What is the Christian perspective of Muhammed (pbuh)?

[cyberpi]

Secondly, I would put forth I am not missing the meaning. Jesus said do not judge, so you will not be judged (Luke 6:37). That's pretty basic language, to me. And here is the full text about the plank, which makes it pretty obvious that I'm doing a straight forward reading:
Matthew 7:2-4 (New International Version)

New International Version (NIV)

2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. 3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?

I do not say, "Let me take the speck out of your eye"... I say, "Shame on you, you have a plank, and it is your choice whether or not you want to take it out". Do you realize that Jesus was JUDGING with words as he said that? If you don't want to be judged by me... then don't judge. If you don't want others to comment on your words... then don't post. I submit that is what Jesus was saying.

Those who have loved me have judged me, and those who have judged me have loved me.
Those who I have loved I have judged, and those who I have judged I have loved.

 

[cyberpi]

LOL- you are so off base about my mother. I said "everyone's mother" as in a general stereotype of the overbearing motherly hen. LOL You really do not read my posts very closely.

My own mother is like a saint to me, and I've said so numerous times on CR. I can't imagine a more wise and lovely woman. We're best friends- my sister, my mother, me, and my aunt (my mother's sister). If you knew me better rather than assuming stuff about me, you'd know that. Heck, if you even read my posts you'd know that.

But thanks anyway for the consistent "shaming." In the absence of an annoying and overbearing mother hen, I can get that fix here on CR from you. LOL

Oh I get it... so you generalize about everyone else's mother except your own. Basically you assume the character of everyone else's mother as being different than your own, and that everyone else's mother is commonly treated by leaving them to the answering machine. I see who it is then who assumes and generalizes about others. I simply figured you knew your mother better than anyone elses. Correct? If you go talking about mothers everywhere or how everyone else treats their mother, then I think you are really talking about your own mother and the way you treat her. I'd say that is a fair assumption. When you say 'WE'... I will read 'I'. When you say 'OUR'... I will read 'MY'.

 

[Quahom1]

What would Jesus do? What would a Christ-ian person do?

Please don't tell me they would bring an M16 with an M203 grenade launcher to prevent the people from stoning the woman... or call in a GPS guided munition to do the people if an Ace picks up a stone.

Now that would be... rude.

More like, cover her with my ballistic armored body...that would probably scare the hell out of them (watching those stones bounce harmlessly off).

Like my folks say, "use the tools God gives you to cover those in need, against those with animosity, indeed".

lol, more than one way to skin a snake, and more than one way to stop violence...

 

[path_of_one]

Oh I get it... so you generalize about everyone else's mother except your own.

No, you really do not get it. Let me spell it out for you, since it is clear that no minute detail of conversation can be left unspoken.

It is a common stereotype in United States middle class society that mothers are "mother hens" (hence, the phrase, "mother hen")- that they can be bossy, overbearing, offering loads of advice-- to their adult children. Which their adult children find annoying, and so they ignore them. If you watch United States sitcoms or movies, you will find this theme in numerous places. It is a common cultural stereotype in the United States. It is part of the humor of comedy- a stock character.

When I said you were like everyone's mother... I meant you are acting like everyone's (as in, the collective group at CR's) mother. As in, you feel it necessary to tell everyone how to respond, how to moderate, when to feel shame, etc. Which is kind of motherly in the stereotypical way depicted in US media.

I was not making assumptions about other people's mothers. I was saying you were acting as a mother to us all. A stereotypically annoying mother, like the ones on the sitcoms and movies.

You seem determined to read what I write incorrectly. Feel free to continue, as I'm quite sure you will, as it seems to be your perogative. I notice that you pick little bits of what I say and ignore the rest, too. Eh, such is life.

I do not say, "Let me take the speck out of your eye"... I say, "Shame on you, you have a plank, and it is your choice whether or not you want to take it out". Do you realize that Jesus was JUDGING with words as he said that? If you don't want to be judged by me... then don't judge. If you don't want others to comment on your words... then don't post. I submit that is what Jesus was saying.

