'An Affair On Golgotha' -- a refutation

RJM Corbet said:
I do believe you are mislead. God is a personal matter, and religions do not have a right to enforce themselves by the sword upon people who do not subscribe.

Either you are being naive, or you truly believe that Muslims are evil.
..that the Qur'an and the OT teach mankind to be evil.

It's hypocrisy. Many people praise democracy until it results in a system they are not in agreement with.
The western secular system has evolved into what we have today. Many Christians have become so liberal, that they follow next to nothing or have become atheists!

The Qur'an does NOT teach people to kill other people from peaceful nations. It teaches to deal harshly with enemies.
It's no different to how US and UK treated Hitler and his followers.
..so please .. don't take the Qur'an and OT out of context.
 
Last edited:
Is this not contradictory?

Many things appear to be. :)
I would agree that it is better to be alone than to be in "bad company".

What I'm trying to say, is that being ENTIRELY alone is not good. It is better to be with a congregation,
unless they are totally astray and involved with major sin.

Most people do not fare well by themselves .. we might get into bad habits .. or become delusional etc.
 
Either you are being naive, or you truly believe that Muslims are evil.
..that the Qur'an and the OT teach mankind to be evil.

It's hypocrisy. Many people praise democracy until it results in a system they are not in agreement with.
The western secular system has evolved into what we have today. Many Christians have become so liberal, that they follow next to nothing or have become atheists!

The Qur'an does NOT teach people to kill other people from peaceful nations. It teaches to deal harshly with enemies.
It's no different to how US and UK treated Hitler and his followers.
..so please .. don't take the Qur'an and OT out of context.
OK, I really want to bring down the temperature. First, I don't care what you believe, that is your personal decision. If that is the path that speaks to you and teaches you, then that is the appropriate path for you.

Having said that, keep in mind that you began by trying to discredit Christianity, and using misinformation (or misapplied information) to do so, without considering the context. The context renders the discredit moot, and so to justify the discredit the context is ignored. That is a very common rhetorical device.

Not all Muslims are evil, but the world has witnessed a great deal of evil in the past few decades done by evil Muslims. There is simply no other way to honestly put this.

That does not excuse evil done in the world by Christians, or Hindus, or Buddhists, or any other faith. Evil is evil regardless. Attempting to justify evil only implies agreement with it or collusion with it.

I look around at the various faith walks, who by and large share a good many moral teachings (I did an exercise not long after I started here, the thread may still exist somewhere, comparing the moral teachings of the major faiths), and most emphasize good works and cooperation. The only odd man out I see as a rule (not exception) is Islam. I mean no disrespect, just my honest observance, and that is completely divorced from any secular or patriotic sentiment.

So when someone attacks from a Muslim perspective, I am on guard. I know they tend to be well versed in rhetoric, but rhetoric has no obligation to truth. American politicians are fond of rhetoric for that very reason. Rhetoric has only to tug on heartstrings and sound plausible to gain believers. I am NOT saying Islam is rhetoric, but I have heard many Muslims using rhetorical tactics to advance their arguments, and then bounce back to logic in an effort to cover their trail. Quite clever actually, but not scholarly, and get really testy when called on it.

You are passionate for your belief, that is a good thing. I would only say that being zealous for your faith can easily tip over the edge into becoming a Zealot. Some faiths are more prone to this than others, but people are people and this is a psychological tendency of people. I can say this because I have stood on the brink and stared down into this particular abyss.

I would encourage you to practice looking past the shortcomings of those you disagree with. You do not have to accept, you do have to tolerate. If G-d is love, and love exhibits peace as but one manifested evidence, then in order to live in peace with others you have to learn to tolerate them. It can be difficult to discuss with those you disagree with, but the alternative is to jump headlong over the brink into the abyss.
 
