IT) the word "God" appears many times - as in John "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God." The word "God" in Aramaic Christian Scriptures is "Alah".
So, a Christian can say that the Islamic notion of God is different from the Christian, and that the God of the Quran doesn't say things the way the Christian God does. But one cannot say that Allah is not God. The word Allah IS the word "God". Arab Christians pray to Allah the Father, Allah the Son and Allah the Holy Spirit.
Among Christians it is well to say that Allah is a moon god, or whatever, but that is predestined to fail if that is the way evangelization of Muslims is done, in large part because it's offensive, stupid, devoid of fact and not true, and no Muslim will recognize anything about his religion in that. The missionary bringing that message may not be stoned, but he certainly is going to get nowhere. It would be like a secular trying to persuade Christians to leave the Church by proclaiming "The 'Virgin' Mary was a whore!" Christian minds slam shut at such obnoxiousness. No evangelization is done.
So, "Allah" may behave differently from Allah the Father and Allah the Son and Allah the Holy Spirit, BUT the WORD ITSELF means GOD, generically: God, the One True God. The Muslim concepts of who that God IS differ, but if one is going to use the Quran itself to evangelize Muslims, one has to respect them and their language. One can say, in English "God" instead of "Allah" - that is not offensive to Muslims, for Muslims themselves will tell you that "Allah" means "God".
Bombthrowers who just want to hate Muslims are already seething at me, but you said you wanted to use the Koran to evangelize, not bait. So that's a starting point.
Now let's get farther into this Sura III. The speaker in the film said that the Koran speaks of Mary's Immaculate Conception, sinless life and bodily ascension into Heaven. If it did, then the Quran's vision of Mary would be the same as traditional Catholic belief. Here in this Sura we will not find an immaculate conception. We will find that it ends with Jesus and does not speak of Mary's death, so we cannot yet draw any conclusions about her Assumption, at least not from this Sura. We do find that God keeps Mary in purity, which certainly implies sinlessness.
Judge for yourself. Remember that "Imran" is the father of Mary.
Sura III, Section 4, Verses 33-37 God did choose Adam and Noah, the family of Abraham, and the family of Imran above all people.
Behold! A woman of Imran said : "O my Lord! I do dedicate unto Thee what is in my womb for Thy special service, so accept this of me, for Thou hearest and knowest all things."
When she was delivered, she said: "O my Lord! Behold! I am delivered of a female child, I" And God knew best what she brought forth. "And nowise is the male like the female. I have named her Mary, and I commend her and her offspring to Thy protection from the Evil One, the Rejected."
Right graciously did her Lord accept her. He made her grow in purity and beauty. To the care of Zakariya* was she assigned. Every time that he entered her chamber to see her, he found her supplied with sustenance. He said "O Mary! Whence (comes) this to you?" She said "From God, for God provides sustenance to whom he pleases, without measure."
*Zakariya is Zecharariah, father of John the Baptist (who is called "Yahya" in Arabic).
So, there you have it. The Quran has remarkable information about Mary. This information somewhat parallels an early orthodox Christian writing called The Protoevangelium of James.
There is no particular inference in it of an immaculate conception, but there certainly is the dedication to God while in the womb, and the fact that God raises Mary up in purity, protected from the Evil One.
So, when it comes to the film's claim: Immaculate Conception? No. Sinlessness - at least up to this point in the narrative - Yes. Assumption of the Virgin? We don't know yet.
As I said, the film does contain some strong and interesting points. Mary is indeed the only woman mentioned by name in the Quran, and she clearly has divine protection. In fact, the text we just read traces the line of blessedness down from Noah and Abraham to Imran, father of Mary, whose family is most blessed of all.
If the film were reworked slightly, to remove the overreach "Family of Mary" name, which is not correct, and the Immaculate Conception claim (which nobody cares about but Catholics anyway - you don't, for instance) then so far it is good.
The next three versus are the story of the annunciation to Zechariah of the birth of John (the Baptist). We will skip over these three to get back to Mary in our next communication.
Thanks. I had a source some time back from a Muslim who converted to Christ. He was adamant that if witnessed to Muslims in English to ensure to use "God" and not Allah. I'll look it up and share later.
That's right. "Allah" means "God" and "God" in Arabic is "Allah".
The problem is that if in English you use "Allah", you're making a distinction between Allah and God. That's going to do nothing good for you whatever argument you are trying to make to a Muslim.
If you're trying to discuss things with a devout Muslim, he knows that "God" is English for Allah.
If you're trying to evangelize a questioning Muslim, he ALSO knows that "God" is English for "Allah", so making a point of making the distinction will ring very hollow with him. Muslims who become Christians mostly do not reject God - their Allah. Rather, they come to realize the continuum between Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and recognize that Jesus is Allah's Son.
And because the Quran and Christianity are so close already (really, the Islam of the Quran is the Arian Heresy, in Arabic), all that is required is the same movement of mind that persuaded ancient Arians to drop their belief in the non-divinity of Jesus and simply accept that Jesus really WAS God's SON.
