Jesus' status in Islam and Judaism

[Angelos]

The disputation is about the fact that God’s promise concerning Isaac was fullfilled in Jesus Christ whose followers have become a great nation of BELIEVERS. And, as I maintain, his promise to Ishmael and his decendants only came true with Muhammad and the Qur’an whose followers have become a great nation of BELIEVERS. And the people of both of these great nations have the chance to become childred of Abraham if they live by faith in what God has taught them. I don’t know how I can put it any clearer.

Why adding Christianity into our discussion concerned with God’s promises to Abraham about his sons Ishmael and Isaac?

Do Jews believe that we are really Abraham’s spiritual descendants because of our faith in Christ? NO! This is because they do not believe in Jesus. Can we Christians believe that Muslims are Abraham’s descendants because of their faith (Islam)? NO! Question: Why? Answer: Because their scripture and faith are not from God. Since we do not believe that Islam is a celestial religion or revelation, we can never say that Islamic faith can make Muslims Abraham’s descendants!

Also true. Yet, they (Ishmael’s decendants the Muslims) can also be children of Abraham if they have faith in what God has revealed to them.

NOPE! They simply cannot be Abraham’s spiritual children with the help of their faith because their faith is NOT based on the Bible! This is where your mistakes emerge from: God has revealed NOTHING to Muslims! Their faith is vain and they are not true descendants of Abraham EVEN in a spiritual sense!

I can’t believe you still can’t concede this point. Is Christianity the name of a nation? I ask you, what kind of nations do you think God was talking about in these promises? Was it a religious nation for Isaac but not for Ishmael? Or was the promise concerning Isaac fulfilled in the kingship of David and Solomon and the promise to Ishmael was fulfilled because God blessed him with working testicles and a woman to impregnate?

Exactly! Isaac’s progeny (Israel) became a religious nation because of God’s decision to make His covenant with Isaac! God did not make the same covenant with Ismael, this is why Ishmael’s progeny never became a religious nation chosen by God to receive His Law!

Now you’re just being intentionally difficult. You did read the passage about the how the story of Hagar and Sarah “may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants”? Aren’t there numerous similarities between the Judaism of the Old Testament and the teachings of Islam?

The alleged similarities between Judaism and Islam do not necessarily mean that Islam came from God. If I copied a famous painting by Michelangelo and claimed that it was original, no one would believe that I was Michelangelo!

How? What was great about the nation who had disobeyed God so many times and was in complete subjection at Jesus’ time? Also, I claim this because this is what we’re taught in the New Testament. Once again I tell you, you and I are part of that great nation Israel because of our faith in Christ Jesus.

Great nations can stumble and fall, nothing wrong with that! We believe to be the part of that great nation of Israel because of our faith in Jesus, whom we consider the Messiah of Israel! How can you say that we would be spiritual descendants of Abraham through our faith in Jesus even if Jesus were not a PHYSICAL descendant of Abraham through Isaac??? Why do you think Jesus was adopted by Joseph and linked to his genealogy??? Why do you think Jesus was born as a Jew???

Fine, have it your way. Prove to me that the nations God spoke about concerning Isaac and Ishmael were simply physical decendants in physical locations. Bear in mind, this would mean that you are saying that you are not part of Israel as described in the New Testament.

They were physical descendants! However, our faith in the PHYSICAL descendant of Abraham, Jesus the Messiah, made us Abraham’s spiritual descendants. We are spiritually linked to Jesus, who is PHYSICALLY linked to Isaac.

I hope my views are clear now

 

[Ed_Rand]

isn’t this calling God a liar by telling Him that His Word is corrupt, regardless of His saying His words cannot be corrupt, in both NT and OT, before Muhammad?

Actually, the last words in the Bible admit that it is possible.

“I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.”

Why the warning if its impossible?

 

[Ed_Rand]

Why adding Christianity into our discussion concerned with God’s promises to Abraham about his sons Ishmael and Isaac?

I’ve been linking them all along. That has been the point of this discussion.

Can we Christians believe that Muslims are Abraham’s descendants because of their faith (Islam)? NO! Question: Why? Answer: Because their scripture and faith are not from God. Since we do not believe that Islam is a celestial religion or revelation, we can never say that Islamic faith can make Muslims Abraham’s descendants!

It’s okay that you believe this. The point in this discussion has been to prove that Islam is from God, as I believe. It is His revelation to them, different than His revelation to Israel (you and I).

