Jesus Did Not Die

[ashab_al-yameen]

Writer:

I understand what you are saying, and I agree with you on a certain level. We both agree that man is fallen, and any religion or faith on earth will be corrupted to a degree because of man’s “bent” nature within. Having said that, however, what I was looking for was some glipmse into how Muslims perceive themselves. How is your cultural and religious identity viewed from within, and what do you hold to be some of your greatest accomplishments of the more recent history? While judging any religion by the poor behavior of a fraction of its followers is unfair, it seems justified to be concerned regarding a faith which does not seem to enourage cultural or scientific growth or exploration or even simple charity of thought or deed.

Let me inform you of my view concerning why the Muslim world is in such turmoil:

Towards the end of the Ottoman Empire, Muslims and Muslim rulers began to slowly abandon their religion in pursuit of worldly goods. As this began to happen, the Ottoman Empire slowly began to crumble. At the Empire’s last days, a number of people saw the West as the ideal example to follow, and so Kemal Ataturk abolished the Muslim Caliphate and secularized Turkey. The way we (as Muslims) are living in today is a result of the lack of achievments that have taken place since the late 1400’s, which was the end of the Islamic caliphate. (You placed the time at 12th century. Remember, the Ottomans are considered to have been a superpower between the 1200’s and the 1400’s.)

Now, to be straightforward with your question regarding what we hold to be some of our greatest accomplishments of the more recent history, I tell you this:

Since the end of the Ottoman Empire, we, as Muslims accomplished NOTHING.

Without our faith, we, as Muslims, are nothing.

 

[Writer]

ashab al-yameen:

Let me inform you of my view concerning why the Muslim world is in such turmoil:

Towards the end of the Ottoman Empire, Muslims and Muslim rulers began to slowly abandon their religion in pursuit of worldly goods. As this began to happen, the Ottoman Empire slowly began to crumble. At the Empire’s last days, a number of people saw the West as the ideal example to follow, and so Kemal Ataturk abolished the Muslim Caliphate and secularized Turkey. The way we (as Muslims) are living in today is a result of the lack of achievments that have taken place since the late 1400’s, which was the end of the Islamic caliphate. (You placed the time at 12th century. Remember, the Ottomans are considered to have been a superpower between the 1200’s and the 1400’s.)

Now, to be straightforward with your question regarding what we hold to be some of our greatest accomplishments of the more recent history, I tell you this:

Since the end of the Ottoman Empire, we, as Muslims accomplished NOTHING.

Without our faith, we, as Muslims, are nothing.

Thank you for your honest and straightforward response. I appreciate it and will give it greater thought.

 

[ashab_al-yameen]

Writer:

Thank you for your honest and straightforward response. I appreciate it and will give it greater thought.

I recently made a research paper about the Ottomans. It isn’t too detailed, but it might help. If you want, I would be more than willing to e-mail it to you

 

[Writer]

ashab al-yameen:

I recently made a research paper about the Ottomans. It isn’t too detailed, but it might help. If you want, I would be more than willing to e-mail it to you

Sure, that would be interesting. That’s not an era I have studied for a number of years.

Your earlier observations regarding man and God are actually similar to my own. It is true that, without God’s continued grace, we are nothing. It is through Him and in Him that we find our purpose and our meaning. Put another way, His grace saves us. Don’t know whether I am supposed to include my e-mail address in a post, but you can send the essay to karlerickson@earthlink.net. Thanks!

 

[Booklover]

ashab al-yameen:

There are holes, however, in the theory that Jesus Christ was crucified in the place of an insurrectionist.

My theory:
The identities of “Jesus who is called the Messiah” and “Jesus Barabbas” were switched in text, yet not in real life. Jesus Christ was probably the actual Jesus Christ, while “Jesus who is called the Messiah” was a self-claimed king of the Jews, an insurrectionist preparing to topple Pilate’s reign.

Why?

For the following reasons:

Pontius Pilate would me insane to free an insurrectionist and crucify a man who did no harm to his rule.
The morale of Pilate’s soldiers would decrease if they saw Pilate free an insurrectionist who had commited murder.

Pilate had a lot more interest in killing an insurrectionist than to kill some Jewish Prophet.

insurrection: The act or an instance of open revolt against civil authority or a constituted government.

Are you telling me that Pilate would free a man who revolted against him and crucify some man that had problems with his fellow Jews?

Isn’t it amazing how you more than the Catholic Church that’s been around for 2000 years!

Where did you get the nonsensical idea that Jesus was going to topple Pilate’s reign??? Is that more distortion of our scriptures by Islam??

 

[ashab_al-yameen]

Booklover:

Isn’t it amazing how you more than the Catholic Church that’s been around for 2000 years!

Where did you get the nonsensical idea that Jesus was going to topple Pilate’s reign??? Is that more distortion of our scriptures by Islam??

I am sorry, but it seems that you are confusing yourself.

Please read my post more carefully.

 

[Booklover]

Nan S:

In other words, Jesus Christ Himself was a liar when He showed the disciples His crucifixion wounds to prove that he was the one crucified and resurrected.

