Is Jesus Christ=Isa Al-Maseeh?

[Winkenzo]

There are hesitation if Isa al-Maseeh who told in Quran was Jesus Christ in the Bible.

I...myself believe they are two different person and personality.

 

If Isa al-Maseeh and Jesus Christ are two different people, than why Quran accused Bible as corrupted, when they are not talk about the same person?

 

[PenOfTruth]

wut

 

 

 

on what basis and knowledge do you believe that? we both view him differently he's the same personality to both of us.

[:Sami II]

correct 

JESUS CHRIST is not :Nabi-Isa-Ibn-Mariam (as) .

JESUS CHRIST is fictional character created to be similar to :Isa (as) , but are total opposites .

JESUS CHRIST  is son of god or god .

is black , white , yellow or an alien .

he is a jew 

was born on 25th dec

had a father (Joseph the carpenter/ and God )

was crucified 

He had an affair

he had kids 

he first miracle was turing water into wine 

he swore at his mother 

he went to india 

he was tempted by satan 

he had doubts 

he sinned 

etc etc etc 

 

:Isa (as)

is a perfect man 

did not sin 

his first miracle was speaking as a baby 

he never swore at his mother 

he was not crucified nor died 

he was not tempted 

he will be with :Imam-Mahdi (as)

and he was not born on 25th dec 

and he had no father 

and he is a :Muslim.

 

but for the sake of political correctness , PR and corporatising RELIGIONS so they can maximise bottom line , some leaders from all sides say they are the same .

who am I to say otherwise .

Edited October 28, 2013 by :Sami II

[Qa'im]

There are hesitation if Isa al-Maseeh who told in Quran was Jesus Christ in the Bible.

I...myself believe they are two different person and personality.

 

If Isa al-Maseeh and Jesus Christ are two different people, than why Quran accused Bible as corrupted, when they are not talk about the same person?

 

Both the Qur'an and the Bible discuss the same historical man, but their views on this person differ. For example, we may both have a mutual friend and have two different perspectives on this same person.

 

Anyway, the Bible was not written by Jesus. The Bible is a collection of books and epistles written by various authors and editors (many anonymous) who, Christians believe, were divinely inspired. We believe that the Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to set the record straight, clarify the message of the prophets and the Messiah Jesus, and guard the truth of the previous scriptures.

[IbnSohan]

There are hesitation if Isa al-Maseeh who told in Quran was Jesus Christ in the Bible.

I...myself believe they are two different person and personality.

 

If Isa al-Maseeh and Jesus Christ are two different people, than why Quran accused Bible as corrupted, when they are not talk about the same person?

This is the form of philosophical thinking through which Christians and other deviants try to confuse people. Allah is one, in Islam ,Christian and Judaism literature. The difference is that some of members of these three religions has ascribed wrong attribution to Allah.

Similar thing happened to prophet Isa, the one who was born without father, his mother is Maryam, he cured blindness and raised the dead. In Islam, he is a prophet, a human that was elected by Allah to deliver message to other humans. In Christianity, he is described as god or part of god or God son. Quran discussed these corrupted beliefs of Christians and said that some of it ( God son in specific) was adopted from pagan religions.

Quran, which is the book that we should believe in, did not deny that Jesus the quran spoke about is the same one the bible spoke about.

 

Your thoughts are correct if we re-phrase the question to : Do Muslims view Jesus the same way as Christians? answer is no.

ws

[Son of Placid]

There are hesitation if Isa al-Maseeh who told in Quran was Jesus Christ in the Bible.

I...myself believe they are two different person and personality.

 

If Isa al-Maseeh and Jesus Christ are two different people, than why Quran accused Bible as corrupted, when they are not talk about the same person?

IbnSohan says it well.

 

Isa has many names, but it's the same person. It's many other sources of opinions have decided His personality. I would suggest you read what both Bible and Quran have to say about Him, you will see they are one in the same.

 

The Quran does not accuse the Bible of corruption, the Quran states "woe to them that...", Muslim assume it must always mean the "past scriptures", but wait..

 

There is Hadith, and hadith. Those you must believe, and those you half believe, add countless scholars you want to believe. The job of Hadith is to create the contents of the "Religion box" while hadith is geared towards protecting Islam from Christianity. I don't think Muhammad had any intention on creating "Muhammad's religion". The irony of which is that Islam is the religion from all prophets since Adam.