NOPE! They simply cannot be Abraham’s spiritual children with the help of their faith because their faith is NOT based on the Bible! This is where your mistakes emerge from: God has revealed NOTHING to Muslims! Their faith is vain and they are not true descendants of Abraham EVEN in a spiritual sense!

The Bible is for Israel. The Qur’an is for Muslims.

Exactly! Isaac’s progeny (Israel) became a religious nation because of God’s decision to make His covenant with Isaac! God did not make the same covenant with Ismael, this is why Ishmael’s progeny never became a religious nation chosen by God to receive His Law!

Right, God did not make the same covenant with Ishmael. Although he did make the same promise (of a great nation)to Ishmael. And Muslims basically did recieve His law.

The alleged similarities between Judaism and Islam do not necessarily mean that Islam came from God. If I copied a famous painting by Michelangelo and claimed that it was original, no one would believe that I was Michelangelo!

If the purpose of Michelangelo’s painting was to help you understand art, and get closer to a comprehension of him, than a copy of his painting would be of equal value. No one is claiming that Muhammad is God.

How can you say that we would be spiritual descendants of Abraham through our faith in Jesus even if Jesus were not a PHYSICAL descendant of Abraham through Isaac??? Why do you think Jesus was adopted by Joseph and linked to his genealogy??? Why do you think Jesus was born as a Jew???

I somewhat get your point, but not entirely. Jesus’ people were descendants of Isaac. Muhammad’s people were descendants of Ishmael. Physical descendancy is not entirely important here.

They were physical descendants! However, our faith in the PHYSICAL descendant of Abraham, Jesus the Messiah, made us Abraham’s spiritual descendants. We are spiritually linked to Jesus, who is PHYSICALLY linked to Isaac.

Muslims are spiritually linked to Muhammad, who is PHYSICALLY linked to Ishmael.

Also, I just thought of something… When did Arabs start claiming that they were descendants of Ishmael? Probably after they had read the Old Testament or the Qur’an.

 

[whatevergirl]

excellent meedo. Apparently I had read the part on the crucifixion in the Qur’an wrong. To me it read as though he was actually crucified, and it appeared to people that he died but actually did not. So Muslims do not believe in His resurrection, but they do believe in the resurrection of body, correct?

…and one step further, Muslims believe that someone else was crucified in Jesus’ place. I think that it would be more convincing, for lack of a better word, to just deny the whole event. But, to say that Judas (I believe the Qu’ran says ‘the betrayer’) was crucified…where there is no historical or Biblical basis for this, just doesn’t make logical or spiritual sense. Muslims don’t believe that Jesus died and resurrected. That is why it’s surprising to me to see Christians leave the faith, to follow Islam…because you would have to abandon everything you have come to know as Truth.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Not so much incompatible, but not there. Incompatable is only a good word if you say that I cannot see myself as a child of God or call him Father, which some Muslims do. I should have used a different word. If Jesus was prophet, and God told both he and Muhammed what to say, then why is Father not one of the 99 names? Why did we go from Father/Child back to slave/master? There is a hole in the logic, to me at least. The easy answer is to reject what disagrees with the Koran. The hard part is to see if, in fact, they can fit together.

First of all, do you think there is a limit to God’s names? Are there only 99? (The answer is no, there are more.)

Here is something to consider–and really it’s only speculation: perhaps the people at the time of Jesus needed to be brought closer to God, and that was they way it was done. And then Islam rejects it because of the exaggeration of the Christians–to say that they are children of God. Muhammad wasn’t sent to the same people that Jesus was sent to. He was sent instead to people without a law, without previous prophets. Just as a note.

But if you refer to my previous post–there are other “maybes” and I can’t prove any of them.

There are other reasons, I would say. It is possible that for the audience that Muhammed had, the Father/Child imagry was not strong enough. It is also possible that the basic understanding of God that the Jews had is much closer to Christianity than the Arabians had to Islam. This would make, in my mind, Islam a first step that should lead people from idolatry to the One True God.

Laa ilaaha illa Allah. The oneness of God is in three things–oneness of His Lordship, oneness of His Godhood, and oneness of His Names and Attributes.

This means that God is our only Lord, only God, and that the Names and Attributes which belong to Him and His alone. Now. I have a father, who is not my God. Is it possible that they can share a name?

Just something else to consider.

This is not a bad view from what I can tell. I would say that there were extremely spiritual Jews, but there were also very legalistic ones. It is a danger of a faith based on what you do not so much on what you beleive.

In fact faith is proved by action. From the point of view of a Muslim, the Pharisees saw only action, and Christians today see only belief. Both components are integral and necessary to a proper righteous life.

