An Honest Question for Any Honest Muslim

[Daegus]

If you choose to be ignorant, I can’t stop you.

That’s funny, I’m pretty sure I made some valid points, yet they were ignored and you did not even bother to refute them, then you say I’m choosing to be “ignorant”. If your religion is the truth, I’m sure you would have no problem refuting any of the points I brought up just like Catholic apologists never have any problem refuting Protestant claims that we are not the true Church of Christ.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Originally Posted by Sister Amy
Hey, I’d rather live here too. I agree with you. Even the flaws of American justice leave it a better alternative to almost any Muslim state in the Muslim world, where lawlessness and corruption are rampant.

Note how even the Muslims have been objecting to the their governments lately.

Be careful Sister Amy, A religion should infuse the culture to the point that its laws, history, and even customs reflect its spirit. If you were able to pull the backbone of Christianity out of western society I dare say that you wouldn’t want to live here. It would be too barbaric. With all its corruption, hypocrisy, and past exploitation, this Christian tainted culture offers the human spirit more options for growth than does Islamic culture. If Islam is truely the better faith for the individual to live out there earthly existance, then it should be reflected in a culture that attracts all men to want to live there. Don’t get me wrong for I am quite aware that this country will possibly fall due to its flaws. However, since we live in a post Christian setting, our fall will not be due to the Christian component which is being ignored. Please remember that Christians hold the view that Jesus is God and therefore knows God intimately. As a result, what Jesus tried to do was to show mankind that the essence of God is LOVE. If this love can ignite the dry bones of a culture, then the ash becomes the fertilizer that changes a society in fruitful ways.

Heh. Not sure if you want to get me started about that. I’ll pretend you don’t, and spare this thread a rant that will fall on deaf ears.

 

[Sister_Amy]

That’s funny, I’m pretty sure I made some valid points, yet they were ignored and you did not even bother to refute them, then you say I’m choosing to be “ignorant”. If your religion is the truth, I’m sure you would have no problem refuting any of the points I brought up just like Catholic apologists never have any problem refuting Protestant claims that we are not the true Church of Christ.

Oh I don’t have any problem refuting them (as I’ve done half a dozen times before now) except that my refutations will be wasted.

If you think I’m lying before I speak, why should I waste my time? You’ve made up your mind anyway.

 

[nablaise]

I think Muslim should realize that they don’t really believe that God is almighty and all merciful even though they confess it with their lips. Full confession of faith is not with lips but with real life.

Killing a sinner is not a sign of faith and hope, it is a sign of fear and despair.
Those who truly know God and truly believes in his love and his power, do know the ways of God. They have a sense of redemptive punishment of the loving God.
Take Rwanda for instance. Many people who committed Genocide, have been released so they can work to support the survivals of the Genocide. By doing this, in addition to their repentance, they are doing something to repair the damage they did. Those who did not repent and are still dangerous, I believe they have a life sentence, because the Christian society hopes in God. They hope that God can give the sinner power to repent and live a new life. They believe God can give the victim power to forgive and reconcile. And God never fails to show these powers of people.

Should anyone consider this and stay obstinate in clear falsehood?

God bless

 

[Sister_Amy]

I think Muslim should realize that they don’t really believe that God is almighty and all merciful even though they confess it with their lips. Full confession of faith is not with lips but with real life.

Killing a sinner is not a sign of faith and hope, it is a sign of fear and despair.
Those who truly know God and truly believes in his love and his power, do know the ways of God. They have a sense of redemptive punishment of the loving God.
Take Rwanda for instance. Many people who committed Genocide, have been released so they can work to support the survivals of the Genocide. By doing this, in addition to their repentance, they are doing something to repair the damage they did. Those who did not repent and are still dangerous, I believe they have a life sentence, because the Christian society hopes in God. They hope that God can give the sinner power to repent and live a new life. They believe God can give the victim power to forgive and reconcile. And God never fails to show these powers of people.

Should anyone consider this and stay obstinate in clear falsehood?

God bless

Frankly, I’m glad that my country, regardless of any allegations that its government is based on Christianity, rejects the absurd notion to neglect justice in a civil society.

It’s a real weakness of Catholicism that Catholics seem to think that a justice system is against God, imo.

 

[nablaise]

Frankly, I’m glad that my country, regardless of any allegations that its government is based on Christianity, rejects the absurd notion to neglect justice in a civil society.