Those who have loved me have judged me, and those who have judged me have loved me.
Those who I have loved I have judged, and those who I have judged I have loved.

Of course, you are free to read it however you wish. As am I. Commenting on others' posts is different from shaming them. And personally, I don't care if you judge me. I believe I've said that before. I only care if God judges me. What difference does your judgment make to me?

As for you equating love to judgment, that's fine for you. I don't see it that way, which is fine for me. To each our own.

 

[Quahom1]

No, you really do not get it. Let me spell it out for you, since it is clear that no minute detail of conversation can be left unspoken.

It is a common stereotype in United States middle class society that mothers are "mother hens" (hence, the phrase, "mother hen")- that they can be bossy, overbearing, offering loads of advice-- to their adult children. Which their adult children find annoying, and so they ignore them. If you watch United States sitcoms or movies, you will find this theme in numerous places. It is a common cultural stereotype in the United States. It is part of the humor of comedy- a stock character.

When I said you were like everyone's mother... I meant you are acting like everyone's (as in, the collective group at CR's) mother. As in, you feel it necessary to tell everyone how to respond, how to moderate, when to feel shame, etc. Which is kind of motherly in the stereotypical way depicted in US media.

I was not making assumptions about other people's mothers. I was saying you were acting as a mother to us all. A stereotypically annoying mother, like the ones on the sitcoms and movies.

You seem determined to read what I write incorrectly. Feel free to continue, as I'm quite sure you will, as it seems to be your perogative. I notice that you pick little bits of what I say and ignore the rest, too. Eh, such is life.



Of course, you are free to read it however you wish. As am I. Commenting on others' posts is different from shaming them. And personally, I don't care if you judge me. I believe I've said that before. I only care if God judges me. What difference does your judgment make to me?

As for you equating love to judgment, that's fine for you. I don't see it that way, which is fine for me. To each our own.

Reason does not work instinctively, but requires effort and toil in order to grow gradually from one insight to another. You are unevenly yoked in your reasoning with others, Path. You are carrying the majority of the load...

 

[path_of_one]

Eh, maybe I was just speaking too cryptically. It's difficult on a forum at times. My mind tends to work in big networks, pulling together this and that and the other thing (hence, the "Don't feed the mods" sign reference). My brain, for better or worse, pulls together gobs of stuff that a lot of people might feel unrelated or may misunderstand without some explanation. I also get in moods where I have (I am told) a quirky sarcastic humor that seems to run in my family. In print, if people don't know me that well (or have only seen Serious Kim) they might take it the wrong way.

In regular conversation, naturally, tone and gestures and follow-up discussion work wonders. When I work on books or articles and such, I obsess over the details until I am sure it is clear. But this off-the-cuff writing can easily lead to misunderstanding. And I think cyberpi and I regularly misunderstand each other anyway- perhaps just different ways our brains and language works. C'est la vie.

 

[Quahom1]

Eh, maybe I was just speaking too cryptically. It's difficult on a forum at times. My mind tends to work in big networks, pulling together this and that and the other thing (hence, the "Don't feed the mods" sign reference). My brain, for better or worse, pulls together gobs of stuff that a lot of people might feel unrelated or may misunderstand without some explanation. I also get in moods where I have (I am told) a quirky sarcastic humor that seems to run in my family. In print, if people don't know me that well (or have only seen Serious Kim) they might take it the wrong way.

In regular conversation, naturally, tone and gestures and follow-up discussion work wonders. When I work on books or articles and such, I obsess over the details until I am sure it is clear. But this off-the-cuff writing can easily lead to misunderstanding. And I think cyberpi and I regularly misunderstand each other anyway- perhaps just different ways our brains and language works. C'est la vie.

ok, I meant that cyberpi has to meet you at least half way (something he refuses to do). But I already knew about the rest of that stuff. your "J" told me...lol.

v/r

Q

 

[cyberpi]

You sound like you're trying to be everyone's annoying, overbearing mother.