The issue with this statement is that Christianity has not forgetten the laws, per se, but Christians do not follow them. As Chesterton said, being Christian has not been tried and found lacking, it has been found difficult and therefore left untried.

Christians do not follow them. Pretty much what I meant.

 

[ralphinal]

First of all, do you think there is a limit to God’s names? Are there only 99? (The answer is no, there are more.)

Here is something to consider–and really it’s only speculation: perhaps the people at the time of Jesus needed to be brought closer to God, and that was they way it was done. And then Islam rejects it because of the exaggeration of the Christians–to say that they are children of God. Muhammad wasn’t sent to the same people that Jesus was sent to. He was sent instead to people without a law, without previous prophets. Just as a note.

But if you refer to my previous post–there are other “maybes” and I can’t prove any of them.

True enough. Why should anyone outside of SA prefer Islam?

Laa ilaaha illa Allah. The oneness of God is in three things–oneness of His Lordship, oneness of His Godhood, and oneness of His Names and Attributes.

This means that God is our only Lord, only God, and that the Names and Attributes which belong to Him and His alone. Now. I have a father, who is not my God. Is it possible that they can share a name?

Yes.

Just something else to consider.

In fact faith is proved by action. From the point of view of a Muslim, the Pharisees saw only action, and Christians today see only belief. Both components are integral and necessary to a proper righteous life.

Christians do not follow them. Pretty much what I meant.

Not all Christians ignore them. Most Christains follow the Commandments very well. Now, if you mean the food laws, God released us from them. If you mean the sacraficial laws, Jesus replaced them.

If you mean no Christian follows God’s laws, that is as offensive ot me as saying all Muslims are going to hell for being terrorists would be to you.

 

[swariffin]

A Christian believer can never say that God willed Mohammad and his Koran because this is equal to saying that God willed the humiliation of Jesus’ followers and agreed that the advent of Islam was crucial. However, the Gospel makes one thing clear: Jesus is the Alpha and Omega. He is the one through whom came grace and truth! Therefore, Jesus is enough for us, we do not need a new scripture or messenger.

Yes, indeed. The bible never said there will be another prophet sent to humanity. As Jesus as the cornerstone, that means the prophethood ended with Jesus. Jesus only promised the Holyspirit, and through the apostle the Holyspirit works.

 

[swariffin]

You are wrong friend. Paul quotes the Torah when he’s explaining this. “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.”–Galatians 3:10 and Deuteronomy 27:26.

Dear Ed,

Sorry I missed something. You are correct that Paul was quoting the Thorah, but you are wrong if Paul refering to the Talmud. So, the Thorah and the Talmud are not exactly the same things. What I said in my post, that it was the Talmud fabricated by the Pharisee that the Jews followed at that time.

 

[morning_star777]

Howdy, Ed.

I get what you were saying about being a Christian and a Muslim at the same time. Since according to the definition of Islam in the Qur’an (such that Abraham was a Muslim),Jesus Christ was a Muslim. So a true Christian would be the religion of Jesus, right?Which would be Islam.

can u prove that abraham or jesus was muslim?&who gave ur islam the authority to decide that who would be true christian?

 

[swariffin]

regarding the Moderators on this sub-forum, i do not think they close an thread that goes off track as long as the original question has been answered and the OP goes on askin more questions.

regarding your question, no the OT do not point out to Islam in any shape or form. The OT is taking about blessing Abrahams’ descendants, not about creating religions …Arabs existed before Ishmael anyway, and Christian Arabs existed before Muhammad…not to add that the Quran is not from God to begin with, something i think you understood by now

Yes, indeed. a great nation as promised for Ishmael does not necessarily means religion. A community or a group of people, yes. A country in modern definition, may be yes may be no (for sure never meant to be a Republic). A religion? definitely no as prophethood ended with Jesus, and continued under the Holyspirit reigns.

It is interesting anyway, that many modern muslims indeed are people enslaved by the sets of law, some even to what was written literally. But, it was not what Paul had in mind in Gal 4:21-24. Paul in that verse was refering to what he meant in Rome 3:20, although he wrote the letter to the Roman later than the letter to the Galatians.

 

[swariffin]

Howdy, Ed.

I get what you were saying about being a Christian and a Muslim at the same time. Since according to the definition of Islam in the Qur’an (such that Abraham was a Muslim), Jesus Christ was a Muslim. So a true Christian would be the religion of Jesus, right? Which would be Islam.

And then there is the concept of the same deen (Islam) but a different law (Shari’ah) for different times.