Bring it on .. I'm feeling strong today. 2 onto 1 .. 10 onto 1 .. whatever :)
Great that you're feeling better and nice to see you around here again, Muhammad :)
 
Either you are being naive, or you truly believe that Muslims are evil.
..that the Qur'an and the OT teach mankind to be evil.
No of course I don't believe Muslims are evil. Where did you get that idea? Some undoubtedly are, but that goes for people in general. But we all have to grow and move or we'd still be knocking rocks together to make fire, and so I personally do not believe a literalist reading of scripture allows barbaric treatment of innocent people whose only offence is not to subscribe to the same scripture as I do? That's why secular states have secular laws which can change to meet new conditions.
It's hypocrisy. Many people praise democracy until it results in a system they are not in agreement with.
In which case they are still bound to accept it? Or go somewhere else?
The Qur'an does NOT teach people to kill other people from peaceful nations.
So can we agree then that the use of the sword should be reserved for defence against aggressive invaders, and not to attack innocent people because they do not share our own beliefs?
..so please .. don't take the Qur'an and OT out of context.
I've told you, I don't know enough about the Quran.
I'm outta here ...
 
Last edited:
..keep in mind that you began by trying to discredit Christianity, and using misinformation (or misapplied information) to do so, without considering the context..

I refer you back to post #17

I said:
I'm not "rubbishing it" ..
I would trust the testimony of Jesus' disciples. I'm very wary of embracing a creed of somebody who appears to contradict their view. As I say .. we need to distinguish between historical fact and the personal opinions that are embedded in the gospels by their authors.
..particularly John!

The context is one in which the articles linked from the homepage are being discussed.
While I agree that they deserve criticism, I do not say that on the basis of defending misbelief. i.e. Jesus claimed to be God / trinity

Furthermore, the articles in question have a stream of references as appendix. That, in my book, deserves further attention.
You can accuse us of spreading misinformation as much as you like.
I am quite prepared to answer criticism of Islam based on scholarly articles from wikipedia, which I often quote.

Not all Muslims are evil, but the world has witnessed a great deal of evil in the past few decades done by evil Muslims..

Yes, that is quite so. Don't confuse religion with politics. The klu-klux-clan and IRA are similarly guilty, for example.
Someone shouting "Allahuakbar" means nothing .. satan only wishes to divide and uses tactics that seem good to him.
 
I care .. I care about what happens to me after I die. I care about whether satan corrupts me in this life and leads me into temptation .. knowingly or unknowingly. It is my duty to be aware of truth and falsehood.
I agree, wholeheartedly, I could not possibly agree more. And yet I'm on a very different path. Just as I am certain there are very many others who agree with your statement absolutely, yet walk still different paths than either you or me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Hi Muhammad_isa –
Like us all, glad to see you back in action!

Re your religious conviction, I do not question, nor do I challenge the Qran nor the teachings contained therein. What follows are rather clarifications of what to me seem misrepresentations of Christianity.

... apart from Jesus not dying on the cross, of course ...
I always wonder why Islam did not let Jesus die on the cross, and simply refute the Resurrection. The idea that the Romans crucified someone, but allowed a living body to be taken away I find hardest to believe. The guards at the seen would have made very sure that the executed were dead before they allowed anyone to take the bodies away. Tacitus, in his annals, says: "Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus... " Had Jesus survived, there's little doubt the Romans would have got to hear about it, as the news would be all over Jerusalem!

Furthermore, a "human Jesus" laying down his life and being resurrected would not make him God or Divine.
No, but that's not why we regard Him as such.

This type of narrative is pagan in origin. It has nothing to do with Judaism.
Resurrection? Actually it is in pre-Christian Judaism.

He himself would denounce it.
That's like me saying the Prophet never received a Revelation ...

Such concepts are pagan in origin i.e. gods dying and coming back to life.
That's not the doctrine at all.

God is One and does not die .. ever
Which is just as we believe.

...believing that the Bible is "the word of God" is just that .. a belief.
Like the Divine Revelation in the Quran.

... It was revealed over a few years to one man .. Prophet Muhammad.
That is the dogma of Islam and a mark of your faith, but it is, like my belief in the death and resurrection, 'just' a belief.

However, I eventually realised that the concept of God is much more complex than imagining Him as a person who does things ... Divine justice is about reality .. not the whims of 'a personal god', as people often think about Jews & the OT.
In conversations with Muslims I get very much the impression that Allah possesses many qualities of a person who acts – indeed the Divine Names do just that, and I see absolutely no difference between this and the idea of a 'personal god'. In talking to Muslim scholars, of course, we enter a different order of dfailogue, but the Muslim in the street, as it were, is another kettle.

