Saint Paul and Islam

[itinerant1]

The Quran never forbids reading the OT, it commands that we accept it as truth in 3:3 and elsewhere. Sorry if you don’t like the answer.

Sura 3:3: He sent down to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming all previous scriptures, and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel.

I see that this Sura teaches the divine origin of the Torah and the Gospel. However, it does not follow that Mohammed did not, as a matter of historical fact, forbid followers in his day from reading the Torah and the Gospel. If the Quran contains no such prohibition, it does not follow that the original practice was not to forbid the reading of the Torah and the Gospel. A practice like this need not have been written down. In fact, I suspect that it would not have been included in the the Quran. By the same token, where in the Quran are Muslims instructed to read for themselves, the Torah and the Gospel?

Behind this question is the obvious problem that Mohammed interpreted the Torah and the Gospel radically differently than do Jews and Christians. What is the basis for the difference in interpretations? I know what my answer is, as a Catholic.

Did Mohammed just tell his followers how to interpret the Bible? I suspect that if his followers actually read the Bible for themselves they would have seriously questioned Mohammed’s interpretations.

Hence, in light of the issues I have brought up here, Sura 3:3 is not an adequate answer to my question. If you can point to something in addition that addresses these issues, that would be helpful. As you see, the answer to my question may not be as simple as quoting a Sura.

itinerant1 :tiphat:

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Sura 3:3: He sent down to you this scripture, truthfully, confirming all previous scriptures, and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel.

I see that this Sura teaches the divine origin of the Torah and the Gospel. However, it does not follow that Mohammed did not, as a matter of historical fact, forbid followers in his day from reading the Torah and the Gospel. If the Quran contains no such prohibition, it does not follow that the original practice was not to forbid the reading of the Torah and the Gospel. A practice like this need not have been written down. In fact, I suspect that it would not have been included in the the Quran. By the same token, where in the Quran are Muslims instructed to read for themselves, the Torah and the Gospel?

Behind this question is the obvious problem that Mohammed interpreted the Torah and the Gospel radically differently than do Jews and Christians. What is the basis for the difference in interpretations? I know what my answer is, as a Catholic.

Did Mohammed just tell his followers how to interpret the Bible? I suspect that if his followers actually read the Bible for themselves they would have seriously questioned Mohammed’s interpretations.

Hence, in light of the issues I have brought up here, Sura 3:3 is not an adequate answer to my question. If you can point to something in addition that addresses these issues, that would be helpful. As you see, the answer to my question may not be as simple as quoting a Sura.

itinerant1 :tiphat:

That they are said to be sent as truths of God is allowance enough for Muslims to read them. The Quran doesn’t didn’t forbid it. The Quran also doesn’t contradict Jesus on the cross (only that he wasn’t killed by the cross as assumed which would seem to void out Isaiah 42:4, but God took his life), binding of Isaac, etc. Muslims have just interpreted them wrong, though not necessarily Mohammed.

Jews also believe Messiah is fully human not a God so they agree with Muslims on that interpretation. I can only assume the difference with Christians on the deity issue is that the Bible was handled early on by Roman Gentiles and they interpreted the Bible according to their patterns of belief which involved demigods.

 

[swariffin]

That they are said to be sent as truths of God is allowance enough for Muslims to read them. The Quran doesn’t didn’t forbid it. The Quran also doesn’t contradict Jesus on the cross (only that he wasn’t killed by the cross as assumed which would seem to void out Isaiah 42:4, but God took his life), binding of Isaac, etc. Muslims have just interpreted them wrong, though not necessarily Mohammed.

Jews also believe Messiah is fully human not a God so they agree with Muslims on that interpretation. I can only assume the difference with Christians on the deity issue is that the Bible was handled early on by Roman Gentiles and they interpreted the Bible according to their patterns of belief which involved demigods.

Dear FoA,

Paul, the earliest NT writers was a Jew, eventhough not borned in the land of Judea and gained Roman citizenship. Paul was a student of Gamaliel, the well-known Jews’ Rabbi.

Matthew, the gospel writer, was a Jew, and very well versed in the OT.

What is the role of any Roman Gentile you accused? and who were they?

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Dear FoA,

Paul, the earliest NT writers was a Jew, eventhough not borned in the land of Judea and gained Roman citizenship. Paul was a student of Gamaliel, the well-known Jews’ Rabbi.

Matthew, the gospel writer, was a Jew, and very well versed in the OT.

What is the role of any Roman Gentile you accused? and who were they?

I’m referring to interpreting the Bible to form the mainstream Christian doctrine we see today. Gentiles handled that, not Jews. How many Jewish popes were there?

 

[swariffin]

I’m referring to interpreting the Bible to form the mainstream Christian doctrine we see today. Gentiles handled that, not Jews. How many Jewish popes were there?

Dear FoA, Why do you think there has to be Jewish and Gentiles anyway?

