Need Help With Passages Meaning

[Maryismymama]

Basically, these are ones used by Muslims to claim Jesus was only human or the Bible speaks about Muhammad:

John 14:28 (I’m sure you are not surprised)
Isaiah 29:12
Numbers 23:19

 

[tagtotaloffice]

This article addresses their many claims to their false prophet being mentioned in scripture: http://www.tektonics.org/guest/monono2.html including the verses you mention

 

[TMC]

I feel the same way about these kinds of things as I do when Christians claim that the Koran “proves” that Islam is not a religion of peace. Namely, those of other religions should not tell people what their own religious text “really” means.

 

[tagtotaloffice]

Amen. Always go to the maintainers and and community a book belongs to and assess in their terms.

 

[Maryismymama]

They also claim one of the Puranas (hindu text) talks about Muhammad. However, it is clearly demonizing him and muslims. It is pretty accurate (It calls him muhamada, talks about medina, and says his followers will keep beard and shave the mustache and other things) but also say they eat everything, which is clearly untrue

 

[Gorgias]

I feel the same way about these kinds of things as I do when Christians claim that the Koran “proves” that Islam is not a religion of peace. Namely, those of other religions should not tell people what their own religious text “really” means.

Right. Although, in the interest of building trust and community, it’s always fair to ask them what it means… right?

 

[john14v27]

• God took on human flesh and made Himself subservient to the Father. As we’re told in Philippians 2:5-11 and also Hebrews 2:9 He was temporarily made lower than angels, taking the form of a servant. John 14:28 does not deny the deity of Christ, it relates to His role. He subjected Himself to the will of the Father.
• Isaiah 29:12 - you have to read the chapter to fully see the context. It is speaking of the spiritual blindness of those who reject Jesus. God seals up the truth so as that even the learned, because they don’t believe, cannot discern it. I encourage you to read Matthew 10:13-17 which references Isaiah. Also, to add that God’s wisdom is revealed by the Holy Spirit… a mystery that has been hidden from non believers. I encourage you to read 1 Corinthians 2. In v14: “The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit”

1 Cor 1:18-25: For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.” Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men"

• Numbers 23:19: " “God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?" - the last sentence of v19 concludes it. This doesn’t deny the deity of Christ. The point of this scripture is to say that God doesn’t lie. He doesn’t break His promises or change His mind. There is a difference between the creature and the Creator. That God would come in the flesh and be put to death as atonement for sins was spoken of way back in the beginning in Genesis (Genesis 3:15) before the book of Numbers was even written. And remember this - Jesus’ crucifixion was written about before crucifixions even existed!!

 

[TMC]

Right. Although, in the interest of building trust and community, it’s always fair to ask them what it means… right?

Yes, absolutely. (Understanding that even within a community there may be different interpretations, just as in Christianity.)

 

[Maximian]

But many Moslems also say the Koran demands war on the infidel.

 

[TMC]

But many Moslems also say the Koran demands war on the infidel.

But many Christians also say that the Bible demands that gay people be jailed, or even executed.
But many Christians also say that the Bible demands belief in a 6,000 year old world.
But many Christians also say that the Bible demands that Christians should rule over non-Christians.
And so on…

 

[Dan_Defender]

John 14:28 ‘The Father is greater than I’ refers to Jesus in his humanity. In his humanity, the Father is greater. In his Divinity, they are equal.

 

[Maximian]

I don’t care what non Catholics say about the Bible. But there are mainstream Moslem imams who agree that the Koran means what it says.

 

[po18guy]

Regarding what Muslims, Jeovah’s Witnesses and Mormons (strange bedfellows there) say, Jesus being the God-man, could speak from both His human and divine natures.

This also points to the error of using printed words alone, whether it be the Judeo-Christian bible, the BoM, or the Qurán. From the Haydock Commentary, respectively:

(John 14) Ver. 28. The Father is greater than I. [3] According to the common exposition, Christ here speaks of himself, as made man, which interpretation is drawn from the circumstances of the text, Christ being at that time, going to suffer, and die, and shortly after to rise again, and ascend into heaven, all which agree with him, as man, and according to his human nature. But the Arians can take no advantage from these words, (though with divers of the ancient Fathers, we should allow them to be spoken of Christ, as the Son of God the Father may be said in some manner to be greater than the Son, if we consider the order of the divine processions, that is, that the Father is the first person, and proceeds from no other; whereas the Son proceeds from the Father. If any one, says S. Chrys. will contend, that the Father is greater, inasmuch as he is the cause, from which the Son proceedeth, we will bear with him, and this way of speaking: provided he grant that the Son is not of a different substance, or nature. S. Athanasius allows the same, and takes notice, that though the Father is said to be greater, yet he is not said to be better, nor more excellent, than the Son; because they are one and the same in substance, nature, and other perfections. Wi. — The enemies of the divinity of Christ here triumph, and think they have the confession of Christ himself, that he is less than the Father. But if they would distinguish the two natures of Christ, their arguments would all fall to the ground. Jesus Christ, as man, and a creature, is inferior to his Father, the Creator; but, as God, he is, in every respect, equal to him. S. Basil, S. Aug. &c. — Others, likewise, answer it thus: Following the confused opinion of the world, and even of the apostles themselves, who as yet only considered Christ as a prophet, and as a man, eminent in virtue and sanctity, he was less than the Father. S. Chrys. Leont. Theophyl. Euthym. — And likewise the title of Father, (as we generally use the word) is greater, and much more honourable, that that of Son; and in this respect, Christ is inferior to his Father. S. Athanas. S. Hilar. S. Epiph. S. Greg. Nazianz. and S. Cyril. — But this appellation, though really true, does not destroy the equality of the persons, because Christ has declared, in numerous other places, that he is equal to the Father; that he is in the Father; and that he and the Father are one.
(cont.)