It’s a real weakness of Catholicism that Catholics seem to think that a justice system is against God, imo.

A justice system can not be against God!
It is an unjust system which is against God!
Where did you get the idea that Catholicism is against justice system?

 

[Sister_Amy]

A justice system can not be against God!
It is an unjust system which is against God!
Where did you get the idea that Catholicism is against justice system?

Your post above, as well as many others which suggest their authors consider the execution of justice (as has been prescribed even since Biblical times) to be verboten.

 

[Mort_Alz]

Do you mean Josephus?

Yes, this includes the small passage about Jesus by Josephus. I believe mainstream scholarship today asserts that the passage as a whole is Josephus’ original works but with 3 or 4 interpolations added by Christian copyists. Even with the interpolations cut out, Josephus affirmed that Jesus of Nazareth was “condemned to be crucified.”

But, Josephus is not all I’m referring to. There was also a first-century Roman historian by the name of Tacitus who gave an account of Nero’s dealings with early Christians. This historian was not a Christian or a Jew.

He states:

“Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome.”

 

[Tyuiop411]

I guess we Americans should count ourselves lucky that our revolution didn’t turn out as a farce like so many others have.

 

[nablaise]

Your post above, as well as many others which suggest their authors consider the execution of justice (as has been prescribed even since Biblical times) to be verboten.

You don’t see God’s justice in what I said?
God’s justice streams from his love.
Well, if you are really not getting it, let’s be more clear and I will explain. What ‘bible prescribed justice’ system are you talking about here?

God bless

 

[nablaise]

Your post above, as well as many others which suggest their authors consider the execution of justice (as has been prescribed even since Biblical times) to be verboten.

Continuing from above…
I think I know what you mean by ‘execution of justice as has been prescribed even since Biblical times’. However, in order to be sure what you are saying, and also to know where to start, could you point out where exactly to look in the Bible?

God bless

 

[Sister_Amy]

Yes, this includes the small passage about Jesus by Josephus. I believe mainstream scholarship today asserts that the passage as a whole is Josephus’ original works but with 3 or 4 interpolations added by Christian copyists. Even with the interpolations cut out, Josephus affirmed that Jesus of Nazareth was “condemned to be crucified.”

But, Josephus is not all I’m referring to. There was also a first-century Roman historian by the name of Tacitus who gave an account of Nero’s dealings with early Christians. This historian was not a Christian or a Jew.

He states:

“Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome.”

This historians weren’t actual witnesses, though. They’re just repeating the story the Christians were telling.

Honestly, what I believe is that God knows what really happened, and if God says there was no crucifixion, then that’s what I believe. And giving me secondary and tertiary historic reports just confirms the Qur’anic narrative.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Continuing from above…
I think I know what you mean by ‘execution of justice as has been prescribed even since Biblical times’. However, in order to be sure what you are saying, and also to know where to start, could you point out where exactly to look in the Bible?

God bless

Why?

 

[nablaise]

Why?

I was asking you what you meant by suggesting that I “consider the execution of justice (as has been prescribed even since Biblical times) to be verboten.”

Can you point out those Biblical times you had on mind?

 

[Sister_Amy]

I was asking you what you meant by suggesting that I “consider the execution of justice (as has been prescribed even since Biblical times) to be verboten.”

Can you point out those Biblical times you had on mind?

Once Moses led the Israelites from Egypt is a good place to start. Deuteronomy is filled with laws and instructions on how to treat those who transgress the law.

 

[Loml]

This historians weren’t actual witnesses, though. They’re just repeating the story the Christians were telling.

Honestly, what I believe is that God knows what really happened, and if God says there was no crucifixion, then that’s what I believe. And giving me secondary and tertiary historic reports just confirms the Qur’anic narrative.

Fine. Allah tricked everyone into believing Jesus was crucified so it’s Allah’s fault that people believe in the crucifixion and Christianity.

 

[GaryTaylor]

This historians weren’t actual witnesses, though. They’re just repeating the story the Christians were telling.

Honestly, what I believe is that God knows what really happened, and if God says there was no crucifixion, then that’s what I believe. And giving me secondary and tertiary historic reports just confirms the Qur’anic narrative.

