Do only Muslims reject the historical crucifixion?

[TheSufi]

I thought Islam says Jesus is not the Son of God.

He is not the literal Son of God. But there is nothing in Islam that would prohibit a Muslims from accepting verses in the bible which indicate the believers are the Children of God, like Psalms 82:6.

Yet a person is banking their entire soul on incomplete history of an unknown person of an unknown background.

Not really, because I didn’t accept Islam based on the Crucifixion nor do I reject Christianity because of the crucifixion. I don’t really focus on this aspect.

1. The idea of God becoming man, being man is a pagan belief. A belief probably instituted by the disciples of Jesus of pagan origins, or early pagan converts to Christianity. Maybe the Hindus would find this belief acceptable. Pure Abrahamic religions such as the early Christian Ebionites, the Jews, and Muslims, reject this belief. In the Old Testament it clearly says, God is not a man. So why would I believe Jesus is God?
2. Jesus’ Gospel that we read to today, there is no assurance that Jesus uttered everything that is recorded in those books. As there are contradiction between those books.
3. You may believe that the Holy Spirit guides the Church, but I don’t. The Nicene Creed was not uttered by Jesus, nor his disciples.

 

[TheSufi]

Reuben’s question still not answered. People on the internet often throw stuff against the wall to see if it sticks. This may be one of those cases.

To honest I’ve read it some where. And I could simply quote it, but choose not to because I haven’t thoroughly researched it. I only read it in one book. And never bothered to research this issue indepth because it is an unimportant issue to me. And I don’t have the time to. Research it right now. As I have other projects that I’m working in currently.

 

[LtTony]

Then you’re throwing garbage against the wall and hoping it sticks, nothing more.

 

[TheSufi]

Then you’re throwing garbage against the wall and hoping it sticks, nothing more.

For me, it was enough evidence. But for a Catholic, Protestant or an Orthodox, I am not sure.

 

[LtTony]

He is not the literal Son of God. But there is nothing in Islam that would prohibit a Muslims from accepting verses in the bible which indicate the believers are the Children of God, like Psalms 82:6. .

What is “the literal Son of God.” Are you talking about insemination through marital relations or what?

Not really, because I didn’t accept Islam based on the Crucifixion nor do I reject Christianity because of the crucifixion. I don’t really focus on this aspect.

You should, because the death and resurrection are the linchpin of the Christian faith, as I mentioned earlier. As Paul said, if Christ didn’t diw and didn’t rise from the grave, then we are believing in a lie.

1. Jesus’ Gospel that we read to today, there is no assurance that Jesus uttered everything that is recorded in those books. As there are contradiction between those books.

Like what?

1. You may believe that the Holy Spirit guides the Church, but I don’t.

OK. Goes without saying actually.

The Nicene Creed was not uttered by Jesus, nor his disciples

The Lord’s prayer was and you don’t say that. And the Creed coiuld have very easily been uttered by his earliest disciples. So what anyway? As we established earlier, everything we do and believe IS NOT recorded in the Bible. Much of it elsewhere. We’re not Muslims following a book like the Koran.

Do you homework:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles’_Creed

 

[dronald]

To honest I’ve read it some where. And I could simply quote it, but choose not to because I haven’t thoroughly researched it. I only read it in one book. And never bothered to research this issue indepth because it is an unimportant issue to me. And I don’t have the time to. Research it right now. As I have other projects that I’m working in currently.

Unfortunately this is the topic at hand, not whether Christians have adopted pagan beliefs. I commend you for defending your faith from multiple Christians, but your answers to the topic we’re discussing have been insufficient. Mostly because there is no answer besides taking the Qur’ans statements as truth at face value and not questioning its reasoning.

This thread, although it can be for you as well (I challenge all Christians and Muslims to always question their Faith) is for Muslims and Christians alike to see that there is no good reason for Allah to fool his Disciples. There is no sufficient answer to why Allah did this and there is no evidence from the first Century that agrees with Islamic claims.

 

[TheSufi]

Unfortunately this is the topic at hand, not whether Christians have adopted pagan beliefs. I commend you for defending your faith from multiple Christians, but your answers to the topic we’re discussing have been insufficient. .