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Dear FoA, Why do you think there has to be Jewish and Gentiles anyway?

Bible says so.

Matthew 12:21 And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.

 

[abucs]

How many Christian Rabbi’s were there ??

It’s a silly question. Any Popes of Jewish backround would be called Christians - like Peter. The early Christians were a Jewish sect who spread their message to the gentiles. They all became Christians and got into trouble for the very fact of rejecting the ‘many gods’ of the Romans. They were against it so much that they were fed to the lions instead of worshipping them.

Look, Muhammad got it wrong. He should have paid more attention when he was growing up with the Christians, before spreading his message to the Arabs.

St Johns gospel was written by a Jew and makes the claim of Jesus’ divinity very clear in his writings.

He was exiled by the Romans after living most of his life in Israel. This Roman ‘many Gods’ notion is an invention because it is obvious that Muhammad was wrong about the beginnings of Christianity.

Nearly all of the apostles died for their faith, most at the hands of the Romans. And they were all Jewish.

You have absolutely no proof that the Divine Jesus Christianity was anything else other than it appears to be through all of the writings and traditions from that time.

The only reason you are suggesting this is from your belief that Muhammad can’t have been wrong.

It is that wrong belief that makes you look for explanations, no matter what the evidence is to the contrary about Christs nature.

If God wants to take on human form for the purpose of redemption, who are you to tell Him He can’t do that ?

 

[FaithofAbraham]

How many Christian Rabbi’s were there ??

It’s a silly question. Any Popes of Jewish backround would be called Christians - like Peter.

Why? Jews – at least one this board – still identify as Jews even though they have converted to Christianity. Jesus called himself a Jew and he was the first Christian. But I’m guessing there weren’t a lot of Jewish popes, mostly Gentile.

If God wants to take on human form for the purpose of redemption, who are you to tell Him He can’t do that ?

I think it’s silly to say God cried and prayed to Himself to save Himself, or that God was obedient to Himself.

Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he (JESUS) had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him (GOD) that was able to save him (JESUS) from death, and was heard in that he feared;

Hebrews 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

 

[swariffin]

Bible says so.

Matthew 12:21 And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.

Dear FoA,

Please don’t forget Mat 28:19. All nations are supposed to be the deciples of Jesus. Why do we still need to have Jews and Gentiles? Matthew in Mat 12:21 you refered, were quoting Isiah, and nothing to do with Gentiles of Jews who interpret Christianity. Christianity comes from Jesus and nothing to do with Gentiles of Jews. In His eyes, no difference between Gentiles of Jews anyway.

 

[abucs]

Look, i’ll grant you there are some verses which make you wonder about the nature of the relationship between Christ and the Father but the nature of God is a different topic.

The idea you are proposing (without any evidence) is that the Roman gentiles corrupted the true message of Christianity.

And the only reason why you are doing that is to try and reconcile Muhammads talk of Jesus being from God with the Christians message of incarnation.

It is pretty obvious that the early quotes of Muhhamad towards the Christians, when he was trying to get them ‘on side’ are different from his later quotes when he realised they weren’t going for his revised story.

You cannot have Muhammad praising Christians of being of the book, a revealed text according to him and a people who Muhammads followers should consult with the fact that those same people carried the message of the incarnation.

It is only afterwards that he starts going into his tirade about Allah having no partners (which i’m guessing meant females - another mistake) and suddenly saying Christians are cursed and telling his followers then that they shouldn’t have any friends among the Christians.

This is another contradiction. He was making it up as he went along and getting rich at the same time and sleeping with lots of women whose husbands he got his followers to murder.

Muhammad might have been a great man, but he obviously wasn’t a good one, by his own writings.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Look, i’ll grant you there are some verses which make you wonder about the nature of the relationship between Christ and the Father but the nature of God is a different topic.

The idea you are proposing (without any evidence) is that the Roman gentiles corrupted the true message of Christianity.

It’s the same topic but I think we’ve exhausted it. Point is the idea of man-God never existed in Jewish thought – ask any Jew – suddenly it did once filtered through the Gentile Roman Church.

 

[swariffin]

Look, i’ll grant you there are some verses which make you wonder about the nature of the relationship between Christ and the Father but the nature of God is a different topic.

The idea you are proposing (without any evidence) is that the Roman gentiles corrupted the true message of Christianity.

And the only reason why you are doing that is to try and reconcile Muhammads talk of Jesus being from God with the Christians message of incarnation.

It is pretty obvious that the early quotes of Muhhamad towards the Christians, when he was trying to get them ‘on side’ are different from his later quotes when he realised they weren’t going for his revised story.

You cannot have Muhammad praising Christians of being of the book, a revealed text according to him and a people who Muhammads followers should consult with the fact that those same people carried the message of the incarnation.