 

The Quran does go into detail on many of the Christian doctrines that were overdone, but to say someone snuck in, in the middle of the night and changed a bunch of words is just as overdone.

 

Many examples if you are interested.

 

 

 

lol @ wut

Edited October 31, 2013 by Son of Placid

[PeaceLoving]

The Quran does go into detail on many of the Christian doctrines that were overdone, but to say someone snuck in, in the middle of the night and changed a bunch of words is just as overdone.

 

HI Son of Placid

 

That is not necessarily  the meaning of 'alteration'.

 

It could be in some instances but not necessarily in all. 

 

 However, if the sense has been changed by human intervention, without actual alteration to the original text, it is just as good as 'alteration'.

 

Let us take the famous example which I quoted to you in the other thread about the Church claiming that the earth was the center of the universe and basing that interpretation to their understanding of the Bible.

 

Well, as it turns out that interpretation was wrong.

 

So the Bible couldn't have meant it.

 

But the Church insisted on that meaning for hundreds of years.

 

So what did they do?

 

They altered the intended sense of the text, without physically changing it, and thereby committed an alteration. 

Edited October 31, 2013 by PeaceLoving

[Son of Placid]

HI Son of Placid

 

That is not necessarily  the meaning of 'alteration'.

 

It could be in some instances but not necessarily in all. 

 

 However, if the sense has been changed by human intervention, without actual alteration to the original text, it is just as good as 'alteration'.

 

Let us take the famous example which I quoted to you in the other thread about the Church claiming that the earth was the center of the universe and basing that interpretation to their understanding of the Bible.

 

Well, as it turns out that interpretation was wrong.

 

So the Bible couldn't have meant it.

 

But the Church insisted on that meaning for hundreds of years.

 

So what did they do?

 

They altered the intended sense of the text, without physically changing it, and thereby committed an alteration. 

Exactly. That is what the Quran warns about most as I see it, and it's happened long before and still after this warning.

This is why I encourage people to read on their own. imho hadith is also an alteration. It has convinced all Muslims that the Bible is so corrupted that there's no use even reading it.

[PeaceLoving]

This is why I encourage people to read on their own. imho hadith is also an alteration.

 

Once again, my friend

 

It shows how little you know about hadeeth.

 

Have you read any hadeeth books, if I may ask?

 

There is no such thing as one set of hadeethes.

 

There are a very large number of collections.

 

For some reason that, in my view, has more to do with the denominational dispute, the Sunnis have announced six succh books as saheeh (flawless).

 

The Shias, to which most of us here belong, and other sects have no such collection.

 

Individual hadeethes are given various credit ratings and could vary from one sect to another.

 

That is all.

It has convinced all Muslims that the Bible is so corrupted that there's no use even reading it.

 

Such generalized statements do not help promote a climate of inter-faith dialogue. 

 

Especially if made out of context! 

 

Make your point at the right time.

[PeaceLoving]

 imho hadith is also an alteration. 

 

Which particular hadeeth are we talking about here ? 

 

There are tens of thousands around.

[IbnSohan]

Exactly. That is what the Quran warns about most as I see it, and it's happened long before and still after this warning.

This is why I encourage people to read on their own. imho hadith is also an alteration. It has convinced all Muslims that the Bible is so corrupted that there's no use even reading it.

nonsense.

ws

[Son of Placid]

Which particular hadeeth are we talking about here ? 

 

There are tens of thousands around.

There certainly are. Sunni have more, even to the point of condemning themselves along with Muhammad.

Hadith goes from Allah talking Jesus out of a situation with the promise of a reward, (40 extra virgins) to Jesus coming back in two yellow dresses to slay all the Christians.

 

Just wondering but do you know who all of these people are?

Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from Sahl ibn Ziyad, from 'Amr ibn ‘Uthman, from Mufaddal ibn Salih from Sa‘d ibn Tarif from Asbagh ibn Nabatah, from Ali (a.s) who has said the following.

 

Ahmad ibn 'Idris has narrated from Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Jabbar, from certain persons of our people in a Marfu’ manner, who have ascribed it to abu 'Abdallah (a.s) who has said the following.