The Sonship gets all the way there. That's what's missing from the Quran's accounts of Jesus.
So, playing word games and trying to distinguish Allah from God goes nowhere with Arabs, whether they're Muslims OR Christians. All Christian Arabs call God Allah, because that's the WORD "God" in Arabic.
Going into the fever swamps about pagan moon gods persuades Christians who merely want to rage at Muslims. It's never going to teach an Arabic speaker anything. It'll just drive him away.
There is a book at the site called Reaching Muslims for Christ.
The only weakness in the excerpt is the handling of The Name, YHWH.
That is my main contention with Muslim apologists. The Allah of Quran is not identified by The Name.
Again getting into arguments while presenting the Gospel is not wise. The Name above all other names is what presenting the Gospel. And of course that name is Jesus Christ.
Allah is Arabic "Eloah", which is Hebrew. El/Eloah/Elohiym are three forms of the same word in Hebrew. It's the first name "God" in the Scriptures.
There's that passage in Exodus where God tells Moses that Abraham only knew him by the name "El Elyon" - God Most High - not YHWH. Since Islam claims to be the religion of Ishmael - the worship of the God of Abraham received from Abraham's son, it follows logically that the Ishmaelites would have the name "Eloah", but not the name "YHWH".
And since Jesus is the purest prophet and the final judge in the Quran, the Muslims are already highly disposed towards Jesus. In this sense they are very different from the Jews of the First Century (or, sotto voce, today). Jews then rejected Jesus as a false prophet and blasphemer, who did his miracles by the power of Satan. Jews today don't go that far. They simply say he was a deluded rabbi who taught the teachings of Hillel, but who became deranged into believing himself divine. So, Jesus is not a prophet to Jews - he is still a man who was in error. Modern Jews - in America, when speaking to Christians anyway - think that Jesus was a nice man who taught good things, but who ultimately was touched in the head. Not a prophet.
To Muslims, Jesus is the holiest of all the prophets, and the final judge of humanity. So Muslims do not have nearly as far to go as Jews. Muslims have to be persuaded that Jesus was God's son, and not MERELY a prophet. This is hard, but it starts out, at least on the basis of a revered prophet being MORE than merely a prophet. For the Jews, they have to take a madman blasphemer and change their mind, decide they're no longer really the Chosen People, and worship a man as God. That's a much wider chasm.
Of course, few Muslims convert, because worshipping a man as God, a "second God" is as horrifying to the Muslim monotheistic mind as it is to the Jewish. In this, the Jews and Muslims are close and the the Christians are the odd men out. In universalism and belief in the holiness of Jesus, Muslims and Christians are close and the Jews are the odd men out.
To move along now in Sura III of the Qu'ran, remembering that our purpose is to compare what the text says to the short film in which the Christian said that the Qu'ran proves that Jesus is God. He gave a list of attributes of Jesus that he said were in this Sura 3 of the Qu'ran. Bob has asked us to analyze the text to see if the film is accurate for use in evangelization.
We have already seen that there is an inaccuracy regarding the title of the Sura (it is "Family of Imran", not "Family of Mary" - although the family of Imran IS, in fact, the family of Mary, so this is a matter of semantics - the actual NAME of the Book - it's the sort of inaccuracy that people pounce upon even if it's a distinction without a difference).
We have also seen that three of the very Catholic attributions of Mary: Immaculate Conception, ever sinless and Assumed bodily into heaven, were claimed by the speaker, but that the Immaculate Conception is not referred to, that the Assumption, if it occurs in the Quran, occurs later. We saw that God kept Mary in purity, which certainly can be interpreted as sinless, though it doesn't need to be.
So, now where in Sura 3, Section 5, verses 42-54. This is a long section dealing entirely with Jesus. So let's read it ourselves here, and then discuss it afterwards: ___ Behold, the angels said: "O Mary! God hath chosen thee and purified thee - chosen thee above the women of all nations. O Mary! worship thy Lord devoutly. Prostrate thyself, and bow down (in prayer) with those who bow down."
This is part of the things, of the things unseen, which we reveal unto thee (O Apostle!) by inspiration: Thou wast not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be charged with the care of Mary. Nor wast thou with them when they disputed (the point).
Behold! The angels said: "O Mary! God giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the hereafter and of those nearest to God."
"He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity, and he shall be (of the company) of the righteous."
She said "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said "Even so, God createth what he willeth when He hath decreed a plan. He but saith to it 'Be', and it is!"
"And God will teach him the Book and Wisdom, The Law and the Gospel. And (appoint him) an apostle to the Children of Israel (with this message: 'I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by God's leave. And I heal those born bind, and the lepers, and I quicken the dead by God's leave. And I declare to you what we eat, and that you store in your houses. Surely therein is a sign for you if ye did believe.
(I have come to you) to attest the Law which was before me, and to make lawful to you part of what was (before) forbidden to you. I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear God and obey me.'"
"It is God who is my Lord and your Lord. Then worship Him. This is a Way that is straight."
When Jesus found unbelief on their part, he said: "Who will be My helpers to (the work of) God?' Said the Disciples: "We are God's helpers. We believe in God. And do thou bear witness that we are Muslims."