Dear Sister,

Under the definition of Islam that I know which means “Complete Submission to God”, I agree with you. This kind of thinking has been introduced by Indonesian Islamic scholar too, who promoting Islam as an Inclusive religions, not exclusive.

The difference between Abraham, Jesus, Moses, the Jews and the Christian in one side as opposed to the Muslim, is the second sentence of your Syahada. We don’t mind and completely agree that “There is no God but Allah/YHWH (in all of His Property, Might, Power, and Wholeness)”. We also agree to your word “Allahuakbar”. Indeed God is Great, even the Greatest.

 

[inJESUS]

Muslims do not oppose everything God taught.

don’t they oppose, in your case, what Jesus did and taught regarding His death and who He is?

What they oppose are a few key doctrines

 

[swariffin]

Do Christians believe that God would call a secular nation to be a “great nation” in the Bible?

Let us look at these verses from the NIV Bible:

"And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation." (Genesis 17:20)

**“What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the LORD our God is near us whenever we pray to him? And what other nation is so great as to have such righteous decrees and laws as this body of laws I am setting before you today?” **( Deuteronomy 4:7-8)

In the above verses, we first see a clear promise from GOD Almighty that He will make a “great nation” from Ishmael’s descendants. We then see the definition of “great nation” as being a nation that directly receives a Law from GOD Almighty.

Since “great nation” proves that the people have the Law of GOD Almighty, and since the descendants of Ishmael (pbuh) were promised to become a “great nation” in the Old Testament, then this clearly and irrefutably makes the Noble Quran as the Law of the LORD in the Old Testament

Dear Hamba2han,

Your analogy is too far and connecting the unconnected. My son was born during the fall down of Suharto Regime in Indonesia. Can I say that the birth of my son is the caused of the fall of 32 years old regime?

 

[inJESUS]

Actually, the last words in the Bible admit that it is possible.

“I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.”

Why the warning if its impossible?

well actually the interpretation is rather adding to the meaning by giving wrong interpretations and deducting its meaning from giving as well wrong interpretations, that is why th echurch is very careful dealing with the book of Revelation. But even if we were to take your interpretation about actually adding words or substracting words, am afraid God says He overthrows the plans of the wicked…He did not say humans have no ability to try. It is more than clear that God’s word cannot be corrupt, not one letter will be corrupt till Jesus comes again to fulfill what is left. If you believe againt this, you better become Muslim and beleive that Allah is moody, lies, and is not serious about his word but only wakes up to his words with Muhammad. This is very unlike the God of Israel who says He is faithful to His plans and words, His Word stand for ever and are like gold and who warned against false prophets teaching different gospels.

 

[inJESUS]

true. “turn the other cheek” is a higher level as we all admit, yet God commands those whose nations and ways of life are under attack and must survive–such as the Jews of old and the Muslims of today–to take “eye for an eye”.

Ed, God gave that command to Jews, and to Jews gave the command to forgive and let go of the grudge as the standard in the OT and stressed it in the Messianic covenant, the covenant which will last forever and be followed by all according to both OT and NT. What Muhammad taught of literally plucking your eyes to punish you is neither in the OT, nor NT. So he actually misrepresented the OT and gave a blind eye to the Messianic covenant of peace…Jesus did not say that you should turn the other cheek because we are not at war or under attack…Jesus made sure that war is NOT what He wants neither does He want grudges and vengence…remember He says i give you peace the world cannot give…as such His teachings lead us in that direction, something that humans should understand and strive for. According to the Bible, Jesus will send prophets after Him and He did send prophets, none of which lead wars and killed people because he was attacked…so if you are to believe God’s words, Muhammad couldn’t simply fit the desciption of prophets sent by Jesus, who went preaching the same gospel in different lands without killing a soul but who got killed for their belief. Muhammad simply does not fit in the Messianic Covenant of peace. A man not sent by Jesus is no prophet, nor does he have the right to ascribe to God what he picked and chose from OT and NT, gnostic, apocrhpha and legend writers.

That is why i find it terrible when one even entertains the idea that Quran is from God because it is an insult to Jesus no matter how nicy nicy words muhammad used regarding Jesus. A man saying Jesus was not crucified is a man calling God a liar no matter how great names he gives to God…

Islamic logic that anything that contradicts the Quran is not from God is the peak of twisted logic because, hello, the Bible condemns the Quran, not the other way round.