 

A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from Muhammad ibn Ali from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn abu Hashim from Ahmad ibn Muhsin al-Maythami who said that I was with abu Mansur al-Mutatbbib who said the following.

"One of my friends has said that he was with ibn abu al-‘Awja’ and ‘Abdallah ibn al-Muqaffa‘ in the holy Mosque of Makkah and ibn al-Muqaffa‘ said,

 

Now then, surely jihad is one of the doors of Paradise, which Allah has opened for His chief friends. It is the dress of piety and the protective armour of Allah and His trustworthy shield. Whoever abandons it Allah covers him with the dress of disgrace and the clothes of distress. He is kicked with contempt and scorn, and his heart is veiled with screens (of neglect). Truth is taken away from him because of missing jihad. He has to suffer ignominy and justice is denied to him.

Beware! I called you (insistently) to fight these people night and day, secretly and openly.

 

I assume this talks of apostates.

[placid]

Hi Winkenzo,

 

Quote from Post 1:

There are hesitation if Isa al-Maseeh who told in Quran was Jesus Christ in the Bible.

I...myself believe they are two different person and personality

 

Response: --- There was only one Jesus who was the prominent Person in the Gospels. He was a Prophet but also the Messiah, as He is referred to in the Quran. --- If you check the birth stories of Luke 1, and Surahs 3 and 19, you will see that the Angel told Mary she would have a faultless son.

 

Unless there is some reason for not reading the New Testament to discover this, then it is good to read both from the original.

[PeaceLoving]

There certainly are.

 

Something is indeed bothering you bad.

 

As I have already indicated, though not perhaps very bluntly, hadeethes are a complete mess.

 

Well, 'complete' is a bit of an exaggeration but I hope you get the drift.

 

Be that as it may, it is a colossal task identifying the ones that are very reliable.

 

Throughout history, scholars have tried to establish credit ratings but their pronouncements vary from sect to sect and sometimes, from one scholar to another.

 

Each hadeeth is an independent unit of study.

 

Needless to say, some of them could be related to others.

 

But you cannot know which until you spend years studying them along with all their variants. 

 

The way to discuss a hadeeth is to quote the particular book it is from, the hadeeth number and chapter and to find out what its credit rating is.

 

And as I have already said, the credit ratings are not uniform across the smorgasbord of the Islamic world.

 

So if you are serious about examining hadeethes, do them one at a time, in the manner I have indicated.

 

Hope that helps. Sorry I cannot be of any more help.

Just wondering but do you know who all of these people are?

 

I assume they are narrators and there are hundreds of them across the board.

Edited November 1, 2013 by PeaceLoving

[IbnSohan]

Son of Placid, I did no know what post to quote so i quote non but:

 

1- Quran says that Injil Turat and zabour are holy books (correct)

 

2- Quran says that Injil Turat and Zabour have been corrupted (correct)

 

Hadith just confirms what Quran says.

[PeaceLoving]

Whoever abandons it Allah covers him with the dress of disgrace and the clothes of distress. He is kicked with contempt and scorn, and his heart is veiled with screens (of neglect). Truth is taken away from him because of missing jihad. He has to suffer ignominy and justice is denied to him.

Beware! I called you (insistently) to fight these people night and day, secretly and openly.

 

I assume this talks of apostates.

 

Not necessarily.

 

It is talking about 'whoever abandons it', which, in my view, would include not only apostates but also atheists and people on the fringes of the faith. For examples, people who believe in God but knowingly flout His commandments. 

[Son of Placid]

Something is indeed bothering you bad.

 

 

Yeah, sorry it shows.

 

Son of Placid, I did no know what post to quote so i quote non but:

 

1- Quran says that Injil Turat and zabour are holy books (correct)

 

2- Quran says that Injil Turat and Zabour have been corrupted (correct)

 

Hadith just confirms what Quran says.

#2 not so correct. Hadith has done a good job of confirming what the Quran hasn't yet said. Or...says it to clear up any thots we may have about Christians being sane. For one thing hadith has taught you that the past scriptures are past, past scriptures, so past that they don't exist anymore and the past scriptures that do exist are not the same as the scriptures that existed during the time of Muhammad.

