Why Islam denies the crucifixion of Christ

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Byzantine Wolf,

Normally, a post such as this one would settle the matter…

Unfortunately when I presented that post to Planten he essentially responded with, “I disagree!” then started rambling on about Gnostics.

 

[KathleenGee]

I also think what needs to be addressed on individuals taking turns using the name, Planten.

Another form of taqirye…

Yesterday I visited our fairly new Middle Eastern market owned by Lebanese Christians…Marionite and Syriac…All the Muslims around come there…

First time I was in there, I came over to look at some fruit on display…a woman wearing her burka deliberately shoved her hands in front of me to push me aside…I stopped and looked at her and she was quite tall and look at me with a smile but defiant look.

Yesterday I was trying to look at some food. This Muslim man who looks like Ken Ellis from Minnesota who is now in Congress and came in with an adversarial spirit, refused to budge…I had to repeat loudly, ‘Excuse me!’.

They have quite a low opinion of American women. This ongoing falseness and mistreatment.

I say if people come on pretending to be the same person, but it is obvious that they are now, they need to be called on it.

Yest

 

[jakasaki]

I also think what needs to be addressed on individuals taking turns using the name, Planten.

Another form of taqirye…

Yesterday I visited our fairly new Middle Eastern market owned by Lebanese Christians…Marionite and Syriac…All the Muslims around come there…

First time I was in there, I came over to look at some fruit on display…a woman wearing her burka deliberately shoved her hands in front of me to push me aside…I stopped and looked at her and she was quite tall and look at me with a smile but defiant look.

Yesterday I was trying to look at some food. This Muslim man who looks like Ken Ellis from Minnesota who is now in Congress and came in with an adversarial spirit, refused to budge…I had to repeat loudly, ‘Excuse me!’.

They have quite a low opinion of American women. This ongoing falseness and mistreatment.

I say if people come on pretending to be the same person, but it is obvious that they are now, they need to be called on it.

Yest

I’m sorry poster, what does your post have to do with the topic at hand?

And I will close with this.

If a woman was wearing a “burka” as you stated, you would have **NOT **seen her smile because it would have been covered within the burka and you would have **NOT **seen her “defiant look” because her face would have been covered.

The only thing you can see behind the “burka” is a shadow/outline of their eyes.

 

[sedonaman]

…
There are even wilder theories I’ve heard, including one that says Simon of Cyrene was crucified instead of Jesus!

The craziest one I read once was it was Jesus’ shadow that was crucified!

As I argued before in this thread, it is very, very ironic to me that the Quran states that it is Christians with “no certain knowledge” and it is Christians who are full of “conjecture,” when in fact it seems the only side with that line of thinking is the side of Islam.

Yes, and with all their claims that Christians [especially that dastardly Paul of Taursus] corrupted the Bible, they have no trouble corrupting it themselves.

 

[jakasaki]

The craziest one I read once was it was Jesus’ shadow that was crucified!

Yes, and with all their claims that Christians [especially that dastardly Paul of Taursus] corrupted the Bible, they have no trouble corrupting it themselves.

You’ve (SedonaMan) asked this over and over.

Why can’t islam stand on it’s own without the support of the OT & NT.

To this day, there has been NO answer.

One minute the Bible is corrupted

Then 5 minutes later you will see muslims quoting Bible passages to try to “prove” something which isn’t there, while with the same breath they’ll state other passages corrupted.

Islam is not an extension of Judaism or Christianity therefore it needs to stand on their own.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

You’ve (SedonaMan) asked this over and over.

Why can’t islam stand on it’s own without the support of the OT & NT.

To this day, there has been NO answer.

One minute the Bible is corrupted

Then 5 minutes later you will see muslims quoting Bible passages to try to “prove” something which isn’t there, while with the same breath they’ll state other passages corrupted.

Islam is not an extension of Judaism or Christianity therefore it needs to stand on their own.

I corrected your post slightly, I hope you’ll forgive me - I assumed you meant “OT and NT”…I changed it as such

Partially the reason is their own Quran argues as much. One minute the Quran is that which confirms what came before it (S. 6:92; S. 9:111) and then suddenly it is corrupted by Jews and Christians (S. 2:75).

Hence when a devout Muslim comes across the crucifixion in the NT, they must either play pick-and-choose with the passages, or accuse it of being an outright forgery.

 

[jakasaki]

I corrected your post slightly, I hope you’ll forgive me - I assumed you meant “OT and NT”…I changed it as such

Partially the reason is their own Quran argues as much. One minute the Quran is that which confirms what came before it (S. 6:92; S. 9:111) and then suddenly it is corrupted by Jews and Christians (S. 2:75).

Hence when a devout Muslim comes across the crucifixion in the NT, they must either play pick-and-choose with the passages, or accuse it of being an outright forgery.