My own mother is like a saint to me, and I've said so numerous times on CR.

As for you equating love to judgment, that's fine for you. I don't see it that way, which is fine for me. To each our own.

Who has judged you the most in this world?

 

[Quahom1]

Let's keep this to the original thought of the starter of this thread.

thanks.

Q

 

[cyberpi]

You have been banned for the following reason:
You have exposed your intent to disrupt CR, and expressed deliberate attempt to de-rail threads at your pleasure, but to the detriment of CR's open forum. Perhaps a few days of reflection will assist you in rethinking your way of dealing others.
Date the ban will be lifted: 8-17-2008, 12:00 PM

My first post on CR spoke against censorship and moderating. You seriously think you found evil in my heart and that banning me against my will, will cure it? Shame on you moderators. I take notice that two moderators here who I have enjoyed dinner with, and argued with, have not had children yet.

Thank you for your judgment, moderators. Shame on you for providing it in the dark like cowards, and for condemning me from posting here for a few weeks to prevent further comment. Shame on you moderators, hypocrites, for while you prefer to think you are cleaning the threads on a server... you are merely defending keeping your own servers polluted. Shame on you moderators, hypocrites, for you call words living gardens and defend them with your walls against comparing religion. Shame on you moderators, hypocrites, for while you prefer to think of CR as an open courtyard, you call it yours and threaten the people who would dialogue with you. Shame on you moderators, hypocrites, for you consider a book to be the truth, yet defend a CR forum as if it were that book. While here you prefer to think you are defending words that somehow define Christianity, Quahom1... you are merely defending your own beliefs. The words you have applied towards me, I apply to you... moderators. This forum above others is NOT open, but is closed to your desire to hear specific words and to not hear others. You think you see evil in my words... why do you hold that evil in your hearts? Shame on you moderators, hypocrites... you lock out those who you think do not conform to your way of thinking, and behold: nobody else here moderates here the way of the CR moderators. Yes, I realize that moderators all across the internet do; however, consider the methodology of wiki-pedia, which is itself a garden, and an open public forum, and a source of information... and then consider your private methodology of moderating your CR-pedia or forum-religion-pedia.

No, moderators, I was never trying to de-rail any threads from the OP. That was your language and your metaphor. If anyone invests the time learning Islam, maybe because they wish to think of themselves as peace keepers, or because they wish to actually compare religions here on-rail or 'on topic', then they might recognize that the Qur'an says to judge and enjoin others towards truth. I find that is not a Truth as in deciding whether or not any single book (Qur'an, Bible) contains an absolute Truth... but that a Truthful person does not say one thing and do the other, or to fabricate history (lie), or to hide the truth (deceive). Literally Islam says to call each other out for being hypocrites, liars, or for burrying the evidence... employing a selective memory. That truth and judgment then is not in a book... it is in our own words and thoughts. For example: the Qur'an is a matter of whether or not the author of it was truthful, and the bible of whether or not the authors of it were truthful. But the comparison that is important personally, in whether or not we personally are truthful, is in our own words and thoughts and actions. It does NOT take a book to figure that out... but it does take something special that is not personally us.

I would like to konw how the Christian look at Muhammed (pbuh)?

The contention over Trin, JiG, SoG, and the birth and the death is there, but the DNJ: Do Not Judge, gets leveled in the strangest ways in divisions between people. I have seen it between people in life who neither actively scribe themselves as Christian or Muslim, but as an example: I saw it here on CR between separate forums: 'Liberal' Christians and 'Fundamental or Conservative' Christian forums. For the example here: within the group taking part in this 'Christian' forum some fundamentalists would claim to be calling a spade a spade (Judging, yet often for censoring someone), and the liberals would claim to be more loving yet laying out the (DNJ). I personally find it interesting that it was a moderator laying the DNJ verse on me here. It often gets laid against Islam. I was expecting it from someone but I didn't know who, and most moderators here would be harder pressed to lay the DNJ towards anyone.... am I right Q, 123?