It's like saying Gabriel had nothing else to talk about at that time.

 

When auditing a quality system if I see all bases covered I dig because I know the truth is under, not out where one can see it.

I care nothing the "AHA factor" but I can't help if I don't know the truth.

 

So now that we know the past scripture means past past, way in the past, too far past for anyone to know kinda past, then I guess God can't preserve His word like He said He could. We're stuck with some altered text written by men of no stature. Isn't that about??? 

 

You are the one who said nonsense above, maybe I should listen to you for a while. A positive note certainly wouldn't hurt about now.

[IbnSohan]

there are 2 groups of verses that speak about the past scriptures:

 

1- say that the Quran confirms what's in the past scriptures.The Quran speaks here about the original books that were in the hands of the prophets, the original teachings, not about the current available versions

 

2- say that the past scriptures were altered ( in one way or another). Yet, Quran and Muslims used the corrupted versions to show the consistency between the past religions and the new religion in its general path.

 

bear in mind that many of the jews of Yemen converted to Islam, to shia islam in particular, so many Christians as well converted to Islam and they were holding versions a lil less corrupted than the ones you have today.

[placid]

Hi Ibn,

 

Quote from Post 15:

1- Quran says that Injil Turat and zabour are holy books (correct)

 2- Quran says that Injil Turat and Zabour have been corrupted (correct)

 

Question: --- Gabriel confirmed the former Scriptures as true in 625 AD, so what verses in the Quran are you referring to that say the Scriptures have been altered?

[IbnSohan]

Hi Ibn,

 

Quote from Post 15:

1- Quran says that Injil Turat and zabour are holy books (correct)

 2- Quran says that Injil Turat and Zabour have been corrupted (correct)

 

Question: --- Gabriel confirmed the former Scriptures as true in 625 AD, so what verses in the Quran are you referring to that say the Scriptures have been altered?

Do you covet [the hope, O believers], that they would believe for you while a party of them used to hear the words of Allah and then distort the Torah after they had understood it while they were knowing? (75)

 

Among the Jews are those who distort words from their [proper] usages and say, "We hear and disobey" and "Hear but be not heard" and "Ra'ina," twisting their tongues and defaming the religion. And if they had said [instead], "We hear and obey" and "Wait for us [to understand]," it would have been better for them and more suitable. But Allah has cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, except for a few. (46)

 

So for their breaking of the covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their [proper] usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded. And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good. (13)

 

O Messenger, let them not grieve you who hasten into disbelief of those who say, "We believe" with their mouths, but their hearts believe not, and from among the Jews. [They are] avid listeners to falsehood, listening to another people who have not come to you. They distort words beyond their [proper] usages, saying "If you are given this, take it; but if you are not given it, then beware." But he for whom Allah intends fitnah - never will you possess [power to do] for him a thing against Allah. Those are the ones for whom Allah does not intend to purify their hearts. For them in this world is disgrace, and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment. (41)

 

And if only they upheld [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to them from their Lord, they would have consumed [provision] from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them are a moderate community, but many of them - evil is that which they do. (66)

[PeaceLoving]

And if only they upheld [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to them from their Lord, they would have consumed [provision] from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them are a moderate community, but many of them - evil is that which they do. (66)

 

[5:66] does not talk about alterations but it is, of course, an unambiguous condemnation for infringement of the Torah and the Injeel.  

 

The verse mentions both the Torah and the Injeel and therefore clearly includes both Jews and Christians.

 

The Quran's honesty and lack of stereotyping and discrimination can also be seen in that it recognizes that there were some moderate men among them but most of them were, of course, evil.

[PeaceLoving]

There is yet another verse that talks about alterations - [2:59] - but does not specify who it is talking about.

 

2:59 But wrong-doers changed (those words) to a statement other than that which had been given to them. So We sent down upon them a punishment from heaven because they were defiant and disobeyed.   (English made a little easier)

 

It is believed to apply to Jews as it is right in the middle of a lengthy sermon to them, beginning at [2:40],

Edited November 4, 2013 by PeaceLoving

[Son of Placid]

If you take a look at every ayat you have brought up as an argument to say the past scriptures are corrupt, they merely say someone read it and taught differently, distorting the meaning orally. Nada nowhere actually says the scriptures themselves were altered by pen. It may not be as hadith has taught you, but it's worth taking a second look at.

