Do only Muslims reject the historical crucifixion?

[Reuben_J]

I never said the Ebionites supported our view regarding crucifixion.
While I am Sunni, I am also an independent thinker, because I am a seeker of truth. Bahais don’t consider themselves Muslims. Ahmadiyya do consider themselves Muslims. From my perspective, they are Muslims, although they have erred greatly, because Ghulum Ahmad isn’t the Messiah (Jesus) or al Mahdi, which is their claim.

Similarly the Ebionites did not consider themselves Christians. From our view they were not Christians. They practiced Judaism albeit differently (if they believed Jesus to be a prophet).

And I do not think most of the teachings of the Quran conform to the Ebionites.

Ha ha. Ha ha. At least they agreed that Jesus was not crucified which Mohammad confirmed in his Quran 4:157 six hundred years later. Though he might say it differently – that Allah deceived the Jews by making the person crucified to look like Jesus. The only problem was that this person seemed to talk like Jesus. So Allah’s deceit is really foolproof. I thought you said it was a great deceit. Sorry to quote you, if you do not mind.

I lift your Name
Your Holy Name
Yahweh God Elohim
The Great I Am
The Risen Lamb
My Comforter and King

 

[Porknpie]

it is not futile because believe that Prophets of the Old Testament are our prophets as well, and we also believe that Jesus is our prophet. We just believe that the Jews and Christians corrupted their message, and Prophet Muhammad corrected it. Because the Jews and Christians had problems with preserving their books in their purest forms, God ensured that the Quran would be preserved in its purest form, and it has. So it is not futile.

TheSufi,

I just read through this entire thread…:choocho:

Couple of questions,

Tell me more on how God preserved the Quran ? Do you have the original writing somewhere… In a museum I assume?

Also, how do you know that Muhammed was a prophet from God?

Thank you,

Pork

 

[TheSufi]

Tradition and assume have different meanings.

I’ll end this discussion here, this debate had gone sour a while back. Sometimes you can get lost in the debate and forgot why I caame here in the first place. I simply came here to defend my religion, not to pick apart yours. I deeply apologize.

I have deep respect for Orthodox/Catholic tradition. At anyway rate.

I’ll let you with this quote, from one of my favorite Christian books, this book was originally written by a Catholic Monk, as Spiritual Combat by Lorenzo Scupoli, edited by an Greek Orthodox Monk, Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain and revised by a Russian Orthodox Monk Theophan the Recluse and is currently entitled, Unseen Warfare.

"What is Christian Perfection?

We all naturally wish, and are commanded to be perfect. The Lord commands, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” (Matt 5:48)

… If you my reader beloved in Christ, wish to attain to such heights, you must first learn in what Christian perfection consists. For if you have not learnt this, you may turn off the right path and go in a totally different direction, while thinking that you make progress towards perfections. I will tell you plainly: the greatest and most perfect thing a man may desire to attain is to come near to God and dwell in union with Him. There are many who say that that the perfection of Christian life consists in fasts, vigils, genulflexions, sleeping on bare earth and other similiar austerities of the body. Others say that it consists in saying many prayers at home and in attending long services in Church. And there are others who think that our perfection consists entirely in mental prayer, solitude, seclusion and silence. But the majority limit perfection to a strict observance of all the rules and practices laid down by the statutes, falling into no excess or deficiency, but preserving a golden moderation Yet all these virtues do not by themselves constitute the Christian perfection we are seeking, but are only a means and methods for acquiring it… to the end of the chapter… If I had time I would type out the whole chapter for you guys, it is so deep."

Every time I read it, I am like this monk gets it. He understands the point of it all. Thought I leave on a good note, by leaving a gem.

Peace.

 

[Reuben_J]

I simply came here to defend my religion, not to pick apart yours.

Let refer to the second part first. You actually did not pick our religion apart. There is nothing to it. All of your accusations have been answered.

As for the first part, your defense of your religion is not clearly and logically supported. You are making statements without giving reason and backing them up other than saying ‘perhaps’ it is so.