Yup… thanks for the correction.

 

[sedonaman]

You’ve (SedonaMan) asked this over and over.

Why can’t islam stand on it’s own without the support of the OT & NT.

To this day, there has been NO answer.

One minute the Bible is corrupted

Then 5 minutes later you will see muslims quoting Bible passages to try to “prove” something which isn’t there, while with the same breath they’ll state other passages corrupted.

Islam is not an extension of Judaism or Christianity therefore it needs to stand on their own.

Heaven forbid that we should ask for an actual list of Biblical passages that are “corrupted” according to Islam. In fact, I can’t even get an answer from planten on what Jesus’ good teachings are according to Islam or even as he understands them, and this after he made a claim that “there is a hell of a difference between the teachings of Jesus and those of Paul.”

I think what we are experiencing here is that Islam contradicts itself and therefore should be rejected by all reasoning persons.

I also found this little tidbit:

Islam is similar to Sikhism or Baha’ism, which we looked at in our previous section. These two religions, which claimed to spring from and yet supercede Islamic teaching, were dismissed in part because both relied upon Islamic tradition as a foundation for their own views and then contradicted the main tenets of the Islamic tradition with their own views. In doing so, Sikhism and Baha’ism were shown to be in contradiction of themselves. For if Islam is in error where Sikhism or Baha’ism disagree with its teachings then Islam cannot provide the historic foundations for Sikhism or Baha’ism. In which case, both religions’ affirmation that the Islamic tradition was a message from God is in error since both religions also deny the main tenets of the Islamic message from God by asserting their own claims.

Likewise, Islam is also invalidated by its claims to come from and uphold the Judeo-Christian tradition, which Islam claims is from God. Since the Judeo-Christian tradition in no way permits Islamic teaching then Islam must be in error either in its own teaching, which deviates from that of Judaism and Christianity, or Islam must be in error in its assertion that the Judeo-Christian tradition is of God.

[Page down to third to last and second to last paragraphs.]

 

[KathleenGee]

After reading some posts about the moon, about prostrating one’s self, etc., I encouraged DavidMark to visit it the other thread on Muslims believing in the messages of Muhammed. He needs to study the roots of the various faiths and see how they ‘interact’.

 

[KathleenGee]

DavidMark,

Please read the previous post…you need to take a second look …

Come to the Banquet Table and eat of Food that will last…

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

After reading some posts about the moon, about prostrating one’s self, etc., I encouraged DavidMark to visit it the other thread on Muslims believing in the messages of Muhammed. He needs to study the roots of the various faiths and see how they ‘interact’.

He has been to the other threads. He mostly posts stuff about the Bahai faith.

 

[famdigy]

Partially the reason is their own Quran argues as much. One minute the Quran is that which confirms what came before it (S. 6:92; S. 9:111) and then suddenly it is corrupted by Jews and Christians (S. 2:75).

Hence when a devout Muslim comes across the crucifixion in the NT, they must either play pick-and-choose with the passages, or accuse it of being an outright forgery.

Wolf, when the Qur’an says it is the book which confirms that which came before it, it is referring to the divine revelations which preceded it, that is to say the message as taught by Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. But when referring to the OT and NT books in our hands today, then Qur’an asserts those books have been altered to some degree.

We believe the Bible we have today is not entirely divinely inspired and that significant parts of it have been altered by the authors of the bible.

Given that we believe the Quran to be final uncorrupted revelation, picking and choosing passages from the bible is not done disingenuously. Passages that are in agreement with the Qur’an are generally accepted to be part of the divine revelation, but passages that are in disagreement are considered to a latter addition by people.

 

[KathleenGee]

Jagasaki
I thought the woman with the long veil and clothes was called a burka…I had happened to walk over to the stand when her behavior caused me to look up at her…and she was aggressive…

 

[KathleenGee]

About DavidMark, he shared his background and its connection to Islam.

About Muhammed and his miracles, I found out more about his errors in thread about the messages of Muhammed, and thought it good he read it to understand Islam better through his messages.

Quite insightful.

 

[Nine_Two]

Wolf, when the Qur’an says it is the book which confirms that which came before it, it is referring to the divine revelations which preceded it, that is to say the message as taught by Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. But when referring to the OT and NT books in our hands today, then Qur’an asserts those books have been altered to some degree.

We believe the Bible we have today is not entirely divinely inspired and that significant parts of it have been altered by the authors of the bible.

Given that we believe the Quran to be final uncorrupted revelation, picking and choosing passages from the bible is not done disingenuously. Passages that are in agreement with the Qur’an are generally accepted to be part of the divine revelation, but passages that are in disagreement are considered to a latter addition by people.