And the writers of the New Testament were liars when they said that the Jesus whom they had followed for three years was the one crucified and resurrected.

And that all of the other writers who were not included in the New Testament, but who received the word from the eyewitnesses, were fools for believing the eyewitnesses and liars for propagating their testimony.

Please understand when I take offense to your proclaiming that the core of my religion is lies. Especially when the only evidence you have is the testimony of a single man who received visions hundreds of years later, visions that were completely unverified on this issue by any historical record.

Nan, here’s a very good quote from Padre Pio: “Be cheerful! Jesus will take care of everything. LET US PAY NO ATTENTION TO PEOPLE WHO DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. Let us trust in Jesus and our heavenly Mother, and everything will work out well.”

 

[JP2Admirer]

ashab al-yameen:

You did not answer the arguments I made in blue.

Here they are again:

Matthew 5:19
Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven

1 Corithians 10:25
Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience,

If you are referring to the Judaic Laws about "unclean eating, please read the Acts of the Apostles. Peter is given a vision from God where God tells him, “What God has made clean, you are not to call profane.” (Acts 10:15)

 

[JP2Admirer]

Joseph_Alison:

Salaam Brother JP2 Admirer;
Can you relate to us the exact circumstances of the death of every one of them, or provide us with a link(s) which does(do)?

Did the apostles directly witness (eye-witness) the death of Jesus?
Also, did the apostles write the stories of the death of Jesus themselves?
Many Thanks.

Salaam.
Joseph.

I’d be here all night if you wanted me to find what happened to all twelve. Not all of them were martyred, but many were. Peter and Paul were at Rome. John was exiled, the man who you believe was mistaken in witnessing the crucifixion of Christ.

Even so, can you argue with the fact that Nero didn’t persecute the early Church? Secondly, claiming to be God is a pretty significant claim, or claiming that someone else is God. When the Empire only wanted to destroy Christianity, and kill Christians, don’t you think, if there was a hint of evidence that Christ was not actually killed, the news would have been all over the empire?

The lack of historical evidence of someone who was in Christ’s inner cirlce claiming that he was not killed, is enough evidence to suggest that He was actually killed.

Think about it, let’s say in Saudi Arabia today there was someone going around claiming to be a prophet, or even God. The Saudi monarchy wants him exposed for his hypocracy. This man claiming to be a prophet has followers. (Since Saudi Arabia is one of the worst human rights abusers, I think they fit the mold of the Emporer Nero. Imagine Saudi Arabian ethics fused with the might of America, and you will have something similar to 1st Century Rome.)

They start killing his followers, torturing, and exiling others. Now if one of this mans inner circle claimed under punishment that this “prophet” had not died, don’t you think the propaganda machine would start churning; especially with all the resources Rome had at its disposal? Don’t you think there would be some historical evidence of any of these “apostles” cracking? My friends, there is none from Christ’s time either.

Also, John, Mary and some other women witnessed Christ’s death. The Bible even clarifies “eye witness” testimony (John.) Again, if you think John had anything to gain by lying about Christ dying, you are mistaken. His options were, exile, torture, or death. Would you lie about your eye witness account if that is what you faced? I know I wouldn’t hold the gig for that long if Christ hadn’t actually died.

Yes, John did write of the death of Jesus. Also, Peter signifies as much in his letters. Matthew, Mark, and Luke were all followers of either Peter or Paul. So unless you are insinuating that Peter and Paul are liars, then I would suggest that the Gospel accounts are pretty accurate representations of the ministry of Christ.

 

[JP2Admirer]

ashab al-yameen:

There are holes, however, in the theory that Jesus Christ was crucified in the place of an insurrectionist.

My theory:
The identities of “Jesus who is called the Messiah” and “Jesus Barabbas” were switched in text, yet not in real life. Jesus Christ was probably the actual Jesus Christ, while “Jesus who is called the Messiah” was a self-claimed king of the Jews, an insurrectionist preparing to topple Pilate’s reign.

Why?

For the following reasons:

Pontius Pilate would me insane to free an insurrectionist and crucify a man who did no harm to his rule.
The morale of Pilate’s soldiers would decrease if they saw Pilate free an insurrectionist who had commited murder.

Pilate had a lot more interest in killing an insurrectionist than to kill some Jewish Prophet.

insurrection: The act or an instance of open revolt against civil authority or a constituted government.

Are you telling me that Pilate would free a man who revolted against him and crucify some man that had problems with his fellow Jews?

Where is your evidence for Barrabas being an insurrectionist? Yes, there was another man at the time of Christ claiming to be a warrior Messiah, but I fail to see his connection to Barrabas. Barrabas was a murderer. Please validate this claim.

 

[Bulldog]

JP2Admirer:

Where is your evidence for Barrabas being an insurrectionist? Yes, there was another man at the time of Christ claiming to be a warrior Messiah, but I fail to see his connection to Barrabas. Barrabas was a murderer. Please validate this claim.