Actually there is recorded record in the NT. There were Apostles who witnessed the event Sister Amy. You are certainly entitled to believe as you wish. But by your own logic how would you chose to believe the same story told 600 years after the event, as opposed to an eye witness or the Apostles? Peter, John, Paul, Luke etc all had first hand knowledge of the NT events. The painting Luke painted of Christ and Mary still exists.

While the OT is very informative and historically correct, its fufilled through the messianic prophecy of the NT.

The witnesses of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ are listed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8.

Paul also speaks about the Old Testament testimony to the resurrection of Christ in Acts 13:27-39.

1 Corinthians 15:5 “He was seen by Cephas” {Peter} Luke 24:34

1 Corinthians 15:6 “After that he was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present”

1 Corinthians 15:7 “After that He was seen by James”

1 Corinthians 15:7 “then by all the apostles”

To say I believe what God said in the Quran could only indicate one thing. Someone must have misinterpreted by what God said, or maybe they actually didn’t talk to him?, Because we have eyewitness accounts of Christ Crucifixtion and Resurrection.

 

[Mort_Alz]

This historians weren’t actual witnesses, though. They’re just repeating the story the Christians were telling.

Honestly, what I believe is that God knows what really happened, and if God says there was no crucifixion, then that’s what I believe. And giving me secondary and tertiary historic reports just confirms the Qur’anic narrative.

That is not necessarily true. Historians outside the Bible had no theological agenda. They had no reason to lie about Jesus’ death. As far as they were concerned, He was just a poor carpenter.

The only theological reason I can fathom, is that of Josephus saying Jesus was crucified to deny that Jesus had ANY connection with God; being not even a prophet.

But even with that being so, Tacitus LITERALLY had no reason to lie about Jesus or simply repeat a “story” by Christians. If that were so, his account would read: “the Christians believe Christus to be executed as a part of their superstition.” But, instead, Tacitus confirms that he died, and there were certainly other witnesses to testify to that fact. Roman soldiers carried out crucifictions. Jesus’ death would’ve been confirmed and recorded and that is why we have Tacitus’ account.

“Giving me secondary and tertiary historic reports just confirms the Qur’anic narrative.” I’m afraid I don’t follow your logic. How does providing evidence against the Qur’anic narrative somehow become evidence FOR it?

 

[Mort_Alz]

Fine. Allah tricked everyone into believing Jesus was crucified so it’s Allah’s fault that people believe in the crucifixion and Christianity.

Yes, I believe the Qur’an reads: “but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them” 4:157 (Yusuf Ali translation)

If it was God who made it appear falsly that Jesus’ died, then that is quite a charge. By deceiving people into thinking Jesus died, that would make God guilty of deception/dishonesty. Not to mention misleading about a third of the world’s population today into believing Jesus is the Son of God plus the many Christians who lived before THIS generation.

However, I’m not certain that Islam attests that the “made to appear to them” was the work of God. But, if not God, then who?? Who could actually do that? That’s the most elaborate hoax in the history of the WORLD!!

 

[Mort_Alz]

Actually there is recorded record in the NT. There were Apostles who witnessed the event Sister Amy. You are certainly entitled to believe as you wish. But by your own logic how would you chose to believe the same story told 600 years after the event, as opposed to an eye witness or the Apostles? Peter, John, Paul, Luke etc all had first hand knowledge of the NT events. The painting Luke painted of Christ and Mary still exists.

While the OT is very informative and historically correct, its fufilled through the messianic prophecy of the NT.

The witnesses of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ are listed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8.

Paul also speaks about the Old Testament testimony to the resurrection of Christ in Acts 13:27-39.

1 Corinthians 15:5 “He was seen by Cephas” {Peter} Luke 24:34

1 Corinthians 15:6 “After that he was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present”

1 Corinthians 15:7 “After that He was seen by James”

1 Corinthians 15:7 “then by all the apostles”

To say I believe what God said in the Quran could only indicate one thing. Someone must have misinterpreted by what God said, or maybe they actually didn’t talk to him?, Because we have eyewitness accounts of Christ Crucifixtion and Resurrection.

This point makes a lot of sense to me. To believe in a Gospel recorded 600 years (probably later) after Jesus’ life seems to make little sense when compared to believing a Gospel recorded 60 years after His life. Not just that, but multiple accounts telling that Jesus was indeed crucified, while the Qur’an was written by one person.