"Our Lord! We believe in what Thous hast revealed, and we follow the Apostle. Then write us down among those who bear witness."
And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned. And God too planned. And the best of planners is God. ______________
So, there you are. Jesus is indeed described by the angel as a word from God, whose name would be Jesus. That part of the video is accurate (although the Christian significance of the word "Word" is not clearly intended here. Rather, God makes it clear that what he wishes to be, becomes so by him simply saying "Be".
The healings and raising of the dead are names.
Most importantly to the argument of the videotape, Jesus comes says that God has given him the power to make the sign of breathing life into the clay bird he has shaped. However, Jesus clearly says that he does this "By God's leave",
It takes a two-step stretch to get from there to "Jesus is God", like the film does. First, one must give the word "Word" the greater mystic significance that Christian scriptures give to that word. In the Quran, God speaks things into being, but in that passage there is no sense of "word" as deity. Rather, God exercises his deity by speaking words, which is not the same thing.
As far as the miracles goe, and particularly the giving life to the bird, Jesus makes it clear that this is all "by God's leave".
So, I don't think that this passage gets nearly as far to proving the divinity of Christ in the Quran as the man in the film thinks it does. To use this as a tool of evangelism, one would have to impart the greater significance of the word "Word" in English religious speak than in Arabic.
#34. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, tomder55 (#33)
I believe Vic is 'thinking out loud' on what the Muslim texts 'say' and not what is actually believed or practiced. Kind of like what an opposing Army's intelligence analyst would do when 'putting on the hat' of the opposing force. This is what intelligence personnel do when advising a commander and staff on cultural influences and norms.
That's my impression.
What I believe you are doing is observing actions of those who claim their book. What they actually do and what must be combatted to win.
You would be what the Army calls the X analyst who gives us the number of reports, specific groups which are attacking, their stated motives---What they are actually doing.
Based on the above analysis from two different (sometimes many more than 2) perspectives is establish my 'method of attacking' the adversary. I of course would take your advice as the 'X' analyst to prepare options for meeting violence with violence. I would take Vic's analysis on how to exploit the enemy's weakness in the information realm. Nothing is more effective than showing a wayward populace their owe 'book' and what it actually says and then comparing what insurgents and terrorists are actually DOING.
If we only have Vic's analysis we all continue to bleed
If we only have your analysis we keep the enemy's ranks filled to the brim and continue to bleed.
With both of you we have a strategy to combat the evil dudes.
The above works well on the tactical and operational levels of conflict. We have yet to find a 'will' at strategic level.
No they don't. They think that the Christians mangled what Jesus said and changed it when they wrote it down in the Christian scriptures.
They remade him from what the Gospels and Epistles say, but they think that their Quran was revealed by God directly, and is true, and that the Christians remade him in what they wrote down and chose to believe.
It's a perfectly parallel argument to the one you have made. And the radicals on their side have the same vitriol that you do too. But their Koran and traditions tell them to attack, so we have to deal with them when they do.
Is the Koran "holy"? Not to me it isn't. "Holy" means "set apart". Certainly it's holy to the Muslims, and we need to remember that when dealing with them - at least if we want to have any sort of productive dialogue with them over things that matter to us (such as oil, shipping lanes, financial investments, sales of goods and services, votes in international bodies for various agreements, relief efforts in time of disaster, and military alliance.
Turkey is a Muslim nation and a member of NATO. We're pledged to go to war with Russia, or anybody else, if need be, to protect Turkish territorial integrity. So going into an alliance meeting with Turkey and using a Koran as a footrest would be self-defeating. They think it's holy, and we need to remember that and be circumspect about it when dealing with them.
Paul did not go into the Athenian forum and start pissing on the statues of the gods. He even called the shrine to the Unknown God a memorial of the God of Jesus. Paul kept his head and maintained decorum in the presence of religious practices with which he did not agree.
Now, there are parts of the Quran that present things that are indeed holy. For example, that there is one God, creator of heaven and earth. That is true, and a holy fact. That Mary is the virgin mother of Jesus is also a true and holy fact.
Even the forbidden fruit was pleasant to look at and good to eat. If it looked, smelled and tasted like a turd, Eve would never have taken it in the first place, and she wouldn't have offered it to Adam.
The errors of the Koran are fundamental. But to be able to address them with Muslims you have to know what they are. And to know what they are, you have to read it. That's kinda basic.
I believe Vic is 'thinking out loud' on what the Muslim texts 'say' and not what is actually believed or practiced.
As I do with the Scriptures, when I read them and then compare them to Christian Church traditions or the behaviors of Christian societies, and find a gap.
As I do with the Scriptures, when I read them and then compare them to Christian Church traditions or the behaviors of Christian societies, and find a gap.
Protestants wisely go along with the Scripture alone. The RCC has developed its own Christianity in their traditions and Popish pronunciations. I'm sure you know that and also we won't be changing our viewpoint any time soon. Of course, there are those who have lost their sense of Christianity and have developed their own satanic views.