So be aware, lest for being politically correct, you end up advocating the spirit that denies Jesus is Word in Flesh, died and ressurrected…and you know what the Bible says about such spirit…and if you answer me that satan will not highlight God and reprove himself in his book, to which i reply, satan is the father of lies , not an idiot… a liar mixes truth with falsehhood…an idiot exposes himself…the best technique is to convince you that you are doing God’s word when in fact you are being mislead and are actually opposing it …nothing will make satan happier that reversing what Jesus did…and when Jesus says people will kill Jews and Christians thinking they are doing the will of God but in fact they know neither the Father nor the Son…Muhammad fighted both Jews and Christians…the last words on Muhammad’s sweet mouth before his death was cursing Jews and people…

 

[Angelos]

I’ve been linking them all along. That has been the point of this discussion.

Sorry, it has taken me a long time to notice that.

It’s okay that you believe this. The point in this discussion has been to prove that Islam is from God, as I believe. It is His revelation to them, different than His revelation to Israel (you and I).

If Islam is really from God, as you believe, we must consider the following possibilities:

**1) **There must be TWO different and opposing gods, one revelation of which contradicts that of the other.

2) If Islam is from God, Christianity must not be in its original form today.

3) If Christianity is from God and in its original form, the religion named Islam must be fabrication.

Right, God did not make the same covenant with Ishmael. Although he did make the same promise (of a great nation)to Ishmael. And Muslims basically did receive His law.

Your assertion is baseless unless you prove me that God promised to make His covenant with BOTH Isaac and Ishmael.According to my guide (Torah), Ishmael was excluded from divine blessings and the rights of election imposed by God only on Isaac.This is why Ishmael’s progeny remained a nation with no forther promises than being a nation descending from Ishmael.

If the purpose of Michelangelo’s painting was to help you understand art, and get closer to a comprehension of him, than a copy of his painting would be of equal value. No one is claiming that Muhammad is God.

You misunderstood my analogy. I am not talking about the value of the painting, but the authorised painter. More, it is not honest for a man who is NOT Michelangelo to claim that he is.

I somewhat get your point, but not entirely. Jesus’ people were descendants of Isaac. Muhammad’s people were descendants of Ishmael. Physical descendancy is not entirely important here.

This is what I am trying to remind you! The supposition that Mohammad is a physical descendant of Ishmael, with whom God did NOT make His covenant, does not automatically make Mohammad a spiritual descendant of Abraham.

Muslims are spiritually linked to Muhammad, who is PHYSICALLY linked to Ishmael.

NOPE! This is your dead-end chain: Muslims are SPIRITUALLY linked to Mohammad, who is PHYSICALLY linked to Ishmael, who was NOT chosen by God for His covenant. Christians, on the other hand, are SPIRITUALLY linked to Jesus, who is PHYSICALLY linked to Isaac, the chosen one with whom God made His covenant.

Also, I just thought of something… When did Arabs start claiming that they were descendants of Ishmael? Probably after they had read the Old Testament or the Qur’an.

The Koran does not mention God’s promise to Abraham about Ishmael’s becoming a great nation. Muslims also traditionally believe that the Torah is corrupted and therefore not authentic.

 

[inJESUS]

Here is something to consider–and really it’s only speculation: perhaps the people at the time of Jesus needed to be brought closer to God, and that was they way it was done. And then Islam rejects it because of the exaggeration of the Christians

 

[inJESUS]

Originally Posted by Ed Rand
Also, I just thought of something… When did Arabs start claiming that they were descendants of Ishmael? Probably after they had read the Old Testament or the Qur’an.

In pre-Islamic times Ishmael was never mentioned as the Father of the Arabs."

W. Aliyyuddin Shareef is being honest enough.

Indeed, how could Ishmael be the father of Arabs who existed before him is beyond me.

 

[Ed_Rand]

what do you have left to say? that Jesus crucifixion and resurrection are meamingless? because that’s what the deity of the Quran is saying by denying both.

 

[Ed_Rand]

In pre-Islamic times Ishmael was never mentioned as the Father of the Arabs."

Exactly, so this idea came to them either through the Old Testament or the Qur’an

Indeed, how could Ishmael be the father of Arabs who existed before him is beyond me.

I’m confused now. Do you mean Muhammad? You are not disputing that Ishmael was the father of Muhammad’s people are you? Because I have proven that. And it is a small step from that proof to saying–If it is proven in the Old Testament that Ishmael was the patriarch of a people who settled on the western half of the Arabian peninsula, and if Muhammad came from that exact region and people, then Ishmael is the Father of the people of Islam.

I would ask you to clarify this post for me. In the first part it looks as though you agree with me. Then in the end it appears the opposite.