Is Islam peaceful and a good religion for everyone ?

[RJM]

@yitzak tover

According to the NT when they came to arrest Jesus, Peter took out a sword and cut off the ear of the high priest's servant. Jesus told him to put the sword away, and healed the ear.

When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Lord, shall we smite with the sword?
And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear.
And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.
(Luke 22: 49-51)

Clearly Jesus did not want them to defend him with swords. But after he was gone, they would need to defend themselves, and also need purses to buy what they needed -- when previously he had told them to go out without bag or purse or a spare cloak.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sell_your_cloak_and_buy_a_sword
Jesus spoke of the new situation. Formerly, when the Disciples had gone out, on mission, they had not lacked anything. Now they would need a purse, a bag and even a sword ... But the disciples misunderstood Him and produced weapons. 'That is enough', said Jesus to end a conversation which they had failed to understand. The way of Jesus, as they should have known, was not the way of the sword, but of love.

I accept that interpretation of the passage, read in context ...

(edited)

 

[yitzak tover]

Ok. Got it, here:

And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.

And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.
(Luke 22:35-38)
Luke 22 KJV Read whole chapter

Fair enough. In context he said this to them just before entering the Garden of Gethsemane. So he knew he was shortly going to be taken away. It's a cryptic passage, isn't it? It doesn't sound as if he was leading his men out to battle, with only two swords? He knew they were soon going to be left alone without him.

That's not 'Go buy swords, kill my deniers'

nope. wrong. you don't tell your followers to go buy swords. sell their cloaks. then turn around and say oh I meant just two of you go do that. clearly the two sword thing was a later addition by church scribes

 

[RJM]

nope. wrong. you don't tell your followers to go buy swords. sell their cloaks. then turn around and say oh I meant just two of you go do that. clearly the two sword thing was a later addition by church scribes

Yuh. The parts that suit your drift are genuine and the parts that don't are false. Same ole ... yawn

 

[muhammad_isa]

Yuh. The parts that suit your drift are genuine and the parts that don't are false. Same ole ... yawn

It's not worth arguing about .. unless of course you are a pacifist..
Do you think that Jesus would tell the Ukranians to hand over their country to Putin?

Personally, I doubt it..

Pope Francis says 'rivers of blood and tears flow from Ukraine': Pontiff slams Putin for 'sowing death, destruction and misery' and insists his invasion is 'NOT a military operation but a WAR'

 

[yitzak tover]

Yuh. The parts that suit your drift are genuine and the parts that don't are false. Same ole ... yawn

just use your commonsense mate

 

[RJM]

just use your commonsense mate

I will. It tells me: don't feed the troll. Go find a better teacher, mate. Come back when you know what you're talking about ...

 

[yitzak tover]

I will. It tells me: don't feed the troll. Go find a better teacher, mate. Come back when you know what you're talking about ...

your obviously not using commonsense if you still believe Jesus was a prince of peace

 

[Ella S.]

I think it is illogical to call Islam as a whole anything like nasty, peaceful, or good. At the very least, it would be an over-generalization.

There are nasty people who are Muslim. There are peaceful people who are Muslim. There are good people who are Muslim.

As I, myself, am not Muslim, I do not think I am in a good place to interpret their beliefs for them. I can only take each individual's actions as they come.

 

[Ella S.]

And I have nothing against you, @muhammad_isa

Indeed, I think you have had some very insightful and very compassionate posts and so I have come to respect your perspective.

 

[yitzak tover]

I think it is illogical to call Islam as a whole anything like nasty, peaceful, or good. At the very least, it would be an over-generalization.

There are nasty people who are Muslim. There are peaceful people who are Muslim. There are good people who are Muslim.

As I, myself, am not Muslim, I do not think I am in a good place to interpret their beliefs for them. I can only take each individual's actions as they come.

I as well am hesitant to label all church clergy as pedophiles some are really good trinitarians and some are vile pedos ...don't paint them all with the same brush. I left church for islam in 2002

 

[Faithfulservant]

I beg for God's forgiveness. I am a sinner. I don't mean to be rude.
I believe that the Qur'an is true, and the author is none but God.

Do you believe that the Torah and the Injil were also inspired by Allah?

I believe that if the Qur'an was corrupted that He would send us another Prophet.
I have yet to see where it is wrong or contradictory. I know some people might think it is,
but I have explanations that satisfy me that it is not.

I have been reading the Quran and comparing Surahs to Hadiths I am finding important and serious contradictions. I am just barely understanding the concept of abrogation and the fact that all Arabic to English translations are frustrating to me as they all differ depending on what sect of Islam is responsible for it. I guess it's much the same with Christian translations as I personally prefer the textus receptus versions. I also noticed that denominations of Muslims are also similar to Christian denominations. They vary.

I'm continuing my studies. Wish me luck!

 

[Faithfulservant]

God, there is no god but Him. The Holy Sovereign.
"There is no compulsion in religion. Truth is distinct from falsehood."
- Qur'an -

What point is there in forcing somebody to believe something?
What is it that people fear? Isn't Almighty God enough for them?

There is a huge difference between legislating the death penalty for heresy,
and wishing for your brother what you wish for yourself.
I don't care if it is an Islamic nation or a Christian nation, killing people for their beliefs
is not according to God's will.

I'm sorry but this is where I found contradictions in the Quran. I've tried discussing them with Muslim friends and they all say the same thing.. that it was in the past and no longer practiced.. but no longer practiced by whom? Please understand I have no wish to offend but quid pro quo.. in order to discuss Christianity with Muslims I must understand where they are coming from.

 

[Faithfulservant]

I haven't recently been offended

As far as I'm concerned, this thread is history now.
I started it last year in the middle of the pandemic when things got a bit out of hand.

