I'm sorry, but how does this answer my question? Duty of Christians to accept Muslim authority to dictate Christian belief? Excuse me if I've missed it?I think perhaps I will answer the question for you
It involves the changing beliefs of the church from the 4th century through the middle ages to this day.
Is Islam peaceful and a good religion for everyone ?
- Thread starter muhammad_isa
- Start date
Is it?
..anyhow, if we are all sitting comfortably, let us begin.
Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109) was born in Italy, and would you believe it, a Benedictine monk
Up until then the ransom theory of atonement was the Catholic teachings.
The ransom theory of atonement says that Christ liberated humanity from slavery to sin and Satan, and thus death, by giving his own life as a ransom sacrifice to Satan, swapping the life of the perfect (Jesus), for the lives of the imperfect (other humans).
I'm sure Thomas can correct me, and provide some fine details, but that is not far off.
I asked: Muslims are not encouraged to read the NT? I'm wrong?
Slip sliding away ...
Last edited:
The Qur'an speaks extremely highly of both the Gospel (Injil) and Torah and considers them full of light and guidance.
Reading the Bible is permissible provided that the Muslim has a lot of knowledge
about the Islamic rulings and teachings of the Quran.
But essentially, although not expressly forbidden, you are generally encouraged not to read the Bible? It would apply to the large majority?
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.
However, I certainly WOULD recommend a Christian to read it.
You encourage Christians to read the Quran, which essentially discourages Muslims from reading the Bible NT? Have I got it wrong?
I don't know what's on your mind..
..but I would encourage everybody to "seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave".
That includes all types of knowledge including travel.
..but I would encourage everybody to "seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave".
That includes all types of knowledge including travel.
That would be an answer to the question? Never mind ... I had to try ...
SufiPhilosophy
Evolution by mutation has never been observed
- Messages
- 241
- Reaction score
- 55
- Points
- 28
@RJM Corbet
I really don't get the animosity to my coreligionist muhammad_isa but l just want to say: l find very little to disagree with in what he says. He is on point with most of what he writes - as far as l believe.
I want to add:
- The entire point of the Quran is that it's new, the Bible is lost (though we do believe a redeemer will one day come and discover the true Torah)
- The Quran has enough depth for us, there have been libraries of exegesis on it. It suffices for us, and the Qur'an itself tells us it is enough for us, at least as a mercy and a guidance.
- If there's a reason for an outsider to dip into the Bible, then l say go for it!
- muhammad_isa says you need to be qualified to dip into the Bible as a Muslim. I say: not necessary, although l'd say there's a lot of unpleasantry in the Bible about some prophets that could harm the mind of the unready Muslim.
- Thank you for the benediction to our Prophet, peace be upon him (whom l don't represent by the way, but it is really nice to see it).
- I heard "Jesus" actually means "saviour" so l got no problem with Christians calling him that.
- Finally, back to the point of this little sub-debate: The Bible has horrible things in it, my friend, and so the harm for us usually outweighs the good. We would never say those things about Prophet Lot (peace be upon him), Prophet Job / Ayyub (peace be upon him), or even Prophet Ham (peace be upon him) and so forth. I can't even repeat the tales.
SufiPhilosophy
Evolution by mutation has never been observed
- Messages
- 241
- Reaction score
- 55
- Points
- 28
@RJM Corbet can l just add also:
According to our beliefs, the only purpose of our life is to worship Allah.
That is literally it. There is nothing else for us.
However it is like people on this forum's views of angels having no free will, as if they would therefore be dull.
What l'm trying to say is, being tied to Infinite God as a slave is not actually dull and narrowing, it's the definition of the opposite.
So, as you can see, that is why we don't really get hung up on the Bible. In fact we believe our entire history is convergin on Allah revealing "The Shin", whether it's his own shin bone or what, l don't know. And after that, our entire lives will culiminate in just one glimpse of Allah. These things sound innocuous but they will apparently be well worth it all.
So, in the scheme of all this, what we consider to be a spent and corrupted book, the Bible, isn't a major talking point nor a sticking point for us.
According to our beliefs, the only purpose of our life is to worship Allah.
That is literally it. There is nothing else for us.
However it is like people on this forum's views of angels having no free will, as if they would therefore be dull.
What l'm trying to say is, being tied to Infinite God as a slave is not actually dull and narrowing, it's the definition of the opposite.
So, as you can see, that is why we don't really get hung up on the Bible. In fact we believe our entire history is convergin on Allah revealing "The Shin", whether it's his own shin bone or what, l don't know. And after that, our entire lives will culiminate in just one glimpse of Allah. These things sound innocuous but they will apparently be well worth it all.
So, in the scheme of all this, what we consider to be a spent and corrupted book, the Bible, isn't a major talking point nor a sticking point for us.