[IbnSohan]

If you take a look at every ayat you have brought up as an argument to say the past scriptures are corrupt, they merely say someone read it and taught differently, distorting the meaning orally. Nada nowhere actually says the scriptures themselves were altered by pen. It may not be as hadith has taught you, but it's worth taking a second look at.

hm?

you are telling me that injil was written since day one? how old is the oldest bible you've got according to you?

[Son of Placid]

hm?

you are telling me that injil was written since day one? how old is the oldest bible you've got according to you?

Not sure how you got that from my post, but come to think of it, if all prophets had the same revelation it stands to reason it was the Injil from the start. I don't imagine God came up with a new revelation just for Jesus. If you are talking about the Gospels, Jesus never wrote a book nor was known to carry one. Nine references in the Quran and none of them actually call it a book either.

 

Ecc 1:10 says; Nothing under the sun is new, neither is any man able to say: Behold this is new: for it hath already gone before in the ages that were before us.

 

Long long stories about how the Bible became what it is now.

Around 382-383, St Jerome was commissioned to revise the old translations. St Jerome was a good choice as he was considered the greatest scholar Latin Christianity had ever produced. He took great care in translating from the original Hebrew and Greek as well. Finally done around 405, it became what's known as the Latin Vulgate.

 

Jerome was born about 340 A.D., of Christian parents. He had the advantages of the best classical education and became a devoted student of the best Latin writers. He began his theological studies in Gaul; but later moved to the desert near Antioch where he studied Hebrew from a converted rabbi. His studies also included the Hexapala, which was a six fold translation by Origen Adamantius of Alexandra (184-5 to 253-4) which included corresponding columns of text from the original Hebrew, Hebrew in Greek characters, the Septuagint, and the Greek versions of Theodotion, Aquila of Sinope, and Symmachus.

 

Origen's original work, which is said to have had about 6000 pages in 15 volumes and which probably only ever existed in a single complete copy, was stored in the library of the bishops of Caesarea for some centuries, but it was destroyed during the Muslim invasion of the year 638.

 

Just wondering if the past scriptures you're talking about are the ones Muslims themselves destroyed?

 

Interestingly enough neither Jerome, nor Origen were Trinitarians so the Bible was preserved but their commentaries were rejected by the second council of Constantinople.

Some 29 commentaries of Origen were discovered last year, it will be interesting to know more about him.

Edited November 5, 2013 by Son of Placid

[placid]

Hi Ibn,

 

I will respond again to your Post 20, but first I want to add a little to what Son posted above.

Latin was a known language to Christians and it was used on the inscription on the Cross of Jesus in Luke 23:

38 "And an inscription also was written over Him in letters of Greek, Latin, and Hebrew:

THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS."

 

When the Canon of Scripture was completed and approved about 365 AD and then translated into Latin about 400-405, the Scriptures were locked into the Latin Vulgate from then till about 1600, when they were translated into English in the Douay Version.

--- There was absolutely no way that anyone could change that text from 400-1600. --- So this covered the time of Muhammad in the 600’s. --- It is a futile effort to try and say anything was changed.

 

Furthermore, the King James Version was translated from Greek Manuscripts into English, shortly after the Douay, which again could not be changed.

I have a copy of each and to read them side by side, the only difference is the choice of words of the translators.

Gabriel confirmed them as true in Surah 3:3-4, and 7, so --- that should be sufficient proof for all of the critics.

[PeaceLoving]

There was absolutely no way that anyone could change that text from 400-1600. --- So this covered the time of Muhammad in the 600’s. --- It is a futile effort to try and say anything was changed.

 

Hi Placid

 

It is not important whether anything was subsequently changed or not.

 

The more important thing is whether the original texts of the gospels were accurate.

 

If they were not eyewitness reports as mentioned in another thread, the chance that they were accurate to begin with, is questionable. 

 

May be you should join the other  thread and prove that they were eye witnesses.

[placid]

Hi Peace,

 

The evidence was already given in Post 24 on the topic, 'The difference between the OT and NT."

Actually it was in answer to your 'Question 4.'