 

[po18guy]

(cont)

The apostles ought to have rejoiced that Christ was going to the Father, who was superior to him, considering him in his human nature; because, then, would the Son shew forth his honour and glory to be equal to the Father’s, in heaven. This would have been a mark of a pure, solid, and disinterested love, which ought to have inspired the apostles, if they truly loved their divine Master. Calmet. — Protestants assume to themselves the liberty of making the Bible only, the exclusive rule of faith, yet refuse this privilege to others. Thus Luther insisted, that his catechism should be taught, and followed. Calvin burnt Servetus for explaining his faith, by his own interpretation of the Bible, particularly of these words, the Father is greater than I. The Church of England compels every clergyman to swear to the Thirty-nine Articles, and has inflicted the severest penalties on such as interpreted the Bible according to the principles of Socinus; and on Catholics, who understand the words of Jesus Christ, This is my body: this is my blood, in the literal and obvious sense of the words. As long as each individual is at liberty to expound Scripture by the private spirit, it is a great injustice to compel any one, by penal laws, to yield his judgment to any authority, that is not less fallible than his own.

(Isaiah 29:10.13) Ver. 10. Sleep, or compunction, (Rom. xi. 8. C.) denoting their obstinacy. S. Chrys. — Visions. Prot. “the seers.” H. — The Jews perceived but very imperfectly the meaning of the prophets, when they spoke of a future Redeemer, God and man. They are now more infatuated, (C.) having a veil on their hearts. 1 Cor. iv. 3. Both learned and ignorant refuse to believe, excusing themselves. v. 12. H. — The more they read the Scriptures, the less do they understand. C.
Ver. 13. Men. Our Saviour applies this to the Jews. The evangelists follow the Sept. Mat. xv. 8. Mark vii. 6. C. — “This people approacheth to me, (Grabe adds, with its mouth and with) their lips they honour me, but their heart is far from me. Yet in vain do they honour me, teaching the commands of men and doctrines.” H. — They still continue to corrupt God’s word by their false interpretations.

(Numbers 23) Ver. 19. Changed. Heb. “repent.” Sept. “to be overawed by threats.” Origen, “to be terrified.” In the book of Judith, (viii. 15,) it is said, For God will not threaten like man, nor be inflamed to anger, like the son of man. C. — Do. Will he suffer me to curse Israel, after he has once given me a decided prohibition? M.

 

[TMC]

I don’t care what non Catholics say about the Bible. But there are mainstream Moslem imams who agree that the Koran means what it says.

All of the things I said are believed by some Catholics. And there are lots of Catholics (and other Christians) who would say the same thing about the bible. So how is Islam different in that regard?

You seem to recognize that Christians have many different ways to interpret the bible, and also assert that you have a right to your interpretation. Do you agree the same is true for Muslims?

 

[Maximian]

No that is the exact opposite of what I said.

I use interpretations that mainstream moslems use.

 

[Gorgias]

You seem to recognize that Christians have many different ways to interpret the bible, and also assert that you have a right to your interpretation. Do you agree the same is true for Muslims?

Well, to be fair, Catholics wouldn’t make that claim. We don’t “have the right to [a personal] interpretation.” And, we would recognize that different denominations of Christians interpret differently, but we wouldn’t suggest that conflicting interpretations are fair game. So, in answer to your question, a Catholic might say “well, different Muslims interpret differently; how can we know which interpretation is the most accurate?”

 

[TMC]

No that is the exact opposite of what I said.

I use interpretations that mainstream moslems use.

No. You are still saying that you get to decide what “mainstream moslems” say that the Koran means. That is no different from the Muslims that say that the New Testament shows that Jesus is not really God.

I have many Muslim friends and co-workers. None of them believe that the Koran says they have to attack infidels. If you believe that some Muslims somewhere else disagree, that has nothing to do with my relationship with my Muslim friends, or with Islam overall.

 

[TMC]

Well, to be fair, Catholics wouldn’t make that claim. We don’t “have the right to [a personal] interpretation.”

Umm, yes we do. Why do you think we do not? The Church does not mandate the meaning of every passage of Scripture. There are quite literally thousands of threads just on this forum alone debating and discussing the meaning of Scripture, just between Catholics, let alone all the other Christian denominations.

So, in answer to your question, a Catholic might say “well, different Muslims interpret differently; how can we know which interpretation is the most accurate?”

We can’t even agree what our Scripture means. How can we decide which interpretation of Islam is “most accurate,” whatever that means?

 

[Gorgias]

Gorgias:

Well, to be fair, Catholics wouldn’t make that claim. We don’t “have the right to [a personal] interpretation.”

Umm, yes we do. Why do you think we do not?

Umm… maybe because that’s not how the Church asks us to approach Scripture?

From the Catechism:

85 “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

And again…

111 since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. “Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written.”

The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.

112 1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”. Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.
The phrase “heart of Christ” can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.
113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church").

114 3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

So… how are Catholics called to understand Scripture? Not by creating their own interpretation, but by hearing the Magisterium and understanding Scripture in light of the entirety of the Scriptures, from “within the living Tradition of the whole Church”, and in continuity with the “coherence of the truths of faith among themselves.”