I summarize your points:

• That Jesus was not crucified because Mohammad/Quran said so.
• There were Christian sects, eg, the Ebionites which believe this and therefore the belief that Jesus was crucified was by no mean a certainty.
• You argue against Christians’ belief that Jesus is God by referring to the fact that he never said he is God (in the Bible). And therefore by implication (since you did not say) there is no need for the crucifixion.

All of these have been answered and explained which you did not challenge.

As for Jesus being substituted in the crucifixion, there is no coherent explanation from you. The explanation given as to what actually happened was “Muslims generally believe that … .” Your position on the crucifixion is that Jesus was being replaced by a criminal whom Allah made to look like him.

Having been dialogue with other Muslims before, I know that this is not the only positions that Muslims have especially as regards to Quran 4:157. In other word, **there is no specific explanation from Islam why Jesus was not crucified.
**

 

[Brendan_64]

I will tell you plainly: the greatest and most perfect thing a man may desire to attain is to come near to God and dwell in union with Him. .

God Bless

 

[MartinJordan]

I’ll end this discussion here, this debate had gone sour a while back. Sometimes you can get lost in the debate and forgot why I caame here in the first place. I simply came here to defend my religion, not to pick apart yours. I deeply apologize.

I have deep respect for Orthodox/Catholic tradition. At anyway rate.

I’ll let you with this quote, from one of my favorite Christian books, this book was originally written by a Catholic Monk, as Spiritual Combat by Lorenzo Scupoli, edited by an Greek Orthodox Monk, Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain and revised by a Russian Orthodox Monk Theophan the Recluse and is currently entitled, Unseen Warfare.

"What is Christian Perfection?

We all naturally wish, and are commanded to be perfect. The Lord commands, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” (Matt 5:48)

… If you my reader beloved in Christ, wish to attain to such heights, you must first learn in what Christian perfection consists. For if you have not learnt this, you may turn off the right path and go in a totally different direction, while thinking that you make progress towards perfections. I will tell you plainly: the greatest and most perfect thing a man may desire to attain is to come near to God and dwell in union with Him. There are many who say that that the perfection of Christian life consists in fasts, vigils, genulflexions, sleeping on bare earth and other similiar austerities of the body. Others say that it consists in saying many prayers at home and in attending long services in Church. And there are others who think that our perfection consists entirely in mental prayer, solitude, seclusion and silence. But the majority limit perfection to a strict observance of all the rules and practices laid down by the statutes, falling into no excess or deficiency, but preserving a golden moderation Yet all these virtues do not by themselves constitute the Christian perfection we are seeking, but are only a means and methods for acquiring it… to the end of the chapter… If I had time I would type out the whole chapter for you guys, it is so deep."

Every time I read it, I am like this monk gets it. He understands the point of it all. Thought I leave on a good note, by leaving a gem.

Peace.

Beautiful.

Remember also that Theophan the Recluse also said this along with the above…"He who believes in God, but does not confess Him as the Father of the Son, does not believe in a god that is the true God, but in some personal invention

Please don’t take it personal TheSufi if i seem to be trying to ruffle your feathers. But I felt it must be mentioned what Theophan the Recluse also included in his mysticism. I pray for you.

MJ

 

[LtTony]

Be careful Lieutenant. You could be dragged into discussing Christianity in an Islamic thread.

Too late. LOL

I’ll end this discussion here, this debate had gone sour a while back. Sometimes you can get lost in the debate and forgot why I caame here in the first place. I simply came here to defend my religion, not to pick apart yours. I deeply apologize.

I have deep respect for Orthodox/Catholic tradition. At anyway rate.

I’ll let you with this quote, from one of my favorite Christian books, this book was originally written by a Catholic Monk, as Spiritual Combat by Lorenzo Scupoli, edited by an Greek Orthodox Monk, Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain and revised by a Russian Orthodox Monk Theophan the Recluse and is currently entitled, Unseen Warfare.

