Among the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) i.e. the “ten thousands of saints”, were Abyssinian, Persians, Romans and Israelites.
Who is “us” and “we” in this verse?.. Is there more than one Christ being referred to here??
What has this verse got to do with the resurrection of Jesus (pbuh) on the third day?
and as a Muslim, you surely must not have a problem with this:
the problem is not in the OT but in your understanding of the word “it is written”. You think it means you will find the exact same words in one passage.
And you have already been told that you are not going to find a specific text. You are thinking too explicitly. The Semitic mindset isn’t like that. The closest verse you are going to get is in Hosea 6:13. Some scholars see this as a reference to the resurrection.
Muslims are in no position to allege that. Muhammad borrowed heavily from both Judaism and Christianity, before inventing Islam in AD 610. In fact, he connected the origin of his people to the Old Testament, by claiming Ishmael (sp), the illegitimate son of Abraham, to be one of their founders.
And they cannot be called saints as they followed Muhammed, the false prophet.
Nope. It is prophetic language and may or may not reflect a number. In any event, three days and restored is there
Not left in the tomb or decay? My goodness, do I have to draw you a picture?
His Church
What does Jesus saying something have to do with truth in Islam? He said that he would be killed and rise again. ARe you once again calling him a lier? WAS JESUS WRONG OR JUST A LIER?
Ralph, Isa surely did not know that Allah will put someone else on the cross…or it that Allah will put no one but creates a crucifixion “in appearance”…or is it that He was crucified but did not die…or is it that he asked someone to take his place…Allah knows best. And Muslims come telling us about Jesus when they are the only ones full of doubt, as per the Quranic verse.
One should note that the work of Bart Ehrman isn’t used by most scholars in the field. As I recall from previous study of his work he makes conjectures and then confuses them with actual fact.
The more I read about it, and read it, the more confused I am about what they really beleive.
HambaI am from South Africa. I know a Catholic priest who has a Phd in Islamic stdies - in fact he holds a master’s degree in Arabic and Islamic Studies and a doctorate in Shi’a Islam. He underwent these studies in order to gain a better understanding of Muslims and to promote goodwill between the two great faiths.
I attended some talks he gave at the Catholic University several years ago which I found very interesting. There were a few Imams present. At the end of the talks they praised his unbiased presentations.
Yesterday in the Catholic weekly newspaper The Southern Cross there was an article titled “Church scholar urges new Qur’an analysis”. I shall quote some paragraphs:
*"The Qur’an, holy book of the Islamic faith, has never really been subjected to serious critical study by the Muslim world as a text per se, which has had a limiting effect on modern Islamic scholarship and a contemporary understanding of the book as applied text, a local Church-based Islamic scholar has said.
…
As such, it is seen as “the last fullstop”, source of faith, morals, law, praxis. Islamic scholars have resisted the kind of centuries-old critical approaches employed by their Jewish and Christian counterparts to the Bile, for fear of showing disrespect towards their holy book’s sheer sacredness. It limits possibilities for alternative textual interpretations.
Catholicism, on the other hand, draws on a combination of Scripture (seen as a collection of inspired texts), Church Tradition and the teachings of the Magisterium.
Certainly there are different interpretations among Muslim individuals across the world. Fr Clohessy said one way forward in more critical approaches to the Qur’an is to distinguish between divine dictation and written text, which makes sense to scholars of Islam who have picked up on grammatical inconsistencies in about 140 places throuhghout the text as well as random, rather than chronological, arrangement of sections.*
While the Church has always sought to improve on translations of the Bible and we always have the Traditions passed down a part of which is the Magisterium itself, Muslims should not be so ready to criticise the Bible. It is their interpretations of the bible that are inconsistent and not the Bible itself.
I do believe we should be tolerant and have an enquiring mind.
You are still mentioning those “ten thousands of saints”!!!, the SSS by inJESUS didn’t convince you!, it did for me
.I think inJESUS, djconklin, and ralphinal have answered that already (thank you all), however here is a Bible commentary from Matthew Henry Concise edition:
Please read this commentary by Matthew Henry Concise:
Matthew Henry Concise:
In many parts of Saudi Arabia, if someone says that he has a PhD in Islamic studies from any world-renown Western university, they will not allow him to give a sermon in their mosque.Hamba
I was hoping that you might respond to this posting. The priest in question is a very serious scholar. That he would undergo studies to Phd level in order to gain understanding of Islam is certainly commendable. His findings regarding interpretation deserve comment.
I could have sworn the Saudis awarded Karen Armstrong the King Faisal Prize for her ‘Services to Islam’. Oh yes, that’s right, the Westerner must be an Islamic sympathizer in order to be recognized by Muslim scholars, imams and muftis.
I was not aware that Karen Armstrong has ever given a sermon in a Saudi Arabian mosque.
She doesn’t have to. She does her preaching in her books, they preach her rhetoric in mosques.
Where’s his work been published? Which university did his work at? What is his name?
made sense from what I’ve seen so far. I haven’t seen a Bible critic yet that was consistent.
ironically, muslims reject both OT and NTregarding the crucifixion for the sake of a book whose meaning they don’t even understand.