 

 

It was a result of them reading that, --- that they started the new Topic.

--- When they don't like the proof from the Scriptures, they can believe what they want.

 

I have never felt I have to 'defend' the word of God. ---  When we present it the way it is written in Scripture, then it will defend itself.

 

The fact that Gabriel confirmed to Muhammad that the former Scriptures were true, is evidence that Muslims should believe them too. --- If Gabriel came from God and said they were true, --- all we have to do is believe it.

 

Those who lack Faith in God have to rely on their own intelligence, is that not right?.

[PeaceLoving]

Hi Placid

 

We have already discussed many times before what the expression 'former scriptures' in the Quran means. If you wish to interpret differently, that is up to you.

 

As for the points about the NT, I have responded to you in the NT thread.

 

Cheers

[Son of Placid]

Obviously the "expression" did not suffice. Not to be a tag team, but every rational explanation so far has meant corrupted orally, not textually, so...

Who tells you the former scriptures have been altered?

[IbnSohan]

Obviously the "expression" did not suffice. Not to be a tag team, but every rational explanation so far has meant corrupted orally, not textually, so...

Who tells you the former scriptures have been altered?

this is really a simple math

Injil was oral tradition in its early days (as you claimed, Jesus was not known to have a book) so those who memories his words kept this oral tradition up to a point in history ( hundreds of years after Jesus).

Quran says that the Injil was altered (orally as per your understanding of the verse)

 

So what Quran is saying that those who carried the oral tradition in their heart in early days of Christianity had altered the words of Jesus.

 

The illogical thing to ask Muslims to accept a group of verses in their own holy book but to reject others? although you seem as if convinced that Jebril Gabriel was the one teaching the Quran to our prophet

If so, why would we accept some revelations from Gabriel but reject others? any good excuse for being selective with holy texts?

Also, it is illogical to reject hadith after accepting Quran, both hadith and Quran came from prophet, from Gabriel and both were transmitted textually as well as orally. Hadith was taught and written since the prophet days.

 

At the end, why would I accept your assumption but reject my written history ( in form of hadith) where prophet in numerous occasion told Muslims not to seek answers or details about the previous nations from Christians and Jews.

And why would I accept your assumption where my religion tells me that Allah is one, is simple in nature , have no need of wife or son while your bible  (not Allah's bible )teaches otherwise. Why to accept your version of history that shows prophets of Allah doing things that a man of God should not do(Story of Lut)

 

Your request is denied, your argument is flawed. Quran says that the books that revealed ot Jesus and Moses are holy books, those holy books were altered, so they are now not pure. Quran teaches that some of the verses of the current version of the holy books are correct, Quran encourages the Christians and Jews to read their books to find the truth,Mulism used the corrupted version to show the Christians and Jews how wrong it is their doctrine according to their own books but Quran dose not encourage Muslims to refer back to Turah or Injil to find answers, learn history or take their beliefs from.

[Son of Placid]

this is really a simple math

Injil was oral tradition in its early days (as you claimed, Jesus was not known to have a book) so those who memories his words kept this oral tradition up to a point in history ( hundreds of years after Jesus).

Quran says that the Injil was altered (orally as per your understanding of the verse)

 

So what Quran is saying that those who carried the oral tradition in their heart in early days of Christianity had altered the words of Jesus.

 

 

That would mean there never was a proper injil for the Quran to talk about.

 

The illogical thing to ask Muslims to accept a group of verses in their own holy book but to reject others?

 

 

I assume you are talking Quran? If these groups of verses are on the same subject, how can you accept some and reject others unless they are contradictory?

although you seem as if convinced that Jebril Gabriel was the one teaching the Quran to our prophet

If so, why would we accept some revelations from Gabriel but reject others? any good excuse for being selective with holy texts?

 

 

It is my understanding that Gabriel translated God's words to Muhammad. Is there something wrong with that?

 

 

Also, it is illogical to reject hadith after accepting Quran, both hadith and Quran came from prophet, from Gabriel and both were transmitted textually as well as orally. Hadith was taught and written since the prophet days.

 

 

I believe anything said by Muhammad outside of the Quran is called Sunnah? From what I understand, Muhammad knew nothing of the Torah.

