Comparing the Koran with the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tiffany_M_S
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
i disagree with you , he said many times that he was sent from God ,

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Jhn 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life

Jhn 7:28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not.

If Jesus indeed was God he would have sent himself, not let someone send him.

Now let us look at some other interesting verses concerning jesus (pbuh) :

Jhn 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: **and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me. **

.Jhn 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

Jhn 8:26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him.

Jhn 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

So those verses make it crystal clear that everything he said, everything he spoke was not of his own but of the ONE WHO SENT HIM, which is the Father. So hence Jesus did not even say things of his own! This is proof that he is indeed a prophet, every prophet speaks what God tells them to speak, Jesus is no exception to this rule.
It is not proving anything. He speaks about the first Person of the Holy Trinity, the Father. Although there is 1 GOD, there are 3 distinct Persons in it. I know this concept is hard to understand in this world, and as i remember, Augustin was saying that the one who claims to understand the concept of Trinity is either a great lier, or he is GOD himself.
We can’t understand all this with our limited mind, limited by our sins.

A very important question Elwill: what about the free will in islam? We, christians, have free well. GOD doesn’;t force us to believe, to follow HIM.
In the same time we all know what Sharia says about those who leave islam. What creator can hate so much? It is a lot of hate sens in Coran, hate towerds christians and jews. Why?
 
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, (1 John 4:1-2)
 
To elwill:

Allow me to go through your responses one by one.

First, you respond to the argument that demanding the quotation “I am God” fails because Christ likewise never said “I am a prophet” nor “I am a messenger” by saying, “But he said he was sent from God!” No Christian denies that - but any one can be sent from God. The Assyrians and Babylonians were sent by God as punishment upon the ancient Israelites. The fact is, if you are going to repeat to us Deedat’s mantra of “Where does Jesus say ‘I am God’?” then we demand that you show us where Jesus said “I am a prophet” or “I am a messenger.” You won’t find it. You have to pick verses and say, “Well this means this,” yet that is precisely how we argue for his divinity. You therefore argue with inconsistent standards.

Second, you respond to the quotation in John 8:58 by asking if the verse really does mean Christ predestined Abraham. Actually…yes it does. The original Greek is clear on that: πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί. Literally: “Before Abraham came to be (γενέσθαι, past tense), I am (εἰμί, present tense),” or even “I exist.” Christ is speaking about a past event (before Abraham’s life) and puts Himself there, but in a present tense. This was a sign of an eternal nature Only one person had a right to speak this way: God. As I said before, the Jews knew that if Jesus was merely a man (as they assumed Him to be) this was heresy. That’s why in the following verse they pick up stones to kill Him. Either Jesus was preaching heresy, or He knew what He was saying, and He was saying something which confirmed deity.

Third, you respond to the citation of John 6:32-33 and 35 by just asking, “That’s your proof that Jesus is the God?” That’s one proof, yes - can you name me one prophet who came down from heaven? Can you name one prophet who said he came down from heaven, or compared himself to something which did?

Fourth, you respond to Christ’s statement that He is the resurrection and the life with: “believing in someone means that you trust him not that divine him.” You’re completely ignoring the context of the passage. Let’s review it:

Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.” Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?” [John 11:23-26]

Martha talked about the resurrection. Christ replies, “I am the resurrection and the life.” He denotes the resurrection with Himself. Jews up to that time always denoted the resurrection with God. Quote me one prophet who ever associated himself with the resurrection and the life - not his teachings or what God was speaking through him, but him himself. Not one prophet has - because to do so would have been blasphemy.

Fifth, you jump from the story of the paralytic to Christ’s argument with the Pharisees over His testimony (two unrelated events). Aside from the fact that you’re again quoting from scripture you yourself believe to be corrupt and thereby contradicting that point, what you forget is that in that story of the paralytic Christ responds to the Pharisaical accusation of blasphemy that He is doing it so “that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Matt 9:6). The Greek word used for “authority,” ἐξουσία, is a high form of authority (more specifically, not mere authority but authority that has action behind it), and this is credited to “the Son of Man” - meaning Jesus Christ. Christ is therefore affirming a certain authority to Himself that the Pharisees knew was blasphemy if Christ was merely a man. If Christ was, then He was indeed a blasphemer.

Sixth, you respond to the citation of John 17:5 with a sarcastic, “who asking whom again.” I have absolutely no idea what you mean by that, and I can only assume it’s a complete non-answer because in order to respond to that quotation you would have to leave most of your presuppositions aside.