"What is Christian Perfection?

We all naturally wish, and are commanded to be perfect. The Lord commands, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” (Matt 5:48)

… If you my reader beloved in Christ, wish to attain to such heights, you must first learn in what Christian perfection consists. For if you have not learnt this, you may turn off the right path and go in a totally different direction, while thinking that you make progress towards perfections. I will tell you plainly: the greatest and most perfect thing a man may desire to attain is to come near to God and dwell in union with Him. There are many who say that that the perfection of Christian life consists in fasts, vigils, genulflexions, sleeping on bare earth and other similiar austerities of the body. Others say that it consists in saying many prayers at home and in attending long services in Church. And there are others who think that our perfection consists entirely in mental prayer, solitude, seclusion and silence. But the majority limit perfection to a strict observance of all the rules and practices laid down by the statutes, falling into no excess or deficiency, but preserving a golden moderation Yet all these virtues do not by themselves constitute the Christian perfection we are seeking, but are only a means and methods for acquiring it… to the end of the chapter… If I had time I would type out the whole chapter for you guys, it is so deep."

Every time I read it, I am like this monk gets it. He understands the point of it all. Thought I leave on a good note, by leaving a gem.

Peace.

That you for the expression of that beautiful thought. Good way to wrap up a lengthy discussion. Stick around; hope to exchange ideas with you on other subjects.

 

[TheSufi]

Let refer to the second part first. You actually did not pick our religion apart. There is nothing to it. All of your accusations have been answered.

As for the first part, your defense of your religion is not clearly and logically supported. You are making statements without giving reason and backing them up other than saying ‘perhaps’ it is so.

I summarize your points:

• That Jesus was not crucified because Mohammad/Quran said so.
• There were Christian sects, eg, the Ebionites which believe this and therefore the belief that Jesus was crucified was by no mean a certainty.
• You argue against Christians’ belief that Jesus is God by referring to the fact that he never said he is God (in the Bible). And therefore by implication (since you did not say) there is no need for the crucifixion.

All of these have been answered and explained which you did not challenge.

As for Jesus being substituted in the crucifixion, there is no coherent explanation from you. The explanation given as to what actually happened was “Muslims generally believe that … .” Your position on the crucifixion is that Jesus was being replaced by a criminal whom Allah made to look like him.

Having been dialogue with other Muslims before, I know that this is not the only positions that Muslims have especially as regards to Quran 4:157. In other word, **there is no specific explanation from Islam why Jesus was not crucified.
**

Your summaries are not accurate.

 

[TheSufi]

Too late. LOL

That you for the expression of that beautiful thought. Good way to wrap up a lengthy discussion. Stick around; hope to exchange ideas with you on other subjects.

Perhaps.

 

[TheSufi]

Beautiful.

Remember also that Theophan the Recluse also said this along with the above…"He who believes in God, but does not confess Him as the Father of the Son, does not believe in a god that is the true God, but in some personal invention

Please don’t take it personal TheSufi if i seem to be trying to ruffle your feathers. But I felt it must be mentioned what Theophan the Recluse also included in his mysticism. I pray for you.

MJ

Of course, he believed that, he was an Orthodox Christian.

 

[MartinJordan]

Of course, he believed that, he was an Orthodox Christian.

Good. So that means you are picking,what you like and throwing out what you don’t. That is not proper Theology.

MJ

 

[TheSufi]

Good. So that means you are picking,what you like and throwing out what you don’t. That is not proper Theology.

MJ

Not much of what you say to me, makes sense to me. And probably vice a verse a.
peace.

 

[MartinJordan]

Not much of what you say to me, makes sense to me. And probably vice a verse a.
peace.

All I’m saying is one must complete the full quoting and context. Why is that so difficult?

MJ

 

[MartinJordan]

Not much of what you say to me, makes sense to me.
peace.