Catholics have the Pope .. he has the responsibility. Islam should not change. The Qur'an is specific. Men are in charge of women. Adultery is serious etc.
We have the pope, you have Imams. Islam changes from country to country, near enough, in its application. Taliban Islam is something, Saudi Islam something else ... I'm not attacking Islam, I'm simply saying the same critique you apply to Europe can be applied to Moslem states. So Europe is lax, I don't disagree, but shooting children because she's a girl and wants to go to school? Yet I met a woman who is a Moslem scholar and holds a very senior position in a Moslem Institute in Spain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Hi Muhammad_isa –
Like us all, glad to see you back in action!

Time will tell if I can keep it up :)


I always wonder why Islam did not let Jesus die on the cross, and simply refute the Resurrection..

Well .. "Islam" tells us what actually happened, however hard it is for somebody to believe :)

The idea that the Romans crucified someone, but allowed a living body to be taken away I find hardest to believe. The guards at the seen would have made very sure that the executed were dead before they allowed anyone to take the bodies away. Tacitus, in his annals, says: "Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus... " Had Jesus survived, there's little doubt the Romans would have got to hear about it, as the news would be all over Jerusalem!

We don't really know the details of what happened. The Qur'an says that Jesus was not crucified but "it appeared as if he was".
That has caused some Muslims to suggest that somebody else took his place .. or that pontius pilatus had no intention of crucifying him, and instructed his men to make it look as though he was etc.
Are there accounts of Jesus appearing with the wounds that he might of got from being crucified? I think there is, isn't there?

I said:
It was revealed over a few years to one man .. Prophet Muhammad.
That is the dogma of Islam and a mark of your faith, but it is, like my belief in the death and resurrection, 'just' a belief.

What are you saying?
..that the Qur'an was NOT revealed to Prophet Muhammad and he and his disciples were lying?

In conversations with Muslims I get very much the impression that Allah possesses many qualities of a person who acts – indeed the Divine Names do just that, and I see absolutely no difference between this and the idea of a 'personal god'. In talking to Muslim scholars, of course, we enter a different order of dfailogue, but the Muslim in the street, as it were, is another kettle.

The only form of communication that we have is language. That is how God guides His creation. Through His human Messengers who bring us revelation. The Qur'an confirms the Bible in this respect.
People have always debated on the topic of the nature of God.
The bottom line is that nobody knows. We can only imagine relative to what we already know .. what we can see etc.
Many atheists complain about "a person called god" who commits genocide etc. To a believer, that is utter nonsense.
Comparing God to a person can give some insight into his nature eg. God created us in His image
That is, however, as far as you can take it. God is not a creature!


We have the pope, you have Imams. Islam changes from country to country, near enough, in its application. Taliban Islam is something, Saudi Islam something else ..

Yes, there are many different creeds in Islam .. just as there are in Christianity.
 
Last edited:
Well .. "Islam" tells us what actually happened, however hard it is for somebody to believe :)

I see a balance has been given between the Christian Interpretation of the Bible and the Islamic Interpretation of the Quran.

The balance for me was found in a Tablet written by Baha'u'llah called the Kitab-i-Iqan.

Regards Tony
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Last edited:
The balance for me was found in a Tablet written by Baha'u'llah called the Kitab-i-Iqan.
None of the many Prophets sent down, since Moses was made manifest, as Messengers of the Word of God, such as David, Jesus, and others among the more exalted Manifestations who have appeared during the intervening period between the Revelations of Moses and Muḥammad, ever altered the law of the Qiblih.
(The Kitáb-i-Íqán)
www.bahai.org/r/658212558


The whole point is that Christians do not view Jesus as just another prophet. So any writing that starts with that as an original premise doesn't even get past the first base as far as Christians are concerned.

At risk of repetition:

“And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”
John 20:28-29


“Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?”
John 14:19

etc

“He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you Simon bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Matthew 13:15-20
etc
Also, the Transfiguration:
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-17/

And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of Man be risen again from the dead.
Matt 17:9
 
Last edited:
What are you saying?
..that the Qur'an was NOT revealed to Prophet Muhammad and he and his disciples were lying?
The two scriptures disagree, and cannot both be right?