Likewise, all of yours and everybody else’s replies have been equally insufficient. I guess the only thing that we have in common is giving insufficient replies.

 

[LtTony]

Insufficient? I don’t know if you’re talking about Christianity in general or just posters here. But please let us know where we have been insifficient, and we will try and do better, if possible.

You could also answer these questions that were asked earlier:

What is “the literal Son of God.” Are you talking about insemination through marital relations or what?

** “2. Jesus’ Gospel that we read to today, there is no assurance that Jesus uttered everything that is recorded in those books. As there are contradiction between those books.” **

Like what?

Misunderstood. Does it say that in the Koran?

 

[TheSufi]

Insufficient? I don’t know if you’re talking about Christianity in general or just posters here. But please let us know where we have been insifficient, and we will try and do better, if possible.
:

Replies are insufficient because we have different standards of what is acceptable.

For example, you believe I should considers the Crucifixion important because Paul considers it important (You quoted him). But Paul is not authoritative to me, he doesn’t fit in my criteria or standard of acceptable or sufficient replies.

Debates between religious people will always be endless, because of our personal standards and the standards of our religions, and these two standards can sometimes be different depending on the person.

Why do we differ?

I consider the Quran to be authoritative, you don’t.
You consider the writings of Paul to be authoritative, I don’t.

How can we ever come to an agreement, when we have different standards?

If you think about it, we are lawyers. Trying to bend other people’s standards to fit our worldview, as lawyers, try to bend laws to help their clients get off.

 

[dronald]

Replies are insufficient because we have different standards of what is acceptable.

For example, you believe I should considers the Crucifixion important because Paul considers it important (You quoted him). But Paul is not authoritative to me, he doesn’t fit in my criteria or standard of acceptable or sufficient replies.

Debates between religious people will always be endless, because of our personal standards and the standards of our religions, and these two standards can sometimes be different depending on the person.

Why do we differ?

I consider the Quran to be authoritative, you don’t.
You consider the writings of Paul to be authoritative, I don’t.

How can we ever come to an agreement, when we have different standards?

If you think about it, we are lawyers. Trying to bend other people’s standards to fit our worldview, as lawyers, try to bend laws to help their clients get off.

Except what happened 2000 years ago has been historically agreed upon that Jesus really was crucified. All first century writings point to this, and all Muslims can say is God tricked others into believing it. Even though the Qur’an says Jesus’s Disciples (who called themselves Muslims) became dominant. Again, a historical inaccuracy.

 

[TheSufi]

Except what happened 2000 years ago has been historically agreed upon that Jesus really was crucified. All first century writings point to this, and all Muslims can say is God tricked others into believing it. Even though the Qur’an says Jesus’s Disciples (who called themselves Muslims) became dominant. Again, a historical inaccuracy.

That means God did a really good job of making it appear that Jesus was crucified.

 

[LtTony]

Which means God did a really good job of misleading millions and millions of people.

That’s the difference, You believe in a God like that. We don’t.

“For example, you believe I should considers the Crucifixion important because Paul considers it important (You quoted him). But Paul is not authoritative to me, he doesn’t fit in my criteria or standard of acceptable or sufficient replies.”

I didn’t say that was the reason! All Christians believe the crucifixion and resurrection are extremely important. Our salvation, we believe, depends on it. I only quoted Paul to punctuate the point.

You sure have a way of reading what you want into things. That would be another difference we have.

 

[MartinJordan]

That means God did a really good job of making it appear that Jesus was crucified.

This is horrible Theology.

MJ

 

[TheSufi]

Which means God did a really good job of misleading millions and millions of people.

That’s the difference, You believe in a God like that. We don’t.

Well you believe in a God, that tells that world, that He is not man, and then bases our salvation on Him becoming a man and dying in order to save us. According to the Catholic narrative.

But I am condemned to hell, for rejecting God as a man, when God says in the Old Testament God is not a man. But I am condemned to hell, because God contradicts Himself. You call that Love. So your God is misleading as well. ** You believe in a God like that.**

The whole Catholic narrative makes no sense.

 

[MartinJordan]

Well you believe in a God, that tells that world, that He is not man, and then bases our salvation on Him becoming a man and dying in order to save us. According to the Catholic narrative.