Which parts specifically have been altered? I ask because I hear Muslims arguing using the bible often enough for their faith. Obviously those select parts haven’t. Do you have a list or something of what has been changed?

 

[famdigy]

Which parts specifically have been altered? I ask because I hear Muslims arguing using the bible often enough for their faith. Obviously those select parts haven’t. Do you have a list or something of what has been changed?

It all comes down to what you use for a point of reference, for Muslims, the Qur’an as a divinely inspired book is the point of reference, this means concepts that are in disagreement with the Qur’an are considered to be of human origin. One such example would be the concept of the Trinity.

 

[dzheremi]

It makes sense to me now why the moon is such a symbol in Islam…after all, it’s a great big circle…

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

We believe the Bible we have today is not entirely divinely inspired and that significant parts of it have been altered by the authors of the bible.

Given that we believe the Quran to be final uncorrupted revelation, picking and choosing passages from the bible is not done disingenuously. Passages that are in agreement with the Qur’an are generally accepted to be part of the divine revelation, but passages that are in disagreement are considered to a latter addition by people.

It all comes down to what you use for a point of reference, for Muslims, the Qur’an as a divinely inspired book is the point of reference, this means concepts that are in disagreement with the Qur’an are considered to be of human origin. One such example would be the concept of the Trinity.

I understand that, however, does it not fit then that to use a later revelation as a “lens” to look back on previous revelation lead one to circular reasoning?

Consider that when the apostles of Christ went about preaching on Christ as Lord and Messiah (as we find in Acts and the epistles) that they never once accused the Jews of corrupting scripture or maligning it in any way. Rather, they used scripture to confirm what they were preaching. They used the previous revelation to confirm the new to show the unanimity.

Now when we come to the Quran, we don’t find that. Instead, we are told that those previous corruptions are corrupt - why? Because the Quran says so (S. 2:75). How do we know the Quran isn’t corrupt? Because it says so (S. 15:9). How do we know what to follow in the previous revelations? Whatever the Quran agrees with. This seems to not only be an example of circular reasoning (as I said) but it also presents intellectual dishonesty and inconsistency: Muslims are forced to agree with whatever proves their point, and disregard whatever doesn’t as corrupt. Furthermore, one must ask: why did God change His mode of revelation? Why is it that suddenly we don’t use those previous revelations? I understand the charge of corruption, but why would it suddenly become corrupt after thousands of years of preservation and the blatant use of Christ’s followers in using the scripture? Furthermore, if the Quran claims that Mohammad can be found in their scripture, as it does on numerous occasions, why can’t it, as the apostles did, quote the scripture? Why can’t it quote those bits of untarnished scripture for Christians and Jews to find? Why is it that in Romans 9 we find twelve direct OT citations from at least five OT books, yet in the Quran there isn’t one single quote from the Bible of an untarnished verse that proves who Mohammad or the Quran is?

Therefore returning to the subject of the crucifixion, why should Christians turn down the testimony of eyewitnesses who were there and early Church members who knew the eyewitnesses (and were disciples of them) based on the testimony of one religion coming from a different land, culture and language than that known to them? Especially when it comes some 600 years after the time of the crucifixion and created by men who were not even there and didn’t know the people who were?

 

[Nine_Two]

It all comes down to what you use for a point of reference, for Muslims, the Qur’an as a divinely inspired book is the point of reference, this means concepts that are in disagreement with the Qur’an are considered to be of human origin. One such example would be the concept of the Trinity.

How can you be sure it is only parts that directly conflict with the Koran which are corrupt? What about parts that have nothing to do with the koran directly? Would it not be safer to just avoid the bible altogether since we don’t know the bounds of its corruption?

 

[seraphime2008]

Wolf, when the Qur’an says it is the book which confirms that which came before it, it is referring to the divine revelations which preceded it, that is to say the message as taught by Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. But when referring to the OT and NT books in our hands today, then Qur’an asserts those books have been altered to some degree.

We believe the Bible we have today is not entirely divinely inspired and that significant parts of it have been altered by the authors of the bible.

Given that we believe the Quran to be final uncorrupted revelation, picking and choosing passages from the bible is not done disingenuously. Passages that are in agreement with the Qur’an are generally accepted to be part of the divine revelation, but passages that are in disagreement are considered to a latter addition by people.

Excuse me…why do you think that those people deliberately chose to let other people be astray? Their lifes were in danger, they died for their faith? What benefit did those people get to make a so called latter addition? Why didn’t God forbid that earlier? Why God even confirmed the messages in OT and NT by sending confirmation that brought many martyrs and saints to keep the true revelation of the NT and OT?

While Muhammad created his own version of religion, he got all the gold and glory for his own sake, his tribe’s sake, his people’s sake, his family’s sake, his follower’s sake. Then it’s clear the motives behind the so called the last revelation of allah. Hmmmmm