Fitting name of the OP poster: 'dialogue is the best'. I'll bet that it was not to suggest that a good loving deed is without merit. Rather, that dialogue itself is a good deed. I include disagreement, and judgment surrounds dialogue. To answer that question in the OP: the biggest divide I see in anyone who cultivates disagreement with the principle of 'judgment' contained within Islam is that there is a split and some become fundamentalists who will not openly dialogue and hear or consider contrary judgment... their beliefs are entrenched, while others will become liberals who tell others NOT to judge yet their 'love' is self ascribed. Those are generalizations and not applied solely to Christianity or Islam or Moderators... but applied to anyone who themselves struggles with the principle that just happens to also be taught within Islam. In summary: many prefer to judge and avoid argument (discussion in their courtyard), while many prefer to judge themselves for themselves.

Again, thank you for your judgment moderators... will be interesting to see if you continue to condemn me or my words for sharing it. If you don't value my judgment then just say the word... I'd be happy to leave... no reason for you to ban me.

 

[Quahom1]

...Again, thank you for your judgment moderators... will be interesting to see if you continue to condemn me or my words for sharing it. If you don't value my judgment then just say the word... I'd be happy to leave... no reason for you to ban me.

Then perhaps you should leave, as it is not your value as a contributor that is in question, but your attitude to disrupt/derail/rerail threads, which you have made quite clear, is your intention.

This post is public, for a reason. This attitude is unacceptable here. This challenge to the staff is unreasonable, inappropriate, and will not be tolerated.

v/r

Q

 

[islamis4u]

i will be replying the posts as fast as i could......

 

[17th Angel]

I'd be happy to leave... no reason for you to ban me.

I hope that is not the case.

Then perhaps you should leave, as it is not your value as a contributor that is in question, but your attitude to disrupt/derail/rerail threads, which you have made quite clear, is your intention.

We all derail threads, I am infamous for it... I have never been banned (Well not for that lol)

This post is public, for a reason. This attitude is unacceptable here. This challenge to the staff is unreasonable, inappropriate, and will not be tolerated.

v/r

Q

I really think we should re-evaluate all such situations, from a neutral stance.... Who challenges who, or a better way to phrase it is, who provokes who?


From an neutral point looking in from the window I tend to feel that cyber is picked on but that might just be me...

 

[islamis4u]

see this post:
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/guys-good-bye-and-allah-9629.html#post162862

 

[sonoman]

Islam has a tough road ahead of it in the West. Muslims are not giving Islam the world's best sales pitch and when a Christian looks at the news and thinks about Islam, many see a false prophet and a false doctrine in action bringing great harm to those following the Islamic belief system. Not only physical harm but psychological harm as well as Islam under Muhammad's model, greatly curbs human behavior consider "natural", i.e. we in the West see another Puritanism, another puritanical ideology that like all puritanism brings violence in its train when puritanism is the law of the land.

Only democracy saves societies from puritanical abuse by advocates of a single religious or political monoculture. "By their fruits ye shall know them" does not speak well for Islam and Muslims in our modern times. Sorry, but that's the way it is. We've seen too much totalitarianism to ever want to embrace it again and Muhammad's Islam is totalitarian, Muhammad's 7th Century ideology has total control over the minds and lives of its adherents. They think the way Muhammad thinks but in the West we know this the 21st Century and 7th Century ideas about most everything do not fit our modern world or what we face in the future.

 

[dailogue is the best]

Can you tell me, sonoman, what you see in Islam as inequivalent in the 21century? By the way, the madia isnt a reference at all. The media has its own agenda, and that is very clear.

Is Muhammed a false prophet? I always remember William Montgomery Watt's question: " how could God help in spreading a religion if its prophet is false, and it is based on lies?!!

 

[Quahom1]

Can you tell me, sonoman, what you see in Islam as inequivalent in the 21century? By the way, the madia isnt a reference at all. The media has its own agenda, and that is very clear.