But I am condemned to hell, for rejecting God as a man, when God says in the Old Testament God is not a man. But I am condemned to hell, because God contradicts Himself. You call that Love. So your God is misleading as well. ** You believe in a God like that.**

The whole Catholic narrative makes no sense.

I think you need to calm down. No one here said you are condemned to hell.

MJ

 

[TheSufi]

I think you need to calm down. No one here said you are condemned to hell.

MJ

You guys have a right to belittle my God but I don’t have belittle your God.
You can throw stones, but I don’t have a right to throw stones at you.

 

[MartinJordan]

You guys have a right to belittle my God but I don’t have belittle your God.
You can throw stones, but I don’t have a right to throw stones at you.

No one is throwing stones at you TheSufi. And you know that.

MJ

 

[LtTony]

Well you believe in a God, that tells that world, that He is not man, and then bases our salvation on Him becoming a man and dying in order to save us. According to the Catholic narrative.

But I am condemned to hell, for rejecting God as a man, when God says in the Old Testament God is not a man. But I am condemned to hell, because God contradicts Himself. You call that Love. So your God is misleading as well. You believe in a God like that.

The whole Catholic narrative makes no sense.

No one has condemned yoiu, as Martin said. Personally, I don’t think you would go to hell for that reason.

Where in the “Catholic narrative” does it say that God cannot present Himself in human form. And you need to read the Catechism 839.
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/epub/index.cfm

 

[TheSufi]

No one has condemned yoiu, as Martin said. Personally, I don’t think you would go to hell for that reason.

Where in the “Catholic narrative” does it say that God cannot present Himself in human form. And you need to read the Catechism 839.
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/epub/index.cfm

Jesus said in John, You search the scripture. The only scripture of that time was the Old Testament, which clearly states, God is not a man nor the son of man (numbers 23:19).

The catholic narrative goes against the scripture in
Believing that God became man, to die for our sins.

The orthodox say God became man to conquer human nature, died to conquer sin, and resurrected to conquer death.

 

[dronald]

Jesus said in John, You search the scripture. The only scripture of that time was the Old Testament,

This is a game I enjoy playing. A Muslim quotes the Gospel so I quote multiple other things Jesus said that Muslims don’t accept from the same speech. You accept John 5 as truth so perhaps you can interpret this for me:

5:18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling **God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
**

5:22 Moreover, the** Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father.** Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.

Contrast 5:22 with Psalm 96:13 Let all creation rejoice before the LORD, for he comes, he comes to** judge the earth. He will judge the world **in righteousness and the peoples in his faithfulness.

Wait… So who’s judging the world? The Father or the Son? Or perhaps the Father and the Son are One, and that’s why the Jews wanted to kill Jesus. Because let’s face it, if Jesus isn’t God then He most certainly was blaspheming by saying all judgement is His.

5:25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.

which clearly states, God is not a man nor the son of man (numbers 23:19).

Let’s first start with the irony of this conversation. The entire conversation you’ve been trying (and failing) to prove that God did in fact deceive many people into believing Jesus really was crucified. Let’s look back:

That means God did a really good job of making it appear that Jesus was crucified.

And let’s look at the first half of your quote:
Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie;

So you’ve quoted a part of the OT and it is used against your theory that God tricked the entire world into believing Jesus really was crucified as shown in your quote. That’s not the part you’re interested in though, you’re interested in the part that says, “God is not a man.”

This passage is showing the qualities that man has and is teaching that God does not share these qualities that men have. God has made a promise and He must follow through with such a promise, that’s what the entire passage is about.

“God is not a Son of Man that He should change His mind” is one translation of the rest of the passage. However the word used here is נָחַם which is “nachem” and means God does not feel sorry about His word. God does not take the quality of a mans son by apologizing for what He has promised and turning His back on it.

I would think that you also believe that God does not share qualities with men or men’s sons in that God could change His mind or feel sorry for His decision. I’m not sure about the lie part though from your point of view, just from our conversation thus far.

The passage concludes: “Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?” Saying that God always acts on what He promises. And what did He promise in the Scriptures about the Son of Man to come?

Daniel 7:13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one** like a son of man**, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

Again, worship, authority, glory, sovereign power, everlasting dominion… All qualities for God, yet even in Daniel, given to the Son of Man.