 

Hadith is the "reported that this guy said that this guy said, that this guy said, etc. It would be illogical to expect that through the injil's oral times, it was altered, yet hadith has stayed true to the original.

 

 

At the end, why would I accept your assumption but reject my written history ( in form of hadith) where prophet in numerous occasion told Muslims not to seek answers or details about the previous nations from Christians and Jews.

 

I'm obviously not schooled in hadith and it's hard to answer to something I've never seen, but don't you find it interesting that every time the Quran says something positive about Christians, Jews, past scriptures, etc, there is always hadith to counter it?

 

NOTE: And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah - a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil).

 

Is it hadith that says no, no, not the torah and gospel, the previous torah and gospel? The ones that were lost or destroyed, not any that are around today.

Why, oh why would God tell Gabriel to even mention what was obscure, impossible to find, it makes no sense to me. It's like God is admitting He couldn't preserve His scriptures so He had to do it again.

 

And why would I accept your assumption where my religion tells me that Allah is one, is simple in nature , have no need of wife or son while your bible  (not Allah's bible )teaches otherwise.

 

 

You'll have to save this line for a Trinitarian ;)

 

Why to accept your version of history that shows prophets of Allah doing things that a man of God should not do(Story of Lut)

 

You don't have a version (story of Lut) you have 6 short stories of the Biblical version, just starts late and stops short of what happened next. Hadith decides the rest.

Notice that none of the Quranic accounts contradict the Bible, but the division comes from hadith.

 

Your request is denied, your argument is flawed. Quran says that the books that revealed ot Jesus and Moses are holy books, those holy books were altered, so they are now not pure. Quran teaches that some of the verses of the current version of the holy books are correct, Quran encourages the Christians and Jews to read their books to find the truth,Mulism used the corrupted version to show the Christians and Jews how wrong it is their doctrine according to their own books but Quran dose not encourage Muslims to refer back to Turah or Injil to find answers, learn history or take their beliefs from.

 

My argument is only flawed because it's incomplete. If you guys showed me what hadiths you're talking about I'd at least know where you're coming from.

 

Tafsir Al-Mizan goes off in so many tangents I almost need a tafsir for the tafsir. Besides that, he takes the ayats of the Quran to mean "As it happened to Muhammad" Not sure but doubt the Quran would be telling a story of what happened to Muhammad without telling the story. 5:41 - 50. The Author never bothers to mention their books were corrupted tho. He considers it their guidance and their light, not Muhammad's. He also points out Muhammad had no idea of the Torah.

 

If hadith  could explain why God was not able to preserve His word it might help some. If so, why would God encourage the Christians and Jews to continue reading their corrupted books, looking for truth?

Then again, which corrupted version did the Muslims use to show them all their doctrines were wrong? Must have been a corrupted "version" cuz none of my Bibles have most those doctrines in them.

[Winkenzo]

It've been a few months ago, I thought I couldn't open new thread for I was newbie here. well, thank you for all of you who participate in this thread. 

 

wut

 

 

 

on what basis and knowledge do you believe that? we both view him differently he's the same personality to both of us.

Hi Pen,

 

I based on Bible and Islamic scripture

Edited February 21, 2014 by Winkenzo

[Winkenzo]

hi Sami..

let me reply on your box

correct 

JESUS CHRIST is not :Nabi-Isa-Ibn-Mariam (as) .

JESUS CHRIST is fictional character created to be similar to :Isa (as) , but are total opposites .

JESUS CHRIST  is son of god or god .

is black , white , yellow or an alien .

he is a jew 

was born on 25th dec

had a father (Joseph the carpenter/ and God )

was crucified 

He had an affair

he had kids 

he first miracle was turing water into wine 

he swore at his mother 

he went to india 

he was tempted by satan 

he had doubts 

he sinned 

etc etc etc 

 

:Isa (as)

is a perfect man 

did not sin 

his first miracle was speaking as a baby 

he never swore at his mother 

he was not crucified nor died 

he was not tempted 

he will be with :Imam-Mahdi (as)

and he was not born on 25th dec 

and he had no father 

and he is a :Muslim.

 

but for the sake of political correctness , PR and corporatising RELIGIONS so they can maximise bottom line , some leaders from all sides say they are the same .

who am I to say otherwise .