So when Theophan the Recluse said:

The sin of every man is a great offense to God Who has written His law in our hearts. The sin of a Christian offends God incomparably more, since the Christian has received a clearer and fuller knowledge of commandments, and has received grace to strengthen him in the fulfillment of those commandments. And a Christian, who has received in himself Christ the Lord - which is the highest degree of Christian perfection - in sinning offends God immeasurably.

The Apostle thus concludes that he** tramples on the Blood of Christ, even crucifies Christ Himself, Whom he has received in himself, and offended the Holy Spirit.**

Source: stsymeon.com/theoph1.html

Naturally will make no sense to you. Am I right?

MJ

 

[TheSufi]

So when Theophan the Recluse said:

The sin of every man is a great offense to God Who has written His law in our hearts. The sin of a Christian offends God incomparably more, since the Christian has received a clearer and fuller knowledge of commandments, and has received grace to strengthen him in the fulfillment of those commandments. And a Christian, who has received in himself Christ the Lord - which is the highest degree of Christian perfection - in sinning offends God immeasurably.

The Apostle thus concludes that he** tramples on the Blood of Christ, even crucifies Christ Himself, Whom he has received in himself, and offended the Holy Spirit.**

Source: stsymeon.com/theoph1.html

Naturally will make no sense to you. Am I right?

MJ

Theophan was right when he said, “the greatest and most perfect thing a man may desire to attain is to come near to God and dwell in union with Him.”

St.Theophan was wrong when it came to Jesus being crucified and Jesus being God. You are wrong for believing it in.

It is not different then you. Sometimes you say things that are right, and sometimes you say things that are wrong.

So I simply don’t always agree with you.

No one is perfect.

 

[Porknpie]

Of course, he believed that, he was an Orthodox Christian.

The Sufi,

I am still interested in your response to post 233…Learning I am.

Thank you, Pork

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSufi
it is not futile because believe that Prophets of the Old Testament are our prophets as well, and we also believe that Jesus is our prophet. We just believe that the Jews and Christians corrupted their message, and Prophet Muhammad corrected it. Because the Jews and Christians had problems with preserving their books in their purest forms, God ensured that the Quran would be preserved in its purest form, and it has. So it is not futile.
TheSufi,

I just read through this entire thread…

Couple of questions,

Tell me more on how God preserved the Quran ? Do you have the original writing somewhere… In a museum I assume?

Also, how do you know that Muhammed was a prophet from God?

Thank you,

Pork

 

[Reuben_J]

The Sufi,

I am still interested in your response to post 233…Learning I am.

Thank you, Pork

Your nick may be very offensive to Muslims. lol. Just kidding.

 

[Porknpie]

Your nick may be very offensive to Muslims. lol. Just kidding.

Long story…porknbeans wasn’t available…either way it was pork though.

 

[TheSufi]

I just read through this entire thread…

Couple of questions,

Tell me more on how God preserved the Quran ? Do you have the original writing somewhere… In a museum I assume?

The Quran has been preserved orally. The Quran was revealed in ten different modes of recitations, and all have been preserved orally. It’s letters, wording, sound, proper pronunciation, meanings etc, have been preserved. The most commonly memorized recitation is called Hafs, as it is the easiest to learn. The second most common recitation is Warsh, memorized mainly by those in Northern Africa. You are not considered a scholar unless you have memorized the Quran at least in one mode. And in some place, you are not considered a scholar unless you have memorized two modes of recitation. And you are not considered a serious student of knowledge unless you have memorized the Quran with proper recitation. And for each of these recitation, we know who learned it from who all the way back to Prophet Muhammad. We know the chains of transmission for each mode.

The Quran has been preserved through mass transmission, meaning multiply people in every generation from the time of Prophet Muhammad, have memorized it and passed it on to the succeeding generations. And no matter where you go around the world, any part of the Quran in the recitation of Hafs or whatever recitation, will sound exactly the same whether that person is in Egypt, America, Africa or Asia.