SufiPhilosophy
Evolution by mutation has never been observed
- Messages
- 241
- Reaction score
- 55
- Points
- 28
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. No worries. I am talking mostly about the New Testament.
My point is someone from one faith lecturing those of another to change their beliefs and disputing meanings in a scripture he is effectively encouraged not to read? Certainly not to study?
It is far more interesting to hear someone sharing insights about their own faith, and that way learn about how others think? That's all.
Wrong !
We are encouraged to learn about everything. I would have thought that being born and living in
a Christian majority country, it would be ignorant of me to ignore the religion I was raised with.
It seems to me that you just don't like me personally, discussing my understandings
of Christianity, and how it relates to Islam.
@RJM Corbet
I would agree with you that I have been very involved with multiple boards, and that
I probably come across as repetitive. However, as far as I'm aware,
I have not been arguing against a particular religion in its forum.
Anyhow, I don't intend to engage in any of the boards other than Islam and the Lounge
for a while. Let's see how it goes, shall we?
I would agree with you that I have been very involved with multiple boards, and that
I probably come across as repetitive. However, as far as I'm aware,
I have not been arguing against a particular religion in its forum.
Anyhow, I don't intend to engage in any of the boards other than Islam and the Lounge
for a while. Let's see how it goes, shall we?
Last edited:
I've responded by PM
Well it's two lines, I assume, copied from a long document, the wiki article on Salvation in Christianity, so my suggestion would be for anyone interested to read on to the end of the document for themselves, no need to rehearse line by line here.
Not wanting to post extensively on the Islamic Board, but in response to the enquiry, suffice to say there is no one, single, definitive dogma of Salvation, simply because that truth of the Church was never challenged by heresy. Rather, it was always a given and understood that Christ died for our sin. A foundational commentary was given by Irenaeus of Lyon (130-202AD) – the Recapitulation Theory appeals to me particularly – and Fathers, Doctors, saints and sages have given rise to different doctrinal approaches through their own exegesis.
With regard to the Atonement, to quote the Catholic Encyclopedia:
At first we have the central fact made known in the Apostolic preaching, that mankind was fallen and was raised up and redeemed from sin by the blood of Christ... By whatever names or figures it may be described, that work is the reversal of the Fall, the blotting out of sin, the deliverance from bondage, the reconciliation of mankind with God. And it is brought to pass by the Incarnation, by the life, the sufferings, and the death of the Divine Redeemer. All this may be summed up in the word Atonement. This, is so to say, the starting point.
The base text, if you like, is from the Council of Trent in 1547:
Whence it came to pass, that the Heavenly Father, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort (2 Corinthians 1, 3), when that blessed fullness of the time was come (Galatians 4:4) sent unto men Jesus Christ, His own Son who had been, both before the Law and during the time of the Law, to many of the holy fathers announced and promised, that He might both redeem the Jews, who were under the Law and that the Gentiles who followed not after justice might attain to justice and that all men might receive the adoption of sons. Him God had proposed as a propitiator, through faith in His blood (Romans 3:25), for our sins, and not for our sins only, but also for those of the whole world (I John ii, 2). (Sixth Session: Decree on Justification, Chapter II: On the dispensation and mystery of Christ’s advent)
The shortest and most succinct theory is offered in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
It is love "to the end" that confers on Christ's sacrifice its value as redemption and reparation, as atonement and satisfaction. He knew and loved us all when he offered his life. Now "the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died." No man, not even the able to take on himself the sins of all men and offer himself as a sacrifice for all. the existence in Christ of the divine person of the Son, who at once surpasses and embraces all human persons, and constitutes himself as the Head of all mankind, makes possible his redemptive sacrifice for all."
(CCC Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 2, Paragraph 616)
To be even briefer, Love is the answer, and it is for each one of us to search our hearts as to its meaning.
That's it..
3 For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures,
4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures,
- 1 Corinthians 15 -
..so it was/is a matter of interpreting what Paul meant by that.
Yes, and then comes the concept of "original sin" that only became fully formed with the writings of Augustine of Hippo (354–430), who was the first author to use the phrase "original sin".
Anyhow, I was just commenting on the fact how Catholics / Christians have held different views in the various eras
eg. early, medieval, enlightenment
and becoming what it is today.
Well neither 'God' nor "Messiah' are names, in that sense, one could say both are categories.
Yes, we have those too!
The Litany of the Holy Name of Jesus, for example.D'you think so? Perhaps if you understood the context better. Suffice to say we don't.
It's a pity you can hold 'apologists' in such contempt, I'm sure that does not apply to defenders of your own faith. As you say, it's indicative of an ideology "wherein everything in your narrow space is the way you see it ... It's self perpetuating small mindedness ... just flame."
Your words, not mine.