He might be getting it from here:

Luke 23:18-19 DRB But the whole multitude together cried out, saying: Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas: (19) Who, for a certain sedition made in the city and for a murder, was cast into prison.

and its the sedition thats the word in reference to “insurrectionist” that he is get his notions.

 

[Nan_S]

JP2Admirer:

Where is your evidence for Barrabas being an insurrectionist? Yes, there was another man at the time of Christ claiming to be a warrior Messiah, but I fail to see his connection to Barrabas. Barrabas was a murderer. Please validate this claim.

If he supports his claim by quoting one of the gospels, remind him of this:
**

r.gonzales:

we don’t even consider these accounts to be authentic

**
He may try to support his claim from the Koran. I would give him the same answer they gave us.

 

[JP2Admirer]

Bulldog:

He might be getting it from here:

and its the sedition thats the word in reference to “insurrectionist” that he is get his notions.

Thanks Bulldog. It’s been awhile since I read about the sentencing of Christ. I noticed the that 3 of the 4 Gospels refer to Barrabas as a revolutionary. Big oversight on my part! My mistake, please disregard that last post everyone.

 

[Bobby_A.Greene]

hlgomez:

Funny, after 600 years of errors, God decided to send Muhammad to correct it.

What errors? The Gospels contain an eyewitness to Christ’s crucifixion, death, and resurrection - Saint Matthew. The Gospels are the inspired word of God himself. What possible correction could an illiterate epileptic provide six hundred years after the fact?

By analogy, if you propose this kind of “invented” evidence to the courts it will go to the garbage can.

Pio

But isn’t Islam itself criticized for being an “invented” religion?

 

[Topher]

Bobby A. Greene:

But isn’t Islam itself criticized for being an “invented” religion?

Off course. It is simply demonic perversion and amalgamation of Judaism and Christianity.

 

[Bobby_A.Greene]

Topher:

Off course. It is simply demonic perversion and amalgamation of Judaism and Christianity.

Actually, to be more specific and accurate: "Mohammed’s religion, known among its adherents as Islam, contains practically nothing original, it is a confused combination of native Arabian heathenism, Judaism, Christianity, Sabism (Mandoeanism), Hanifism, and Zoroastrianism."

Please read:

newadvent.org/cathen/10424a.htm

for a very good Catholic exposition on Islam.

 

[Bobby_A.Greene]

Without our faith, we, as Muslims, are nothing.

Currently the Muslim government of Algeria is persecuting fundamentalist Muslims because, as one government official said, they will throw us back to the 12th century.

That is the problem with Islam, it wants to stifle initiative and squash incentive in favor of the seventh century views found in the KORAN.

The advancements in math, medicine, and philosophy developed during the Moorish occupation of medeival north Africa were all derived from the Greeks (with the exception of al-gebra which was an Muslim Arab invention). The practice of fundamental Islam would bring all human creativity to a screaching halt in favor of Canon Law, religious law.

 

[ashab_al-yameen]

Bobby A. Greene:

The advancements in math, medicine, and philosophy developed during the Moorish occupation of medeival north Africa were all derived from the Greeks (with the exception of al-gebra which was an Muslim Arab invention). The practice of fundamental Islam would bring all human creativity to a screaching halt in favor of Canon Law, religious law.

You see, Muslims translated them and built upon them. These were ideas from people that the Roman Chruch considered heretics and therefore never had the intention to even look at them. Could the Rennaisance (sp) have just come about as soon as Muslims left spain?

You see, we used soap, soap entered Europe through the Muslims.

We produced the astrolabe and perfected it.

We invented the gun and gunpowder.

There are many other things we invented, you just have to open your mind a bit more.

 

[hawk]

ashab al-yameen:

You see, Muslims translated them and built upon them. These were ideas from people that the Roman Chruch considered heretics and therefore never had the intention to even look at them. Could the Rennaisance (sp) have just come about as soon as Muslims left spain?

You see, we used soap, soap entered Europe through the Muslims.

We produced the astrolabe and perfected it.

We invented the gun and gunpowder.

There are many other things we invented, you just have to open your mind a bit more.

Gunpowder was invented by the chinese, the cannon was invented by the chinese too.

Soap was invented by the persians of the medo persian empire.

The same people the muslims periodically declared war on.

But it is cyclical, up today, down tomorrow, that is the way of all things.

 

[Ghosty]

These were ideas from people that the Roman Chruch considered heretics and therefore never had the intention to even look at them.

You don’t know much about the record-keeping at monestaries, eh? The Catholic Church is notorious, and always has been, for keeping record after record, from both within the faith and without. If it lacked any information, it was because it wasn’t available to them, not because it was disregarded as heretical. On the contrary, the Church even keeps libraries of truly heretical works for study.

If it was looked down upon as heretical, why was this old knowledge so quickly and deeply embraced when we came into contact with it again? Upon studying the ancient Greek philosophers, Thomas Aquinas wrote the Summa Theologica, considered to be one of the greatest non-Scriptural works of theology by the Church both then and now.

Your accusation is completely unfounded.