Seventh, you respond to the discussion of worship given to men in the NT with: “What kind of worship did Jesus accept from them?” I discussed that in my post, citing a time when it was clearly said Jesus was worshiped. I then cited other times when it was done to other people outside of Jesus, and that in each instance the people were accosted. Quote me one time when Jesus, receiving worship from someone, told them to stop and only worship God. You will not. The quotation of Jesus in the Quran at S. 5:116-117 is, I’m sorry to say, completely and utterly made up.

Eighth, you respond to Christ’s quotation of Daniel with: “I will explore this one and answer you later.” Good, I encourage you to review the topic, as it’s an interesting declaration by our Lord. One warning, though: I’ll be holding you to your word. 😉 Don’t pull a planten on us and claim you’ll answer a question but then never do. Not that you’re like planten, of course.
 
I’ll make it even simpler than that, Byz Wolf and Elwill –
Those are old boring arguments. Back in the 300’s people were raising Elwill’s arguments even down to the same chapter and verse quotations. That’s how old this is. And after they used Elwill’s Bible verses they came to a conclusion: divinity of Jesus.

Their descendants argued some more in the 400’s using Elwill’s Bible verses again, and they came to a decision: divinity of Jesus.

Their descendants argued some more in the 500’s using Elwill’s Bible verses yet again, and they came to a decision: divinity of Jesus.

This is old, old, old, old stuff. **It’s insanely boring now because it’s been done so much. **

I think it is absolutely clear that Elwill did not come up with those verses on his/her own. Rather, he or she copied stuff from a webpage. Well, Elwill, how about you use Google to find out how those verses were resolved back in the 300’s and 400’s and 500’s?

You’re not being clever with your cut-and-paste proficiency. You’re just displaying willful blindness, and that’s really not cool.
 
A very important question Elwill: what about the free will in islam? We, christians, have free well. GOD doesn’;t force us to believe, to follow HIM.
They have free will too. You only have to read a few pages of the Koran to find the idea of free will stated.
What creator can hate so much? It is a lot of hate sens in Coran, hate towerds christians and jews. Why?
(cough) Noah Joshua Judges Samuel Kings Amos Hosea Zephaniah Habakkuk Jeremiah (cough)
We all have to be careful not to be pots who call the kettle black. You couldn’t find free will in the Koran. Are you really certain that you read hatred in the Koran?
 
They have free will too. You only have to read a few pages of the Koran to find the idea of free will stated.

(cough) Noah Joshua Judges Samuel Kings Amos Hosea Zephaniah Habakkuk Jeremiah (cough)
We all have to be careful not to be pots who call the kettle black. You couldn’t find free will in the Koran. Are you really certain that you read hatred in the Koran?
How is this free will manifested in Coran? All former muslems declare there is no free will. They must believe, cannot question islam or Mohammed and if they leave islam the penality is death. Where exactly is the free will?

What about honour killings?
 
Sam, look how full of "love"Coran is:

Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors. (3:110)

*Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures. (98:6)

Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve, then they would not believe. (8:55)*

He does not love the unbelievers (30:45)

Say: “Obey Allah and His Messenger”: But if they turn back, Allah loveth not those who reject Faith. (3:32)

Surely Allah does not love any one who is unfaithful, ungrateful. (22:38)

“Allah is the enemy of the unbelievers” (2:98) and, as we shall see, he hates them so much that he even leads them into sinning and actively prevents them from believing in him, thus ensuring their fate.

And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers (3:85)

hose who disbelieve, surely neither their wealth nor their children shall avail them in the least against Allah, and these it is who are the fuel of the fire (3:10
)

Surely those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers and (those who) desire to make a distinction between Allah and His messengers and say: ‘We believe in some and disbelieve in others’, and desire to take a course between (this and) that. These it is that are truly unbelievers, and We have prepared for the unbelievers a disgraceful chastisement. And those who believe in Allah and His messengers and do not make a distinction between any of them-- Allah will grant them their rewards (4:150-152)

But as for those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them; boiling fluid will be poured down on their heads, Whereby that which is in their bellies, and their skins too, will be melted; And for them are hooked rods of iron Whenever, in their anguish, they would go forth from thence they are driven back therein and (it is said unto them): Taste the doom of burning. (22:19-22)


*O ye who believe! Take not for friends unbelievers rather than believers: Do ye wish to offer Allah an open proof against yourselves? (4:144) *

O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk. (5:51) ( what about loving each other, Jeus’s teaching"?)