Are there accounts of Jesus appearing with the wounds that he might of got from being crucified? I think there is, isn't there?
Luke 24:36-49
While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”

When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence. He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Luke-Chapter-24/ (Whole chapter)

John 20:24-27
But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/John-Chapter-20/ (Whole chapter)


However these passages are written as evidence of the Resurrection. The resurrected Christ reveals his wounds as evidence that it is really him. Remember that a lance was thrust into his side while still upon the cross, to make sure he was dead. It would anyway be quite unlikely that he was walking around and talking and eating normally a few days after incurring such wounds?
 
Last edited:
Well .. "Islam" tells us what actually happened, however hard it is for somebody to believe
Well that's an article of faith, rather than fact, we think you're in error on that point.

We don't really know the details of what happened. The Qur'an says that Jesus was not crucified but "it appeared as if he was"...
Some gnostic schools held similar opinions. Again, erroneous.

Are there accounts of Jesus appearing with the wounds that he might of got from being crucified? I think there is, isn't there?
Yes.

What are you saying? ..that the Qur'an was NOT revealed to Prophet Muhammad and he and his disciples were lying?
No, I'm saying that the reception of the Qur'an as Divine Revelation is a matter of faith.

The Qur'an confirms the Bible in this respect.
Indeed, but the Christian Scriptures do not need nor rely on the Qur'an for confirmation, any more than the Hebrew Scriptures require the New Testament.

People have always debated on the topic of the nature of God.
Yes.

The bottom line is that nobody knows. We can only imagine relative to what we already know .. what we can see etc.
Yes.

Many atheists complain about "a person called god" who commits genocide etc. To a believer, that is utter nonsense... Comparing God to a person can give some insight into his nature eg. God created us in His image

That is, however, as far as you can take it. God is not a creature!
No-one claims that God is.

From the Christian perspective, it always seems that Islam, with regard to God, thinks we believe something we do not, and then argues against it.

The two most common errors relevant here seem to be that Christians believe in three Gods, and that Christians believe God died on the cross.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
The resurrected Christ reveals his wounds as evidence that it is really him.

So why did God the Father not create him again without his wounds?
If he had had his head cut off [ like John the Baptist ] would God have created him again without a head?

..or perhaps you think that Jesus' wounds have nothing to do with his death. That would mean that the lance thrust into his side wouldn't of killed him?

No .. any reasonable person would deduce that he didn't actually die.

..and btw .. where in the OT does it say that the Messiah would die and be resurrected 3 days later?
 
why did God the Father not create him again without his wounds?
Missing the point again. He returned as the spiritual Christ. He could manifest himself anywhere or everywhere, or choose not to at will. He had transcended death, descended into hell and conquered hell and returned victorious over death. He manifested the wounds to prove himself to those in doubt.

You haven't even read it and you do not understand the context or complexity. The greatest minds have debated it for two millennia and the greatest painters and artists have dedicated themselves to trying to portray the mysteries of the crucifixion and resurrection.

I'm sorry @muhammad_isa but IMO your lack of knowledge about the subject does not justify you dashing in to try to rubbish it. I would have far too much respect to presume to try deconstruct the validity of your faith without at least a reasonable knowledge of your scripture.

It's ridiculous and actually disrespectful for anyone to come and try rubbish the New Testament without having even read it. It does not reflect well that you would attempt to do so. Imo

EDIT
And the real issue is why do you so badly need to?
 
Last edited:
No, I'm saying that the reception of the Qur'an as Divine Revelation is a matter of faith..

Hmm .. I think that the word "faith" is often misunderstood.
Many atheists feel that most people believe in God through "blind faith".
They might be right .. a lot of people have little knowledge, and their faith comes from a variety of places..

eg. their conscience .. their heritage

..so if somebody thinks that the Qur'an is NOT a Divine revelation, that implies that it is fraudulent, imo
Now .. somebody might conclude that, because it doesn't agree with what they already believe, or
what it says might not suit them etc.

As far as I'm concerned, I was a Christian and came across the Qur'an and concluded that it was indeed true.
My faith in Almighty God INCREASED .. in no way has my faith been replaced by another. There is only One God.
It's a matter of understanding. Naturally, people are free to believe what they like. There must be a reason however..
..saying "it's a matter of faith" is not a reason at all :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top