Is Muhammed a false prophet? I always remember William Montgomery Watt's question: " how could God help in spreading a religion if its prophet is false, and it is based on lies?!!

The question is simple. What prophecies did Mohhamad present (and you can not use the fall of Rome)...

Was Mohhamad a "man of God"? I think so. Was his message lost? Again, I think so. Has it been convoluted? Again, I think so.

v/r

Q

 

[sonoman]

Can you tell me, sonoman, what you see in Islam as inequivalent in the 21century? By the way, the madia isnt a reference at all. The media has its own agenda, and that is very clear.

Is Muhammed a false prophet? I always remember William Montgomery Watt's question: " how could God help in spreading a religion if its prophet is false, and it is based on lies?!!

Where would I begin? Muhammad's 7th Century idea of an ideal society following Islamic rules is a social governing theory that went out when theocracies were overthrown in the West by democratic government. Wherever Muslims try to reintroduce this 7th Century model, they meet with resistance which will grow as Muslims discover the freedom of being that exists within democratic society untroubled by religious fundamentalist totalitarian ideology. We've been there, done that, with the Catholic Church and Communism. Don't want another go at it. Middle East Muslims haven't had their fill of oriental despotism yet, don't recognize it in Muhammad's theology, and we in the West have to wait for them to catch up.

I do believe Muslims will catch up and eventually chuck the Muhammad idolization out the window so they can embrace Islam as it was meant to be--a religion of peace where one surrenders to the will of God as peace, the root meaning of "Islam" that must be learned for the religion to last. Right now, the only Muslims who practice Islam as a true religion of peace are the Ahmadiyah Muslims who follow the guidance of a Muslim messiah of peace. If Islam, doesn't change, it will go down as the Religion of Suicide Bombers.

 

[dailogue is the best]

The question is simple. What prophecies did Mohhamad present (and you can not use the fall of Rome)...

Was Mohhamad a "man of God"? I think so. Was his message lost? Again, I think so. Has it been convoluted? Again, I think so.

v/r

Q

Well, Quahom1, I won't talk about the fall of Rome, the division of moon, the spider and the dove, the talking sheep........and many other "materialistic" prophecies.

Look, Quahom1, if you are a magician, and I present to you something that go far beyond magic, you will of course believe in my powers.

If you are very "materialistic", and you believe just in material things, and that people cant be ressuracted, and I show you materialistic things like bringing dead people alive, and turning blind into one who can see, and deaf into one who can hear, I m sure then that you are going to believe in my powers.

If you are a great poet, and I present you a book of non-comparing poetry and at the same time very revealing, then for sure you will believe in my powers.

God sent every prophet by prophecies that suited those people.

By the way, those who refused Muhammed from his tribe accused him of being a poet (and they knew he wasnt), a magician (and they knew he wasnt), a crazy (and they knew he wasnt). Muhammed' morals and ethics were highly regarded by his own people even before the message was sent down to him.

 

[dailogue is the best]

I do believe Muslims will catch up and eventually chuck the Muhammad idolization out the window so they can embrace Islam as it was meant to be--a religion of peace where one surrenders to the will of God as peace, the root meaning of "Islam" that must be learned for the religion to last. Right now, the only Muslims who practice Islam as a true religion of peace are the Ahmadiyah Muslims who follow the guidance of a Muslim messiah of peace. If Islam, doesn't change, it will go down as the Religion of Suicide Bombers.

When Bush declared war on Iraq, he used the term "Crusade", and he said something like that God ordered him to do so??!! and look, sonoman, at what is hapenning in Iraq, and how the story of mass weapon turned to be a BIG lie. Shall I understand from this that Christianity is a religion of violence, lies, and contempt? No, I know that all prophets came with message of love and peace.

Islam and voilence is a very repeated subject that the media leaves no effort to fix it in people mind. One, if he/ she really cares, can get the true picture of Islam by individual, independent effort.