O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty. (9:123)
 
Flower, that sure looks like a Google-search cut-and-paste. Did you also Google Isaiah 45:7? In the KJV it reads, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” Well, if God is the author of evil, why are you complaining about evil? It comes from God, right? We just read in Isaiah that all evil comes from God, didn’t we? :eek:

How about Psalm 137:9 about smashing infants on rocks to kill them? You were looking for a verse of love. Is that a verse of love? :eek:

Is Obadiah a book of love? :eek:

I Googled some websites about “love.” Here are four. Do you agree with them?

evilbible.com/ :eek:

snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp :eek:

markhumphrys.com/bible.html :eek:

angelfire.com/band/cure/thetruth.html :eek:

Obviously other people can do to Christianity and the Bible what your Google-search does for Islam and the Koran. In the end everybody loses from it. I used to get anti-Bible Google lists all the time from atheists. I hate them. :crying:
 
We all know that there are stories in the old Testament about death, evil etc. I think the main issue for me comes in regards to how these have been used & how they are currently being used, to justify killing others. As far as I am aware, there is not & never has been, a world wide, multicultural, widely accepted as “orthodox” group of people using the old testament, at the direction of learned spiritual leaders, to wage war on the world to make the entire world come under the control of judiasm or christianity. It is simply not a tenant of those religions to wage jihad on others.
I also fail to see the free will aspect of islam. you have the free will to accept or not accept the call but once you do, thats it. I guess it depends on your definition of free will like the definition of peace. My research has shown me that the peace & love often spoken about are for other muslims, not humanity in general.
 
This poster is shockingly unaware of the atrocities in muslim society. . . recall any recent stoning, nose cutting, wife beating, etc. ? Muslim societies are better at hiding these atrocities, not being open to free media like the west.
nose cutting ? explain ! Islam says to cut noses of others ?
 
Please revise that from Christian families TO secular families…
*You are absolutely correct. Muslims like to judge us all the same and do not realise that there is a difference!!

I know someone who is a psychologist and has lots of Muslim clients who come for counseling and their problems are as bad as anyone else. They prefer not to go to a Muslim psychologist because they know it would be discussed in the community.

Blessings
Cinette:)*
 
The increasing integration of the world and the incredibly fast diffusion of information make it impossible for atrocities in any quarter to be hidden. It is a development that pleases me much.
*I wrote to the New York Times and complained about an article on their front page which insinuated that the Pope’s visit to the UK was not a success and focused on the protesters who outnumbered the latter by a huge margin. I watched hours of footage daily (4 days) on Sky News (with excellent commentary by Catholics who know) and one could hear the Pope’s words and see the crowds going wild. They devoted about 10 minutes to the protesters some who didn’t know what they were protesting about - others about abortion, birth control (they don’t have to abide by these - they are not Catholics). How will the NYT retain their credibility in the electronic age where news flies fast and images speak volumes.

In regard to the abuse I think that it is a symptom of liberalism and our secular society. Those who are guilty are betraying God and their vows - they will be severely punished for their crimes. *
 
Flower, that sure looks like a Google-search cut-and-paste. Did you also Google Isaiah 45:7? In the KJV it reads, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” Well, if God is the author of evil, why are you complaining about evil? It comes from God, right? We just read in Isaiah that all evil comes from God, didn’t we? :eek:

How about Psalm 137:9 about smashing infants on rocks to kill them? You were looking for a verse of love. Is that a verse of love? :eek:

Is Obadiah a book of love? :eek:

I Googled some websites about “love.” Here are four. Do you agree with them?

evilbible.com/ :eek:

snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp :eek:

markhumphrys.com/bible.html :eek:

angelfire.com/band/cure/thetruth.html :eek:

Obviously other people can do to Christianity and the Bible what your Google-search does for Islam and the Koran. In the end everybody loses from it. I used to get anti-Bible Google lists all the time from atheists. I hate them. :crying:
Of course i copy and paste, should i memorize the Coran? It is absolutly normal to copy and paste specially when time is limited, so don’;t make it sound as if it is something bad, as it is not.
Important is the info, and i wonder what you try to prove: are you defending Islam? Aren’t you christian?

As for others googleing to prove that Bible is evil they can do, the history of Christianity is proving since 2000 years that it is the only real religion. A religion can be recognised by it’s fruits, and the catholic saints are doing this job more than great.

For me things are clear.
 
We all know that there are stories in the old Testament about death, evil etc. I think the main issue for me comes in regards to how these have been used & how they are currently being used, to justify killing others. As far as I am aware, there is not & never has been, a world wide, multicultural, widely accepted as “orthodox” group of people using the old testament, at the direction of learned spiritual leaders, to wage war on the world to make the entire world come under the control of judiasm or christianity. It is simply not a tenant of those religions to wage jihad on others.
I also fail to see the free will aspect of islam. you have the free will to accept or not accept the call but once you do, thats it. I guess it depends on your definition of free will like the definition of peace. My research has shown me that the peace & love often spoken about are for other muslims, not humanity in general.
I once made the point that in regards to violent passages, you see different focuses on Christianity and Islam. With Christianity, if you read many early Church Fathers, you see that they interpreted most violent passages in the psalms and prophets as a spiritual struggle, whereas it wasn’t until later with fundamentalist pastors that you suddenly had the Bible being a pro-war book. With Islam, if you read early Muslim commentators you’ll see they interpret passages like S. 9:29 as…well…violent, and it isn’t until later on, in our post-modern age, that you have some Muslims claiming they aren’t.
 