I see somebody rejuvenated the thread .. don't panic, it will pass .. inshAllah

Sorry but I'm rejuvenating it again... I need something to post on.

 

[Faithfulservant]

When we are talking in the Islam section, it will be better, if we quote from the Quran. And same, when we are talking in the Christianity section, it will be better, if we quote from the Bible. Then, there will be no disrespect to each other. So, I request to all members, please use quotes as the above, I have mentioned. Thanks to all.

Hmm I'm not sure if I agree with this as the Quran refers to the Torah and Injil as part of Allah's inspired word. They speak of our prophets and accept them as their own. I feel that might limit the conversations? Just my opinion of course

 

[RJM]

I'm sorry but this is where I found contradictions in the Quran. I've tried discussing them with Muslim friends and they all say the same thing.. that it was in the past and no longer practiced.. but no longer practiced by whom? Please understand I have no wish to offend but quid pro quo.. in order to discuss Christianity with Muslims I must understand where they are coming from.

Imo many of the exhortations to violence against disbelievers in the Quran are best understood as specific to Muhammad's (pbuh) wars of his own time? The context is key. They are historical and not intended as a permanent injunction?

I recently found this Oxford translation. He explains the history and context, and also explains a lot of other issues for someone new to the Quran. It is the best translation to start with, imo

 

[talib-al-kalim]

As I say, most Christians believe that Jesus is the Saviour.
They believe that anyone who is a true believer will produce good works as a product of faith,
just as a good tree produces good fruit.

If only that were true. I suppose it depends what you mean by "true believer".
Is a person who is NOT following "the law" a true believer? What fruits are they producing?
i.e. what are "good works" ?

Why do Christians believe that Jesus is the Saviour?
It's in his given name: Jeshuwa, the same name as Joshuwa. "Shuwa" means "saves". But who saves? It's "Je", or "Jo". That's an ellipse for Ha Shem. It's God. Jesus has the given name "God saves".

 

[talib-al-kalim]

I believe Muslims are encouraged by the Prophet (peace be upon him) not to read the Bible or New Testament? Yet some seem enthusiastic to comment analyse these scriptures they are encouraged to ignore?

Just another question?

I could cite a long list of Quran verses that indicate that the message of the Quran is to accept and respect the Word of prior prophets. It's not written in the Quran not to read the Bible, nor is it written that the Torah or the Gospel have been changed. There is only a verse saying that the Jews are twisting the Word in their mouths. It uses Arabic present tense which can't refer to the past or to a general habit. Muslim scholars have twisted this Word in their mouths, saying, the scriptures are distorted.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

I would not recommend somebody to read the Bible in preference to the Qur'an.
However, I certainly WOULD recommend a Christian to read it.

That's what the scholars say. That's not what the Quran says. See above.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

You're welcome. Please be assured there was no flaming when l called the Bible a spent and corrupted book. That is actually what we see it as. We also believe there is much goodness in it, but that's kind of implicit in it being "corrupted".

Also note l said "corrupted", not "corrupt". "Corrupt" implies it's corrupt to begin with. Not so. But some very bad old men looked it up and down and they hated it and they changed it. I mean the Temple franchise, whom may l remind you, Jesus was at odds with.

Personally, l love what l have read of Proverbs and Lamentations. I also think there's some true prophecies in the Book of Revelations, which is itself considered a dubious addition to the Bible, but much of it feels true. Anyway, feel free to write up a critique of our faith. I'd really like to know how you think.

Of course, the Gospel is only related though hadith. I suppose, a great part of the written Torah is based on oral traditions. I have the impression that the Torah also contains prescriptions that are later than Musa, probably from the time of the "Judges", Joshua until Shmuel (Samuel).
I also have the impression that John, the author of the fourth canonical Gospel account, is mixing his own thoughts into things reported as the direct speech of Jesus (p.b.u.h).
In this sense, it's good to have a critical awareness when reading the Tanach and the Gospel accounts.

There's no hint to this in the Quran, not even in reliable Hadith going back to Muhammad (p.b.u.h) saying that the Torah and the Gospel are corrupted. That's mere scholarly opinion, and many scholars are only repeating it, without even reading the Bible.

Muslim scholars often think that "sent down" means that the Word is directly "dictated" by God. But it must have been a more complex process; already Muhammad (p.b.u.h), according to Hadith, describes different ways of inspiration. The inspiration of Jesus was different; he never reported to have received inspiration from an angel. Musa, Ibrahim and Nuh are reported to have had dialogues with God. Out of all the prior messengers received only the ten commandments to Musa were written down immediately. There's always a way of transmission in between.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

OK.

It seemed to me this Islamic reference site, and wiki, is not so definitive.

To explain the Catholic position:
Our Lord affirmed that Baptism is necessary for salvation (Mark 16:16, John 3:5). Because no other explicit teaching was given, the Church cannot affirm other means of assuring entry into heaven without it, without contradicting the word of Scripture.

However, Christ died for all, that sins may be forgiven, and since all are called to the one and the same destiny (cf 1 Timothy 2:4), holds that it is within the gift of the Holy Spirit to baptise whomsoever the Spirit wills (cf John 3:8).

As for children, we trust in the mercy of God that they be saved, as we do in the funeral rites for them. Indeed, Jesus said: "Suffer the little children to come unto me" (Mark 10:14), and in this we hope and believe in the salvation of those without Baptism.

So this is one of those instance where the letter is the letter, but the spirit transcends the letter.

Please know that the "Islamic reference site" is a Salafya site; it stands for a particular understanding of Islam. But the article you linked is quite ok, certainly in line with orthodox Sunni madhab.

If you read carefully, there's only one citation going back to Muhammad: "God knows better."
Why should we not leave to God what is His?