It is only afterwards that he starts going into his tirade about Allah having no partners (which i’m guessing meant females - another mistake) and suddenly saying Christians are cursed and telling his followers then that they shouldn’t have any friends among the Christians.

This is another contradiction. He was making it up as he went along and getting rich at the same time and sleeping with lots of women whose husbands he got his followers to murder.

Muhammad might have been a great man, but he obviously wasn’t a good one, by his own writings.

Dear Abucs,

Are you directing your post to me? I am just asking, no offense.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Dear FoA,

Please don’t forget Mat 28:19. All nations are supposed to be the deciples of Jesus. Why do we still need to have Jews and Gentiles? Matthew in Mat 12:21 you refered, were quoting Isiah, and nothing to do with Gentiles of Jews who interpret Christianity. Christianity comes from Jesus and nothing to do with Gentiles of Jews. In His eyes, no difference between Gentiles of Jews anyway.

Jews observe Torah, Gentiles don’t. There doesn’t need to be any Jews I guess, but there are, or at least they say so. So it would be a good bit of info, aside from this particular issue, to know if there were any Jewish popes like Peter, he was Jewish. You know, popes born to a Jewish mother or once having converted to Judaism, then becoming pope.

 

[abucs]

And you are living in denial by not having any proof and starting from the fact that at all costs Muhammad must be right.

With respect to asking any Jew, would that include the saints Peter, John, James, Paul, Mary, Nicodemus etc.

The idea that God would come as man was a revelation. That it was unexpected doesn’t negate it.

With regard to asking Jews of today there are many who have converted to Christianity, do these count ?

Or should i only ask ones who haven’t accepted Jesus as the Messiah ?

At least Muhummad got that right.

 

[abucs]

By the way, with Muhammad saying that Jesus was the Messiah, you might want to ask a Jew if the Messiah will be ruler of the world. Will you accept their answer if it comes back yes ?

 

[swariffin]

Jews observe Torah, Gentiles don’t. There doesn’t need to be any Jews I guess, but there are, or at least they say so. So it would be a good bit of info, aside from this particular issue, to know if there were any Jewish popes like Peter, he was Jewish. You know, popes born to a Jewish mother or once having converted to Judaism, then becoming pope.

Dear FoA,

I think you have answered your own question. Peter is the greatest pope we have, that no other popes used/is using his name. My question remains, why do you insist on the issue of Jews and Gentiles? Would it make a difference if a pope is a Jew or gentile?

 

[FaithofAbraham]

And you are living in denial by not having any proof and starting from the fact that at all costs Muhammad must be right.

With respect to asking any Jew, would that include the saints Peter, John, James, Paul, Mary, Nicodemus etc.

The idea that God would come as man was a revelation. That it was unexpected doesn’t negate it.

With regard to asking Jews of today there are many who have converted to Christianity, do these count ?

Or should i only ask ones who haven’t accepted Jesus as the Messiah ?

At least Muhummad got that right.

There are about .05% of all Jews believing in Jesus, that’s not a lot. They mostly believe he is God, along with the Christians.

But fact is verses like Hebrews say differently. God doesn’t need to beg Himself to save His own life. Jesus is a powerful prophet who God dwells in and rules over us. But he isn’t God that existed for all eternity, that much is clear, so Mohammed was right on that point.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Dear FoA,

I think you have answered your own question. Peter is the greatest pope we have, that no other popes used/is using his name. My question remains, why do you insist on the issue of Jews and Gentiles? Would it make a difference if a pope is a Jew or gentile?

Jews never had the idea of God incarnated into a man. Gentile Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, etc. did with Osiris, Zeus, Mithras, Dionysus, etc. That’s why things like Zeitgeist were a hot issue, comparing the RCC Jesus to those Gentile deities.

So it would be interesting to know how many Jewish popes there were who specifically agreed with Jesus deity doctrine.

 

[swariffin]

There are about .05% of all Jews believing in Jesus, that’s not a lot. They mostly believe he is God, along with the Christians.

But fact is verses like Hebrews say differently. God doesn’t need to beg Himself to save His own life. Jesus is a powerful prophet who God dwells in and rules over us. But he isn’t God that existed for all eternity, that much is clear, so Mohammed was right on that point.

Dear FoA,

Why do you think that Christianity must be based on 99.05% Jews? Muhammad can agree to those 99.05% or to any other source, but Christianity comes from Jesus, the Kalimatullah, not from the Jews not from Muhammad, and certainly not from me.

 

[swariffin]

Jews never had the idea of God incarnated into a man. Gentile Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, etc. did with Osiris, Zeus, Mithras, Dionysus, etc. That’s why things like Zeitgeist were a hot issue, comparing the RCC Jesus to those Gentile deities.

So it would be interesting to know how many Jewish popes there were who specifically agreed with Jesus deity doctrine.

Dear FoA,

Christianity comes from Jesus Christ, not from the Jews.