I was shocked for that picture, anyway I think who does that is a criminal. Not all muslims are cutting noses!.!
 
In regard to the abuse I think that it is a symptom of liberalism and our secular society. Those who are guilty are betraying God and their vows - they will be severely punished for their crimes.

If you are talking about the abuses within the Church, I think you’re right.
When you write of the abuses in predominantly Muslim countries and the increased crime by Muslim-immigrant communities in Europe, the case is not the same.
When, in Iran, a woman is threatened with being buried up to her shoulders and being stoned to death, that’s not the Liberal Conspiracy to Overthrow Civilization at work.

**That is the result of an ultra-conservative back swing in the interpretation of Islam, which was made mostly by people, read Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Sayyid Quttb, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who had become radicalized themselves by way of state imprisonment and torture in their native countries. **
State torture with the stated aim of “protecting civilization.”

I was referring to the violence inherent in the culture of the Middle East and Hindu Kush. This can no longer be hidden, and it will be associated with those peoples, their religion, their communities, immigrant and non-immigrant alike. These things were repressed by Western imperialists, came back with force in the mid-20th century, and now cannot be hidden in the
21st.
The positions that multiculturalists take–
  1. That the Koran is as holy as the Bible,
  2. that Islam and Christianity, as religions, are basically the same,
  3. that peoples from these regions will accept and assimilate into Western culture,
    are all part of the Liberal Conspiracy to Overthrow Civilization for sure.
    As a Christian, you must reject these ideas.
To the topic:
More evidence that comparing the Koran and the Bible is a futile exercise.
 
I once made the point that in regards to violent passages, you see different focuses on Christianity and Islam. With Christianity, if you read many early Church Fathers, you see that they interpreted most violent passages in the psalms and prophets as a spiritual struggle, whereas it wasn’t until later with fundamentalist pastors that you suddenly had the Bible being a pro-war book. With Islam, if you read early Muslim commentators you’ll see they interpret passages like S. 9:29 as…well…violent, and it isn’t until later on, in our post-modern age, that you have some Muslims claiming they aren’t.
Byz Wolf – that could be true, but then progressing in time is the history of Christian Europe admirable? Shameful? Somewhere in the middle? Mixed? What’s your take on it?

I’ve read some mean stuff by Reformed Christians (you label yourself Reformed) in Europe. Have you also come across any bad Reformed history for Europe? In the USA, wasn’t it Reformed Christians who burned “witches” to death? Did they have a good reason that you know of? Or am I remembering my school books wrong? What’s your take on how Christian America treated Blacks and Indians in the 1800’s. They were using the Bible to justify their position, or so I was taught. How about Christian Spain and and Christian Portugal’s history in South America – good? bad? mixed?

I grew up in Arizona. I remember in 10th grade in “Arizona History” class we were taught that the Roman Catholic missionaries from Spain christianized Mexico and the American Southwest by killing everyone who refused to convert. Seriously. Was my teacher wrong? Is my memory of it wrong?

Alright, these can be received as rhetorical questions. 😉 My point, to answer Flower’s question now, is that (1) it’s totally uncool to ignore one’s own ugly history, and (2) it’s totally uncool to selectively quote the Koran in the same way that atheists selectively quote the Bible.

We have to be charitable in our criticisms. Joshua is a pretty mean book. “Kill them all. Leave no survivers.” Come on. So is that Psalm about smashing babies heads on rocks. It is. Imagine the tables were turned, Flower, and Moslems were reciting the awful histories of Christians, and reciting to us the entire “evilbible.com” webpage. We would be hurt. And we would think ill of them. And we would shut our ears to them.

We have to be better than that if we want Moslems to listen to us. We have to be honest about our own shortcomings, and have good explanations for our sins (which might simply be “we were wrong”), and we have to understand the other guy’s history before we pull out the equivalent of “evilbible.comThat’s my point.
 
The crimes of one community do not excuse the crimes of another.
If the direction, in 1519, was “convert or kill”, how is it that by 1680, there were enough non-Christian Indians, or Indians who had rejected Roman and Spanish Christianity, to stage and carry out a revolt so powerful that it threw the Spaniards out of the American Southwestern region for a few decades at least?
That’s a bill of goods I’m not buying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top