 

 

correct 

JESUS CHRIST is not :Nabi-Isa-Ibn-Mariam (as) . ==> correct

JESUS CHRIST is fictional character created to be similar to :Isa (as) , but are total opposites .==> :) empty claim... Isa' character was created after Jesus Christ exist

JESUS CHRIST  is son of god or god .==> correct, and this made you think that God born from Marry

is black , white , yellow or an alien .

he is a jew ==> correct

was born on 25th dec

had a father (Joseph the carpenter/ and God )==> correct both Marry and Joseph are David's descendants

was crucified ==> correct

He had an affair

he had kids 

he first miracle was turing water into wine ==> correct 

he swore at his mother 

he went to india 

he was tempted by satan ==> correct, and He won ;)

he had doubts 

he sinned 

etc etc etc ==> the rest, doesn't written in the Bible..it was your empty claimed ;)

 

:Isa (as)

is a perfect man 

did not sin 

his first miracle was speaking as a baby 

he never swore at his mother 

he was not crucified nor died 

he was not tempted 

he will be with :Imam-Mahdi (as)

and he was not born on 25th dec 

and he had no father 

and he is a :Muslim.===> its your belief, and I don't intend to get into your belief doctrine.

 

but for the sake of political correctness , PR and corporatising RELIGIONS so they can maximise bottom line , some leaders from all sides say they are the same . ==> not really

who am I to say otherwise .===> its your choices

Both the Qur'an and the Bible discuss the same historical man, but their views on this person differ. For example, we may both have a mutual friend and have two different perspectives on this same person.

 

Anyway, the Bible was not written by Jesus. The Bible is a collection of books and epistles written by various authors and editors (many anonymous) who, Christians believe, were divinely inspired. We believe that the Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to set the record straight, clarify the message of the prophets and the Messiah Jesus, and guard the truth of the previous scriptures.

Hi Qa'im

Yes, probably it happened.. but unlikely.

if we have a mutual friend, our friend couldn't born in the different place. its just one of some differ.

 

:) Yes, Bible was not written by Jesus, but Jesus was its central

This is the form of philosophical thinking through which Christians and other deviants try to confuse people. Allah is one, in Islam ,Christian and Judaism literature. The difference is that some of members of these three religions has ascribed wrong attribution to Allah.

Similar thing happened to prophet Isa, the one who was born without father, his mother is Maryam, he cured blindness and raised the dead. In Islam, he is a prophet, a human that was elected by Allah to deliver message to other humans. In Christianity, he is described as god or part of god or God son. Quran discussed these corrupted beliefs of Christians and said that some of it ( God son in specific) was adopted from pagan religions.

Quran, which is the book that we should believe in, did not deny that Jesus the quran spoke about is the same one the bible spoke about.

 

Your thoughts are correct if we re-phrase the question to : Do Muslims view Jesus the same way as Christians? answer is no.

ws

hi IbnSohan,

:) its not a philosophical thinking to confuse people, but this is to makes people know better about Jesus and Isa.

in Islam belief, Isa will return and lead moslems along side with al Mahdi, will marrying woman/women have children and die..CMIIW brother..

 

but its not what Jesus Christ will do when He return, :)

[Winkenzo]

Hi Winkenzo,

 

Quote from Post 1:

There are hesitation if Isa al-Maseeh who told in Quran was Jesus Christ in the Bible.

I...myself believe they are two different person and personality

 

Response: --- There was only one Jesus who was the prominent Person in the Gospels. He was a Prophet but also the Messiah, as He is referred to in the Quran. --- If you check the birth stories of Luke 1, and Surahs 3 and 19, you will see that the Angel told Mary she would have a faultless son.

 

Unless there is some reason for not reading the New Testament to discover this, then it is good to read both from the original.

Hi Placid, thank you for remind me about this thread. :) if you never mention, I would never remember about this thread nor know if this thread have been approved. but, I only can visit this thread after I free after you mentioned ;)

 

:) was that only Luke 1 and Surahs 3 and 19 you found to defend your opinion that they are the same, brother..?

please check and read other part also, I believe you have more knowledge than me, and your experience too.

don't focus only on their past, but also their future

 

God bless