The Quran was revealed in a way that makes it easy for memorization. Even if you don’t know the meaning of the words. We consider it the direct word of God. It is one of its miracles. Literally millions of people know the Quran by heart even little children ages 5 and up.

youtube.com/watch?v=r5DqElTUnH4 Koran by Heart, is a nice documentary on memorizing the Quran.

We have chains of transmission in every discipline (belief, law, spiritual, hadith, Quran) back to the Prophet.

If you go to places like Maurtania, scholars there have memorized dictionaries, 4 volumes dictionaries and it is no exaggeration. Traditional Islam is a memory and oral based tradition. The one who has memorized the Quran is called a Hafiz. And we also have hafiz of hadith, you are not considered a hafiz of hadith unless you have memorized 100,000 hadith, along with it chains of transmission, meaning, it was related to me, by Shaykh so and so, who learned it from so and so, all the way back to the Prophet.

In terms of written copies. I am not sure. But there is pretty old copy in Turkey I believe. I am not sure how old.

Also, how do you know that Muhammed was a prophet from God?

Thank you,

Pork

Through spiritual insight. Islam has to be experienced.

 

[dronald]

The Quran has been preserved orally. The Quran was revealed in ten different modes of recitations, and all have been preserved orally. It’s letters, wording, sound, proper pronunciation, meanings etc, have been preserved. The most commonly memorized recitation is called Hafs, as it is the easiest to learn. The second most common recitation is Warsh, memorized mainly by those in Northern Africa. You are not considered a scholar unless you have memorized the Quran at least in one mode. And in some place, you are not considered a scholar unless you have memorized two modes of recitation. And you are not considered a serious student of knowledge unless you have memorized the Quran with proper recitation. And for each of these recitation, we know who learned it from who all the way back to Prophet Muhammad. We know the chains of transmission for each mode.

The Quran has been preserved through mass transmission, meaning multiply people in every generation from the time of Prophet Muhammad, have memorized it and passed it on to the succeeding generations. And no matter where you go around the world, any part of the Quran in the recitation of Hafs or whatever recitation, will sound exactly the same whether that person is in Egypt, America, Africa or Asia.

The Quran was revealed in a way that makes it easy for memorization. Even if you don’t know the meaning of the words. We consider it the direct word of God. It is one of its miracles. Literally millions of people know the Quran by heart even little children ages 5 and up.

youtube.com/watch?v=r5DqElTUnH4 Koran by Heart, is a nice documentary on memorizing the Quran.

We have chains of transmission in every discipline (belief, law, spiritual, hadith, Quran) back to the Prophet.

If you go to places like Maurtania, scholars there have memorized dictionaries, 4 volumes dictionaries and it is no exaggeration. Traditional Islam is a memory and oral based tradition. The one who has memorized the Quran is called a Hafiz. And we also have hafiz of hadith, you are not considered a hafiz of hadith unless you have memorized 100,000 hadith, along with it chains of transmission, meaning, it was related to me, by Shaykh so and so, who learned it from so and so, all the way back to the Prophet.

In terms of written copies. I am not sure. But there is pretty old copy in Turkey I believe. I am not sure how old.

Although, some of the Qur’an has been lost. Correct?

Ibn Umar al-khattab states in suyuti’itqan part 3 page 72: “Let no one of you say that he has acquired the entire Qur’an for how does he know that is all? Much of the Qur’an has been lost, thus let him say, ‘I have acquired of it what is availible.’”

Sahih al-muslim 2286: "We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (surah) bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: ‘if there are two valleys full of riches, for the son of adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of adam but dust,’ and we used to recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of musabbihat, and I have forgotten it.

Sunan ibn majah 1944: "it was narrated that Aishah said, "the verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was under my pillow. When the messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came and ate it."

Ibn abi daud, kitab al-masahif: "Umar was once looking for the text of a specific verse of the qur’an he vaguely remembered. To his deep sorrow, he discovered that the only person who had any record of that verse had been killed in the battle of yamama and that the verse was consequently lost."